If my calcualations are correct 6000 watts is close to 8 hp. There is only two hour capacity with the batteries charged via the solar array. Can a 40 foot cat be driven at 6 knots by 8 hp? Perhaps in very ideal conditions and a very light boat. They say 15 knots with 5 nautical gallons an hour fuel burn, which equates to close to 100 hp.. So this boat apparently will be slightly more effecient than the PDQ (if my recollections are correct), but 6 feet longer). I suspect that this is optimistic.--especially when the boat gets loaded for cruising, in real world conditions of wind, current and seas. Who is going to be going only 12 miles a day? Also what about power to run the other systems aboard? This will take away from the available battery power. Is a "Torpedo" hull form super effecient? I don't believe so--but perhaps I am wrong about that. I wonder what type of formal tank testing has been done? I have a friend who has his house roof covered with solar pannels. He figures that it will take 17 years of power savings (and this includes any money he gets from selling power back to the grid) to pay for the solar panels. I question that the panels will have a life expectancy of 17 years on a boat--espeically on surfaces which are walked on. (I realize that there are some very rugged solar cells). Retail price on a 390 watt Solar Pannel is $2700--Looks like $44,000 for solar pannels. AGM batteries with 6,000 watt storage capacity would run in the neighborhood of a few thousand more dollars. Then the generators--which will generate somewhere 100000 watts (to achieve the 15 knots) I realize I am leaving a number of factors out here. plus the motors, it seems like a huge expense for some very little savings--since $40,000 will buy a 10,000 gallons of fuel--or if they are using 8 hp, this would be using 1/2 a gallon of diesel an hour to drive the boat at that speed---or 20,000 miles worth of diesel at 6 knots....assuming that 6 knots is achievable with 6000 watts or 8 hp. This next really belongs on the trawler list, but is apporpiate for the optimism of designs. The C Ranger 25 (a trailerable trawler) was touted to get 16 mph cruising and 18 mph top speed with a 80 hp engine. With a 120 hp engine, the reality is that the light boat is running slightly lower than predicted with the 80 hp and the company is looking into putting in a 160 to 180 hp engine to get the preformance. The 80 hp will be only at displacement speeds. Part of this is weight, some is probably a bit of optimism. But the reality is that few boats in cruising mode will get the predicted or even the "magazine" boat tests numbers. (See the discussion on C Brats--C Ranger 25 thread) I realize that cats behave differently, but weight and sea conditions still are important variables. So shoot that full of holes, please. Regards, Bob Austin

Bob said >"They say 15 knots with 5 nautical gallons an hour fuel > burn, which equates to close to 100 hp.. So this boat > apparently will be slightly more effecient than the PDQ (if > my recollections are correct), but 6 feet longer). I suspect > that this is optimistic." Not even that, Bob, they claim 5 nm per gallon (3 gph @ 15kts). Regards Roger Bingham France Going to la Rochelle next week to look at Highland 35 and Excitecat 810 & 1010. I'll report back.