There's a lot of 'toon manufacturers out there, I know, and I've been
looking at all their propaganda about why there's is the best. Granted
I'm not looing for a "new" pontoon boat, but the used market is fine
with me.

I've been studying the advantages of every 'toon design ie round, U-
shaped, square etc, but have always wondered why s lot of mfg's will
cut the back of the tube off right about where the engine mounts,
while some will have a pointed tip which my or may not exted back
beyond the transom.

I would think that an extended tip would be more efficient for
"gliding" though the water and provide more bouyncy. (I know, bad
spelling!)

is there any advantage to a rear tipped tube? over a squared off one?

I can almost understand the advantage of a U shaped tup over a round
one, due to the fact that loading heavy over towards the transom can
cause the rear of the tube to "sink" above the curvature of the tube
itself,, but then again, I'm not sure if thats a good/bad factor or
not.

I've seen some tubes that were hollow iar, and some that were
styrofoam filled. the filled tubes sound more attractive in case
there's some puncture, but otherwise I can go either way, I suppose.

I'm really looking for a 26-28 ft float, if that makes any difference.

Oh yeah, Not STEEL!

Looking for ideas.

THANKS!

Tim

On Apr 4, 12:58 pm, "Tim" wrote:
There's a lot of 'toon manufacturers out there, I know, and I've been
looking at all their propaganda about why there's is the best. Granted
I'm not looing for a "new" pontoon boat, but the used market is fine
with me.

I've been studying the advantages of every 'toon design ie round, U-
shaped, square etc, but have always wondered why s lot of mfg's will
cut the back of the tube off right about where the engine mounts,
while some will have a pointed tip which my or may not exted back
beyond the transom.

I would think that an extended tip would be more efficient for
"gliding" though the water and provide more bouyncy. (I know, bad
spelling!)

is there any advantage to a rear tipped tube? over a squared off one?

I can almost understand the advantage of a U shaped tup over a round
one, due to the fact that loading heavy over towards the transom can
cause the rear of the tube to "sink" above the curvature of the tube
itself,, but then again, I'm not sure if thats a good/bad factor or
not.

I've seen some tubes that were hollow iar, and some that were
styrofoam filled. the filled tubes sound more attractive in case
there's some puncture, but otherwise I can go either way, I suppose.

I'm really looking for a 26-28 ft float, if that makes any difference.

Oh yeah, Not STEEL!

Looking for ideas.

THANKS!

Tim

In a real world test there would be no noticeable performance
advantages or disadvantages because of differences in the shapes of
pontoons on pontoon boats. Find the one that is the size you want,
with the features you want, at the price you want to pay and forget
about what shape it's pontoons are. If you care about performance you
need to stop looking at pontoon boats.

jamesgangnc wrote:

Tim

In a real world test there would be no noticeable performance
advantages or disadvantages because of differences in the shapes of
pontoons on pontoon boats. Find the one that is the size you want,
with the features you want, at the price you want to pay and forget
about what shape it's pontoons are. If you care about performance you
need to stop looking at pontoon boats.

That's sort of what I was thinking. and by meaning "performance" I
wasn't talking about stuff like speed and handling, but rather
operational economy. I thought it was odd that there that many
varient's in tube designs, though.

Dunno where you live but I know that houseboats built for charter in South
Australian waters (River Murray mainly), must be built "under survey". This
means mainly safety specifications such as pontoons built with several
seperate chambers in case of rupture etc, quality of welding, regular out of
water inspections & so on.
I think there are requirement as well for shape so as to minimise river bank
erosion.
Now in my mind, if it reduces the "bow wave" & "wash", then it would also be
more effecient.
I'd look up & maybe email some of the construction companies & get some
advice from them?
Many of these huge houseboats only use twin 25hp outboards or similar.



"Tim" wrote in message
oups.com...

jamesgangnc wrote:

Tim

In a real world test there would be no noticeable performance
advantages or disadvantages because of differences in the shapes of
pontoons on pontoon boats. Find the one that is the size you want,
with the features you want, at the price you want to pay and forget
about what shape it's pontoons are. If you care about performance you
need to stop looking at pontoon boats.

That's sort of what I was thinking. and by meaning "performance" I
wasn't talking about stuff like speed and handling, but rather
operational economy. I thought it was odd that there that many
varient's in tube designs, though.

BruceM wrote:
Dunno where you live but I know that houseboats built for charter in South
Australian waters (River Murray mainly), must be built "under survey". This
means mainly safety specifications such as pontoons built with several
seperate chambers in case of rupture etc, quality of welding, regular out of
water inspections & so on.
I think there are requirement as well for shape so as to minimise river bank
erosion.
Now in my mind, if it reduces the "bow wave" & "wash", then it would also be
more effecient.
I'd look up & maybe email some of the construction companies & get some
advice from them?
Many of these huge houseboats only use twin 25hp outboards or similar.


Good point - I think most pontoons are chambered. At least the ones I
looked at all were - or so the sales guys said :-)

Capt Jack R..


"Tim" wrote in message
oups.com...

jamesgangnc wrote:


Tim

In a real world test there would be no noticeable performance
advantages or disadvantages because of differences in the shapes of
pontoons on pontoon boats. Find the one that is the size you want,
with the features you want, at the price you want to pay and forget
about what shape it's pontoons are. If you care about performance you
need to stop looking at pontoon boats.

That's sort of what I was thinking. and by meaning "performance" I
wasn't talking about stuff like speed and handling, but rather
operational economy. I thought it was odd that there that many
varient's in tube designs, though.

"Tim" wrote in message
oups.com...

jamesgangnc wrote:

Tim

In a real world test there would be no noticeable performance
advantages or disadvantages because of differences in the shapes of
pontoons on pontoon boats. Find the one that is the size you want,
with the features you want, at the price you want to pay and forget
about what shape it's pontoons are. If you care about performance you
need to stop looking at pontoon boats.

That's sort of what I was thinking. and by meaning "performance" I
wasn't talking about stuff like speed and handling, but rather
operational economy. I thought it was odd that there that many
varient's in tube designs, though.


Based on my understanding of the speed these things do, I would not really
worry about fuel (operational) economy based on different pontoon designs
but spend more attention to construction quality.

On Apr 4, 6:21 pm, "JimH" wrote:
"Tim" wrote in message

oups.com...







jamesgangnc wrote:

Tim

In a real world test there would be no noticeable performance
advantages or disadvantages because of differences in the shapes of
pontoons on pontoon boats. Find the one that is the size you want,
with the features you want, at the price you want to pay and forget
about what shape it's pontoons are. If you care about performance you
need to stop looking at pontoon boats.

That's sort of what I was thinking. and by meaning "performance" I
wasn't talking about stuff like speed and handling, but rather
operational economy. I thought it was odd that there that many
varient's in tube designs, though.

Based on my understanding of the speed these things do, I would not really
worry about fuel (operational) economy based on different pontoon designs
but spend more attention to construction quality.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I know what you mean, Jim. I suppose what I'm asking is what tube
"design" would provide maximum efficiency. I should have said that
instead of "economy"

Tim wrote:
On Apr 4, 6:21 pm, "JimH" wrote:

"Tim" wrote in message

groups.com...








jamesgangnc wrote:

Tim

In a real world test there would be no noticeable performance
advantages or disadvantages because of differences in the shapes of
pontoons on pontoon boats. Find the one that is the size you want,
with the features you want, at the price you want to pay and forget
about what shape it's pontoons are. If you care about performance you
need to stop looking at pontoon boats.

That's sort of what I was thinking. and by meaning "performance" I
wasn't talking about stuff like speed and handling, but rather
operational economy. I thought it was odd that there that many
varient's in tube designs, though.

Based on my understanding of the speed these things do, I would not really
worry about fuel (operational) economy based on different pontoon designs
but spend more attention to construction quality.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


I know what you mean, Jim. I suppose what I'm asking is what tube
"design" would provide maximum efficiency. I should have said that
instead of "economy"


The biggest tub designed I noticed was that some are trying to get the
tubes to "plane" when they were not standard round shape. Of course they
were also putting big outboat on them as well.

They are all going to corner flat and drive somewhat like a truck. A few
manufactures are placing larger tubes in the center to try to get them
to lean into the turns more. But since top speed was not my goal I was
not interested in them.

One thing that the guy next to us on the lake said he really liked (he
sold a older pontoon and got a new one last year) is that the pontoons
most manufactures are using are larger now. 25 inch. I think he said his
older one had 22 inch logs. He likes the 25 inch ones alot better.

Capt Jack R..

Tim wrote:
There's a lot of 'toon manufacturers out there, I know, and I've been
looking at all their propaganda about why there's is the best. Granted
I'm not looing for a "new" pontoon boat, but the used market is fine
with me.

I've been studying the advantages of every 'toon design ie round, U-
shaped, square etc, but have always wondered why s lot of mfg's will
cut the back of the tube off right about where the engine mounts,
while some will have a pointed tip which my or may not exted back
beyond the transom.

I would think that an extended tip would be more efficient for
"gliding" though the water and provide more bouyncy. (I know, bad
spelling!)

is there any advantage to a rear tipped tube? over a squared off one?

I can almost understand the advantage of a U shaped tup over a round
one, due to the fact that loading heavy over towards the transom can
cause the rear of the tube to "sink" above the curvature of the tube
itself,, but then again, I'm not sure if thats a good/bad factor or
not.

I've seen some tubes that were hollow iar, and some that were
styrofoam filled. the filled tubes sound more attractive in case
there's some puncture, but otherwise I can go either way, I suppose.

I'm really looking for a 26-28 ft float, if that makes any difference.

Oh yeah, Not STEEL!

Looking for ideas.

THANKS!

Tim


I don't know about the back tips being pointed or not. Last year we
purchased a bentley pontoon boat to replace out basic little fishing
boat. I was looking for something to fish out of that was more
confortable. I looked at new and used and liked their 20ft four point
the best. It is not really set up for entertaining as well as the
"Cruise" models. But has bassbiat style seats on all corners. With live
wells and baits wells. For me smaller was better for getting into tight
places around the lake.

On the back of the pontoons is a bracket that is for mounting a
transducer that goes to the fish/depth sounder. And on the other we have
a pump for getting water to the livewell and baitwell. Yet there is
still enought seating for our family of four if we wish to just go for a
run.

The boat is rated for 90hp, I had a 60 put on it that trolls very nice.
Does not use alot of gas either. But I will not win any races. :-)

I would look more at finding a layout and power that suits what you want
to do on it.

Capt Jack R..