RT 27 - CW 28 Hull Differences?

[fred024]

I'm comparing the two largest 8' 6" beam boats:

Ranger Tug R-27 - LOA 27' 1", Dry 6,950 lbs, Draft 26, 200 HP

Cutwater C-28 - LOA 28' 4", Dry 8,000, Draft 28", 260 HP

I can see all the obvious differences, but cannot understand if there are any significant hull design differences. Are there any hull differences that make it perform differently in open ocean or at rest in an anchorage? I assume the CW 28s 15" more length and 1000 lbs more weight would have some effect regardless.

thanks for any information,
fred

 

[Phil Nersessian]

I don't pretend to be an expert on this, I would recommend you ask Andrew Custis of Ranger/Cutwater this, but I believe the tug has a "Displacement" hull,whereas the Cutwater has a "Semi Displacement" hull which gives it planing ability and greater speed potential. I can get almost 30 knots out of my C30 Semi-displacement hull, I don't believe you can get that in a tug. There are other more obvious differences,like the "Rumble seat" etc..

 

[stwendl]

I can get 23kn on my r27 but did not have to pay as much as for a cw30 🙂. 23kts is plenty of speed

 

[Red Raven]

The hulls are both semi-displacement but they are definitely different. There is a continuous range of possible hull shapes between true displacement hulls and full planing hulls. If the R27 were a true displacement hull it would not go much above 7 or 8 knots. My understanding is the R27 is focused just a slight bit more towards efficiency at the slower speeds and the C28 is focused a bit more towards the higher speeds. It all comes with a cost. A bigger engine is required for the C28 and maybe just a little less fuel efficient than the R27 but with the benefit of getting there a bit faster. The R27 shape also allows a bit more volume of interior space per foot than the C28 because the C28 has a more raked stem and windshield. Ultimately I think it becomes a personal choice regarding your preference for the overall look of the boat, price, and whether you value slow vs. go.

 

[pleeson]

Both lovely multi-day water homes. No significant fuel consumption differences at similar speeds. As noted, one is 8 - 10 knots faster if you can afford the fuel and need that option. I think it is more about overall style and layout than anything else. Which speaks to you better or is more practical for your proposed use or needs? They both seem extremely seaworthy and stable for boats with an 8-6 beam.

 

[Cutwater28GG]

I chose the CW28 in this discussion. I either cruise at 18knots (9 gal an hour) or 7knots (1-1.5 gal hour)

it is not a true planing hull. for that you need one of the new fancy outboard CW30's that do 45knots 😱

I found interior wise the 28 to feel bigger than the 27 from a head room point of view but its marginal. more of a styling discussion.

For moving around the Puget sound and islands the speed does help. I'm 3 hours door to door elliot bay to la conner. which is 54 miles and about 30 gals diesel. then 2 more hours to friday harbor.