# Anyone on here have a Twin Vee catamaran?



## BIGRIGZ

I decided a few years back that the next boat I get will bea cat hull. I've been looking at the new stuff on Twin Vee's website and it seems to be pretty impressive. Fuel numbers were crazy, I think the 17' was like 8-9 mpg!! Most others were 4-5 mpg and all over 2 mpg. Can a traditional displacement hull get this good of gas mileage?

Anyone that has a Twin Vee doyou get awesome fuel economy?? And what advice would you give?


----------



## Corpsman

From a cat owner.... I don't think so. You can't go wrong with a cat though. I will never own a mono hull. Most people who ride on a cat feel the same way.


----------



## ditchdoctor81

I've never owned a cat, but one of my fishing buddies has a 31 contender & a 2007 29' express twin vee. I had never fished from a cat until he got his twin vee & I love it. I owned a 21 cape horn & my next boat will be a cat. The ride is awesome. Don't get me wrong, the 31 contender is good for what it does, but I don't have to take 1000mg of motrin after a day out on the cat like I do after the contender.

Sorry I don't have any fuel#'s for ya.


----------



## smokinjoe

I owned a 20' twin vee outrageous it was a POS,the deck would not drain kept about 4" of water on the deck all the time,gunnells were to low. On anchor in a 3' foot sea it would take them over bow and the stern. My guess was it did not have enough displacment and sat to low to the water. I have heard nothing but good things about the 22' and up. As far as fuel I had twin 70 suzuki four strokes and was not impressed it had a 38 gal tank and the range was very limited. The sponsons were foam filled and woul take on water with no good way to drain, lots of cracks in the hulls. Would like to have another cat one day but not a twin vee. I will probably get slammed by tv owners but these are facts.The 20' prokat looked like a nice boat.


----------



## Outta Line

i have owned my 20' TV for 8 years with twin 60 mercs not the best range but great ride.


----------



## Halfmoon

I got an older 17 ft. Its heavy, but it will take some seas.


----------



## reel_crazy

Big

Not sure where you are finding those mpg numbers but generally speaking cats get worse milage than monohulls .. remember no matter what they say you are still trying to push 2 hulls thru or over the water versus one.

rich


----------



## BIGRIGZ

17' TWIN VEE -9MPG

http://www.twinvee.com/Portals/0/17%20performance%20report.pdf

19' TWIN VEE - 5.8MPG

http://www.twinvee.com/Portals/0/19%20performance%20report.pdf

22' TWIN VEE - 3.23MPG

http://www.yamaha-motor.com/assets/products/otb/bulletins/bulletin_4stroke_midthrustjetport_bss_twn-22awesome-t-f115tlr.pdf

26' TWIN VEE - 2.88MPG

http://www.twinvee.com/Boats/CenterConsole/26CenterConsole/tabid/238/Default.aspx


----------



## Corpsman

Ritch. I am going to have to disagree with you. The cat hull is much more efficient than a mono hull. Yes, you are pushing two hulls, but the hull design is better. A trip on my buddy's mono hull going to the same spots will burn about 1/3 more gas than in my cat. I don't know where you got your information, but it it generally accepted that cat hulls are more efficient.


----------



## Xanadu

> *Corpsman (2/4/2008)*Ritch. I am going to have to disagree with you. The cat hull is much more efficient than a mono hull. Yes, you are pushing two hulls, but the hull design is better. A trip on my buddy's mono hull going to the same spots will burn about 1/3 more gas than in my cat. I don't know where you got your information, but it it generally accepted that cat hulls are more efficient.


Right and Wrong, but not a universal law.


----------



## Harry Brosofsky

Don't trust the TwinVee fuel burn numbers. I have two good friends withTV32's...one is a pilot house (Venice), the other a CC (PC). Both have the same Zuke DF250s as I do on my WC330. Economy is as close to identical on the CC and my boat as you can get. The PH burns a bit more. Neither rides as nice as mine and their owners admit this, thought they did pay less than the acverage WC330 owner paid.I actually got sea sick on the 32 CC on a 3' day...I've been sick at sea, but onlymotion sick once and it was on the TV.

Harry


----------



## fishFEEDER9697

I think that there is a little confusion here. To answer your question; no, traditional displacement hulls will not get as good milage. You're also missing some information. There are two other kinds of hulls. Planing and semi-displacment. Most recreational fishing boats are planing hulls. Once on plane, these hulls require alot less force to propel... less resistance=more distance from a give amount of thrust... 

Displacement hulls have a "terminal velocity" that is directly proportional to the length of the waterline. A maximun top-end speed that physics will let them acheive without exponential power.The longer the waterline, the faster it can go. Some nuclear aircraft carriers go some ludicris 30-35 kts. What this means to you? Probably nothing. 

Furthemore, anyone who is trying to sell you something is going to manipulate the statistics in their favor. That is what statistic is all about, interpretation of data. 

Change the motor, stats will change. They are most certainly using an optimum motor choice for their hull, which is definitely inefficient on a completely different hull type. 

Not trying to disuede you. Buyer beware. Educate yourself through whatever means. :toast


----------



## Boatless

Bigrigz - I owned a 2001 Twin Vee 22' Awesome for about 5 years. It had twin 90 Honda 4 strokes. It was by far the best boat that I owned. Inever bothered to check the fuel numbers, but I know that I was getting good mileage by comparison. My typical trip offshore would average around 140 miles round trip based on my GPS. I would average about 36 gallons per trip. When I got the boat, my fuel costs were around $45 per trip. The boat I had before was a 24' Cobia cuddy with a single 225 Yamaha 2 stroke. As with the Twin Vee, I never checked the fuel numbers, but the same trip cost me close to $100 at the same time I paid $45 for the Twin Vee. Of course gas went up since the time I got it and the last trip I took in it before I sold it (Summer 2006) I paid $120 for the same 140 mile trip. Shows how much gas went up. But at the same time, it will give you some means of comparison.

The 22' TV is rated for 230 horsepower and I was a little underpowered. At full trottle, I was getting 35/36 MPH (per GPS) and at cruising range I was getting 26/28 MPH (per GPS). I would highly recommend that you get the full power rating for whatever sized boat you get. One other thing, my boat was loaded down with a lot of extras (mostly stainless steel - large T-top, large dive ladder, lot of seating with backs, etc. - and this was custom, not the standard stuff that comes with the TV from the factory.) So I was pushing extra weight. 

My typical trip would be to leave from the boat ramp at the Oyster Barn on Bayou Texar, make bait, and go to the edge (to the West) and fish in 240 or deeper water. I would make several stops, troll sometimes, and sometimes stop somewhere closer in for snapper on the way back in. Another thing in the comparison - we frequently have 2/3 and 4 foot chop out in the gulf and in my Cobia, I would get pounded to death. My back still remembers it well. In fact, we would slow down to 20 mph or so just to avoid the pounding. In the TV I could cruise at 26 MPH no matter what the chop was. Don't get me wrong, the boat would bounce around a lot ina 2/3foot chop, but it would not pound. Much easier on the back.

And TVs have planing hulls, not displacement, so they can be very fuel efficient. I never bothered to fine tune the props - didn't even know their pitch. There was probably some more fuel efficient props out there. 

I have also been on a newer 26 footer. It was a great ride. It had the Suzukis on it and they seemed to have a lot more power response. You will have to talk to someone else about long-term reliability, cause I don't know. I would definitely consider them though. As for me, I had great success with the Hondas - very reliable and trustworthy. However, my first love is Yamaha and I think the Yammy 4 strokes will be better for a lot of reasons - the biggest one is that they weigh less than the Hondas and I think it makes a lot of difference - especially on a cat.

I sold my boat because my work schedule has changed so that I got very little opportunities to take it out. In the last year I had it, I think I put maybe 30 hours on the motors - not enought to justify the expense of the boat. It killed me seeing it just sitting there and so I sold it. I miss not having a boat badly, but I know it was the right thing to do.

Once you get used to the different handling of the cat, you will never go back to a monohull. I will ride on someone elses mono, but if I own a boat, it will definitely be a cat. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me and I will do my best to answer them. And if you need someone to help with the gas and stuff give me a call, I kept all my gps numbers on a backup handheld and I mught be able to show you some places. I do miss the fishing a lot.

Jim (formerly Got Fish?)


----------



## InTooDeep

> *reel_crazy (2/4/2008)*Big
> 
> Not sure where you are finding those mpg numbers but generally speaking cats get worse milage than monohulls .. remember no matter what they say you are still trying to push 2 hulls thru or over the water versus one.
> 
> rich


I have to disagree as well. I've got a24' cat with twin 150's and have been getting in excess of 3 mpg throughout most of the RPM range. Most of the guys I know with comparable monohull rigs get 1/2 that.


----------



## 401 Cay

> *InTooDeep (2/5/2008)*
> 
> 
> 
> *reel_crazy (2/4/2008)*Big
> 
> Not sure where you are finding those mpg numbers but generally speaking cats get worse milage than monohulls .. remember no matter what they say you are still trying to push 2 hulls thru or over the water versus one.
> 
> rich
> 
> 
> 
> I have to disagree as well. I've got a24' cat with twin 150's and have been getting in excess of 3 mpg throughout most of the RPM range. Most of the guys I know with comparable monohull rigs get 1/2 that.
Click to expand...



I definately disagree with that statement as well.. my 26 Glacier bay gets as good or better lilage then my 22 edgewater.. and has 300 horse versus 225.. much more efficient hull.


----------



## BIGRIGZ

The input on fuel economy is useful, thanks to all who've commented so far.

What about ride characteristics? 

I've heard that a cat willcomfortably tackle30-40% bigger seasthan mono hull would.

Ie; cat boats will be out when everyone else is heading in?!


----------



## joe(Team Miss Emily)

a cat will hold up to alot larger seas and if you want a smooth ride i would go for a glacier bay fully displaced hull its alot heavier but it is really smooth it just plows through waves and its got ok gas mileage


----------



## Boatless

Bigrigz - see my reply above. I was able to maintain cruising speed in sloppy chop seas with the TV vs. slowing down in my Cobia Cuddy due to the pounding characteristics in the monohull. Don't get me wrong, chop is chop and any smaller boat is going to have to ride over them. The key thing is that the cat will be much more comfortable than the mono in similar seas. And yes - I felt much more safer in rough water than I would have felt in a mono. Does that mean that I would take the risk and go out in rougher seas? Probably not - not unless there was some very compelling reason where I though I had too and I am not sure what that would be. I just feel that for general boating safety reasons we should not plan to go out in rough seas just to show that my boat can when your boat cannot. Qualifier - I am speaking strictly from a Gulf chop standpoint.

My first introduction to the Twin Vee was in the Bahamas (Abacos) when a guide took me in a 22' Awesome into the Atlantic in what was easily 8 to 10 foot seas. However, there, the waves were spaced further apart and it was a matter of manuvering between the crests and troughs. I felt very safe there after I got used to it. But it was kinda nervewracking at first when you were in a trough and all you could see is water around you. The boat handled the seas very well and we were going practically full throttle until we got 15 miles offshore to troll for wahoo and YFT.

So I guess it depends on the sea. And it is very misleading for someone to say that the boat will handle 8 to 10 feet seas with no problem. It depends on the sea.

Back in Pensacola, I have been caught in storms a few times when it changed from nearly flat to 4 to 5 footers in a very short time. I didn't feel brave enough to go at cruising speed or full throttle; instead I went at trolling speeds and safely (and I felt safe) made my way home. 

Someone on the thread mentioned having problems with water coming over the bow. I have never had that problem while moving. I have had it happen whenI have been hooked up on a wreck with a very short rode.Of course, you shouldn't work with a short rode, but sometimes you do what you gotta do for whatever reason. Even in those instances the superior flotation and self bailing characteristics of the boat caused the water to leave the boat almost as quickly as it came in. Another case in point, when some one hooks up with a big one, it seems as if everyone winds up on the same side of the boat to watch the fight and see the fish. I have had 4 or 5 people on the same side of the boat and water has come in through the scuppers to the point that we would all be ankle deep in water (we also tend to be on the heavy side!!!). Nothing to worry about unless you don't like getting your feet wet. The water goes right back out when folks get spread back out again. I really do not see this being a problem on the bigger TVs anyway. They provide a much more stable deck. 

Hope this answers your questions.


----------



## leeprice72

The key to good mpg on the tv 22 is 4 strokes. My stepdad has the tv 22 with recently upgraded 4 stoke 115 yamahas. His mpg went way up from what he got with the 2 stroke 90's, (which are still for sale). As far as the ride the boat rides great does not beat you up and will punch right through waves. They are nice cats for the money. The gunnels are a bit low but they really like that for diving. If you get one get four strokes anf fuel flow gauges then you can get decent mpg.


----------



## holy Spear-it

Do a search on Twin Vees on the net. I came up with some forums where owners of the tv's are haveing all kinds of hull problems. They take on water in suposedly sealed locations and crack badly all that stuff and Twin Vee was not fixing the problem to thier satisfaction. I was looking to get a 32 tv and changed my mind.


----------



## Xanadu

Efficiency is a function of weight, powerand resistance. Cats are no better than basic math, but I think people get confused comparing apples to oranges and bananas. First, cats are typically much slower than a similar mono-hulland slow is cheaper. Second, it sounds like some of you are forgetting that an older 2 stroke is going to burn much more fuel than a similar new 4 stroke - or new 2 stroke for that matter. Third, there are several types of cat hulls and each one has different characteristics that contribute to ride, speed and efficiency.

Now, as far as the ride goes, I don't like it. They are clearly smoother in that they don't pound, but they have other nasty habits I don't like. Again, I'm generalizing, but some are terrible riding in a following sea. They'll swerve and gyrate and it's like you're trying to stand on a greasy wiggling stripper in a big following sea. Some are also terribly wet. At anchor, the ones I've been on are prone to burying the nose and just having waves roll through periodically. Of course, the bigger the better and there are some better than others. Whatever Harry's got is said to be awesome, but I haven't been on it. The really big cats run over in Venice aren't too bad either, but as far as I'm concerned the Glacier Bays run by many tuna guides are the worst riding boat I've ever been on. jmho, but I'd rather pound than get thrown overboard and soaked to the bone.


----------

