[Public-list] another outboard discussion

[Gordon Laco]

Ok, I'm going to wade in...

The ability to motor in a chop is important.  The most likely circumstance
of trouble would involve trying to get into or out of a harbour or up narrow
channel.  Yes, purists like to sail where others 'light the fire' and motor,
but the fact is most yacht harbours today are not designed to allow this.

Unless you are prepared to admit that there will be occasions every season
when safety dictates that you must remain at sea or in harbour until
conditions improve, you will be placing your vessel and maybe your family at
risk.

We lived with a very good 4 stroke outboard for 21 years.  Its strengths
were quietness, reliability, and the one time it had a problem, the ease
with which it came off its bracket and went to the shop in the trunk of my
car.  I also liked the idea of not dragging a prop through the water while
sailing.

Its weaknesses were:

The weight was being carried at just about the worst place - 10" beyond the
transom.  The extra pitching moment totally eclipsed the benefit of not
dragging the prop.

Being a longshaft, it rarely came out of the water but when it did, those
particular days are ones I will never forget.  Once was while trying to get
out of Oakville Harbour.  There are piers there and while it did not look so
bad from inside, once we were into the channel we found we were pitching the
outboard out of the water.  We lost steerage way quickly and the drama
developed.  We could not easily turn back and we could not go forward.  We
were being set against one of the walls...  We eventually got turned by
raising and backing the genny and went back.

A similar thing happened years later in the 30,000 Islands coast of Georgian
Bay.  There was a very strong wind blowing from the west into the islands
and we were motorsailing up the inside passage.  Where the passage was
exposed to the outside the seas were 4-6'.  At one point the channel turned
downwind to a buoy, then back up to windward before resuming north.  We
happily scooted down to the pin, rounded the buoy and stuck her nose into
the wind.  Then we discovered that the other end of the channel (Just about
at Henvy Inlet to you Canadians) was open, and we were getting a fairly
unfiltered sea coming in.  The wavelength was compressed by the narrow
channel and shoaling water.  We got a few hundred yards up and could not
make further progress.  The outboard was assisted by the main, and was not
coming out and cavitating every wave, but occasionally.  We decided to go
back south and hole up at an island we had recently passed.  We scooted back
to the buoy and stuck her nose into the other side of the V...and could not
get far back up.

We went back to the buoy to consider options. We were stuck in Sandy Bay,
and while talking things over found we could not even get back to the buoy.
We were loosing ground, being pressed back.  We looked at the chart again
and found two bays, one on the north side and one on the south.  The one to
the north was to windward and just under our lee - I figured we should try
to get into that first because if the leeward south one was too shallow we
would not be able to get back up to try the other.  The North one had
breakers right through it.  We went about and shot south to the
other.....and discovered my favourite anchorage ever.  The relief we felt
gliding into the perfectly calm water, sheltered from the wind by high rocks
and towering pines was spectacular.

Sorry for the long tale - but the point is, an outboard is not to be counted
on the way an inboard can be.  Yes, it is not good seamanship to depend too
heavily on the engine - but the outboard will lure you into trouble if you
think of it as you once thought of the inboard.  By the way, these
adventures and others occurred aboard our Danish Folkboat.

Gord #426 Surprise




> J
> 
> Try for 25 HP
> 
> 
> 
> Mike Lehman
> ~~~_/)_/)~~_/)~~~
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ----Original Message Follows----
> From: "J Bergquist" <JOHN.R.BERGQUIST at saic.com>
> Reply-To: j at ship.saic.com,Alberg 30 Public List -- open to all
> <public-list at alberg30.org>
> To: <dk.campbell at sympatico.ca>, <j at ship.saic.com>,"'Alberg 30 Public List --
> open to all'" <public-list at alberg30.org>
> Subject: RE: [Public-list] another outboard discussion
> Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 21:56:20 -0400
> 
> Don-
> 
> Thanks for your comments. All well taken.
> 
> 1. Not sure about longevity. You might have a good point there. The
> longevity of a brand new 4-stroke outboard vs. a reconditioned Atomic 4
> built no later than 1982 would, indeed, be an interesting celebrity death
> match. I think I'd bet on the Yamaha, personally. But maybe I'd lose.
> However, there's a brisk market in used outboards, and 4 strokes bring a
> premium. They're hard to come by, so they must be doing something
> right...???
> 
> 2. Okay if 9.9 hp is insufficient, then a 15 hp model costs only $500 more
> and still over $1000 less than a rebuilt A4. And - can you believe this -
> weighs the SAME as the 9.9! I know at least one owner who has a diesel of 13
> hp which he says is sufficient. In big chop, I would hope that I'd be
> sailing anyway. I have never understood people's concern with being able to
> use the motor in chop. But maybe I am just not experienced enough. Seems to
> me it's a sailboat, and if there's chop, there's probably wind. But I
> digress from the topic...since an outboard is not hooked up to a 55 or 70
> amp alternator or freshwater pump (I would want FW cooling if I got an
> inboard), it has more available power to drive the propeller. Of course, the
> gearbox losses are probably somewhat higher than a stuffing box and cutless
> bearing. But I bet that in the net the outboard produces more available SHP,
> in an even comparison. And most people I have spoken to are adamant that the
> Atomic 4 never developed 30 HP in an operating Alberg in the first place. If
> you look at the power curve for the motor, it develops 25 hp at 3000 RPM.
> Depending on the propeller match, most boats are probably using less than
> this. The curve is pretty steep as a function of RPM. Note also that the
> outboards are available in both standard and high-thrust models, which
> basically have different propulsion matching (gearing and propeller). Then
> there is the fact that the outboard probably has a much higher propulsive
> efficiency (3 blade prop, with only a small stick instead of a full keel in
> front of it, and not much in the way of inflow wake), not to mention the
> fact that, for racing, you pull the thing out of the water and voila...zero
> auxiliary propulsion system drag! In the net, I'd be willing to bet that an
> outboard puts FAR more effective power into the water than an inboard of
> identical power, on our boats. I don't know if it's 2 to 1, but I'd bet it's
> a significant difference.
> 
> 3. I am not planning to mount the motor on the transom. I thought I was
> quite careful to explain I would mount it on the starboard side near where
> my existing fuel tank sits. This would put it longitudinally somewhere
> between my winch and the aft end of the coaming. I am not sure how you
> figure that removing 500# of atomic 4 and adding 100# of outboard about 3
> feet further aft is not going to result in a net trim by the bow. I'll let
> you work out the arms, trimming moments, and net resultant trim based on the
> change in LCG if you want to. And as for roll, I figured I'd add my extra
> batteries on the starboard side in such a way that the boat would have a net
> zero shift in TCG (and maybe just maybe move LCG far enough back to get the
> boat back on her original lines, otherwise I'd have to start figuring how to
> take stuff out of the bow). It seems to me that Yves is a pretty smart guy
> and he managed to make this kind of system work well. He sure has a lot more
> miles of sailing experience than I've got. I don't know. Maybe he sails
> around with his bow sticking way up in the air, but somehow I doubt it. By
> the way, he claims on his website that his 9.9 hp motor pushes his boat at 6
> knots. By my calcs, hull speed at zero heel is 6.25 knots, so that's about
> as good as one can expect, I guess. Granted, he's not carrying around 500#
> of Atom bomb...maybe that gives him a slightly shorter waterline, and lower
> hull speed, but let's not split hairs, eh?
> 
> 4. Though I am, indeed, a SNAME card carrying naval architect and marine
> engineer, unfortunately I don't own a towing tank or a good model of the A30
> to figure out the real EHP curve so we could answer our propulsion power
> questions with authority. Of course, I could spend some time lofting,
> building, and testing one, and I could maybe get a friend who works at the
> USNA hydro lab to let me into their teaching tank one night or weekend, but
> really I'd rather go sailing. So instead of doing that, I'm asking questions
> to this list.
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
> J Bergquist
> Calliope #287
> 
> PS. Gail, thanks for the brief on the rules! That would be awesome if I
> could still race the boat with this different propulsion system installed!!!
> 
> PPS. Anybody have good ideas about how to plug my stern tube? I'd like to
> avoid anything too permanent in case somebody else comes along later and
> wants to install an inboard... But then again, would also like to avoid
> springing a leak!!!
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dk.campbell at sympatico.ca [mailto:dk.campbell at sympatico.ca]
> Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2005 8:08 PM
> To: j at ship.saic.com; Alberg 30 Public List -- open to all
> Subject: Re: [Public-list] another outboard discussion
> 
>    I am always amazed at the way modern engineers try to get horsepower or
> kilowatts out of small blocks. The way they do it is with fuel injection and
> turbochargers - very simple more fuel and or more air. The life of these
> smaller
> blocks is not what the old long stroke,  big bore motors gave us. Be
> prepared to
> buy several of these over the lifetime of  a good inboard.
>    At the current time, there are a number of unhappy owners of A4s,
> primarily
> due to either wear on the rings and cylinders from extended usage or  poor
> maintenance procedures over the 35 or more years that the motor has been in
> the
> boat. This unhappiness is the result of these motors now  not developing the
> hoprsepower they were designed to operate at, which was at least over 18,
> with a
> potential to go over 30. How will a 9.9 HP unit ever provide you with the
> safety
> you require if your sails won't work against a tide,  current or chop? As I
> have
> said earlier this month, the 9.9 is hard at work to propel an Alberg 22
> which
> weighs 4000 lbs and the same hull design as ours, only on a much smaller
> scale.
>    Since you are  a naval architect and engineer, for a quick test, try
> the
> Alberg hull in a wave tank and see what the drag coefficient does with this
> motor that far out on the transom! I have the feeling that 110 lbs on the
> transom will be worse than the 350 lbs under the bridge deck for waterline
> balance. The other option is to work the propulsion formulae backwards to
> determine the required HP with the hull shape/ displacement and desired
> cruising
> speed for the AL30 hull.With the slippage or efficiency factor that you
> engineers seem to build in at around 50% , the 9.9 should look very small
> indeed, in fact harebrained as you say.
> Don
> #528
> 
> J Bergquist wrote:
> 
>> Dear List,
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Me again, with the busted atomic 4.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> So I have been kicking around all kinds of harebrained ideas about how to
>> propel my boat when there is no wind. Today I went to the marina where I
> am
>> coming out of the water for the winter (Fairwinds on the Magothy), and I
>> discovered that they do a lot of business in outboard motors. I found out
>> that I can buy a brand new, four stroke 9.9 hp Yamaha high thrust long
> shaft
>> motor with electric start for only $2200. It comes with a 2 year
> warranty.
>> It weighs just over 100 #.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Now, my other options are as follows:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 1.      Install a rebuilt Atomic 4. My short block is worthless. But my
>> alternator and carburetor are good. Head and manifold need replacing. By
> my
>> calculations, I need about $4000 to get a rebuild A4 from Moyer. Plus a
>> bunch of time and effort to install it.
>> 2.      Install a new diesel. This seems to be a good option, but I'm
>> currently estimating at least $8000 after I buy shafting, propeller,
>> dripless packing, new fuel system, and a few other while-you're-at-its.
> Plus
>> even more time and effort spent installing it.
>> 3.      Install electric propulsion. I love everything about this option
>> except the range limitation (severe!), the longevity (electronics and
>> water.no no), and the unconventional nature (might be tough to sell to a
> new
>> owner). Its cost is more difficult to estimate because there is not much
> in
>> the way of comparables, but it would be at least $5000 and maybe as much
> as
>> $9000. Depending on how many batteries I buy and what kind of onboard
>> charging system investment I make (solar, wind, fuel cell - yikes), it
> could
>> be a lot more. Then there is the risk.there's nobody out there who has a
>> comparable system and can say yes it works or no it doesn't.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> So I know that Yves Gelinas repowered Jean du Sud with an outboard. And
> he
>> seems to have come up with a nice way of mounting it on an articulating
>> bracket on the port side. My existing gas tank is on the starboard side.
> I
>> am thinking that I could make a real nice bracket and install the
> plumbing
>> for gasoline from my existing tank right out to the motor and hook it
> into
>> my existing electrical system (of course, it only has a 10 amp
>> alternator.wouldn't charge batteries very fast).
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Even considering the cost differential between this motor and an A4, I
> could
>> buy some really nice canvas, a second bank of batteries to make up for
> the
>> additional time I would have to go between charging (boosting my capacity
>> from 200 to 400 amp hours), and a super nice shore-power based charging
> and
>> monitoring system and still have cash left over. Not to mention my boat
>> would be a couple of hundred # lighter (would y'all still let me race?)
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Can someone tell me what is silly about this idea? It seems to me a
> really
>> good option. Allows me to invest more time and money in sailing, rather
> than
>> in my motor. It is, after all, a sailboat. Sometimes I think I might
> forget
>> that.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Your pal,
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> J Bergquist
>> 
>> Calliope #287
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> PS. Is anybody out there interested in helping me sail my boat up to
>> Fairwinds Marina on the Magothy this Saturday? I need crew!
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> These businesses support your Association:
>> http://www.alberg30.org/store/A30supporters.html
>> Please support them.
>> _______________________________________________
>> Public-list mailing list
>> Public-list at alberg30.org
>> http://alberg30.org/mailman/listinfo/public-list
> 
> _______________________________________________
> These businesses support your Association:
> http://www.alberg30.org/store/A30supporters.html
> Please support them.
> _______________________________________________
> Public-list mailing list
> Public-list at alberg30.org
> http://alberg30.org/mailman/listinfo/public-list
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar – get it now!
> http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/
> 
> _______________________________________________
> These businesses support your Association:
> http://www.alberg30.org/store/A30supporters.html
> Please support them.
> _______________________________________________
> Public-list mailing list
> Public-list at alberg30.org
> http://alberg30.org/mailman/listinfo/public-list


 1128086520.0