43' Double Cabin - 1981 with 6/71 Naturals

[jrbrein]

Hello All,

I am going to look at a 1981 43' Double Cabin with 6/71 Naturals, 285 HP this weekend.

What kind of performance should I expect such as RPM's at WOT under load, no load, speeds at WOT and cruising.

What fuel consumption would be expected? Also, did Hatteras use in line 6/71's or were they the 6V/71's?

The boat is not stabilized. We will do most of our cruising in the Chesapeake Bay, ICW and Bahamas.

Thanks for your comments!


Jonathan Brein

 

[Walter P]

I believe the engines are probably 6-71 JT's @310 HP each. They are 426 cu in displacement in an inline configuration. My first 43 DC had those engines and they proved to be very reliable and durable. That boat made many round trips from NJ to Fla each year. WOT under load was 2,450 rpm. I generally ran them at 2,100 rpm which gave me a solid 16 K cruise. I don't remember fuel consumption as that was many years ago but I'm sure some other HOFers on this forum can fill you in on that. My only complaint with that boat (1973 model) was the small fuel capacity which prevented us from running around the clock without refueling. It had twin 200 gal tanks under the bunks in the master stateroom. Most of our running was in the ocean and it was frustrating to have to come in for fuel late in the day when the ocean was fairly calm and we wanted to run overnight.

Good luck with your quest, I'm sure you will love the 43 as IMO it was one of Hatteras' best designs.

Walt

 

[jrbrein]

Thank you very much Walter!!


Jonathan Brein

 

[Timeout]

Mine has 671's (310 HP). I would be surprised if that year 43DC is 285 HP. If it has N80 injectors and advanced timing it should be 310. Generally run 14 - 16 knots running in the 2000 - 2200 RPM range. About 22 GPH total for both engines (11 GPH each). I don't run WOT but my guess would be 18 knots plus. No stabilizers. Runs very well. Only uncomfortable spot is with a large beam quartering sea but if you slow down and bring the tabs up, no problem. I never felt that fuel capacity was an issue but don't run more than 10 hours in a day where I live. I think its the perfect size boat. Not too bad on fuel, easy to find dockage, comfortable for 2 - 4 folks and occasionally 6, relatively low maintenance cost, only 42" draft keel protected, and very reliable.

 

[Walter P]

Good comments Kevin.... I often wonder how much better a flattop (no bridge) would perform with less wind drag and less weight all the way up there. Are there any 43 flattop HOFers lurking....let us know..

Walt

 

[Timeout]

The bridge is really great on nice days. I've stripped a lot off so the weight isn't that big of a deal.

Stuff removed:

Bimini and enclosure
Couple miles of unused wire
Dodger for aft railing
Cooler
Most electronics (currently use wired ICOM handheld for VHF and autopilot control)
Replaced heavy old Raytheon radar with Furuno 24" radome
Remote controlled spotlight (worthless)
Replaced heavy helm seat and foot rest with comfortable lightweight rotomolded seat

Seems that the bridge gets heavy because us Americans find it a place to add a lot of unneeded stuff which eventually doubles the weight. Hatteras actually did a pretty good job of making it light weight. If you think of it like a tuna tower or a great place to watch the world when in port, there is no need for all of the extras.

I did add a set of Kahlenberg air horns (no sense having horns you can't hear)

For me, the biggest down side to the bridge is the space on the lower deck that the ladder takes up. Some have ladders that fold up and latch to the upper deck. Although, the steps are a nice place to set cocktails.

I think the heaviest thing up there now is me...

 

[jrbrein]

Thanks Kevin!!!

Jonathan