Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Alaska Any reason not to run a Solar 470.?

I’m thinking about pulling the trigger on a Solar 470 Super Jet for fishing and maybe dipping on the Kenai, maybe the mouth of Bird and Twenty Mile, lakes, and other rivers I just want something to get around with that might give me some skinny water access as well as handling some bigger water.

I’d like to hear some opinions and further suggestions from you guys - so let ‘em rip.

I’ll be watching this one as I’ve been thinking about the same boat again

I have had a Solar 470 Strella for 4 years with the 50 HP Tohatsu it is the older better material model with the tough poly bottom the newer models have lesser materials. Bought mine from Jetech with the Russian sanctions Bidens war, the ones coming in now are suspect! Dont know how they are avoiding sanctions! Give me a call for more information. But love mine for all around use about 1800 # useful load. 28 MPH, 24 cruise, and 2.75 GPH, can run extreme shallow. Just keep it away from bears. Have owned the 420 Strella and 420 Vega. Kurt

Jetech site on Instagram lots of videos
https://www.instagram.com/jetechinflatables/

I just picked one up too. Way better than those gay mini boats running around. Might as well put a rainbow flag on those!

Drop the mouth of Bird for several reasons...

Maybe you can get Kurt to give you a ride... listen when he says bears like them a lot.

They (like all inflatables) become nasty sails in big winds. You have not lived until you intentionally swamp your inflatable to keep it stable. Had three posters from here on one such incident. Perhaps they will chime in...

Wind and bears are issues with any inflatable, had a very scary ride last summer on the Knik, in a sudden Willowaw. I will not run it in big winds. The top tubes become a sail in the wind. fishing it in the Kenai drifting with a jet for control, tough to get it track. Same problem trolling for trout on lakes, I use a Electric trolling motor for control, slow speed with a Jet is like herding cats, but I catch more fish as lure is not at same speed and depth.

The problem with glacial river winds is the chop, cavitation, unable to read the water, and last summer I was pinned to the shore and had no control when running.

Overall tough to beat for a dual purpose boat would not use it for a dipnet boat on the lower Kenai Zoo! with a jet, would throw a kicker on it for control, in the winds and waves.

Being able to go to places like this is enough reasons to own one Knik glacier my old 420 Strella

I’m so glad I asked.

An inflatable seems a bad choice for what I’d like to accomplish.



…and yes Art, I be dropping the Bird’s mouth.

Why not a light weight jon boat with a 50 hp jet? Something like a Lowe Aura 1852. Kenia legal and able to run skinny water with 2 adults and a moderate amount of gear. Very stable in the water. Boat, motor, battery, and gas should weigh in around 725-750 pounds.

Tunnel is one reason, weight is another. I have a 17 ft G3 similar to what you mentioned above.

A good combo is 2 boats 1 motor 1 trailer, 470 with Jet , and a flat bottom aluminum skiff 17 to 18 ft.

Use the Solar to play and the aluminum skiff for freight and work. Usually easier and cheaper to buy a used boat with trailer and motor. Most were older 2 stroke jets, but so many Solar jet boats were sold. the older 2 stroke, LW outboard jets are long gone!

The inflatable Solar Jet will plane and run with a lot more weight than a Aluminum jet boat just does not have the room, both have there pluses and minuses.

You are not afraid to run a Solar 470 in very skinny water versus a flat bottomed boat, a lot easier to get unstuck even by yourself. Plus with the smaller 420 you can fly it in!

Market has been completely changed since Covid years 4 Stroke Tohatsu 50 HP lightest 4 stroke used to be $6500 and available now around 10 K , try and find a boat trailer now very hard, Solar Jet Boats up about 30%. Older LW 2 Stroke outboards very tough to find and limited on where you can use them.

Thanks Kurt.

[quote=Snowwolfe]

Looked at one this morning.

Does a jet become pointless without the tunnel.?

I owned a “tunnel less” jet boat for years. Used it in rivers, lakes, and salt on occasion. Not sure what I was missing but I enjoyed the rig.

I know we can run shallower with the CORRECT tunnel. Vs same boat and motor without... which is super important on the floodplain end of the rivers as they get to the bering bays....

Whether its important enough has to be each persons call.

I had a tunnel put in a Jon boat in TX. No jet. It never hurt the boat and it would go pretty shallow vs normal. But I have the motor a bit too high and it will cavitate on a turn in deeper rougher water at speed.

Rost,

Thank you for speaking up.. always a pleasure Sir.

I‘ll figure a tunnel similar to their Roughneck - probably build a console (maybe center and up front) for comfort (not be all twisted around).

I’d one wants a tunnel on a flatboat it need to be a round one.
Square tunnels can cause problems in turns due to air and such

Flat bottom boats can cavitate with a tunnel. But can work ok.

A 1/2 round tunnel will not work for a jet, a prop would be ok.

Johnn
I agree with you on most everything...

Sponsons on the transom are better than a tunnel. It can lead to ventilating when air gets in. Square tunnels trap water against the sides in turns with jets. It reduces the slides. A tunnel with sponsons works, also.

Sponsons keep the bow down and increase the waterline to beam ratio... the single largest factor in determining max hull speed versus applied power. Huge efficiency booster.

Cavitation involves plenty of water and a prop or jet over-revving causing bubbles to break out on the driving surface. Ventilation is air under the hull getting into the drive surfaces. Many results are similar, but not the same.

One of my bosses talked at length about jet outboards and tunnels to people. Yup I don't know the people. But this before having one welded in one of our cold bay river boats.

I don't recall the dimensions at all of the tunnel but I think I recall it had to be smaller and shorter than I would have thought. Its square and not round.

Also has tabs on the back instead of the full on floatation sponsons. No issues with leaks there etc... my personal TX boat has floatation ones and have had no issues but no rock to poke holes here either in TX where I run it.

I can say that our boats in AK we dont' need em to slide so much, but they will slide sideways if needed under power. They rarely cavitate at all unless we get really rough water which is not that common in a river thats not so wide.

And again, we definitely run shallower with the tunnel than before we had them welded in. In fact trying to get a non tunnel boat back to town one day is its been replaced with a tunnel one last fall.

Whats often worse on the rivers is the jets dealing with weeds in the water... On the creeks that are only about 2-3 boats wide, sometimes we can't avoid spots of grass etc... its much more of an issue than any of the others. But thats jet life.

The tunnel on the 470 Strella has squared sides, the 470 Super Jet about 4 " wider has a rounded tunnel. The SJ will carry more load and does not like rough water, slides like a standard jet. The 470 Strella has a different hull design does better in chop and does not slide in turns runs like a conventional boat. The SJ will run a little shallower in my experience. Both will run in scary shallow water, very capable boat for exploring.