Good evening. Does anyone know how much the LTs were reduced from the regular Chesapeakes? The website mentions 20% reduction in volume. A few forums mention 1 inch? Thanks. JRC
the basic difference between the 16 and 16LT (as well as the 17 and 17LT) is the height of the side-panels.
for all intensive purposes, the in-the-water parts of the hull and decks are identical. the difference is that the LT versions are cut about an inch lower (so if you took a side panel on the non-LT version and drew a line parrallel to and one inch below the shear-line and cut it....you now have an LT side panel.).
volume is the number of cubic inches that the hull encloses. because in the LT you are taking an inch off of the hull at its widest point (e.g., where one inch translates to the most cubic inches of volume), it reduces the total enclosed volume of the hull by a approximately 20%.relative to the non-LT version.
RSS
RE: 16 verses 16LT
» Submitted by hspira - Tue, 12/2/14 » 11:14 PM
JRC,
the basic difference between the 16 and 16LT (as well as the 17 and 17LT) is the height of the side-panels.
for all intensive purposes, the in-the-water parts of the hull and decks are identical. the difference is that the LT versions are cut about an inch lower (so if you took a side panel on the non-LT version and drew a line parrallel to and one inch below the shear-line and cut it....you now have an LT side panel.).
volume is the number of cubic inches that the hull encloses. because in the LT you are taking an inch off of the hull at its widest point (e.g., where one inch translates to the most cubic inches of volume), it reduces the total enclosed volume of the hull by a approximately 20%.relative to the non-LT version.
i hope that explains it.
Howard