bombard comando vs zodiac futura

[spainman]

Hello,

I would like to ask if the 3 part " rigid keel " of the bombard is better in rough sea conditions as the inflatable keel with speed tubes of the zodiac.

Some people or zodiac salers told me that the speed tubes absorb the waves in roughes conditions.

and that it is same as the 3-part keel of the bombard.

Somebody can advice or have tested both ?

Sorry for my mistakes.

[spainman]

i hade before a zodiac mark III GR, quicksilver HD 380 and all these boats in rough conditions are pretty not nice to drive. the knocks by the waves to the bottom is transmitting very hard to the floor bords.
So maybe speed tubes or Bombard 3 piece keel are better in this conditions.
or maybe a complete inflatable floor with keel like bombard aerotec ???
Please advice.

[office888]

Look at this way:
The Bombard Commando has one less chamber to inflate.

They're both very good boats.

My experience with the Futura is that the "shock mitigating" quality of the speed tubes is minor. However, they do affect the planing qualities of the boat...specifically, it planes quickly at low speeds, and the top speed is very high with light loads.

I like both.

The Commando is a little more simple in construction.

What size outboard are you looking to run? What size boat?

[spainman]

I am looking for comando c5 or futura mark III both with maximum engine 50-60 hp

[office888]

Originally Posted by spainman

I am looking for comando c5 or futura mark III both with maximum engine 50-60 hp

Futura will have a higher top speed in calm conditions. Load carrying capacity will be higher. Handling will be better. If you tow a skier, wakeboard, or tube at all, then I would go with the Futura.

Commando will be easier to maintain and should be a cheaper boat as well. No speed tubes to worry about, and no keel to inflate.

Both boats are made in the same factory on the same assembly line.

[jeffstevens763@g]

Originally Posted by spainman

Hello,

I would like to ask if the 3 part " rigid keel " of the bombard is better in rough sea conditions as the inflatable keel with speed tubes of the zodiac.

Some people or zodiac salers told me that the speed tubes absorb the waves in roughes conditions.

and that it is same as the 3-part keel of the bombard.

Somebody can advice or have tested both ?

Sorry for my mistakes.

I like the bombard would have had one when I bought mine but we're not available because of the buy out at the time, expeditions use them and I like the wood keel only the tubes to worry about then.

[Northern Pike]

I have a Futura Mk3. I haven't owned a Bombard.
The Bombard has a deeper V shape to the hull, which should make for a slightly smoother ride in rough seas, as it cuts through more.
I agree with Richard; the speed tubes have no real cushioning effect in rough seas. Someone is telling you that to make a sale.
My Futura has removable speed tubes, but I believe the newer ones don't. If you have to repair one it is a big problem.
Inflating the tubes and the keel is a pain. I think if I were you I would give serious consideration to the Bombard.
3 fewer potential failure points.
I recall hearing that the keel is a bit of a pain to assemble though.
I thought the Futura would be fast, but with a ETEC 50 and 17p stainless prop the best I can do is about 32 MPH.
My next boat will not have speed tubes.

[spainman]

thank´s a lot guys for the answers.

I am surprised with northern Pike, it seams not so fas as i have been thinking.

Have you got Trim/tilt botton ad the etec 50 ?

[Northern Pike]

Yes. Power trim/tilt. The only other thing I can think of is a custom made prop with a high pitch and small diameter. I think the hull is the limiting factor.

[office888]

Originally Posted by Northern Pike

I have a Futura Mk3. I haven't owned a Bombard.
The Bombard has a deeper V shape to the hull, which should make for a slightly smoother ride in rough seas, as it cuts through more.
I agree with Richard; the speed tubes have no real cushioning effect in rough seas. Someone is telling you that to make a sale.
My Futura has removable speed tubes, but I believe the newer ones don't. If you have to repair one it is a big problem.
Inflating the tubes and the keel is a pain. I think if I were you I would give serious consideration to the Bombard.
3 fewer potential failure points.
I recall hearing that the keel is a bit of a pain to assemble though.
I thought the Futura would be fast, but with a ETEC 50 and 17p stainless prop the best I can do is about 32 MPH.
My next boat will not have speed tubes.

More prop, more trim, and get the outboard farther out of the water.

Basically, you want the rear 1/3 of the boat to be the only thing touching the water.

[Northern Pike]

I've done a lot of experimenting. I've had the motor up to where it was over-ventilating. Tried numerous props. Only thing left to try is a smaller diameter high pitch prop which is not commercially available.

[Brage]

Originally Posted by spainman

I am looking for comando c5 or futura mark III both with maximum engine 50-60 hp

Theres a Futura Mark III for sale here in Oslo. No patches or leaks. Asking price is 900 Euros/bids. Shipping to Spain is aprox 100 Euros (SEA fright).

I can arrange packing and shipping for Free if I can keep the jockey console.

https://www.finn.no/boat/forsale/ad....n&fks=96102278

Cheers