I'm following this thread with interest- I've built one Cheetah for a customer and one for myself (both single motor ones). I've set both of them up the way I've set up all my Cats -
CG @ 30% forward from the rear running surface
strut rather high from the sponson bottom to minimize rear lift which causes nose down "wet" running
fairly positive strut angle to keep nose up under power but allows hull to drop down while off throttle for turns
DSC03914.JPG
I've found (so far, testing still underway) that this airs out the hull under power - in fact partial-to-full-throttle wheelies
I'll agree that the Cheetah sponson architecture isn't anywhere near optimum BUT I'm not convinced that it's the rear step that keeps the nose down - increasing the aoa of the front sponson should cure the wet running/stuffing problems but I'm open to thoughts. It seems, to me at least, that the same lack of understanding of stepped-bottom design that created the psuedo-stepped oingo-boingo bottom of the Geico and it's variants went into the Cheetah sponson design. A correctly designed stepped bottom is NOT just a straight shot front-to-rear with some notches cut out to simulate steps.
DSC03919.JPG
(for contrast/comparison the yellow hull is my Drifter S - the most perfectly aired out hull I've ever encountered)
DSC03921.JPG air8.jpg
CG @ 30% forward from the rear running surface
strut rather high from the sponson bottom to minimize rear lift which causes nose down "wet" running
fairly positive strut angle to keep nose up under power but allows hull to drop down while off throttle for turns
DSC03914.JPG
I've found (so far, testing still underway) that this airs out the hull under power - in fact partial-to-full-throttle wheelies
I'll agree that the Cheetah sponson architecture isn't anywhere near optimum BUT I'm not convinced that it's the rear step that keeps the nose down - increasing the aoa of the front sponson should cure the wet running/stuffing problems but I'm open to thoughts. It seems, to me at least, that the same lack of understanding of stepped-bottom design that created the psuedo-stepped oingo-boingo bottom of the Geico and it's variants went into the Cheetah sponson design. A correctly designed stepped bottom is NOT just a straight shot front-to-rear with some notches cut out to simulate steps.
DSC03919.JPG
(for contrast/comparison the yellow hull is my Drifter S - the most perfectly aired out hull I've ever encountered)
DSC03921.JPG air8.jpg


]
We will just agree to disagree. that last step being negative and on different planes then the other logically will hold the nose down. I dont see how it wouldnt. If the last inch of a mono is kicked down (spooned or hooked) why is everyone so concererned w/ blueprinting????????????????????? Oh wait, because it makes the nose stay pinned to the water and the hull rides wet when hooked. its the same thing, step or no step. Now if the step before the last was at the same negative angle, it too would create lift and it would not run so wet because in theory, the water is going to leave the hull at whatever angle or ride surface it last leaves. And if thats a negative angle, like angling a tab down, its going to push the back of the hull up. In my mind its simple physics. We will see as Im doing each mod to each of my Cheetahs. My twin is getting the last ride pad surface filled to be parrallel and level and true with the pad before it. The single drive, which on on the build bench, is getting the 2nd to last step added to to match the neg angle of the last.
Comment