Seeking advice on repowering a 2001 2300 dvcc

[PastTheBarb]

In my experience, insurance has always been a bad investment. I guess I should consider myself lucky.

 

[cstuart15]

Give the insurance company one slight "out" and see what happens if you ever need to make a claim.

 

[pelagic2530]

When I repowered , I switched insurance companies not because my old insurance company wouldn’t insure my boat but because they only used a random book value which was not more then 65% of what the boat was actually worth on the used market. I switched to an insurance company that would insure my boat with an agreed upon value. I had a couple couple of exchanges with the broker to establish the policy that included some pictures and was required to provide vin/hul #s of hull, trailer and engine serial #s and specs. There was never any mention of any placards or horsepower ratings. I’m not gonna “make a call” to settle internet banter with a stranger but based upon my experience dealing with boat specific insurance salesperson, the horsepower issues did not appear to be an issue when the conversation started with “I just repowered my 2005 Parker 2520 with a new 300hp engine and I need to insure the boat for more $$ then my current insurance provider will agree to”.

Have a good Memorial Day….

Right. And since you have an agreed upon value policy, if you have a fire at the dock, or the boat sinks or gets wrecked by a hurricane, they’ll probably just pay you the agreed upon value with minimal fuss. You’re perfectly correct about that.

Does your policy cover liability? Because THATS where the unseaworthy aspect comes into play. If you’re involved in a collision/allision or some other event where your boat while in operation caused injury or damage to another party that results in an investigation, the investigator is going to check that the vessel was being operated in a safe and seaworthy manner. Being overpowered *can* be cited as evidence of the vessel being inherently unseaworthy, and therefore invalidate your liability coverage. That can leave you with a nasty bill to pay, or at the very least a costly and drawn out legal battle to prove that it wasn’t contributory to the incident. In maritime cases, if there’s evidence of negligence or wrongdoing, it becomes the responsibility of the defendant to prove that said negligence or wrongdoing was NOT contributory to the nature of the accident, not the injured party’s responsibility to prove that it was. Kind of a “guilty until proven innocent” situation.

The insurance company asks for the details on the boat because they are drawing up a rough estimate of how much they might have to pay out to replace it or part of it, so they can base their premiums accordingly. They’re not cross-referencing it to see that it’s safe and seaworthy as configured, because why would they? If they can prove that you made modifications to the boat (additional horsepower) that exceeded what the design naval architects said was safe, then they don’t have to pay you for your liability claim. I’ve never met an insurance company that wouldn’t use any possible excuse to get out of paying a claim.

I hope you have a great Memorial Day as well, hopefully you’re out on the boat. I’m about 7,000 miles from mine at the moment.

 

[Mpellet]

Right. And since you have an agreed upon value policy, if you have a fire at the dock, or the boat sinks or gets wrecked by a hurricane, they’ll probably just pay you the agreed upon value with minimal fuss. You’re perfectly correct about that.

Does your policy cover liability? Because THATS where the unseaworthy aspect comes into play. If you’re involved in a collision/allision or some other event where your boat while in operation caused injury or damage to another party that results in an investigation, the investigator is going to check that the vessel was being operated in a safe and seaworthy manner. Being overpowered *can* be cited as evidence of the vessel being inherently unseaworthy, and therefore invalidate your liability coverage. That can leave you with a nasty bill to pay, or at the very least a costly and drawn out legal battle to prove that it wasn’t contributory to the incident. In maritime cases, if there’s evidence of negligence or wrongdoing, it becomes the responsibility of the defendant to prove that said negligence or wrongdoing was NOT contributory to the nature of the accident, not the injured party’s responsibility to prove that it was. Kind of a “guilty until proven innocent” situation.

The insurance company asks for the details on the boat because they are drawing up a rough estimate of how much they might have to pay out to replace it or part of it, so they can base their premiums accordingly. They’re not cross-referencing it to see that it’s safe and seaworthy as configured, because why would they? If they can prove that you made modifications to the boat (additional horsepower) that exceeded what the design naval architects said was safe, then they don’t have to pay you for your liability claim. I’ve never met an insurance company that wouldn’t use any possible excuse to get out of paying a claim.

I hope you have a great Memorial Day as well, hopefully you’re out on the boat. I’m about 7,000 miles from mine at the moment.

No boat today, did 3 days in a row but about to make some calamari from a haul of squid we caught on Saturday Night. No one understand your 7,000 mile situation better then I, hopefully your travel is for recreational purposes but if not my sympathies. I did the sea bag drag professionally for 35 years and counting and know the feeling well of missing holidays while being on the far side of the world or Cleveland or Des Moines.

Safe travels either way.

PS: In addition to the boat insurance which has liability coverage , I also carry an umbrella policy for liability so if the internet placard story is in fact true, (which I still doubt), I should be able to keep the lawyers busy for a while sorting through my umbrella coverages..

 

[Bodick93]

I have a 23DVCC 2001 year bought in 2010.Repowered the boat, f250 36 knots WOT. Second engine f300 40 WOT. Boat has bottom paint on a mooring in the Keys. I keep the bottom clean. New fuel tank in 2016.

That seems 10 mph low. My 2320 will do 50, but no bottom paint. Must be a shoiitload of drag.

 

[Key Largo]

That seems 10 mph low. My 2320 will do 50, but no bottom paint. Must be a shoiitload of drag.

Fuel burn is 2.5 to 3.0 mpg

 

[Bodick93]

That's about what I get. I have 18" wide tabs, a permatrim, and a 17" Rev 4. By myself, shakedown run only (light as I will ever be) got 3.1 from 24mph at 3400 rpm to 28mph at 3800 rpm. Redlines right at 6000 under these rare conditions. I Cat Scaled it once at 7000 pounds even on the trailer.

 

[Sea Jay]

Thanks everyone for the discussion. I couldn’t find the capacities placard on my 2001 2300 CC, but rounded up the following info which may be useful to someone else:
1) photo of a page from a 1999 Parker catalogue showing 2300 CC
2) screen shot of response from Parker Boats regarding max hp for my 2001 2300 CC

 

[Triggajigga56]

Thanks gman1001. Still wrestling with 250 vs 300. There is a lot of great info on this site about moving the center of gravity forward on this boat. I’ve already started down that road and I’m not afraid to put some sand bags in the fwd fish locker - trolling motor batteries are already under the front seat of console. I will be fishing quite a bit in the ocean and I pick my days, Will likely cruise around 30 knots, but would hope to be able plane around 20, maybe less if I get caught out there when the wind picks up. Any advice how the engine hp (250 or 300) might impact my application would be appreciated.