Formula 233 hull identity

Discussion in 'Boat Design' started by goin70, Nov 1, 2015.

  1. goin70
    Joined: Oct 2005
    Posts: 14
    Likes: 0, Points: 1, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: Atlanta,GA

    goin70 Junior Member

    I could use some help to identify the hull source for my Formula. It is a odd design and only built 1 year. What it looks to be is an almost exact same hull as a Formula 233 hull. My boat is a 1972 Formula 190 and it looks to be a Formula 233 hull that the factory put a block into the mold and reduced the height of the sides, which would have made it into smaller boat. The hull looks to be exactly the same, with the shorter sides, it would have changed the overall dimensions but not the hull and running surface. Could I trouble someone to help me solve or dispell the mystery. I need someone with a Formula 233 to take a measurements of your transom, from the outside. The measurement I could use is the width of your transom, if you would lay a tape measure on the top of transom bump out and measure the width. I think this measurement will give me some information about the hull similarities. I measured my boat and it is 89" wide at that point. Thanks in advance for your help
     
  2. rasorinc
    Joined: Nov 2007
    Posts: 1,854
    Likes: 71, Points: 48, Legacy Rep: 896
    Location: OREGON

    rasorinc Senior Member

    A 1972 should have an ID number. Check all around the transom and the under side of the dash. they try to hide them.
     
  3. goin70
    Joined: Oct 2005
    Posts: 14
    Likes: 0, Points: 1, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: Atlanta,GA

    goin70 Junior Member

    The id tag is gone and the hull numbers were before the HIN requirement.

    I have identified the Formula model, what I need is the width measurement of a Formula 233.

    I am trying to verify my suspicion that a 1972 Formula 190 & 177 were both popped out of the same hull mold as the Formula 233.

    I already have confirmed the measurement from the transon side to the lower edge of the bump out are 10 1/2" on both the 233 & 190.

    Now I need the width of the 233 to test my theory.

    Do you have a Formula 233?
     
  4. Mr Efficiency
    Joined: Oct 2010
    Posts: 10,388
    Likes: 1,022, Points: 113, Legacy Rep: 702
    Location: Australia

    Mr Efficiency Senior Member

    What is the objective, though ? Does it have the hook in the bottom outboard of the full length strake ?
     
  5. PAR
    Joined: Nov 2003
    Posts: 19,133
    Likes: 488, Points: 93, Legacy Rep: 3967
    Location: Eustis, FL

    PAR Yacht Designer/Builder

    The 1972 the Federal Boat Safety Act went into effect on a voluntary basis in November of 1972, but wasn't required until 1973. Most of the boats produced in 1972 didn't have HIN's.
     
  6. goin70
    Joined: Oct 2005
    Posts: 14
    Likes: 0, Points: 1, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: Atlanta,GA

    goin70 Junior Member

    My objective is to determine if the hull and running surface in my Formula 190 is the exact same as a Formula 233. That is the reason I need to get some measurement off of a Formula 233 to verify.

    It would be very cool to know that the Formula 190 and 177 were actually the same running surface only will less freeboard.

    I plan to restore and maintain a historical example of a rare Formula model.

    I just need a few measurements, from a Formula 233, can you help?

    Thanks
     
  7. goin70
    Joined: Oct 2005
    Posts: 14
    Likes: 0, Points: 1, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: Atlanta,GA

    goin70 Junior Member

    Good information and accurate. My 1972 Formula 190 has a hull number but Formula has very limited if not any records on boat prior to 1973. Actually, I was able to locate a Formula brochure and I provided them a copy. They were kind enough to post on their website for others to view.

    Do you have a Formula 233 and could you take a couple of measurements of your hull/running surface?
     
  8. Mr Efficiency
    Joined: Oct 2010
    Posts: 10,388
    Likes: 1,022, Points: 113, Legacy Rep: 702
    Location: Australia

    Mr Efficiency Senior Member

    If the hook outboard of the long strake isn't there, that would answer your question. I can't see how cutting down the topsides would take that much length away, certainly not several feet.
     
  9. goin70
    Joined: Oct 2005
    Posts: 14
    Likes: 0, Points: 1, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: Atlanta,GA

    goin70 Junior Member

    The outboard strake is present and this is a bonified 1972 Formula 190 that is detailed in the 1972 Formula brochure.

    http://www.formulaboats.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/1972-Formula-Brochure.pd

    Boatbulders have made it a practice to chop off a foot or so of freeboard and this would reduce the length of the boat. For example; if the boat was square it would not change any aspect of the width or length. But, boats have a raked bows and this adds a great deal of the overall length (over and above of the waterline profile) and can effect the length and beam. If you looked at the bottom of my boat you would immediately realize what I am trying to explain. If I can get someone, anyone, to give me the transom measurement I will be able to confirm or refute my suspicion. Do you have a Formula 233 that I could get the measurement? Thanks
     
  10. goin70
    Joined: Oct 2005
    Posts: 14
    Likes: 0, Points: 1, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: Atlanta,GA

    goin70 Junior Member

    Try this brochure link

    Please try this link:

    http://www.formulaboats.com/?attachment_id=1543
     
  11. Mr Efficiency
    Joined: Oct 2010
    Posts: 10,388
    Likes: 1,022, Points: 113, Legacy Rep: 702
    Location: Australia

    Mr Efficiency Senior Member

    I don't have one at hand to measure, no ! I'd be surprised if a cut down 233 could be any shorter than 21' without having too little freeboard. The bow is not heavily raked on those boats.
     
  12. goin70
    Joined: Oct 2005
    Posts: 14
    Likes: 0, Points: 1, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: Atlanta,GA

    goin70 Junior Member

    I agree the difference in length sound to be suspect. The beam is only 6" difference between the Formula 233 and the 190. What is surprising is to look at a Formula 233 where the strakes originate at the bow. The Formula 190 has a distance of approx, 10 1/2 inches to the deck. The same distance on a Formula 233 looks to be about 2 1/2 to 3 feet. When I finally get the measurement it will be an easy determination. Please take a look at the Formula 233 strake beginning point at the bow and you will agree the difference is substantial. I will keep you informed if anything turns up.
     
  13. Mr Efficiency
    Joined: Oct 2010
    Posts: 10,388
    Likes: 1,022, Points: 113, Legacy Rep: 702
    Location: Australia

    Mr Efficiency Senior Member

    There is a boat being built out here in Aus called a "Cootacraft Big Ram", which looks very much like a cut-down and/or shortened 233, but the builder says not.
     
  14. goin70
    Joined: Oct 2005
    Posts: 14
    Likes: 0, Points: 1, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: Atlanta,GA

    goin70 Junior Member

    Thanks for the info! I will check them out on the Internet.
     

  15. Mr Efficiency
    Joined: Oct 2010
    Posts: 10,388
    Likes: 1,022, Points: 113, Legacy Rep: 702
    Location: Australia

    Mr Efficiency Senior Member

    http://cootacraft.com/products.php?prod_id=3
    High build quality glass boats made particularly for abalone divers crossing the Mallacoota bar in SE Australia. The 233 genes seem to be prominent, but I don't think they have the hook I spoke about earlier.
     
Loading...
Forum posts represent the experience, opinion, and view of individual users. Boat Design Net does not necessarily endorse nor share the view of each individual post.
When making potentially dangerous or financial decisions, always employ and consult appropriate professionals. Your circumstances or experience may be different.