CHALLENGER 2000 HULL FAILURE
Posted 20 August 2008 - 12:32 AM
Hull repair was covered under warranty, but repair shop pretty much said that the whole thickness/quality of the sea doo hull is crap and they don't believe it can be fixed without completely rebuilding the back of the boat/hull.
Anyone else experienced this? We never hit the boat, or grounded it by the way. It is run on Nantucket sound in Cape cod, so there are frequently 4 footers, it isn't a lake. Any other ocean users see this aroundyear 3-5 of ownership? Any suggestions?
In the meantime, I am installing a secondary bilge pump to keep up with the leak until a permanent fix can be determined by BRP and the repair shop.
Posted 20 August 2008 - 06:39 AM
Do you have any pics of yours you can post up? I hope they are able to find a solution to get your fixed soon!
Want to spread the word about SeaDooSportBoats.com and sport some official SDSB Gear? See what we have to offer here, http://seadoosportboats.com/gear
Posted 20 August 2008 - 01:15 PM
Anyone else experienced this? We never hit the boat, or grounded it by the way.
Thankfully we haven't experienced it (yet), but I have HEARD of this problem. I check periodically for stress cracks around the jetdrive tunnel, and I've heard of a few owners who have added extra fiberglass and resin in that area to strengthen it against future problems.
Mercury's installation instructions for the SportJet engines recommends a hull thickness of 3/8ths of an inch. That seems awfully low to me, but it's right there in the manual. Mercury sells grommets of various sizes to accommodate different hull thicknesses but I think the thickest one is 3/8ths. Considering how high the center of mass is on that engine assembly (the engine sits "upright" which gives it a lot of mechanical moment, in turn transferring stress to the hull) I would have thought Mercury would recommend beefing up the tunnel mounting surfaces a lot more than 3/8ths. Heck, the deck mounting points for wakeboard towers are often about 3/8ths and the engine is a much more stressful load than the tower.
This doesn't seem to be a super common problem, but it would sure be awful to have it. I can't imagine how you'd "fix" it properly. "Rebuilding the whole back end" just doesn't seem feasible to me.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users