After running the A-Maze-Mint, a 207 Quest by Four Winns, for nearly six years, we decided it was time to upgrade to a more suitable boat to fit our needs. Our primary boating uses were scuba diving and offshore fishing. The A-Maze-Mint had been a loyal performer, but we had learned a lot about offshore boating and were feeling a tad cramped. Initially we concentrated on 23 to 25 foot center consoles by Pursuit, Mako and Dusky, all of which seemed to be ideal boats for our use. Then we looked closely at the SeaCat line of power catamarans by North American Fiberglass.

Power catamarans are really just beginning to appear here in the United States. We started out looking seriously at the 25 foot SL5 SeaCat, a center console model. Sitting on a trailer, the boat looks much larger than its 25 feet, an effect caused largely by the height with which it rests on a trailer. While visiting the local dealer's boat show, we saw both the 21' SL1 and the 25' SL5 model sitting side-by-side. The 21' did not look much smaller than the 25', although it obviously was 4 feet shorter in length. At that time, we arranged for test rides in both boats and thus began our conversion to power catamarans.
We learned a lot about power cats when shopping for what was to be the SeaBrat. After nearly two years of research, shopping, looking and wishing we found a lot of hype, a little truth, enjoyed a few test rides and learned a big lesson (or two). If you've been thinking about buying a power catamaran and particularly a SeaCat, join us for the good, the bad, and the UGLY!
the Good...
The SeaCat is a power catamaran manufactured by International Class Catamarans, Inc. in North Carolina. Like most power cats, it provides an exceptionally smooth ride when seas are kicking up. Running directly into the wind, the boat provides a very gentle ride as it cuts through choppy 3-4' seas, an act that would probably cost you a kidney in most typical mono-hulls. The layout of the SeaCat lends itself well to scuba diving and fishing. It features an open transom design which, when combined with an Armstrong marine ladder, allows a diver to virtually walk right into the boat. It also has an unusually large amount of floor space due to its 8'6" beam and wide bow. The nearly vertical sides of the boat assure an extremely wide floor for its beam and the lack of a pointed bow creates a very large front deck area. The center console is roomy and the entire front opens to allow access to the interior.
In April of 1995, we concluded our negotiations with the dealer and bought the SeaBrat, our 21 foot SeaCat SL1. We chose to power it with twin Honda 50 horsepower engines, at that time a highly recommended combination by North American Fiberglass. We had discussed this setup with other owners who had rigged their SeaCats with these engines and all of them highly recommended them. The Honda outboards are 4 cycle engines as opposed to the standard 2-stroke outboard. A 4 cycle engine does not require an oil blended into the fuel, it's like a car engine. In fact, rumor has it that the Honda 90 horsepower outboard uses the old Honda Civic engine design.
Four cycle engines, since they don't burn an oil/gas mix, are also smoke free. There is no noticeable odor and the lack of the smell of burning oil is a godsend when trolling. The Hondas are extremely quiet and very fuel efficient. Operating at 3/4 throttle, or about 4,500 rpm, the SeaBrat delivers nearly 4.5 mpg. When running directly into the wind, this provides a nice smooth ride as the wind actually helps to lift the boat and reduces the effort the engines put into lifting the hull up on plane. Unfortunately, this throttle setting barely planes the boat in smooth water and not at all when running down wind (see "and the UGLY" below).
Under a typical load, operating the boat at around 5,200 rpm delivers a speed of 21 mph and about 3.3 mpg, still a respectable fuel consumption figure for twin outboards! Combine that fuel efficiency with the 80 gallon fuel capacity and you have an effective range of 250 to 350 miles. Last year we ran the boat for a total of 253 hours and 1,552 miles. Our old boat, the A-Maze-Mint with its Johnson 175 got an average of 1.7 mpg and would have burned over 400 gallons more fuel (along with a lot of oil). That's a substantial savings in operating costs and should quickly offset the higher initial cost of the Honda engines.
the Bad...
The SeaCat is a power catamaran and rigging these boats takes a lot of skill and knowledge. With the 50 horsepower outboards, the boat can only be described as marginally powered and often will yield disappointing results (see "and the UGLY" below). The bare hulls are heavy and expensive, largely due to the great amount of surface area as compared to a standard monohull. The knife-like leading edge on each sponson is apparently difficult to get resin into during manufacturing and seems to be prone to air voids. Our boat had a lot of problems with air voids which kept popping up all over. After our third trip to the repair shop for air voids, the local SeaCat representative began to make grumblings about not repairing anymore air voids under warranty! Fortunately, he did agree to fix the last batch and we have not had any more appear since then.
Trailering is also more difficult than with most boats. Given their design, they sit fairly high on the trailer, requiring that it be submerged further than you might expect when launching. We regularly spray the bunks with silicone spray and this allows the boat to be pushed off the trailer without having to submerge the trailer until the hull begins to float. Obviously, this can work against us as well and the boat must be securely fastened to the bow stop before backing down the ramp, or pulling the boat out.
Loading the boat on the trailer can be frustrating. Given the twin hull design, the boat does not naturally steer itself onto the trailer unless you are dead-on center. On our trailer with 2 by 6 bunks, the margin of error is less than 6 inches. If you miss, the boat is pushed off the carpeted bunks over to the side of the trailer where the hull will be damaged when it contacts bare metal. In 15 years of trailering boats, I had never damaged a hull as a result of loading or unloading. That all changed with the SeaCat.
The Honda outboards, like the hull, were also expensive. The Honda 50 costs as much, or slightly more than a standard 90 hp 2-stroke outboard. The initial cost of these engines is offset by the lower operating cost, however. Depending on how much you use the engine, you might find that the difference is made up pretty quickly. In our case, about 2-3 years of operation will more than save the difference in initial cost.
The Hondas are also somewhat heavier than a comparable 2-stroke, but this difference is not so much as you might be lead to believe. The Honda 50 weighs in around 200 pounds, only 10-20 pounds more than a 2-stroke of that size. Given the hull spec weight on our 21' SeaCat of 2,500 pounds, the additional 20-40 pounds of engine weight is pretty marginal.
The finish on these boats, or at least ours, leaves a bit to be desired. Within six months of purchase the boat was displaying a frightening amount of gel cracking, particularly in the transom area. The local rep agreed to fix those with the cautioning remark that such repairs were not normally a warranty item. A few months later, when air voids began to appear in several areas, he probably regretted having agreed to repair those gel cracks. There are still quite a few areas which are showing cracks and crazing. In some areas, particularly the front deck, the colored gel coat is extremely thin and is wearing through.
Other poor areas under fit and finish include the latching systems for the battery box covers. The battery compartments feature a plastic latch with a "living" hinge. We have re-riveted both of them in place and the local rep gave us a pair of stainless steel latches to replace them. The latching arrangement for the fish box and anchor locker consists of a post with a heavy rubber strap. The post on the fish box tore out of the glass and was replaced by the dealer three times before it finally held. It appears to be cracking loose again. The hinges on all hatches are unusual. They appear to be made from fairly thin sheets of stainless steel, but so far have held up very well.
The gunwale mounted rod holders were a $200+ option for four holders. They appear to be good strong stainless steel models, but are a little small for many offshore rods. They do have rubber inserts which can be removed so that the larger rods will fit, but wouldn't it have been easier to just use Lee holders of the appropriate size? Those inserts will eventually get lost or fall overboard.
Floor drainage doesn't work all that well, at least not on our boat. At rest and slow speeds, water tends to accumulate to the front of the boat and will not drain until the boat is underway which raises the bow. This is particularly annoying since the boat tends to take a lot of water over the bow when moving at trolling speeds into a choppy sea.
The SeaCat Hydropod, the little "nose" which sticks down from the middle of the bow and is supposed to help prevent the sneeze which occurs in moderate seas is both good and bad. It probably does reduce the amount of bow spray coming over the front of the boat, but the back side of that nose is drilled with several holes which allow that sneeze to vent into the front deck storage area.
and the UGLY!
We purchased our boat from Kenyon Power Boats in Clearwater, Florida. Kenyon specializes in Bayliners, a package boat, and they seemed to have an awful lot of trouble properly rigging our SeaCat. Regardless of what you may think of Bayliner, as package boats, they require little dealer expertise in rigging. This is not the case with the SeaCat boats. We incurred a substantial and unexpected cost in getting this boat to operate at an acceptable level. As an example, when the boat initially refused to plane out, Kenyon diagnosed the problem as the stock aluminum props. We purchased a set of stainless steel props from them which they recommended, although they refused to allow us to try the props before purchase. We now have a spare set of stainless steel props which, while pricey, do not work well with the boat.
At the time we bought this boat, the manufacturer (North American Fiberglass) was highly touting the advantages of the twin Honda 50 horsepower outboards. This setup, they claimed, would provide a top speed of 30 mph and could achieve 20 mph with one engine tilted up. In discussions with other SeaCat owners running Honda 45-hp engines, all confirmed their top speed to be at or near 30 mph with a cruising speed of 20-25 mph. In our initial runs with the SeaBrat, with the boat nearly empty, we found our top speed to be less than 26 mph. Loaded with fuel and gear, it was unable to plane and struggled to achieve 17 mph.
After spending hundreds of dollars on props and what seemed like a thousand dealer visits and complaints, we weighed the boat on certified scales at the local landfill and arrived at an estimated weight of 3,400 pounds, 900 pounds over the spec weight. Upon hearing this North American Fiberglass agreed to ship the hull back and fix the problem. They reportedly had a problem with their foam gun about the time our hull was being built and felt perhaps the boat was overweight with uncured or waterlogged foam. We would not see the boat again for four months!
Once the boat was returned, we re-weighed it to find that it appeared to have gained about 50 pounds! As it turned out, our weight estimating procedures were faulty. We had taken the shipping weight off the title for the trailer which was 600 pounds too low. Our boat was actually only about 300 pounds overweight. At this point, the local SeaCat representative began working with us in earnest to get the boat to operate as designed. The top speed (empty) was still only hitting about 26 mph, and the boat still failed under moderate loads.
It was decided to try dropping down 1-inch in pitch on the props from 13" to 12", another $400+ out of our pocket (remember, we had already bought a set of stainless steel props at the recommendation of the Kenyon staff). Although the result was a drop in top speed to 25 mph, the load carrying capacity was greatly enhanced, with the boat able to plane and hit nearly 20 mph when loaded close to the USCG limit. It's top speed on one engine, loaded or empty, was only 8 mph. A far cry from the advertised 20 mph.
At this point, at least the boat was usable, whether it met advertised performance claims or not. When running into the wind, the boat performs like a real champion. With the wind or running with even a mild ground swell, it falls off plane each time it attempts to climb up the back side of a swell, with speed dropping from 20+ mph to less than 15 mph. The final word from the local SeaCat representative was that the performance was "disappointing", but no additional solutions were offered. We are currently in the process of upgrading the engines to the larger 90 hp models.
Summary
Even careful shoppers can get burned. Although the performance of the boat was finally improved (and drastically so), it still falls short of the advertised claims. North American Fiberglass's response to the advertised claims issue follows:
The question of whether or not we advertise performance data prompts this answer. We do not and have not for quite some time. Having said that however, I must confess that we did make statements relating to speed with one Honda engine operating and two engines operating in old literature supplied by Larry Potter the designer of the 21'. As a result of our own testing we discovered that Mr. Potter's performance data was inaccurate prompting us to discontinue the sales literature a long time ago. Should we have checked his data out before using it? Yes we should have but, you would think that we could rely on information provided by the "designer". We also severed our relationship with him.
Graham Flanagan, CEO
I guess Mr. Flanagan and I have a disagreement as to what a long time ago is. Interestingly enough, I returned to the Kenyon showroom several days after I received that response and picked up a sales brochure which still made those performance claims.
As to the weight of our boat...it does appear to be overweight, but probably within acceptable limits compared to the spec weight. The spec weight on the 21' was revised from 2,000 pounds to 2,500 pounds sometime between 1993 and 1994. Our hull appears to weigh in around 2,800 pounds based on weight slips at the local landfill. That's 800 pounds heavier than the 1993 model and could easily explain much of the performance problems. Why on earth North American Fiberglass thought they could add 25% to the weight of a hull and NOT affect performance is inconceivable. Were our boat 500 pounds lighter I feel confident that it would easily achieve the 30 mph advertised speed, though I doubt it would even approach the fabled single engine performance of 20 mph.
In support of North American Fiberglass, much of their claims are true. The boat does ride very well and handles rough seas admirably, particularly compared to an equivalent sized monohull. We are very happy with the layout of the boat. Their agreeing to ship the boat back to their factory and attempt to correct the weight problem is to be admired and we appreciate the effort they extended in trying to get the best performance possible from this hull. Our local SeaCat representative, John Richardson, worked very hard to help us and extended every effort and resource available to him to solve the performance problem. He has our sincere gratitude.
Would we buy another SeaCat? Hmm, a qualified yes would be our answer. We would require the sale be contingent on a satisfactory sea-trial of the exact boat, not a dealer's demo model. This puts the performance of the boat in the dealer's best interest since he won't make the sale until he can demonstrate that your boat is rigged to perform at or near expected service levels. Our test ride in the dealer's 21' SeaCat was very impressive, and it was equipped with smaller, 45 horsepower Honda engines. We suspect it was also an older and lighter model.
The New and Improved SeaBrat (1997)

Our Motivation
This spring, while running about trying to find a kingfish or two, we finally came to the conclusion that we really needed to upgrade the engines on our boat. We'd been operating with the twin 50 Hondas for about two years and had been less than pleased with the performance. On this particular fishing trip, the seas were calm with a very mild groundswell of about 2 feet, but there was almost no wind or chop on the water. We had a pretty light load and the boat kept falling off plane while running with the rollers. It simply could not climb up the back of those swells... and these were pretty mild swells! I found this not only annoying, but in the future (inevitable??) event we should encounter heavier stuff, I was concerned for basic safety. Cheryl and I agreed that we needed to fix this problem.
Which Engines?
We spent nearly a month researching larger engines. We both really liked the Honda reliability and lack of smoky exhaust, but the price of the 90 hp engines were pretty steep. Several dealers tried to convince us that the Honda 75 would be big enough. Maybe, but the difference in price between the 75 and 90 was pretty small. Having found ourselves in the position of needing to buy larger engines, we didn't want to be there again. We were going to put the maximum horsepower on this boat. Something we should have done in the first place! Besides, the Honda 75 and Honda 90 were exactly the same size... BIG. The 75 was just a de-tuned 90 and both had a spec weight of 384 pounds, 170 pounds more than the existing 50s!!! We were about to add a total of 340 pounds to the rear of the SeaBrat. At least that ought to take care of the water not draining from the floor while at rest!
SeaCat's Advice
At this point, I decided to contact John Richardson, the local SeaCat representative. Mr. Richardson was more than happy to help us where he could and offered quite a bit of advice as well. He gave us the name of another person (John Thompson) who had just recently done the same thing that we were attempting. Mr. Thompson turned out to be a terrific source of advice and information. He even pointed us in the right direction to get the engines at the lowest possible price.
Boat Modifications
Mr. Richardson told us that the new boats were being made with a raised transom, though we probably didn't need to raise the transom of the SeaBrat. He also suggested that the batteries be moved forward under the center console. We asked Mr. Thompson what he had done and found that he had left his batteries and transom as-is. He agreed that he did pick up a lot more water in the back, since it now sat lower, but didn't feel that it was a problem. He strongly recommended that we replace the access covers with locking models in place of the stock pop-out type. Cheryl and I experimented by standing on the transom of our boat while at anchor to see what that the additional weight was going to do. We found that the scuppers wound up partially submerged and that water would frequently splash over the transom.
Obviously the locking access covers were a good idea and fortunately they were not overly pricey. Raising the transom would be nice, but at a fairly large cost. In addition to the cost of the transom work, we would then need to buy the extra-long shaft version of the outboards which cost more than the standard long shaft models. We decided to forego the transom operation. If we wanted to raise it later, we could. The engines could then be mounted on jack plates so the long shaft version would still work. Now we had a plan, all we needed to do was implement it.
Buying and Rigging the New Engines
The local Honda dealers, while not outrageous on price, were really into the nickel and dime routine. Every little thing was an extra, tachs, controls, gauges... nothing was included. We took Mr. Thompson's advice and looked outside the local dealer area and found a place that would sell us the engines we wanted, complete with gauges and controls, but we would have to pay to have them shipped. A little research found that we were still way ahead of the local dealer and we ordered the engines. While I could manhandle the 50s off the boat, there was no way I could possibly lift those 90s.
We found a nearby marine yard that was willing to accept the delivery of the new engines and would mount them on the boat for a modest fee. Our plan was almost completely in place. John Richardson loaned us his Honda manuals which detailed the rigging procedures. By the time my engines arrived, I had memorized the rigging we would have to do. We had to replace the tachometer (included with the engine) since it was a different type than the 50 used. We could reuse all the old controls. All we had to do was plug in the wiring harness and connect and adjust the throttle/shift cables. It was almost too easy.
Did It Work Out?
Our first sea trial with the new engines went without a hitch. We had bought a set of Powertech RXB 4-blade props which John Richardson recommended and they worked beautifully. Top speed was about 33 mph and we could easily cruise at 25 mph. Although the engines are mounted as high as possible using the existing holes, they could stand to be raised another 1/2 inch.
We could also probably repitch the props another inch or so and pick up a little more speed, though this would definitely reduce our single engine speed. With a little effort and a few more dollars, we could probably increase the top speed to about 37 mph, but I doubt it would improve our cruising speed any. Fuel efficiency, while pale in comparison to the old 50s, is still very good at an average of 2.6 mpg at cruise.


















