tracker jet drive ????

[SNUFFY]

A friend of mine has been looking to buy a jet drive /Tunnel hull type boat for a while. I just happened to see one in my neighborhood. </p>

A 2002 Tracker inboard jet drive I believe it said 170HP ...run 55MPH. Not a tunnel hull but the bottom of the boat has been modified by the factory to keep the jet flush with the bottom.</p>

Not a bad looking rig</p>

Anybody have any experience with these boats ??</p>

 

[ashtrey]

no experience but i seen one at a regional tournament last year and it broke down three times the first day and i am not sure about the second but it didnt run very well at all or at least the person driving it didnt drive it well. sorry that this doesnt help you but thought i would post this anyways.

 

[wrechin2]

I know there is alot more power loss with a jet drive than a propeller. The jet drive is not as effecient. I have a 240HP powerhead and it is amazing that they have it making that kind of power at 6200!!!!!! The reason is the M2 jet drive can not handle RPM's. Alot of the modifications I do to the 2.5 blocks are already done from the factory on this one plus some stuff I have never seen!!!!!

I have a few merc manuals on those engines. If he finds one and needs a book on it, shoot me a pm. Later!

 

[gaspergou]

It all depends on what your friend wants to do with it. Yeah, there's a power loss. So what? You can run it places that you can't get to with a prop drive, which means access to fish that haven't been fished as hard...

I run a 16' bare-bones Tracker jon with an older 20/25 Mariner jet as my personal boat, and a welded 16' with a 60/40 Merc 4-stroke for work. I got mine because I like river fishing and do some other stuff that involves getting to remote portions of rivers. Both have treated me well and I'd recommend similar rigs to anyone without hesitation. A very good friend has an absurd number of hours on his Yamaha F40 jet and has had no issues with it.

That said, I'm not sure I'd get an inboard jet; the position of the grate means it's harder to clean debris, gravel, vegetation, and fallen leaves when they get sucked up into it... and they will!

hope this helps!

 

[wrechin2]

It does depend on purpose. Me personally...I would rather have the 10-15% power loss (depends on ratio) instead of the near 30% that you have with a jet. And as stated they are limited to RPM"s. If I am paying for the gas I want to get the most out of it. I don't fish so I have no reason to go into the shallows or to run a jet drive. That is their purpose. But that is just my opinion. A propeller suits my needs. Just simply stated some facts that SOME people may not know.

 

[Guest]

Inboard jets have a higher power to weight ratio than outboard jets, in other words they are more efficient. Also the position of the intake/impeller on the inboard jet doesn't clog from leaves/weeds as easily as outboard jets. Though once clogged, they are harder to clean. Look for a modified rake or stomp plate add on to your rig. If your going over rocky areas, the trackers w/ inboard jets are a rather thin boat. Also I would avoid tunnel hull and outboard jets, most tunnels take significant modification to prevent blowout in the turns.

For my money, if I was buying a new inboard jet, I would be looking at RiverPro. If I was looking for a outboard jet-jon, I would be looking at James River Jets or a Blazer (trout and sons).

 

[wrechin2]

R14 Good to know. I have no experince with jet drives. But they do have there place. But still the process of using water to push has more loss that a prop moving through water. No matter how much more the power to weight ration is. just my opinion.

I look at it this way, if you take a light boat say a 19' bullet with a hydraulic jack plate and a low water pick up, you can make the pad of the boat hit bottom before the prop, or close to it, will at idle or just off idle. Even at full throttle it would only require about 9" of water with the propshaft 1" above pad if set up properly and on the pad. The boat with a 150HP will still run in the low 70's and still go into very shallow water. I am more performance minded and the jet drive have RPM limitations where as props don't but stock cases do. That is why you have CLE's, bob's and sportmasters to make up for their short comings. Once again, just my opinion.

 

[puddle jumper]

Hey W2,
Here is some good info on the inbaord jets if you are interested in reading it,,,
Im a big fan of the river pro also...Might be my next boat if the economy will pick back up and hold for a while...
Puddle
http://riverpro-boats.com/content/view/29/52/

 

[wrechin2]

Thanks puddle!!!
Good reading. That is close to what a lower unit loss is. But since 83 the ouboards have been rated at the propshaft in HP. So a 200 outboard is really about 220-230HP at the crank to be fair also. That kinda looks like the old ranger with a sterndrive!!! It takes up more room inside the boat though. Can't have cake and eat it to!!!

Thanks again!!

 

[Guest]

W2, you are absolutely correct on the powerloss. However, it is the shallow water feature that attract people to jets. Try making a 15 mile run on something like the Duck or Caney with a prop, can't be done unless you want to rebuild the lower unit. No problem in a jet to run those same rivers. An inboard or outboard jet can easily run in 6" of water and can cross areas with as little as 4" with the right set up.

 

[wrechin2]

Like I said, they have there place. I don't disagree with the shallow running. Unless I was using it to run in very shallow water, I would stay away from the jet drives due to power loss or space loss with a inboard jet. Just my thought.

Good information though.

 

[SNUFFY]

THANKS EVERYBODY!.
My friend is very knowledgable and has a good idea of what he wants for the kind of fishing he`s gonna be doing.He`s gonna be chasin` the shoal bass somewhere in Ga. as well as some inland fishin in Fla. I was just curious about this particular boat.