Temporarily Stumped Grady Customer Service

[Ekea]

I am researching the 263/273 Chase. I know there are two major changes in the line. First, when they extended the running surface in 2000 as a 263, and second when the console was redesigned when they changed the name to 273 in 2002.

Here is the big question though, up through 2005, the dry weight is listed as 3975 and starting in 2006, it is listed as 4843. I was told that 2006 and up did not jump to include engines (this was my guess). The rep told me that they made some changes to the boats in the 2000s to reinforce the boats due to the 300 V8s that came out, but we agreed that 868 lbs was a lot of reinforcement for that size boat (22% increase in weight). She is going to talk to a few of people that worked there in that time period and get back to me.

Does the great grady community have any ideas? Or measured weights of your boats (without gear)?

 

[family affair]

I think that is the same hull as the 270. I just had a similar conversation a few weeks ago and got conflicting information. Carolynn sent me the trailer set up sheet for 2005. The sheet comes from the engineering department and shows the max weight of a boat fully optioned with the heaviest engines available. She was confident that was the best document to go by. Seemed to make sense till I weighed the boat on the trailer. Based on fuel on board the boat seemed to weight somewhere between the 4660 on the low end but not the 5580 on the other end. If you want to be conservative, go with the high number, otherwise I'd advise to split the difference.
FWIW, Burt claimed the higher weight on the 270 for 2005 was because more standard options came with the boat. When I look at a 2003 vs a 2005 brochure, there is no way almost 1000 lbs of standard options were added.

 

[wahoo33417]

When we bought a boat in 2005, the dealer was able to get us the actual Excel spreadsheet of the test runs used to calculate RPM, speed and fuel consumption numbers you see on the web site. There is a test going upriver and down river and the spreadsheet then averages the two. More on point, the spreadsheet listed the hull weight and weight for every additional option for that boat. It even included allowances for anchor and chain.

If Grady could get their hands on those test sheets and provide those to you, it may shed some light on the discrepancy.

It just so happened that Grady tested two different props for that boat on that day. We wanted the data on the larger prop that our dealer thought we would be happier with, even though Grady normally shipped with the smaller prop.

Rob

 

[Fishtales]

Could it be with/without the t-top?

 

[family affair]

Could it be with/without the t-top?

The top on the 270 is only around 300 lbs.

 

[Fishtales]

Yes, but it is 1/3 of the delta. Running the hull full length to the transom, beefing up the transom for heavier 4S outboards or increasing capacity and general design refreshes tend to add weight. Likely a combo of things causing it. Just tossing some ideas out to the OP to investigate.

 

[Ekea]

thanks for all the replies. I did ask the lady (I think her name was Jamie) if it was maybe t-top weight, but she said that it was always included on that boat. it still seems odd that it changed in the 05-06 transition unless they really added that much structure to handle the larger 4s engines. Jamie also did mention the potential of more standard options, but like said above, the number seems heavy for standard options unless a new standard option was lead ballast, haha.

my concern with this is the fact that it is a lot of weight for this size boat. It is a 22% increase in weight with no change to hull dimensions. would that make this boat heavy, sluggish, inefficient, and "rolly"? if not and it rides great with the extra weight, then are the lighter ones too light and more likely to slap in a short steep chop.

does anyone have any first hand experience riding on either weight boat?

 

[Ekea]

so, there is no solid answer other than the fact that GW didn't weigh boats every year. they said the change is due to hull changes (running length and extra bracing for 4s) and additional options

 

[family affair]

I'd just go by the heavier weight. Mine definitely is not close to the lighter weight. As for why - I have another guess. For the 270 they upped the max power to 500 in 2005. With twin 150's I can crack 45 mph. A set of strong twin 250's would make this boat run mid to high 50's. On a CC you might crack 60 mph. The difference in forces from mid 40's to 60 mph + is huge. They might have beefed up the entire hull to take a better beating. Customer service at GW is very careful not to mention that the same model boat from a different year has a less robust hull.