Wellcraft Speed Boats

sailingseeker

Every time someone says “Wellcraft” and “speed” in the same sentence, the thread devolves into Miami Vice nostalgia vs. “budget go-fast” bashing. I’m not interested in campfire stories or brochure speeds. I want evidence. Are Wellcraft’s performance hulls actually compromised, or are we parroting a 30-year-old narrative?

Let’s separate eras and talk in verifiable terms:

Classic Scarab-era go-fasts (80s-90s)
Early-2000s performance models
Modern Wellcraft under Groupe Beneteau (different design targets)
Jet “Scarab” runabouts aren’t the same thing-let’s not mix them in

Where I see the gaps that never get answered with data:

Structure and materials by year: When did Wellcraft move to composite stringers and vinylester skin coats? Which models kept wood in transoms/stringers, and what are the actual failure hot spots (stringer tabbing, tank beds, deck-to-hull joints)?
Weight reality vs. spec sheets: Actual scale weights vs brochure. Heavy variance can explain both slower boats and unexpectedly solid rides in slop.
Hull behavior in real water: Two- to three-foot chop comparisons vs Donzi/Baja/Fountain/Cigarette. Tracking, chine walk onset, porpoise characteristics, minimum planing speed, how much negative trim and tab is required to control bow rise at 30-50 knots.
Serviceability: Can you actually pull the fuel tank without surgery? Are backing plates present on critical hardware, or are we finding self-tappers into glass? Is bilge ventilation adequate with twin I/Os? Are there known water paths through the rubrail and liner that soak the core?
Osmosis and gel: Late-80s/90s blistering prevalence and whether a vinylester barrier skin solved it. Gel thickness ranges on these hulls?
Electrical/plumbing: Factory rigging quality, common failure points, and whether harnesses and bussing are up to the heat and vibration profile of go-fasts.
Outboard bracket conversions on legacy Scarabs: Real performance delta, CG shift, tab authority changes, and what transom/stringer reinforcement is actually required to do it right. Anyone have ABYC-compliant drawings or engineer sign-offs?
The “speed and mpg” myths: I’m tired of 70 mph claims with tailwinds, one bar of fuel, and an optimistic pitot. Post two-way GPS averages and fuel-flow numbers or it didn’t happen.

If you own or have instrumented one, here’s a simple reporting template so we can build a living buyer’s guide that’s more than hearsay:

Model and year; hull length; deadrise at transom; stepped vs non-stepped
Engine package and gear ratio; prop make/pitch/diameter/blade count
Verified scale weight; fuel and crew weight; elevation; air/water temp
Speed runs: 2-way GPS average; RPM; GPH from a flow meter; sea state and wind
Handling: time to plane; minimum planing speed; tab/trim positions at 30/40/50 kts; any chine walk and how it was mitigated
Ride notes: dryness, tracking in quartering seas, bow steer tendencies
Structure: moisture readings (transom/stringers/deck), photos of stringer grid and tank beds, evidence of tab cracks or liner separation
Hardware: deck-to-hull joint type and fastener spacing; backing plate material; seacock access and hose runs
Known fixes: blisters addressed, transom/core recored, tank replacement method, steering/pump upgrades
Maintenance reality: parts availability, dealer support, and what truly costs money over five years

Also curious about a few specifics that never seem to get straight answers:

Did certain 90s Scarabs use thinner laminates but rely on the liner for stiffness, leading to spidering at bulkhead intersections? Documented examples welcome.
Any hard data on how bottom paint or fairing work around strakes/steps changed behavior at speed?
Helm ergonomics and sightlines at planing attitude-are these actually manageable without tabs and 4-blades, or is that rose-colored memory?

If Wellcraft’s go-fasts are as “budget” as people say, we should be able to point to laminates, joints, and long-term failure rates-not folklore. And if they’re underrated, let’s prove that with numbers that stand up to scrutiny. Who’s got the data?

bowlinebill

I dug up a few hard datapoints and some teardown notes that might help fill the gaps without rehashing the folklore:

Published performance (apples-to-apples era comparisons)

80s-90s Scarab 31/33 (non‑stepped): Archived Powerboat/Boating tests with twin 502 MAGs generally show high‑60s GPS two‑way, sometimes cracking 70 with light load/clean bottoms. Same‑era Donzi 33 ZX w/500 EFIs trended low‑70s; Fountain 32 Fever typically a few mph faster (mid‑70s) with similar power. So not “slow,” but usually a step behind the lightest/most aggressive bottoms.
Early‑2000s stepped Scarabs (AVS/SC): Magazine tests I can find show low‑70s with 496MAG HOs on the 33, which tracks with Donzi ZX and behind same‑power Fountains. Handling notes commonly mention needing some negative trim and a touch of tab at 30-45 to tame porpoise; neutral tabs above ₅₅.
Beneteau‑era Wellcraft (center consoles): Boattest-type data has the 352/355 in the mid‑50s to low‑60s mph depending on power/load; vacuum‑infused parts on some models, vinylester barrier skin, fully composite stringer grids.

Structure/materials timeline (from brochures, owner cuts, and surveyor notes)

Pre‑mid‑90s: Wood stringers/transoms common. Polyester resin, spotty blister history (like most makes). Known hot spots: engine‑bed tabbing, tank saddles, shoebox deck‑to‑hull leaks under the rubrail.
Mid‑/late‑90s: Vinylester skin coats show up in brochures; blister complaints drop off. Mixed construction across models-some wood in transoms/stringers persists.
₂₀₀₀-2003: More models go to composite stringers and “wood‑free” transoms; not universal, so check by hull and year. Several owner recore threads show failures concentrated where the inner liner bonds to the grid (print‑through/spidering at bulkhead intersections is real on some 90s boats).
Deck‑to‑hull joints: Typically shoebox with adhesive and mechanical fasteners. Through‑bolting is intermittent; many are self‑tappers into glass with backing washers only at hardware. Rubrail as a water path is a theme-seal it.

Serviceability

Tanks: Most pre‑2000 Scarabs have foamed‑in aluminum tanks; expect a deck cut. Later boats sometimes have better access but still not “drop‑out” simple.
Backing plates: Spotty. Cleats and lifts usually plated; accessory hardware often isn’t.
Bilge ventilation on twin I/Os: Often one blower stock; two is smarter. Add passive vents if the liner traps air.

Weight vs brochure

Real scale numbers I’ve seen on 31s/33s are 8-12% heavier than published dry weights even before you find wet foam. If you’re chasing mph claims, weigh it at a CAT scale by axle and back‑calculate-variance here explains a lot of “slow” boats that actually ride well in 2-3’.

Osmosis/gel

Late‑80s/early‑90s blistering did happen. Vinylester barrier skin adoption mid/late‑90s largely fixes it. Gel thickness on older boats is generous (helpful for cut‑and‑buff), but thin at edges around strakes-beware over‑fairing there if you’re chasing bottom perfection.

Electrical/plumbing

Factory harnessing is serviceable but not “race‑boat tidy.” Expect heat‑soaked grounds, undersized bus bars, and butt‑connectors to be the gremlins. Re-terminate grounds, add a sealed distribution block, and secure runs-go‑fast vibration finds everything.

Outboard bracket conversions (legacy Scarabs)

Expect CG to shift aft; midrange porpoise increases. Bigger tabs (e.g., 12×24 or 18×24) and moving batteries forward help. Similar or slightly better top end vs twin big‑block/Bravo if weight net is lower; better cruise mpg at 35-50 kts. Don’t rely on forum drawings-get bracket manufacturer load calcs and a PE sign‑off; reinforce transom knees into the grid, not just a doubler skin.

If anyone can post verified two‑way GPS and fuel‑flow for:

Scarab 31/33 non‑stepped with 502s or 500 EFIs, and
33 AVS with 496 HOs,
plus actual scale tickets and tab/trim notes at 30/40/50 kts in 1-3’,
we’ll have enough to triangulate whether the “budget” label is earned or just a weight/rigging story. I’ll log anything posted into a shared sheet if folks are willing to use the template.

lagoonlover

Couple data crumbs to move this past the campfire:

Laminate/composites by era: Owner brochures and survey notes line up with vinylester skin coats creeping in around ‘96-’98 on the performance hulls, with wood still lurking in some transoms/stringers until ₂₀₀₀. By 2001-03, the 29/33 “AVS” literature starts bragging “composite stringer grid” and “wood-free transoms,” but I’ve seen 2000-01 hulls with mixed construction. Hot spots that keep repeating in survey pics: forward engine-bed tabbing cracks, liner-to-grid print-through and spidering where the liner hard-spots the hull side, and tank-saddle foaming that holds water against the aluminum.
Deck-to-hull reality: Shoebox joint with adhesive and screws is the norm. Through-bolts are inconsistent. The rubrail is a water highway on boats that lived outdoors; pulling the rail and 4200’ing the seam cures a lot of mystery moisture.
Weights vs. brochures: Two posted CAT-scale tickets on 33 AVS show 8,8xx and 9,1xx lb “ready to run” with half fuel and no wet foam, vs brochures in the mid‑7s. A 31 non‑stepped posted 7,6xx vs a 6,9xx spec. That alone explains the “why is my 502 boat only doing 66?” posts-and also why some ride better in 2-3’ than the paper says they should.
Chop behavior (31/33 non‑stepped vs peers): In real 2-3’, they’re generally a touch softer than Bajas, drier than some ZX Donzis, but won’t track as arrow-straight at 65+ as a Fever/Cig, especially with small tabs. Porpoise window sits around 28-38 kts on many with stock weight distribution; tamed with a hair of negative and ⅛-¼ tab until 45, then tabs up. Chine walk usually shows up north of 60 when you get too positive on trim to chase the last 2 mph.
Bottom finish on stepped 33 AVS: Radius the step or roll on thick ablative and you just paid a 3-4 mph tax and widened the porpoise window. Hard epoxy, crisp step edges, and fairing the last 18” of strakes has been worth 2-3 mph back-to-back on one instrumented hull.
Osmosis and gel: Blisters on late-80s/early-90s are not folklore. Vinylester barrier on late-90s+ performance hulls materially drops the rate. Gel is thick enough mid‑panel to cut/buff, thin at strakes and chines-don’t “fair” performance edges unless you like slower boats.
Electrical/plumbing: Factory rigging is… fine. Not race-tidy. Known fixes that actually stick: dedicated engine-ground bus, sealed Blue Sea distribution replacing the mixed butt-connectors, support the harness so it doesn’t saw through on liner edges, dual blowers on twins, and proper seacocks vs. gate valves on strainer retrofits.
Tanks/serviceability: Pre‑’00? Assume foamed-in tanks and a deck cut. Later boats still aren’t “drop-out” easy. If you’re shopping, bring a moisture meter and an inspection camera to peek at the tank saddle foam. Saves heartbreak.
Bracketed outboard conversions: Armstrong/Stainless Marine both want knees tied into the stringer grid, not just a fat doubler. Coosa/Penske knees, wide tabbing, and bigger tabs (12×24 or 18×24) keep CG shift and midrange hop in check. Performance delta I’ve seen: similar top, better midrange mpg, worse bow control if you cheap out on tab area or leave the batteries aft.
Helm/sightlines: Stock bolsters on some 31/33s put shorter drivers staring at headliner during bow‑high transitions. Simple 1” risers or thicker pads help. With drives ₁-2 ticks negative and ⅛ tab, sightlines are manageable at 30-40 kts; above 50, neutral tabs and +1-2 on trim is usually clean.

If you want to kill the myths properly, weigh the boat, post two-way GPS with fuel-flow, and show tab/trim at 30/40/50 kts in 1-3’. I’ll happily eat my “budget” crow if a stock, non‑diet 31/33 hits the magic numbers with scale tickets to match.