Boat Weight - Does it matter to you?

[Lightning]

When you are shopping for a boat, how important is weight in the decision process? Let's say you are looking at 25' boats or 28' boats. Is weight a concern at all or do other factors weigh in? What's your priority list...
Hey moderators, can you list this as a poll ????
Weight
Power
Speed
Handling
Styling
Fuel consumption
Builder Reputation
Warranty
on edit: this is not my priority list, just some ideas.

[Cheap Thrills]

You can create a poll when you start a new thread by checking the poll option at the bottom of the new post form.
C.T. :wink:

[GRUNION]

weight is definatly somthing to consider. lighter is faster.

[Froggystyle]

This is nearly the opposite of my concerns when I designed a boat, but my priorities when purchasing would be in the following order...
Styling
Builder Reputation
Warranty
Power
Weight
Handling
Speed
Fuel consumption
Top of my list, as it always has been is styling. What you didn't have listed, which has always been second on my list is acceleration. I think it is the single most important performance characteristic in a boat. If it was in the poll, I would have put it second. Additionally, you don't have functionality, ease of ingress/egress, flow of traffic, durability, safety or abuse-resistant interior as items. I will take all above any listed except for styling...
Can't cruise an ugly boat... for any reason.

[Lightning]

This is nearly the opposite of my concerns when I designed a boat, but my priorities when purchasing would be in the following order...
Styling
Builder Reputation
Warranty
Power
Weight
Handling
Speed
Fuel consumption
Top of my list, as it always has been is styling. What you didn't have listed, which has always been second on my list is acceleration. I think it is the single most important performance characteristic in a boat. If it was in the poll, I would have put it second. Additionally, you don't have functionality, ease of ingress/egress, flow of traffic, durability, safety or abuse-resistant interior as items. I will take all above any listed except for styling...
Can't cruise an ugly boat... for any reason.
good points, I tried to keep the list somewhat short. I think durability would be covered under builder reputation, safety would be covered under handling, ingress/egress would be covered under the type of boat you pick (deck, cat, v-bottom). Acceleration is somewhat covered under power and speed - depending on drive selection ;)

[MrsSigEpMock]

This is nearly the opposite of my concerns when I designed a boat, but my priorities when purchasing would be in the following order...
Styling
Builder Reputation
Warranty
Power
Weight
Handling
Speed
Fuel consumption
Top of my list, as it always has been is styling. What you didn't have listed, which has always been second on my list is acceleration. I think it is the single most important performance characteristic in a boat. If it was in the poll, I would have put it second. Additionally, you don't have functionality, ease of ingress/egress, flow of traffic, durability, safety or abuse-resistant interior as items. I will take all above any listed except for styling...
Can't cruise an ugly boat... for any reason.
Froggy, I can't believe you forgot "sexiness" or "enough area to shake my boodie when I drive through the channel" :p

[Froggystyle]

good points, I tried to keep the list somewhat short. I think durability would be covered under builder reputation, safety would be covered under handling, ingress/egress would be covered under the type of boat you pick (deck, cat, v-bottom). Acceleration is somewhat covered under power and speed - depending on drive selection ;)
Not true though. Many, many well-reputed builders have durability issues. I am not talking about build quality, I am talking about interiors that can't take abuse, carpet flooring and wood construction. Anodized fixtures instead of powdercoated, you get the picture. Durability is a boat's ability to stand up to the test of time and abuse, not a manufacturers.
Safety has very little to do with handling. A prop off the back may handle great, but is unsafe. A boat that won't steer with 8 people in the bow section, but "handles" well under a magazine test is unsafe... especially if the bow fits 8 people! Plenty of 100+ mph boats can't roll over at all with six people in the boat, and nearly every top-speed demon at any evaluation had 15+ second time to plane numbers in the bigger boats. I would say emphatically that accelleration has little to do with speed and power. You pretty much need to decide which is more important, speed or acceleration. Hopefully, you find a drive/engine combination that delivers enough of each for the balancing act to be successful.
I saw many "deckboats" this weekend with horrible ingress/egress... particularly on the swimstep and ramps. Tough to get in at the sandbar, tough to get into on clearlake. Layout doesn't help that... it is pure design.
What you have stumbled onto is my greatest challenge right now... re-setting the market's opinion of priorities. Weight is the same as acceleration, horsepower and speed. They are all intimately connected. Thusly, since weight is cheap, it should be a larger concern than power... or at least as large a concern. Not the case. Safety, as you have mentioned is purely relative. Props are not safe, so any declaration of safety added to the use of a prop is polishing a turd. Shrouded props don't work for shit, so there is little way to mitigate this basic safety concern. Combine that with a heavy boat with strange handling under load, and you have a safety concern. I consider swimsteps you can't get into from deep water if you are oversized or elderly to be a safety issue. Or 6 orange vests buried in a bilge somewhere a safety issue. I also consider a fire extinguisher buried under a seat or under the helm a safety issue. Nobody else does, but I am out to change that. Because they should. I think delivering a boat without a properly sized anchor is a safety issue... and I think the most blatant of all is to deliver a boat without training. I helped a brand-new boat owner from a company with a "Good Reputation" out during the weekend of their own regatta in Havasu keep from dragging his boat up the launch ramp with the boat literally half on the trailer. You know that first roller on a 21' trailer for the bow about 5 feet back from the front? The tip of his bow was touching that, and they were about to pull it out of the water. Probably 10' of slack in the winch too. Tow hitch was at least 10" too high for the boat as well. Who cares, as long as the check is good, right?
I call that a safety issue...

[Dave C]

YES... (says the man with a heavy ass boat ;))
but when I grow up and become a baller your damn skippy the boat is gonna be lighter......
I noticed that the lighter the boat the more expensive it is... its a technology thing.

[rivercrazy]

From my own jet versus outdrive experience, there is not much difference in safety between the drive types. My old 21 jet drive stuck out the back of the boat by more than 2 feet and was pretty close to the water surface. My current 25' deep V outdrive boat puts the prop at least 3.5' feet under the water and is tucked pretty far under with the drive all the way in. It is pretty hard to kick or get near the prop at least in this configuration.
I cut my foot pretty good on my jet drive before. So far the prop hasn't caused bleeding for me or anyone else so far. (knock on wood).
My personal ranking of these decision factors would be:
Handling (by far the most important consideration)
Warranty / Builder Reputation (durability, resale value, etc)
Speed (Accel, cruising efficiency, top end)
Styling (looks are great but second to other factors)
Power (to me its directly related to speed)
Weight (important but sometimes more weight is good depending on the boat)
Fuel consumption (no boat gets great gas mileage anyway)

[Froggystyle]

From my own jet versus outdrive experience, there is not much difference in safety between the drive types. My old 21 jet drive stuck out the back of the boat by more than 2 feet and was pretty close to the water surface. My current 25' deep V outdrive boat puts the prop at least 3.5' feet under the water and is tucked pretty far under with the drive all the way in. It is pretty hard to kick or get near the prop at least in this configuration. I cut my foot pretty good on my jet drive before. So far the prop hasn't caused bleeding for me or anyone else so far. (knock on wood).
IMO... any boat properly designed should cover any type of drive with a swimstep or platform. I am talking about the basic safety concern of a propeller vs. jet propulsion. You absolutely cannot have a prop turning with people in the water. Too dangerous. Not the case with a jet.
My personal ranking of these decision factors would be:
Handling (by far the most important consideration)
Warranty / Builder Reputation (durability, resale value, etc)
Speed (Accel, cruising efficiency, top end)
Styling (looks are great but second to other factors)
Power (to me its directly related to speed)
Weight (important but sometimes more weight is good depending on the boat)
Fuel consumption (no boat gets great gas mileage anyway)
Good list of priorities. Seriously. But, for the record increased weight doesn't help any hull type. Period. A type that will cut through waves and chop will do so better if it is lighter.
What weight does help is bad hull design. It is kind of like training wheels. If you have a hull design that isn't inherently stable (some stepped hulls out there...) than increased weight will mitigate handling issues.

[rivercrazy]

IMO... any boat properly designed should cover any type of drive with a swimstep or platform. I am talking about the basic safety concern of a propeller vs. jet propulsion. You absolutely cannot have a prop turning with people in the water. Too dangerous. Not the case with a jet.
Good list of priorities. Seriously. But, for the record increased weight doesn't help any hull type. Period. A type that will cut through waves and chop will do so better if it is lighter.
What weight does help is bad hull design. It is kind of like training wheels. If you have a hull design that isn't inherently stable (some stepped hulls out there...) than increased weight will mitigate handling issues.
No one should ever be close to a boat with the engine running. Watersports may be the only exception but ANY boat driver should be skilled and experienced enough to NEVER put a prop near anyone in the water. Jets are a little safer in this respect - BUT I've read about many injuries caused by jets running over waterski ropes and having a swimmer tangled in the line and either cut or drown. Probably doesn't happen often, but jets are not 100% safe. Driver skill and experience is vital in all situations regardless of drive type. I'd guess more serious boat injuries take place because of human hull contact versus injury by the drive.
I disagree with you on weight. Take any deep V offshore boat for example. Weight improves ride quality in the rough. Just take Cig's for example versus say a Fountain. The Cig will kill the fountain in ride quality - mostly because of their stout construction and more weight. Yea the Fountain will be a little faster but the Cig will maintain a faster speed over a long run because of the ride quality. It doesn't have anything to do with overcoming a poor design in most cases.
If the conditions are rough, a heavier design will cut through the slop better than a very light design. While my personal boat isn't what I'd consider heavy, I've run side by side with other similar bottom designs where the boat is considerably lighter in 3-4 foot wind swept chop in Lake Mohave. My boat was in its total comfort zone where others had to run for protection.
I'm not saying excessive weight is desirable in most situations. But it does have certain advantages in some situations.

[Havasu Hangin']

Safety has very little to do with handling. A prop off the back may handle great, but is unsafe.
A boat that won't steer if you lose power, or suck up a baggie...
..is unsafe.
:notam:

[Froggystyle]

No one should ever be close to a boat with the engine running. Watersports may be the only exception but ANY boat driver should be skilled and experienced enough to NEVER put a prop near anyone in the water. Jets are a little safer in this respect - BUT I've read about many injuries caused by jets running over waterski ropes and having a swimmer tangled in the line and either cut or drown. Probably doesn't happen often, but jets are not 100% safe. Driver skill and experience is vital in all situations regardless of drive type. I'd guess more serious boat injuries take place because of human hull contact versus injury by the drive.
I disagree with you on weight. Take any deep V offshore boat for example. Weight improves ride quality in the rough. Just take Cig's for example versus say a Fountain. The Cig will kill the fountain in ride quality - mostly because of their stout construction and more weight. Yea the Fountain will be a little faster but the Cig will maintain a faster speed over a long run because of the ride quality. It doesn't have anything to do with overcoming a poor design in most cases.
If the conditions are rough, a heavier design will cut through the slop better than a very light design. While my personal boat isn't what I'd consider heavy, I've run side by side with other similar bottom designs where the boat is considerably lighter in 3-4 foot wind swept chop in Lake Mohave. My boat was in its total comfort zone where others had to run for protection.
I'm not saying excessive weight is desirable in most situations. But it does have certain advantages in some situations.
Not according to ANY Naval architect, Peter Hledin, Reggie Fountain, Don Aronow or any boatbuilder of note.
It just doesn't help. Better distribution of weight can help a ton, but most boats of serious weight need tabs and accessories to allow them to provide a range of function... such as rolling over onto plane for example.
The ride when drafting 12" less water is far nicer than the ride drafting 12" deeper. You are subject to far less impact, far less drag and way better performance through it all.
Plus, show me a boat that is considerably lighter than a 28 Shockwave and similar bottom design. By similar, I mean same strakes, steps, deadrise, hook and transom angle. I can't think of any... not that a Shockwave is a lightweight, but it certainly isn't tubby compared to many on the market in that size range.
We are 2,000 pounds lighter than our competition. Show me your boat 2,000 pounds lighter and then tell me if it doesn't ride smoother. What rides better, your boat full of fuel and people or the boat empty? Silly question, because EVERY boat rides and works better empty. Take that weight away again and you don't think you still gain performance, handling and comfort?

[Froggystyle]

A boat that won't steer if you lose power, or suck up a baggie...
..is unsafe.
:notam:
A boat that sinks if you break the outdrive... is unsafe.
A boat that throws everybody forward if you hit a submerged log/sand bar/rock ... is unsafe.
A boat that can cut you if you are near the drive... is unsafe.
Props can't go down the safety road with jets. If you want to go 1 for 1, you have already shot your load! ;)
You shouldn't be pointed at anything you could hit in any case. That is boating safety rule #1. Don't point your boat at anything that in the event of steering or engine failure you would hit at your current rate of speed.

[schlepy]

yes it matters how much weight is in your boat, you dont want your friends to see you cruising the channel with a bunch of fatties in your boat, do you??
well, i for got this is ***boat.com and some of you like that...

[Havasu Hangin']

My boat actually flies more level off 4'+ waves with 1,000lbs of gas onboard.

[Havasu Hangin']

Props can't go down the safety road with jets. If you want to go 1 for 1, you have already shot your load!
A boat that can damage a skier with a roost is unsafe.
A boat with open headers is unsafe.
A closed mind is unsafe.
:notam:

[rivercrazy]

I can't speak for all outdrive boats but my boat's drive bullet is just maybe a few inches below the keel of the boat. That puts the skeg perhaps 8-10 inches below the lowest running surface of the boat. Anyone that runs aground in 8-12 inches of water in either a jet or outdrive is in BIG trouble anyway. That to me is driver error.
While I will agree that generally speaking the lighter the better, I disagree that weight is not an advantage in certain situations/conditions/hull types. Take a Schiada River Cruiser V Drive. They are laid up very heavy (like tanks). Take the same exact length / hull bottom that is laid up light with the same engine and V-drive config. The Schiada will kill the other boat with respect to ride quality.

[Lightning]

A boat that can damage a skier with a roost is unsafe.
A boat with open headers is unsafe.
A closed mind is unsafe.
:notam:
so where's your list..... don't jack my thread. :)

[Froggystyle]

A boat that can damage a skier with a roost is unsafe.
A boat with open headers is unsafe.
A closed mind is unsafe.
:notam:
True on all three accounts. I know of plenty of open header props though... And calling a boat that can damage a skier with a roost unsafe is like calling a handgun that can kill someone unsafe. That is pure operator right there. A driver that would roost a skier is unsafe.
OK... so you want to play? Neither objection is appropriate for the drive discussion.
But, I will throw a couple more out there for you...
Props, when they catch a rope pull them tight, and then keep winding. ...unsafe
Props take on some sand and foul/ruin the impeller and kill the motor... unsafe
Props have a large open hole through the back of the boat protected only by a rubber boot. This is by far the easiest way for water to get in any prop boat in large volume. ...unsafe
Back to the striking the underwater hazard... can total your boat by ripping off the transom. Not just outdrives here... but outboards as well. ...unsafe
Single drive applications tend to twist the boat up at higher speeds in response to the torque of the prop in the water. ...unsafe.
Props hit Manatees ... unsafe ;)
I'll let you catch up here. But don't bring any open header or roost crap...

[rivercrazy]

so where's your list..... don't jack my thread. :)
Your list is incomplete for Jeff. You need to add the following categores: 1) only white gelcoats, 2) built in grey goose bar, 3) enough head room in the berth for Lerch.

[Froggystyle]

I can't speak for all outdrive boats but my boat's drive bullet is just maybe a few inches below the keel of the boat. That puts the skeg perhaps 8-10 inches below the lowest running surface of the boat. Anyone that runs aground in 8-12 inches of water in either a jet or outdrive is in BIG trouble anyway. That to me is driver error.
I do it all the time. Keeps me on the right side of the river. I personally think that if you can't navigate the waterway on the correct side of the river because of your drive or draft... you need a different boat for that waterway. But, since my boat is lightweight ( ;) ) I only draft 10" total at rest and less than two inches on plane. Your 8-10" below the running surface is still 24"+ below mine on plane. Weight becomes a huge factor in this case. I would agree that your boat has no business in 8-12" of water. Mine does fine.
While I will agree that generally speaking the lighter the better, I disagree that weight is not an advantage in certain situations/conditions/hull types. Take a Schiada River Cruiser V Drive. They are laid up very heavy (like tanks). Take the same exact length / hull bottom that is laid up light with the same engine and V-drive config. The Schiada will kill the other boat with respect to ride quality.
Again, show me a boat with the exact Schiada bottom that is considerably lighter. If I infused one of those things it would eat it's older brother alive in terms of handling, performance and comfort. Lee is currently making huge efforts to vacuum bag and lighten up his boats. Ask him if he thinks he is doing all of that to lose comfort?

[rivercrazy]

#1) Props, when they catch a rope pull them tight, and then keep winding. ...unsafe
#2) Props take on some sand and foul/ruin the impeller and kill the motor... unsafe
#3) Props have a large open hole through the back of the boat protected only by a rubber boot. This is by far the easiest way for water to get in any prop boat in large volume. ...unsafe
#4) Back to the striking the underwater hazard... can total your boat by ripping off the transom. Not just outdrives here... but outboards as well. ...unsafe
#5) Single drive applications tend to twist the boat up at higher speeds in response to the torque of the prop in the water. ...unsafe.
#6) Props hit Manatees ... unsafe ;)
I'll let you catch up here. But don't bring any open header or roost crap...
Responses:
#1) Jets are no different - they just wrap the rope around the impeller stalling the motor and ruining the wear ring. - DRAW
#2) A jet will just fill the block with sand causing the motor to overheat and sieze. - DRAW (in fact jets are more likely to pull in sand in low water due to suction from the intake)
#3) Jets have many ways for water to enter the boat (i.e. intake, all that silicone needed to seal water out of the transom, steering cable, rope packing) - ADVANTAGE PROP!
#4) OK but if your in water that shallow and run aground - the jet would be in just as much trouble.
#5) Only out of the hole. When your up on plane running fast speeds, the torque factor is virtually non-existant - DRAW
#6) The hull would hit a manatee before the prop - DRAW

[Beer-30]

Heavier is usually a better, smoother ride, yet slower on same power.
Lighter is more efficient on smooth days, but will be a little harsher in the heavy chop.
Basically, it is common sense:
Family sport boat: Heavy is just fine.
Solo extension boat: Lighter the better.

[rivercrazy]

I I would agree that your boat has no business in 8-12" of water. Mine does fine.
Again, show me a boat with the exact Schiada bottom that is considerably lighter. If I infused one of those things it would eat it's older brother alive in terms of handling, performance and comfort. Lee is currently making huge efforts to vacuum bag and lighten up his boats. Ask him if he thinks he is doing all of that to lose comfort?
There is no way that runnign in a foot of water is safe for any boat. There is no way to predict changes in the bottom of any waterway.
I bet he is trying to lighten those boats more for accel / top end than for ride quality.

[Jordy]

Not just outdrives here... but outboards as well. ...unsafe
Then what's up with the outboard on the Trident??? :idea: :D
http://www.hotboatpics.com/pics/data/500/23DSC01151.JPG
1) only white gelcoats, 2) built in grey goose bar
Hey now F'kn Banker, I don't see any problem with either one of those. As far as head room, don't you mean a step stool so that HH, being the Oompa Loompa that he is, can see over the dash??? :D :D :D

[flat broke]

While I will agree that generally speaking the lighter the better, I disagree that weight is not an advantage in certain situations/conditions/hull types. Take a Schiada River Cruiser V Drive. They are laid up very heavy (like tanks). Take the same exact length / hull bottom that is laid up light with the same engine and V-drive config. The Schiada will kill the other boat with respect to ride quality.
There is a reason that ballast tanks are run in serious 21RCs... It isn't to make them lighter, thats for sure. Yes the lighter boat should be quicker, but if the hull design can't work because there isn't enough weight up front to allow the V to do it's job, the lighter boat will take a beating trying to keep up with the "heavy" boat who's V is doing it's job. Weight does matter, but I think the manner in which it matters has been lost in this discussion. A better example of this issue might be found in the performance differences between the all composite Howard Bullets and their traditional layup siblings.
I don't think Froggy or Rivercrazy are right or wrong, just speaking about the weight in different applications and scenarios.
Chris

[rivercrazy]

Thats pretty funny right there Jordy! Are those jet outboards -or- the ones with whirling knives off the propshaft? :D:D

[Lightning]

There is a reason that ballast tanks are run in serious 21RCs... It isn't to make them lighter, thats for sure. Yes the lighter boat should be quicker, but if the hull design can't work because there isn't enough weight up front to allow the V to do it's job, the lighter boat will take a beating trying to keep up with the "heavy" boat who's V is doing it's job. Weight does matter, but I think the manner in which it matters has been lost in this discussion. A better example of this issue might be found in the performance differences between the all composite Howard Bullets and their traditional layup siblings.
I don't think Froggy or Rivercrazy are right or wrong, just speaking about the weight in different applications and scenarios.
Chris
So you are saying that weight in a cat, weight in a deck, and weight in a v-bottom all have different pro's and con's.

[Jordy]

So you are saying that weight in a cat, weight in a deck, and weight in a v-bottom all have different pro's and con's.
I'd say it's apples to oranges and yes it would matter on what you're trying to do with it.
I know that on the way back from Catalina on Saturday afternoon in 6' to 8' and bigger seas with white caps, my race/lite layup cat with a very efficient bottom with the outboards was spending more time doing airplane imitations than Big Warlock's 38' v-hull Donzi that weighs about 3 times what mine does. After about 10 miles of that I was wishing I was in a bigger, heavier boat. ;)

[Froggystyle]

I'd say it's apples to oranges and yes it would matter on what you're trying to do with it.
I know that on the way back from Catalina on Saturday afternoon in 6' to 8' and bigger seas with white caps, my race/lite layup cat with a very efficient bottom with the outboards was spending more time doing airplane imitations than Big Warlock's 38' v-hull Donzi that weighs about 3 times what mine does. After about 10 miles of that I was wishing I was in a bigger, heavier boat. ;)
Yours does that on Lake Pleasant.... And you always wish you were in a bigger, heavier boat.
Draw... ;)
You going to be there this weekend? We are coming... and hell is riding with me!

[Lightning]

I'd say it's apples to oranges and yes it would matter on what you're trying to do with it.
I know that on the way back from Catalina on Saturday afternoon in 6' to 8' and bigger seas with white caps, my race/lite layup cat with a very efficient bottom with the outboards was spending more time doing airplane imitations than Big Warlock's 38' v-hull Donzi that weighs about 3 times what mine does. After about 10 miles of that I was wishing I was in a bigger, heavier boat. ;)
So do you think if your were in a 38' v-bottom that was a lot lighter you would have been far worse off then he was? What if your cat was 3 times heavier??

[Jordy]

Yours does that on Lake Pleasant....
But not for 32 miles and not it 8' seas. :)
And you always wish you were in a bigger, heavier boat.
Draw... ;)
Touche'
You going to be there this weekend? We are coming... and hell is riding with me!
There as in here, as in Pleasant??? I think Sunday is the plan. Trying to give my body a little more time to recover from the vacation, but yes I'll be local. :D

[Jordy]

So do you think if your were in a 38' v-bottom that was a lot lighter you would have been far worse off then he was? What if your cat was 3 times heavier??
Dammit Ari, you're killing me with all these theoretical questions. I'm just a dumb sales guy trying to keep things lively here. I do think if my cat was 3 times heavier with the same length we would have taken more of a beating, at least based upon the conditions we were running in, with my current engine setup. Perhaps with more weight and I/O's. With the 300X's my boat is very sensitive to weight though as it's alot of glass to push around with little V-6 2-strokes.

[rivercrazy]

I beg to differ on that BS line.....
That's cause your canadian! :D

[Lightning]

Dammit Ari, you're killing me with all these theoretical questions. I'm just a dumb sales guy trying to keep things lively here. I do think if my cat was 3 times heavier with the same length we would have taken more of a beating, at least based upon the conditions we were running in, with my current engine setup. Perhaps with more weight and I/O's. With the 300X's my boat is very sensitive to weight though as it's alot of glass to push around with little V-6 2-strokes.
Dammit Jordy, theory is what makes people sell.... Anyhow, come out to Parker anytime between 7/17 & 7/23 and take me for a ride in that boat. e=mcsquared and all that shi t.

[Havasu Hangin']

So your boat is poorly balanced?
Since a wave is a ramp, it brings the nose up as you launch. With a heavy fuel load, I don't have to use as much tab (which scrubs off speed) to keep the nose down.
If my boat is poorly balanced, then I guess the offshore boats with ballast tanks are in the same boat (pardon the expression).

[sorry dog]

Boating ... is unsafe. Take up shuffleboard instead.

[Never Too Old]

But, for the record increased weight doesn't help any hull type. Period. A type that will cut through waves and chop will do so better if it is lighter.
.
A heavier sailboat will cut through waves and chop better than a lighter one.
Sorry, I would have let that pass if you hadn't said "Period".

[Beer-30]

A heavier sailboat will cut through waves and chop better than a lighter one.
Sorry, I would have let that pass if you hadn't said "Period".
I've been on a cruise ship that passed through 4' rollers ALOT easier than mine would have. Mine handles them just fine, but we didn't even feel them on the ocean liner.