Captain's ReportSurprise PerformanceI love horsepower. The more cylinders, the better. I revere turbochargers, fuel injectors, intercoolers, aftercoolers: anything that can be added to an engine to give it more kick. I’m not a speed demon; it’s acceleration that I crave. Raw, push-you-back-in-the-seat power. So when I was given the assignment to test a 19 foot boat with a 135 horsepower, 4-cylinder, carbureted 3.0 liter engine I was, well, uninspired. Especially considering that I had just run the same boat with a 190 horsepower, 4.3 liter V-6. Having a penchant for power, I was astonished with the performance that this little engine gave Rinker’s 192 Bowrider. In short, I was surprisingly satisfied!In reviewing the numbers between our test boat and her more muscular sibling, the results were remarkably comparable. While the smaller engine, equipped with a correspondingly smaller propeller, cannot be as fast at a given RPM, the fuel consumption to speed ratios were almost dead even. At 25 miles-per-hour, both boats burned about 5.8 gallons-per-hour, for a range of approximately 160 miles. This similarity continued right up to the 3.0 liter’s top speed of 38 miles-per-hour, where the little engine burned about a gallon-per-hour less fuel then the 4.3 liter at the same speed. Even the time to plane was within two-tenths of a second. The most significant divergences were a six mile-per-hour discrepancy in top speed, and a two second difference in time from 0 to 30 miles-per-hour. The smaller engine was also noisier above 35 miles-per-hour, but the sound readings were comparable at slower speeds.Beside the performance, the boat held other surprises as well. Rinker aggressively encourages feedback about their boats from customers, dealers, employees, and apparently anyone who will voice an opinion. At the end of three days of testing, the General Manager of the company followed our test captains through each of thirteen boats, asking questions and taking notes regarding our likes, dislikes, and suggestions. Their willingness to accept and evaluate criticism, and incorporate sensible changes into future boats shows in the finished product. Even on such a small boat, I found numerous thoughtful features that I wish were incorporated by other manufacturers. One small, yet noteworthy example is the rocker switch for the horn, which is colored red to instantly distinguish it among the other switches on the panel. Other niceties include a built-in trash receptacle with a removable insert for cleaning, plenty of well-placed, thoughtfully designed storage compartments, and an overwhelming abundance of drink holders. (I counted twelve on a nineteen-foot boat, which is just adequate when you consider that they magnetically attract sunscreen, sunglasses, cellphones, car keys, cameras, and innumerable other odds and ends.) One flaw reported by all four of the test captains involved the bucket-style helm chairs. The forward part of the seat bottom flips up to allow plenty of room to stand in front of the seat when docking or running in tight quarters. Unfortunately, with the seat in this position the lever that operates the seat’s sliding mechanism protruded painfully into our right calves. One of the test boats sported a newly redesigned locking mechanism that eliminated this problem. If you like to run your boat while standing, try to get the new design.The seating arrangement shows careful consideration as well. Seats in the bow area have padded back and side rests, with convenient grab-rails. All the way forward, the seats are separated by three steps, aiding in boarding the boat from the bow, even for small children. Drink holders and an anchor locker are built into these steps. Behind the windshield, the afore mentioned bucket seats swivel and slide. Farther aft, an L-shaped settee extends down the port side and across the transom. Aft of this settee, the engine compartment cover makes a comfortable sun pad. On the starboard side, a walk-through is provided to traverse from the cockpit to the swim platform without having to climb over the sun pad or settee. Overall, I found this Captiva 192 Bowrider to be a great little runabout. While the 3.0 liter engine proved more than adequate with as many as four people aboard, I suspect it may be marginal for heavier loads. If you like large crowds or plan to ski a lot, consider the six or even eight cylinder engine option. But if the larger engine doesn’t fit your budget, or you just don’t need the extra horsepower, the 3.0 liter proved to be a fun, affordable little engine that could!by Captain Vince Daniello
Test Result Highlights
- Top speed for the Rinker 192 Captiva BR (Not in Production) is 38.0 mph (61.2 kph), burning 10.9 gallons per hour (gph) or 41.26 liters per hour (lph).
- Best cruise for the Rinker 192 Captiva BR (Not in Production) is 30.7 mph (49.4 kph), and the boat gets 4.01 miles per gallon (mpg) or 1.71 kilometers per liter (kpl), giving the boat a cruising range of 151 miles (243.01 kilometers).
- Tested power is 1 x 135-hp MerCruiser 3.0L.
Standard and Optional Features
|Outlet: 12-Volt Acc||Standard|
Full Warranty Information on this brand coming soon!