283 vs 306 canyon

[JJF]

Fishermanbb...

Did you buy your 306 at POE in Jan/Feb 2021?

 

[Fishermanbb]

Fishermanbb...

Did you buy your 306 at POE in Jan/Feb 2021?

Yes

 

[JJF]

Funny.. I think I bought the "other" one.

 

[Mustang65fbk]

The difference is the torque of the F350s.

When I am steaming ahead and bashing into waves, my boat doesn't slow. Instead, the F350s just push it through.

Now, I am not saying the boat needs the 350s, but the torque is worth the extra weight.

Have you ever been on a 306 Canyon with Twin F250's on it before?

 

[JJF]

nope.

 

[Mustang65fbk]

I figured as much. Your above statement seems to imply that the F250's will slow down considerably compared to the F350's, even though you don't have any in person experience to suggest that.

 

[JJF]

I did not mean to imply that, which is why I wrote: "Now, I am not saying the boat needs the 350s, but the torque is worth the extra weight."

Your post #18 seemed to imply that the F350s' extra weight would totally negate the extra HP over the F250s, which is I feel is incorrect. First off, that's a 200 HP difference, which is quite significant. But... it's not just about HP. Yes, the extra weight of the F350s is significant, but it seems to help keep the stern in the water and the extra torque (rotating mass??) allows the boat to stay on plane at slower speeds and in rougher water. As a sort of parallel, there is a reason why go-fast boats run big block Chevy's (Mercruisers), rather than the small blocks. It's about the torque and being able to keep the prop(s) spinning and keep the boat moving. You can build a high HP small block, but it's not going to perform like a big block.

Personally, I would rather have the F300s (just because they are better motors), so I will likely repower in a few years*. I have discussed this with my local GW dealer and he forewarned me that the boat will perform differently. It won't be bad, but it will be different.

*Unless, Yamaha gets around to producing a V6 350, but that's a tale for another thread.

 

[Fishermanbb]

Funny.. I think I bought the "other" one.

You did. That was a sweet boat with only 75 hours on it. This is my second time with this hull. I had a 2000 Marlin at one point with twin 225 2 strokes. It’s a beast of a hull. Not very efficient (or fast) IMO but can do almost anything you ask of it. Very happy……And I downsized from a 360!

 

[JJF]

Small World!!

I am very happy with it. I agree with the not very fast/efficient comment. However, neither of those was my target. I was more so interested in comfort and the rough water capability & stability. I like that the boat can hold plane at slower speeds. At around 24-26, it sort or feels like it's not even moving.

My fishing area/grounds are within 20 - 30 miles (generally) of the harbor entrance, so anytime I can run at two minutes or so per mile, life is good. I am hoping to run a bit further this summer (not further out, but further south towards Cape Cod). We hardly ever have days when I can run @ WOT, so the fuel consumption at the top end isn't of much concern.

The 360 is an entirely different world; it's just huge.

 

[Fishermanbb]

I’m with you. Efficiency is a nice but coming from the 360 this thing Burns about 1/2 the fuel at a higher cruise speed and lower RPM. I don’t care much about speed either. I cruise around 32-33 MPG burning about 26 GPH. I can do better if I want but that’s the sweet spot for me. I don’t care about top end either. Our runs are short when inshore (17 Miles or less) and when we go offshore we run anywhere from 40-60 miles on average. Very happy with the boat. I love the simplicity. I’ve either owned or put significant hours on most of the GW hulls and while the 360 was a blast to own (Except for the $) and the 23 is the best boat for it’s size on the market (IMO) I really like to 30 as an all-around, do anything hull.

 

[Fishermanbb]

I figured as much. Your above statement seems to imply that the F250's will slow down considerably compared to the F350's, even though you don't have any in person experience to suggest that.

I don’t think you need to run it to surmise that 40% more HP swinging bigger props and an additional 3-5% total running weight will result in improved speed. It will without a doubt. Where that speed shows up is more of a question. The 350’s top out in the low 50’s (52-53MPH) in the real world. 300’s in the mid to high 40’s (47 MPH) and the 250’s will likely top out in the low to mid 40’s (42-43 MPH) Cruise them all at 4200 and my guess is the differences will be there albeit smaller. These are REAL WORLD numbers, electronics, gear, fuel, canvas, painted bottom, etc. Stock props. There is no way stock 250’s run close to stock 350’s. 350’s shine at the top end and their torque is what makes them noticeable different.

 

[Mustang65fbk]

I did not mean to imply that, which is why I wrote: "Now, I am not saying the boat needs the 350s, but the torque is worth the extra weight."

Your post #18 seemed to imply that the F350s' extra weight would totally negate the extra HP over the F250s, which is I feel is incorrect. First off, that's a 200 HP difference, which is quite significant. But... it's not just about HP. Yes, the extra weight of the F350s is significant, but it seems to help keep the stern in the water and the extra torque (rotating mass??) allows the boat to stay on plane at slower speeds and in rougher water. As a sort of parallel, there is a reason why go-fast boats run big block Chevy's (Mercruisers), rather than the small blocks. It's about the torque and being able to keep the prop(s) spinning and keep the boat moving. You can build a high HP small block, but it's not going to perform like a big block.

Personally, I would rather have the F300s (just because they are better motors), so I will likely repower in a few years*. I have discussed this with my local GW dealer and he forewarned me that the boat will perform differently. It won't be bad, but it will be different.

*Unless, Yamaha gets around to producing a V6 350, but that's a tale for another thread.

As I mentioned in post #4… “To me, and this is just my opinion, it seems like that setup would be a bit underrated in terms of power, depending on what kind of fishing/boating needs you have.” So… imo, and I’m going from a numbers only, or mostly practical standpoint, any engine choice is going to depend very much on your fishing/boating needs. I think the biggest advantage would be for those that want to go faster or that want slightly better mid range numbers. Top speed on the F350’s is 58.1 mph, which I don’t ever need to go that fast and am assuming most GW owners likely don’t either as these aren’t speed boats. If the OP doesn’t need to go much over 35-45 mph at the most, has little to moderate amounts of gear or weight onboard, then I don’t think the F350’s will be of that much benefit to him. If he’s constantly fishing 4-6 people with a full tank of fuel, tons of gear and so forth every time and wants to go as fast as possible? Then maybe? If I’m personally plowing through waves and snotty weather, I’d prefer to not go balls to the wall and pound through them as fast as possible. Though, that’s just me of course.

https://boattest.com/boats/grady-white/canyon-306-2017

 

[JJF]

Hi,

To be sure, there are many ways to look at...

For me, it's not about running balls to the wall and bashing through waves. It's about being able to run at lower speeds, while on plane without coming off plane. I am not saying the F250s won't keep the boat on plane, because I don't know that for certain. What I do know, is that it takes a lot of energy to keep 10,000 pounds on plane, especially when the wave period is short.

 

[Fishermanbb]

Top speed on the 306 with 350’s is only 58 if it is stripped, no paint, etc. It just doesn’t go that fast in the real world. You are right that these are not, nor are they meant to be SKA boats. They just aren’t built for that, They’re heavy, wide-body boats. However, the 350’s certainly provide more grunt which can be nice in some situations. Also, an extra few MPH at cruise is nice when the sea cooperates.

 

[Fishtales]

The only advantage for the 283 is ease of trailering. If you can swing it and are going to keep it in the water, its and easy decision from here.

 

[Mustang65fbk]

Hi,

To be sure, there are many ways to look at...

For me, it's not about running balls to the wall and bashing through waves. It's about being able to run at lower speeds, while on plane without coming off plane. I am not saying the F250s won't keep the boat on plane, because I don't know that for certain. What I do know, is that it takes a lot of energy to keep 10,000 pounds on plane, especially when the wave period is short.

I honestly don't think that would be the case for the OP's hypothetical situation. The numbers on the similar boat with the same motors on it has an optimum cruise of 4,000 rpm with a speed of 28.9 mph and while burning around 22.5 gph of fuel. At almost 30 mph, that's going to be well beyond planing speeds imo, even if the boat were pretty heavily loaded down with fuel and you were in some pretty snotty conditions. At least the boat itself shouldn't have any issues staying on plane at close to those speeds. Now, the captain of the boat on the other hand? That's anyone's guess and again, it depends on what you want the boat to do

 

[Mustang65fbk]

Top speed on the 306 with 350’s is only 58 if it is stripped, no paint, etc. It just doesn’t go that fast in the real world. You are right that these are not, nor are they meant to be SKA boats. They just aren’t built for that, They’re heavy, wide-body boats. However, the 350’s certainly provide more grunt which can be nice in some situations. Also, an extra few MPH at cruise is nice when the sea cooperates.

Clearly yes, those numbers are likely in perfect conditions and with as minimal amounts of extra weight on board. But you also have to think about the other end of the spectrum in that if the 58 mph figure is in perfect conditions, how close do you think the fuel economy numbers are going to be? In the real world, those GPH/MPG numbers for the fuel burned is going to be considerably worse than what they advertise. Meaning that with the F350's going "58.1 mph" @ 6k rpm, it says you'll be burning 68.3 gph of fuel, which I'm sure that number will be closer to 70 gph or more, if one ever did decide to test it out. It's already over $4 / gallon for fuel here, which makes me think that once again this summer it's going to be over $5 / gallon, which would be approximately $350 per hour spent going at WOT. No thanks, I'll stick with something like what I've got where I'm doing around 25-30 mph and burning 8-10 gph.

 

[magicalbill]

Real World Actual Experience with 300's VS 350's on my Marlin. (Same hull as the 306, I believe.)

My 350's get a tick better mileage than the 300-Powered Marlin I rode in.

350's:
1.4 to 1.5 MPG all day long in reasonable conditions where I can stay on plane.

300's
1.3-1.4, same conditions.

The difference is I'm going 4MPH faster at any given RPM setting than the 300's.

The 300's are fine, well-proven engines. Nothing wrong with them.

The extra weight of the 350's is meaningless compared to the extra torque, planing power and performance they put out. Again, the mileage is (slightly) better. I'll get 1.5 at 30-31 MPH turning 3500 RPM.

For those who fish and go 150 miles out on the ocean, the 350's will be your Best Friends on the return trip. Even if it's too sloppy to run 30 and above, the extra grunt will make it waaay easier to saw thru seas.

(I had to chime in here, or Seasick would be disappointed....)

 

[SkunkBoat]

For those who fish and go 150 miles out on the ocean, the 350's will be your Best Friends on the return trip. Even if it's too sloppy to run 30 and above, the extra grunt will make it waaay easier to saw thru seas.

Yep, no replacement for bigger boat with more HP. Still a CC so your gonna get wet heading west in 3 to 5 , SW at 20 with the sun setting in your eyes thru a spotty windshield. Get some beanbags and foul weather gear for your crew.
More is more. More costs more. Its all good when your box is full of YFT and Mahi and Tilefish

 

[JJF]

Actual numbers without focusing on fuel burn (running the boat however conditions permit):

Summer 2022
122.50 hours (headway speed, cruising, speeding, trolling, idling, pulling lobster traps)
776 gallons
$4,212 (not including Yamaha fuel additives)
Avg Gallons per Hour 6.34
Avg Dollars per Hour $34.38