Re: kickup leeboard for a brick

With the boat on its side in the yard .I put the leeboard in with it
all the way down and marked where I wanted the pivoting point to be.
I tried the 45 degree angle which Jim describes but with the wide
board and high sides of the boat it didn't seem to be far enough to
support the board.So I put in the center of my board 8'' and 14 1/2''
down measuring from the top of the board,which is 13'' from the
topside of the boat.Drilled my 1/4 hole through the boat and board.

Then I trimmed off both brackets that hold the leeboard and the 1x2
on the top of the leeboard. Made my new leeboard guard drilled a
1/4 '' hole though it. Made a new upper bracket long enough to allow
the leeboard to pivot all the way up .

With the pivot point so low and in the middle of the baord, the board
pivots down through the upper bracket when in the board is fully
up . So I added a lever that extends 6'' off the top trailing edge of
the baord where the old 1x2 was located ontop of the leeboard.It acts
like a stopper and sticks up an inch or so above the upper bracket
where i'm going to drill a hole and tie a lanyard.

I've had it in the water and it works great. No worries when coming
in .

Todd
I'll have some pics to send to you tonight.

--- In bolger@y..., <darus@v...> wrote:
> > Just finished today on making my kick up
> > lee board and my kick up rudder blade.
> >
>
> I'd love to learn more about your kickup leeboard.
> My brick desperately needs one.

> Just finished today on making my kick up
> lee board and my kick up rudder blade.
>

I'd love to learn more about your kickup leeboard.
My brick desperately needs one.

--- In bolger@y..., thomas dalzell <proaconstrictor@y...> wrote:

> Seriously though, you mention liquid nails, how are
> these new polyurethane calks for this kind of stuff.
> I am just getting around to using my first tube
> (blush)seems pretty rugged.
>
> TD
> ---

So far so good. No leaks or cracks . At 1.66 for a tube of LQ NAILS
construction grade exterior/ interior adhesive I don't mind. It only
took me six tubes plus one for the leeboard to build my brick.
If I were to do it all over, The only thing I'd do differently
would be to use 3/8 '' instead of 1/4 inch plywood for the sides and
double up the bottom . I wouldn't mind the extra weight for a stiffer
boat.

Todd

Another great use for my brick, it doubles as a camper shell up side
down on the back of my truck.

The price of oars in my local store is $25 each, so I plan to build
them from scratch, 6' long and then cut 'em shorter if I feel like
it. I would hate to pay more for the oars than I paid for the
materials for the boat! <grin> I have built oars once before, from a
drawing from Jim Michalak, they didn't turn out pretty, but they
worked fine and were lighter in weight than the store bought type.
see:
http://www.hallman.org/roar/CutOars.jpg
and
http://www.hallman.org/roar/OarFillet.jpg

--- In bolger@y..., staehpj1@h... wrote:
>I would use 5-1/2' or 6'.
> Personal preference does come into play though.

I stuck my AF4 together with a combination of PL Premium (above the water
line) and 3M 5200 (below). Oh, and a lot of bronze ring nails. A darn sight
easier than epoxy, me thinks.

JB

----- Original Message -----
From: "thomas dalzell" <proaconstrictor@...>
To: <bolger@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, October 12, 2001 11:15 PM
Subject: Re: [bolger] stretching a tortoise(was Re: Length of oar for
Tortoise)

| Well of course not! If I could kite sail, I doubt I
| would worry too much about external chines either.
|
| Seriously though, you mention liquid nails, how are
| these new polyurethane calks for this kind of stuff.
| I am just getting around to using my first tube
| (blush)seems pretty rugged.
|
| TD
| ---
|
| _______________________________________________________
| Do You Yahoo!?
| Get your free @... address athttp://mail.yahoo.ca
|
|
| Bolger rules!!!
| - no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
| - pls take "personals" off-list, stay on topic, and punctuate
| - add your comments at the TOP and SIGN your posts, snip all you like
| - To order plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box 1209, Gloucester, MA,
01930, Fax: (978) 282-1349
| - Unsubscribe:bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
|
| Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject tohttp://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
|

Re: external stringers.

> I severely doubt it. I am not alone in that

Tom Jone's in his current

> book "New Plywood Boats", in a

flatering profile of PCB, wants to see

> a test. I don't need to. There is no

way. 

But seriously, is there a way?

I thought I made it clear that there could be all
sorts of good reasons for this practice. I'm not
convinced, but I am open minded. And also that maybe,
just maybe, the difference in drag or whatever isn't
terribly noticeable, or all that big a deal. But the
idea that the external stringers don't cause drag...
Isn't that ridiculous?

TF Jones' cements were not, as I read them, so we
could figure out this whole external chines improved
row-ability phenomenon. I got the impression he
doesn't have much faith in them either. Though I
think he is the source I am quoting as saying that
Bolger believes there isn't a difference, so sorry
about that since its second hand.

_______________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @... address athttp://mail.yahoo.ca

Well of course not! If I could kite sail, I doubt I
would worry too much about external chines either.

Seriously though, you mention liquid nails, how are
these new polyurethane calks for this kind of stuff.
I am just getting around to using my first tube
(blush)seems pretty rugged.

TD
---

_______________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @... address athttp://mail.yahoo.ca

Hey,

I'm old but not out of shape! Built my brick with just plywood,
nails, liquid nails, and slapped some latex paint on it and it lives
on the back of my truck. When the winds not blowing 15+ and I'm not
out kitesurfing. I'm in my external chine logged no epoxy brick. Its
in the water 3 to 4 days out of the week 3 to 4 hours at a time, so
far no leaks or break downs. Just finished today on making my kick up
lee board and my kick up rudder blade.

Todd

I don't mind those external chines....

--- In bolger@y..., thomas dalzell <proaconstrictor@y...> wrote:

> > According to Bolger, the internal/external chine issue
> is driven by the ease of building>

I severely doubt it. I am not alone in that Tom
> Jone's in his current book "New Plywood Boats", in a
> flatering profile of PCB, wants to see a test. I
> don't need to. There is no way. On the other hand,
> if one is using one's boat to comute a few yards to a
> mooring, the difference in performance may be
> relatively trivial in this working environment. In a
> recreational environment, where the boat may be used
> by kids etc... or out of shape adults. I think this
> issue is worth pondering.
>
> I think another reason for putting the log on the
> outside is that it keeps the inside free of nooks for
> grunge. This to me is kind of the crux of the mater.
> Not the grunge, but the perspective of the guy who
> really lives the life. A little cleaner something
> here, and a little slower something there. With his
> extensive use he probably knows he trade-offs.
>
> But the reality is probably closser to the
> recreational use of these boats. It seems to me that
> most people building them, are also doing a nicer job
> than specified. I have yet to see someone just cut
> out some ply, and cheap lumber, nail it up, and slap
> on a coat of latex, and throw it in the water. I know
> that in my tender environment one of the biggest
> issues was long term outdoor storage, often without
> any cover. The perspective of the guy who lives the
> life only on the rarest occasion. I built mine almost
> fully encapsulated and glassed, incuding the gunnels.
> The thing has been lying outdoors for 8 years, and
> looks as good as the first day. It hardly gets any
> use at all, but it is ready when I get time to put my
> trimaran on a mooring. I don't see an exterior lumber
> chine holding up like that. And another point is that
> in many parts of the country the lumber casts more
> than and epoxy chine would.
>
> Anyway, thank you for refreshing my memory on these
> points.
>
>
> _______________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get your free @... address athttp://mail.yahoo.ca

> The external chine ...
> They don't look bad on some boats, and they do on others.

The looks of the external chine on the sides of the Tortoise is
pretty ugly to my eye. I was able to improve the looks considerably
by "softening" the hard edges of the chines with my belt sander.

Jeff, I bought my stretched Tortoise plans from
Payson. I don't recall if it was merely stretched or
if the bottom rocker was modified. If you don't have
to row far, the strechted T. is a very nice little
boat, great for me and two small children, very light,
stiff in use, easy to build. I kind of regret having
sold mine. To me, it looks better proportioned than
Brick, and is surely better to row, although it is has
far less capacity.
I don't think you could go far wrong just
re-spacing the stations, as you suggest, unless you
stretched it out to the point that the rocker was
insufficient to give stiffness to the bottom, or let
the transoms drag. 8' or under ought to cause no
problems.
---jmbell@...wrote:

> Buy the plans for the Big Tortise from Payson?
>
>http://www.instantboats.com/brick.htm
>
> I know he calls it "Brick" here, but this boat is
> different
> from "Brick". It is narrower and not as deep as
> Brick, and probably
> more practical, too.
>
> JB
>
> --- In bolger@y..., jeffbob@i... wrote:
> > --- In bolger@y..., Sam Glasscock
> <glasscocklanding@y...> wrote:
> > >
> > > with my stretch Tortoise, with the same beam and
> > > gunwale hieght as the regular Tortoise
> >
> > I also intend to build this stretched tortoise.
> How did you stretch
> > yours? As I see it there are two ways:
> >
> > 1. increase the station dimension(ie stations are
> every 7" instead
> of
> > 6") which gives an overall length of 91"(or 7'
> 7").
> >
> > or
> >
> > 2. using the 6" station dimension, mark stations
> 1 to 7 starting
> from
> > the left edge, mark stations 13 to 7 starting from
> the right edge,
> > then use a batten to draw the entire curve of the
> bottom spanning
> the
> > gap from station 7left to 7right. Although this
> method marginally
> > increases the height, the overall length would be
> 8'.
> >
> > Are there other ways that I have not thought of?
> >
> > Jeff
>
>

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
http://personals.yahoo.com

Despite your dismissive tone, I'll reply.

I said

> 3) Don't have to notch frames

On Fri, 12 Oct 2001, thomas dalzell wrote:
> O please.

It makes a difference. Unless you're quite accurate with your cuts, the
nitching creates rot pockets. You can fill it all up with epoxy goop, but
since you're dealing with large pieces of solid lumber, the wet/dry cycle
will probably break the epoxy seal, with a potential for problem.

> I severely doubt it. I am not alone in that Tom Jone's in his current
> book "New Plywood Boats", in a flatering profile of PCB, wants to see
> a test. I don't need to. There is no way.

Well, I guess your mind's made up. Glad to know you're more confident
than Bolger and TF Jones. Makes me trust you a lot.

> I think another reason for putting the log on the outside is that it
> keeps the inside free of nooks for grunge. This to me is kind of the
> crux of the mater.

Yes, this is certainly an important issue, which I elided, for number 3.
Thanks for making this more plain.

Thanks for this interesting reply Chris:
 
According to Bolger, the internal/external chine issue
is driven by the 
ease of building. There is no question that the
external chine is easier 
to build, for several reasons: 
 
1) Easier to bend (just a bit) 

This isn't one of life's great problems, and as I
recall he specifies this construction on boats like
Black Skimmer where the issue hardly arise. I don't
think this adds five minute to construction.

2) Easier to measure (just let it run long, and trim
back) 

Same comment as above. I agree that if my four year
old, my cell phone, and my main phone were all
yatering at me at the same time, while th shop was on
fire, this kind of construction break might seem like
a god send Other than that, is he serious!

3) Don't have to notch frames 

O please.

 
Bolger says there's no difference in use, and he may
be right. 

I severely doubt it. I am not alone in that Tom
Jone's in his current book "New Plywood Boats", in a
flatering profile of PCB, wants to see a test. I
don't need to. There is no way. On the other hand,
if one is using one's boat to comute a few yards to a
mooring, the difference in performance may be
relatively trivial in this working environment. In a
recreational environment, where the boat may be used
by kids etc... or out of shape adults. I think this
issue is worth pondering.

I think another reason for putting the log on the
outside is that it keeps the inside free of nooks for
grunge. This to me is kind of the crux of the mater.
Not the grunge, but the perspective of the guy who
really lives the life. A little cleaner something
here, and a little slower something there. With his
extensive use he probably knows he trade-offs.

But the reality is probably closser to the
recreational use of these boats. It seems to me that
most people building them, are also doing a nicer job
than specified. I have yet to see someone just cut
out some ply, and cheap lumber, nail it up, and slap
on a coat of latex, and throw it in the water. I know
that in my tender environment one of the biggest
issues was long term outdoor storage, often without
any cover. The perspective of the guy who lives the
life only on the rarest occasion. I built mine almost
fully encapsulated and glassed, incuding the gunnels.
The thing has been lying outdoors for 8 years, and
looks as good as the first day. It hardly gets any
use at all, but it is ready when I get time to put my
trimaran on a mooring. I don't see an exterior lumber
chine holding up like that. And another point is that
in many parts of the country the lumber casts more
than and epoxy chine would.

Anyway, thank you for refreshing my memory on these
points.

_______________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @... address athttp://mail.yahoo.ca

On Fri, 12 Oct 2001, thomas dalzell wrote:

> I don't know why Bolger thinks it is a good idea to put the structural
> stringer on the outside of the boat at the lower chine. Perhaps it
> grabs a little better when sailing, but I don't know of any serious
> builders who agree with this strategy. I put mine inboard, and they
> work just fine.

According to Bolger, the internal/external chine issue is driven by the
ease of building. There is no question that the external chine is easier
to build, for several reasons:

1) Easier to bend (just a bit)
2) Easier to measure (just let it run long, and trim back)
3) Don't have to notch frames

Bolger says there's no difference in use, and he may be right.

The external chine is something nice to hold onto when moving the boat
around, or when swimming up to the edge of the boat (I haven't done it
with my Bolger boats, but it is very useful on my Michalak Harmonica-class
shantyboat.)

They don't look bad on some boats, and they do on others.

I have built the Elegant Punt from Instant Boats. It
is a very nice little boat, and far easier on the eye
than the aptly named brick. It is a good rower with
nice manouverability and stability. I built Nymph for
a friend, but I find it too unstable for actual use as
a tender, particularly with the longitudinal seat. I
substituted standard transverse seats, but overall
feel EP is a better boat as a tender. I once rowed a
version a builder had built that included both styles
of seat, a real belt and suspenders guy - There was
hardly anywhere to put one's feet.

I don't know why Bolger thinks it is a good idea to
put the structural stringer on the outside of the boat
at the lower chine. Perhaps it grabs a little better
when sailing, but I don't know of any serious builders
who agree with this strategy. I put mine inboard, and
they work just fine.

_______________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @... address athttp://mail.yahoo.ca

I meant to say "more attractive", but that's strictly subjective. And
the difference in relative beauty is tiny in any case!

The shallower, narrower Big Tortise may be easier to row, though.
(I've only seen a Brick in person once and not been in one on the
water. She is one BIG 8 foot boat.)

JB

"More practical"? Please explain! Hard to imagine.

--- In bolger@y..., jmbell@m... wrote:
> Buy the plans for the Big Tortise from Payson?
>
>http://www.instantboats.com/brick.htm
>
> I know he calls it "Brick" here, but this boat is different
> from "Brick". It is narrower and not as deep as Brick, and probably
> more practical, too.
>
> JB
>
> --- In bolger@y..., jeffbob@i... wrote:
> > --- In bolger@y..., Sam Glasscock <glasscocklanding@y...> wrote:
> > >
> > > with my stretch Tortoise, with the same beam and
> > > gunwale hieght as the regular Tortoise
> >
> > I also intend to build this stretched tortoise. How did you
stretch
> > yours? As I see it there are two ways:
> >
> > 1. increase the station dimension(ie stations are every 7"
instead
> of
> > 6") which gives an overall length of 91"(or 7' 7").
> >
> > or
> >
> > 2. using the 6" station dimension, mark stations 1 to 7 starting
> from
> > the left edge, mark stations 13 to 7 starting from the right edge,
> > then use a batten to draw the entire curve of the bottom spanning
> the
> > gap from station 7left to 7right. Although this method marginally
> > increases the height, the overall length would be 8'.
> >
> > Are there other ways that I have not thought of?
> >
> > Jeff

Buy the plans for the Big Tortise from Payson?

http://www.instantboats.com/brick.htm

I know he calls it "Brick" here, but this boat is different
from "Brick". It is narrower and not as deep as Brick, and probably
more practical, too.

JB

--- In bolger@y..., jeffbob@i... wrote:
> --- In bolger@y..., Sam Glasscock <glasscocklanding@y...> wrote:
> >
> > with my stretch Tortoise, with the same beam and
> > gunwale hieght as the regular Tortoise
>
> I also intend to build this stretched tortoise. How did you stretch
> yours? As I see it there are two ways:
>
> 1. increase the station dimension(ie stations are every 7" instead
of
> 6") which gives an overall length of 91"(or 7' 7").
>
> or
>
> 2. using the 6" station dimension, mark stations 1 to 7 starting
from
> the left edge, mark stations 13 to 7 starting from the right edge,
> then use a batten to draw the entire curve of the bottom spanning
the
> gap from station 7left to 7right. Although this method marginally
> increases the height, the overall length would be 8'.
>
> Are there other ways that I have not thought of?
>
> Jeff

--- In bolger@y..., Sam Glasscock <glasscocklanding@y...> wrote:

>
> with my stretch Tortoise, with the same beam and
> gunwale hieght as the regular Tortoise

I also intend to build this stretched tortoise. How did you stretch
yours? As I see it there are two ways:

1. increase the station dimension(ie stations are every 7" instead of
6") which gives an overall length of 91"(or 7' 7").

or

2. using the 6" station dimension, mark stations 1 to 7 starting from
the left edge, mark stations 13 to 7 starting from the right edge,
then use a batten to draw the entire curve of the bottom spanning the
gap from station 7left to 7right. Although this method marginally
increases the height, the overall length would be 8'.

Are there other ways that I have not thought of?

Jeff

--- In bolger@y..., brucehallman@y... wrote:

> According to the math formula 1/2 beam * 25 / 7
> the oar length for a tortoise works out to 5'4"
> plus or minus a few inches.
>
> >http://barkleysoundoar.com/

Shaw and Tenney say (1/2 beam + 2) * 25 / 7 so you might consider
going a little longer. That makes it come out to 5' 11". They say
round down to the nearest half foot. I would use 5-1/2' or 6'.
Personal preference does come into play though.

I used a pair of 6' oars (which I had surplus already)
with my stretch Tortoise, with the same beam and
gunwale hieght as the regular Tortoise, and they were
pretty much ideal. It wasn't fast, but it sure would
spin on a dime.

---brucehallman@...wrote:

> According to the math formula 1/2 beam * 25 / 7
> the oar length for a tortoise works out to 5'4"
> plus or minus a few inches.
>
> >http://barkleysoundoar.com/
>
>
>

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
http://personals.yahoo.com

According to the math formula 1/2 beam * 25 / 7
the oar length for a tortoise works out to 5'4"
plus or minus a few inches.

>http://barkleysoundoar.com/

Here's a good place to start figuring out oar length and style

http://barkleysoundoar.com/

--- In bolger@y..., Hugsted-Hallman <bruce@h...> wrote:
> Hello everyone, I just completed a rowing version of Tortoise,
[building it was really fun], can anyone advise me as to the best
length of oars to purchase? Bruce Hallman
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Have a look at this site
http://marina.fortunecity.com/breakwater/274/1998/1201/index.htm#Rowin
g1 or go to the way back issue's in alphabetical index look under
rowing

Todd

--- In bolger@y..., Hugsted-Hallman <bruce@h...> wrote:
> Hello everyone, I just completed a rowing version of Tortoise,
[building it was really fun], can anyone advise me as to the best
length of oars to purchase? Bruce Hallman
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hello everyone, I just completed a rowing version of Tortoise, [building it was really fun], can anyone advise me as to the best length of oars to purchase? Bruce Hallman

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]