---

It has been a quaint habit of mine to have collected lead from my works and daily travels.
The sources of such hording has been mainly form discarded and obsoleted automotive batteries.
I have been known to remove the lead sections from such units;
And to melt down and mold the heavy matter in to molding units for cannon balls and suches.
I have made prior to my refit a mold from clay to fit the "Ice locker"
http://www.whalercentral.com/userphot...oto_id=777
And have invested into a two hundred pounds of lead casting of the locker's bottom;
To be installed into the forward section of this beautiful model.
Upon testing the difference in hull performances;
I did find that the forward added on weight had helped a great deal in "balancing" the performance of the Outrage 19's hull's stability upon heavy seas.
I wish that I would have a weight/hull length ratio for a precise formula to present here.
I may experiment into increasing the weight amount by increments of five pounds increases until trim and weight ratio/hull length/water resistance style shape/performance has been satisfactorily reached.
I may the make a permanent and unified mold of the precise weight furnished.
In seeking precision here;
I will have mentioned that hull performance has been reached under a full tankful of gas.
Life is good living with our Whaler hull traditional shapes.
I would have loved to be there when the
Albert Hickman's principles had been discussed and applied to our own Whaler's legacies and that I could have been there to chat with Cole and Daugherty as an undoubtedly humble apprentice to be sure..

---

I would think `ol Al Hickman, Dick fisher, Ray Hunt and Bill Daugherty, would not be happy with you messin with the balance and ride of their boats by using lead in the bow. A properly set up Whaler needs no lead.

---

I think many Boston Whaler boats perform better with a little weight added to their bows, many of the boats are stern heavy. Foe example, the 18' Outrage is only supposed to draft 10" of water, have you ever seen one even come close? 14" is a high floater. The boats ride, and generally perform better with some more weight up forward, they also don't look quite as silly at rest with their bows down where they were designed to be.

---

My 17' Outrage is stern heavy even with the lighter original 115 Merc. Fortunately I was able to move usable lead (the batteries) to the center console to help better balance the boat. The new 115 Etec isn't that much heavier than the old Merc but moving the almost 100 pounds of batteries from the transom to the center console has made a pretty significant difference for the better.

I would hate to add dead weight to a boat but I can understand if the improvements justify it and other reasonable options have already been explored..

---

I too notice the boat rides much better with one person sitting on the console cooler seat.

---

Clearly you don't have enough beer in the front... see the "Water in my drunk tank" thread. Ha. Ok sorry - check please.

In reality, you're probably like me and others on this site - and carefully consider where gear is stored on board in regards to trim. If that's not enough, then i believe you have a great idea there.

---

I take back what I wrote on my first post. Those classic Whalers that were designed some years ago were designed for lighter outboards. Some change in the balance of those classics maybe needed to get them to ride well with modern 4 strokes. I know I moved the interior forward 6" on my 13 footer, and moved the battery and fuel tank forward as well to make the ride acceptable with a 4 stroke 25. Has the design of the really new boats been changed to accept heavy 4 strokes.?

---

Well;
It either was that specific emplacement or choice of materials that prompted me to justify the means.
I actually had a larger porta potty up front and being kept full and heavy did prompt many a passengers to ask upon being tossed a bit by the waves;
What's that smell???
I had to improve on the idea.
But all joking apart guys;
I have found that the weight added abow had evened thing quite nicely.

---

Yes, the newer boats are designed to take the heavier 4 strokes. ie-montauk 17 montauk 170. Put the 2 boats next to each other and the difference is huge. The only draw back would be if I had to repower the 170 my motor choices are limited.

---

Modern technology provides the answer, my Outrage 21 operates very differently with different setups.
For distance a 19p Ventura 4 blade provides the best mileage by far, 6 MPG, for speed raise up the engine via jackplate and see 50+ with a Laser ll, heading into rough seas lower it abit and spin a High five that lifts the stern and plows the bow eliminating pounding, it takes awhile to figure it out but I prefer a light boat.

---

Why deal with adding weights when a set of Lenco (or like) tabs would allow you to set and real time adjust the hull for any condition or any lateral imbalance?

---

Seems like two proven ways to solve the familiar hull/speed tuning up.
I do recall reading of Demercurio describing of his way of tuning up the ride on his V20.
Trim tabs will be seen as another ad on to tune and correct hull performances;
And this from different combination of hull designs and outboard weight and performances.
What do we have as a concrete evidence applying to the specific Outrage Classic 19?
I personally have not seen a single one of our models having been equipped with the tabs option.
I will welcome testimonials from the Classic 1970'ish hull owners.

---

Well;

Since I have not heard of any come back on this factual question;
And that I had consulted with my sources;
Thank You Jim;

I have not heard of anyone so far;
As having installed and operated trims on an Outrage 19 Classic 1975 vintage..
The info is most likely out there.
But, we have not seen or heard of any example of the specific combination of equipment and experience in performances..
So far.
Second hand information is also welcomed.