Re: shoal draft cruising-Yadda Yadda Yadda

> >Don Tyson wrote:
> >At least there would be no carb icing on marinized aircraft engines.
> >Also, using any type of air cooled engine, that I'm aware of, there

> >

>Michael Surface wrote:
>The equation for HP is
>HP = 5252xTorque/RPM
>were Torque is in Foot-lbs
>Using algebra you will find that Torque = HPXRPM/5252
>If you know the HP at a given RPM you can calculate Torque using he equation
>above.
>Michael Surface
>
>
>

>From: Don Tyson
>Reply-To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
>To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [bolger] Re: shoal draft cruising-Yadda Yadda Yadda
>Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 06:44:43 -0700 (PDT)
>
>
>
>
> If this is the case, hP =rpm x torq., where do you get torq.? is that
>given by the manufacturer or is it arrived at another way?
>
> >The torque
>decreases maybe <20% over that range so the horsepower (rpm x torq.)
>goes up over the range because rpm increases more than torque
>decreases.
>
>Why? I think I agree for cruising...but why?
> gearbox and prop combo for a big
>slow
>
>
>Generally though if your working with the best amaount of torq. for your
>speed wouldn't that usually be the most efficient ?
>
>>in terms of hp.hrs./gal. - just the quietest. 1600 -1800 is probably
>close to the minimum recommended rpm for operating at a full load
>for this engine.
>
>10/4
> >1500 hrs is the overhaul time for some airplane engines but is
>mighty short for a boat or industrial engine.
>
>don
>
>
>Bolger rules!!!
>- no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
>- stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred' posts
>- Pls add your comments at the TOP, SIGN your posts, and snip away
>- Plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box 1209, Gloucester, MA, 01930, Fax:
>(978) 282-1349
>- Unsubscribe:bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>- Open discussion:bolger_coffee_lounge-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject tohttp://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>Bolger rules!!!
>- no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
>- stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred' posts
>- Pls add your comments at the TOP, SIGN your posts, and snip away
>- Plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box 1209, Gloucester, MA, 01930, Fax:
>(978) 282-1349
>- Unsubscribe:bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>- Open discussion:bolger_coffee_lounge-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject tohttp://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

> The equation for HP is
>
> HP = 5252xTorque/RPM
>

> Actually, they make better power with the carb heat off

> relatively low rpms.
>

>Don Tyson wrote:
>At least there would be no carb icing on marinized aircraft engines.
>Also, using any type of air cooled engine, that I'm aware of, there would not be a cheap source of cabin heat or hot water for showers since there isn't a water filled heat exchanger. Something to think about even with the Deutz.
>

>Charles wrote:
>
>
>>> I'm afraid you're wrong about the airplane engines, at least for
>>
>>
>most piston engines for small planes.
>
>For comparable horsepower of a tugboat (2000 hp range) and similar
>style ( V or inline water-cooled) the Allisons and Rolls Royce
>Merlins were high speed geared engines. They were also supercharged
>and water-injected for max power with 130 octane gasoline. I realize
>that diesels are inherently heavier by design but there were some
>old low rpm gasoline marine engines too.
>
>Charles
>

>From: Don Tyson <tysond99@...>
>Reply-To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
>To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [bolger] Re: shoal draft cruising-Yadda Yadda Yadda
>Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 06:44:43 -0700 (PDT)
>
>
>
>
> If this is the case, hP =rpm x torq., where do you get torq.? is that
>given by the manufacturer or is it arrived at another way?
>
> >The torque
>decreases maybe <20% over that range so the horsepower (rpm x torq.)
>goes up over the range because rpm increases more than torque
>decreases.
>
>Why? I think I agree for cruising...but why?
> gearbox and prop combo for a big
>slow
>
>
>Generally though if your working with the best amaount of torq. for your
>speed wouldn't that usually be the most efficient ?
>
><Remember 1800 rpm may not be the most efficient speed for the engine
>in terms of hp.hrs./gal. - just the quietest. 1600 -1800 is probably
>close to the minimum recommended rpm for operating at a full load
>for this engine.
>
>10/4
> >1500 hrs is the overhaul time for some airplane engines but is
>mighty short for a boat or industrial engine.
>
>don
>
>
>Bolger rules!!!
>- no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
>- stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred' posts
>- Pls add your comments at the TOP, SIGN your posts, and snip away
>- Plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box 1209, Gloucester, MA, 01930, Fax:
>(978) 282-1349
>- Unsubscribe:bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>- Open discussion:bolger_coffee_lounge-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject tohttp://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>Bolger rules!!!
>- no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
>- stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred' posts
>- Pls add your comments at the TOP, SIGN your posts, and snip away
>- Plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box 1209, Gloucester, MA, 01930, Fax:
>(978) 282-1349
>- Unsubscribe:bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>- Open discussion:bolger_coffee_lounge-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject tohttp://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

----- Original Message -----
From: "Don Tyson" <tysond99@...>

> At least there would be no carb icing on marinized aircraft engines.

Why not? The temperature drop at the venturi is 40 or 50 degrees F and the
humidity is high. (Carb icing is very hard to detect, because after the
crash, the evidence evaporates.) I suspect that most marine and auto
installations have continuous "carb heat" and just accept the power loss.
http://www1.faa.gov/fsdo/hln/carb_ice.htm

The whole carb ice phenomenon is spooky. Continental engines do. Lycomings
(usually) don't. I use my "carb heat" control mostly to bypass the water
soaked paper air filter when flying in heavy rain. (Lean to restore the
RPMs lost to the warmer inlet air.)

> Also, using any type of air cooled engine, that
> I'm aware of, there would not be a cheap source
> of cabin heat or hot water for showers since there
> isn't a water filled heat exchanger. Something to
> think about even with the Deutz.

I don't actually like the scheme, but there is plenty of heat available in
the exhaust plumbing and engine cooling air. The gotcha is that if
maintenance isn't rigorous on an aircraft type warm air heating system, the
possibility of carbon monoxide poisoning is high. (Use of stainless for
exhaust system components has been of marginal success due to the difficulty
of producing gas tight welds and due to its propensity to crack.)

Getting hot water should be easy with a copper coil or small radiator in the
cooling air outlet duct. It would be even easier to wrap copper tubing
around the exhaust pipes, but the temperature extremes and corrosion
possibilities might make this tricky.

Roger (who thinks sails are the only really civilized approach to maritime
motion)
derbyrm@...
http://derbyrm.mystarband.net

> Roger Derby <derbyrm@...> wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Lincoln Ross"
>
> > I'm afraid you're wrong about the airplane engines,
> > at least for most piston engines for small planes.
>
> Amen!
>
> The Thorp T-18 (homebuilt) aircraft was originally designed for the
Lycoming
> O290-G where the G stood for "Ground Power Unit." They were cheap and
> plentiful "war surplus" some forty years ago. Horsepower for current, type
> certificated engines, is typically about 0.5 hp per cubic inch due to
> derating. (During WWII they got over 1 hp per cubic inch from the big
> Wrights and Allisons, but the engines were worn out after 1000 hrs or
less.)
> The O290 has 290 cu-in displacement and is rated 140 hp for take-off and
135
> continuous. The O320 (320 in-cu.) is rated 160 hp in the newer versions.
> Mandatory TBO (for paying customer operations) is 1700 to 2000 hours
> depending on the model. TBO and hp "rating" are tied together. A friend
> was fined by the FAA for upping his O320 from 150 to 160 without doing the
> proper paperwork.
>
> A VW engine might work since it includes a blower for cooling. A lot of
> them have been successfully converted for use in homebuilt aircraft. Make
> sure you put in guages for exhaust gas, cylinder head and oil
temperatures.
>
> Water cooled is MUCH more reliable since the thermal cycling of the parts
is
> reduced.
>
> An aircraft engine (horizontally opposed four cylinder) can be thought of
as
> four separate single cylinder engines sharing a crankshaft and camshaft
and
> held together by a flimsy cast aluminum crankcase. There is perceptible
> movement between cylinders.
>
> I don't know where the horsepower peak is. They're typically red-lined at
> 2700 rpm. If I remember correctly from reading the hot rod magazines fifty
> years ago, the horsepower peak is a function of carburation, exhaust and
> intake manifolding, valve timing, etc. They do not fail instantly if
> operated over red-line for a moment or two.
>
> There are also aircraft engine/prop combinations which have zones where
you
> can't operate continuously. The combo sets up harmonics that causes the
> propellor to come apart. The resulting unbalance causes the engine to tear
> out of its mountings and the plane becomes very tail heavy. Good failure
> mode is when you lose 4" from one blade since you might be fast enough to
> close the throttle. Bad failure mode is where the blade breaks 18" from
the
> tip. Bye. (The pylon racers add a loop of steel cable around a cylinder to
> the engine mount so the CG stays close to the correct place and gives them
a
> chance to crash land.)
>
>
>
> > For light weight, reliability, and long life, a turbine is
> > probably best, but now you're talking big bucks, and
> > maybe more fuel usage for the horsepower. Still, the
> > navy uses them. Must require quite a gearbox.
>
> From what I've read, the gearbox costs more than the engines. The Navy
> often has both turbine and reciprocating engines on the same ship -- the
> turbine for sprints and the diesel for cruising -- fuel economy.
>
> Roger
>derbyrm@...
>http://derbyrm.mystarband.net
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Lincoln Ross"
>
> > I'm afraid you're wrong about the airplane engines, at least for most
> > piston engines for small planes. Compared to car engines they are high
> > torque/low RPM, meant for high power levels for long periods of time.
> > They are low RPM so they can spin a large propellor without making the
> > airflow over the tips go supersonic, which would be loud and
> > inefficient. I've been corresponding with someone whose buddy has an
> > airboat with a Caddy engine and a 6 foot prop on direct drive. The boat
> > is hardly ever used because of noise complaints. Anyway, airplane
> > engines can be a bit lighter in some ways because some of the forces at
> > low RPM are much less. As I recall, they may also be lighter because
> > they have a relatively low compression ratio. The displacement tends to
> > be more than that of an automotive engine of the same power though,
> > partly because of the low rpm and maybe partly because of the much older
> > design. Typically, as I recall, peak HP is at something like 2600 rpm,
> > or maybe half what you'd see in a car. In fact, I think an airplane
> > engine would probably make a good boat engine if you could get enough
> > cooling air past it. But due to certification for aeronautical use it
> > would be expensive. However, I hear there are used drone and maybe even
> > stationary engines out there which are uncertified versions.

> Why? I think I agree for cruising...but why?
> gearbox and prop combo for a big slow

> Generally though if your working with the best amaount of torq.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Lincoln Ross"

> I'm afraid you're wrong about the airplane engines, at least for most
> piston engines for small planes.

Amen!

The Thorp T-18 (homebuilt) aircraft was originally designed for the Lycoming
O290-G where the G stood for "Ground Power Unit." They were cheap and
plentiful "war surplus" some forty years ago. Horsepower for current, type
certificated engines, is typically about 0.5 hp per cubic inch due to
derating. (During WWII they got over 1 hp per cubic inch from the big
Wrights and Allisons, but the engines were worn out after 1000 hrs or less.)
The O290 has 290 cu-in displacement and is rated 140 hp for take-off and 135
continuous. The O320 (320 in-cu.) is rated 160 hp in the newer versions.
Mandatory TBO (for paying customer operations) is 1700 to 2000 hours
depending on the model. TBO and hp "rating" are tied together. A friend
was fined by the FAA for upping his O320 from 150 to 160 without doing the
proper paperwork.

A VW engine might work since it includes a blower for cooling. A lot of
them have been successfully converted for use in homebuilt aircraft. Make
sure you put in guages for exhaust gas, cylinder head and oil temperatures.

Water cooled is MUCH more reliable since the thermal cycling of the parts is
reduced.

An aircraft engine (horizontally opposed four cylinder) can be thought of as
four separate single cylinder engines sharing a crankshaft and camshaft and
held together by a flimsy cast aluminum crankcase. There is perceptible
movement between cylinders.

I don't know where the horsepower peak is. They're typically red-lined at
2700 rpm. If I remember correctly from reading the hot rod magazines fifty
years ago, the horsepower peak is a function of carburation, exhaust and
intake manifolding, valve timing, etc. They do not fail instantly if
operated over red-line for a moment or two.

There are also aircraft engine/prop combinations which have zones where you
can't operate continuously. The combo sets up harmonics that causes the
propellor to come apart. The resulting unbalance causes the engine to tear
out of its mountings and the plane becomes very tail heavy. Good failure
mode is when you lose 4" from one blade since you might be fast enough to
close the throttle. Bad failure mode is where the blade breaks 18" from the
tip. Bye. (The pylon racers add a loop of steel cable around a cylinder to
the engine mount so the CG stays close to the correct place and gives them a
chance to crash land.)



> For light weight, reliability, and long life, a turbine is
> probably best, but now you're talking big bucks, and
> maybe more fuel usage for the horsepower. Still, the
> navy uses them. Must require quite a gearbox.

From what I've read, the gearbox costs more than the engines. The Navy
often has both turbine and reciprocating engines on the same ship -- the
turbine for sprints and the diesel for cruising -- fuel economy.

Roger
derbyrm@...
http://derbyrm.mystarband.net

----- Original Message -----
From: "Lincoln Ross"

> I'm afraid you're wrong about the airplane engines, at least for most
> piston engines for small planes. Compared to car engines they are high
> torque/low RPM, meant for high power levels for long periods of time.
> They are low RPM so they can spin a large propellor without making the
> airflow over the tips go supersonic, which would be loud and
> inefficient. I've been corresponding with someone whose buddy has an
> airboat with a Caddy engine and a 6 foot prop on direct drive. The boat
> is hardly ever used because of noise complaints. Anyway, airplane
> engines can be a bit lighter in some ways because some of the forces at
> low RPM are much less. As I recall, they may also be lighter because
> they have a relatively low compression ratio. The displacement tends to
> be more than that of an automotive engine of the same power though,
> partly because of the low rpm and maybe partly because of the much older
> design. Typically, as I recall, peak HP is at something like 2600 rpm,
> or maybe half what you'd see in a car. In fact, I think an airplane
> engine would probably make a good boat engine if you could get enough
> cooling air past it. But due to certification for aeronautical use it
> would be expensive. However, I hear there are used drone and maybe even
> stationary engines out there which are uncertified versions.




Bolger rules!!!
- no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
- stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred' posts
- Pls add your comments at the TOP, SIGN your posts, and snip away
- Plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box 1209, Gloucester, MA, 01930, Fax: (978) 282-1349
- Unsubscribe:bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
- Open discussion:bolger_coffee_lounge-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject tohttp://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



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

> I'm afraid you're wrong about the airplane engines, at least for

> If this is the case, hP =rpm x torq., where do you get torq.?

> Why? I think I agree for cruising...but why?
> gearbox and prop combo for a big slow

> Generally though if your working with the best amaount of torq.

>Charles wrote:
>
>snip
>With the 4000 rpm engine the gearbox divides the rpm and multiplies
>the torque by the same number(roughly) so the hp. after the gearbox
>stays the same as the input.
>
>You check the hp. vs rpm curve for a particular engine to find its
>hp. output at a given rpm.
>

>Engines that get hp. from high speed/ low torque are small and light.
>( airplanes )
>Low speed/ high torque - big and heavy for the same horsepower.
>(tugboats, trains)
>
>Charles
>
>
>
>
>

----- Original Message -----
From: "Lincoln Ross" <lincolnr@...>
> I'm afraid you're wrong about the airplane engines, at least for most
> piston engines for small planes.

Amen!

The Thorp T-18 (homebuilt) aircraft was originally designed for the Lycoming
O290-G where the G stood for "Ground Power Unit." They were cheap and
plentiful "war surplus" some forty years ago. Horsepower for current, type
certificated engines, is typically about 0.5 hp per cubic inch due to
derating. (During WWII they got over 1 hp per cubic inch from the big
Wrights and Allisons, but the engines were worn out after 1000 hrs or less.)
The O290 has 290 cu-in displacement and is rated 140 hp for take-off and 135
continuous. The O320 (320 in-cu.) is rated 160 hp in the newer versions.
Mandatory TBO (for paying customer operations) is 1700 to 2000 hours
depending on the model. TBO and hp "rating" are tied together. A friend
was fined by the FAA for upping his O320 from 150 to 160 without doing the
proper paperwork.

A VW engine might work since it includes a blower for cooling. A lot of
them have been successfully converted for use in homebuilt aircraft. Make
sure you put in guages for exhaust gas, cylinder head and oil temperatures.

Water cooled is MUCH more reliable since the thermal cycling of the parts is
reduced.

An aircraft engine (horizontally opposed four cylinder) can be thought of as
four separate single cylinder engines sharing a crankshaft and camshaft and
held together by a flimsy cast aluminum crankcase. There is perceptible
movement between cylinders.

I don't know where the horsepower peak is. They're typically red-lined at
2700 rpm. If I remember correctly from reading the hot rod magazines fifty
years ago, the horsepower peak is a function of carburation, exhaust and
intake manifolding, valve timing, etc. They do not fail instantly if
operated over red-line for a moment or two.

There are also aircraft engine/prop combinations which have zones where you
can't operate continuously. The combo sets up harmonics that causes the
propellor to come apart. The resulting unbalance causes the engine to tear
out of its mountings and the plane becomes very tail heavy. Good failure
mode is when you lose 4" from one blade since you might be fast enough to
close the throttle. Bad failure mode is where the blade breaks 18" from the
tip. Bye. (The pylon racers add a loop of steel cable around a cylinder to
the engine mount so the CG stays close to the correct place and gives them a
chance to crash land.)

<snip>

> For light weight, reliability, and long life, a turbine is
> probably best, but now you're talking big bucks, and
> maybe more fuel usage for the horsepower. Still, the
> navy uses them. Must require quite a gearbox.

From what I've read, the gearbox costs more than the engines. The Navy
often has both turbine and reciprocating engines on the same ship -- the
turbine for sprints and the diesel for cruising -- fuel economy.

Roger
derbyrm@...
http://derbyrm.mystarband.net

----- Original Message -----
From: "Lincoln Ross" <lincolnr@...>
> I'm afraid you're wrong about the airplane engines, at least for most
> piston engines for small planes. Compared to car engines they are high
> torque/low RPM, meant for high power levels for long periods of time.
> They are low RPM so they can spin a large propellor without making the
> airflow over the tips go supersonic, which would be loud and
> inefficient. I've been corresponding with someone whose buddy has an
> airboat with a Caddy engine and a 6 foot prop on direct drive. The boat
> is hardly ever used because of noise complaints. Anyway, airplane
> engines can be a bit lighter in some ways because some of the forces at
> low RPM are much less. As I recall, they may also be lighter because
> they have a relatively low compression ratio. The displacement tends to
> be more than that of an automotive engine of the same power though,
> partly because of the low rpm and maybe partly because of the much older
> design. Typically, as I recall, peak HP is at something like 2600 rpm,
> or maybe half what you'd see in a car. In fact, I think an airplane
> engine would probably make a good boat engine if you could get enough
> cooling air past it. But due to certification for aeronautical use it
> would be expensive. However, I hear there are used drone and maybe even
> stationary engines out there which are uncertified versions.

>The torque

>1500 hrs is the overhaul time for some airplane engines but is

> So in this case the Deutz engine in question is at max power when

> If you ran all day at 1800 would that be overloading it?

> When sellecting a prop for the 30hp/3000rpm motor do you just keep

> Another Engine that would be good for the sharpie series boats

> Don

> I guess I'm getting all twisted up in my thinking here but I

> Example: If a boat requires a 30hp engine to go 20 mph at 4000 rpm

> As a sailor I'm into quiet. When I become a motor boater i want to

> I guess I'm getting all twisted up in my thinking here but I

> Example: If a boat requires a 30hp engine to go 20 mph at 4000 rpm

> As a sailor I'm into quiet. When I become a motor boater i want to

> I seem to recall there is some sort of technology other than
> supercharging so that fuel injected two strokes can do without

> crankcase for induction, and therefore not need oil in their fuel.

> confused? If not, how does it work? I seem to recall that direct
> injected 2 stroke outboards are supposed to be low pollution

> is this too far OT, though I'll bet more and more of us who use

> (not me yet) will be using these.

>Don Tyson wrote:
>
>Hugo , Harry,
>I did not realize that Deutz were 2 stroke. If this is the case then they may operate a higher RPMs thereby making it easier to switch drive components with those intended for gas engines. Their are also some drawbacks with 2 stroke the biggest 2 are 1)oil in the exhaust and 2) very low torque ratings at low rpms ( not a problem for boating). snip
>
>

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, Don Tyson <tysond99@y...> wrote:
> Hugo , Harry,
> I did not realize that Deutz were 2 stroke. If this is the case
then they may operate a higher RPMs thereby making it easier to
switch drive components with those intended for gas engines. Their
are also some drawbacks with 2 stroke the biggest 2 are 1)oil in the
exhaust and 2) very low torque ratings at low rpms ( not a problem
for boating). When I was a nurseryman I had a Canadian tractor called
a Holder and it was two stroke (12 hp). It woked like a champ at high
rpm and was worthless at low rpm.
> Hugo, what part of Australia are you from? I got relatives in
Tasmania.
>
> Hugo Tyson <hhetyson@y...> wrote:
> The pun is a very archaic form of humour these days and appeals to
an 'old time' folksy society!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> Don Tyson wrote:
>
> Hey everyone! nobody got my joke! - referring to
> Deutz Diesels-
>
>
> > "raw air cooling"
>
> Yes we did but its not a matter to joke about!!!!
RRRRRRGRRRRRRRRRRRRRDRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR, I'm deaf and have a foul
headache and I've just burned myself on that ....ing dry exhaust
stack,but at least the fumes aren't blowing back in my face with all
their carcigens.. yadda yadda yadda!!!!!?
>
> I'm not totally serious.
>
>
> Harry, what else are you smoking besides salmon if your
Contemplating taking that trip in a wyo? I'll view your pics though
I'm too chicken for such a trip.
>
> Don
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT
>
> Bolger rules!!!
> - no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
> - stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred'
posts
> - Pls add your comments at the TOP, SIGN your posts, and snip away
> - Plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box 1209, Gloucester, MA,
01930, Fax: (978) 282-1349
> - Unsubscribe:bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> - Open discussion:bolger_coffee_lounge-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Yahoo! Search
> - Looking for more? Try the new Yahoo! Search
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> Bolger rules!!!
> - no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
> - stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred'
posts
> - Pls add your comments at the TOP, SIGN your posts, and snip away
> - Plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box 1209, Gloucester, MA,
01930, Fax: (978) 282-1349
> - Unsubscribe:bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> - Open discussion:bolger_coffee_lounge-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, Lincoln Ross <lincolnr@r...> wrote:
> I seem to recall there is some sort of technology other than
> supercharging so that fuel injected two strokes can do without
using the
> crankcase for induction, and therefore not need oil in their fuel.
Am I
> confused? If not, how does it work? I seem to recall that direct
> injected 2 stroke outboards are supposed to be low pollution
somehow. Or
> is this too far OT, though I'll bet more and more of us who use
motors
> (not me yet) will be using these.

>

>A 4830hp. V-16 should push a Wyo. at a pretty good clip.

>Don
>
>
>
>

>Due to problems with the prototype 'Dorothy,"
>development of the Kansas design has been dicontinued.
> It proved a good heavy-weather boat, and quite fast,
>but could only turn in one direction.
>
>--- David Romasco <dromasco@...> wrote:
>
>
>>As opposed to Bolger's Kansas, another of the States
>>series, which is
>>propelled by the use of directed high-velocity air.
>>The prototype,
>>'Dorothy', is under construction.... I hear it's a
>>wizard design.
>>
>>David Romasco
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: pvanderwaart [mailto:pvanderw@...]
>>Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2003 10:39 AM
>>To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
>>Subject: [bolger] Re: shoal draft cruising
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>By the way when converting these over to boat
>>>
>>>
>>engines should we go
>>
>>
>>>with fresh air or raw air cooling?
>>>
>>>
>>It's an automatic feature. When it's cold and windy
>>and rainy, it
>>uses raw air, but when it's warm and sunny, it uses
>>fresh air.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>

> Deutz

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, Don Tyson <tysond99@y...> wrote:
> Hugo , Harry,
> I did not realize that Deutz were 2 stroke. If this is the case
then they may operate a higher RPMs thereby making it easier to
switch drive components with those intended for gas engines. Their
are also some drawbacks with 2 stroke the biggest 2 are 1)oil in the
exhaust and 2) very low torque ratings at low rpms ( not a problem
for boating).

> "raw air cooling"

> "raw air cooling"

----- Original Message -----
From: "David Romasco" <dromasco@...>

> As opposed to Bolger's Kansas, another of the States series, which is
> propelled by the use of directed high-velocity air. The prototype,
> 'Dorothy', is under construction.... I hear it's a wizard design.

> As opposed to Bolger's Kansas, another of the States
> series, which is
> propelled by the use of directed high-velocity air.
> The prototype,
> 'Dorothy', is under construction.... I hear it's a
> wizard design.
>
> David Romasco
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pvanderwaart [mailto:pvanderw@...]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2003 10:39 AM
> To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [bolger] Re: shoal draft cruising
>
>
> > By the way when converting these over to boat
> engines should we go
> > with fresh air or raw air cooling?
>
> It's an automatic feature. When it's cold and windy
> and rainy, it
> uses raw air, but when it's warm and sunny, it uses
> fresh air.
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>
> ADVERTISEMENT
>
>

>

> 9&media=atkins> click here
>
>

> l/S=:HM/A=1706996/rand=204217915>
>
> Bolger rules!!!
> - no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or
> flogging dead horses
> - stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed,
> thanks, Fred' posts
> - Pls add your comments at the TOP, SIGN your posts,
> and snip away
> - Plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box 1209,
> Gloucester, MA, 01930, Fax:
> (978) 282-1349
> - Unsubscribe:bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> - Open discussion:
>bolger_coffee_lounge-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
> Terms of Service
> <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been
> removed]
>
>

> As opposed to Bolger's Kansas, another of the States
> series, which is
> propelled by the use of directed high-velocity air.
> The prototype,
> 'Dorothy', is under construction.... I hear it's a
> wizard design.
>
> David Romasco
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pvanderwaart [mailto:pvanderw@...]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2003 10:39 AM
> To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [bolger] Re: shoal draft cruising
>
>
> > By the way when converting these over to boat
> engines should we go
> > with fresh air or raw air cooling?
>
> It's an automatic feature. When it's cold and windy
> and rainy, it
> uses raw air, but when it's warm and sunny, it uses
> fresh air.
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>
> ADVERTISEMENT
>
>

>

> 9&media=atkins> click here
>
>

> l/S=:HM/A=1706996/rand=204217915>
>
> Bolger rules!!!
> - no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or
> flogging dead horses
> - stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed,
> thanks, Fred' posts
> - Pls add your comments at the TOP, SIGN your posts,
> and snip away
> - Plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box 1209,
> Gloucester, MA, 01930, Fax:
> (978) 282-1349
> - Unsubscribe:bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> - Open discussion:
>bolger_coffee_lounge-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
> Terms of Service
> <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been
> removed]
>
>

> By the way when converting these over to boat engines should we go
> with fresh air or raw air cooling?

> By the way when converting these over to boat engines should we go
> with fresh air or raw air cooling?

> "raw air cooling"

> By the way when converting these over to boat engines should we go

>Harry,
>>From what I could see of it it looks too good to be true however the add was set up around a Player that doesn't work, or at least I never heard of and couldn't get it to work.
>Are you sure this isn't spam to get you to download a player?
>Harry James wrote:Or DBD drive
>
>http://www.dbdmarine.com/dbdmarine.htm
>
>HJ
>
>Don Tyson wrote:
>
>
>
>

>Harry,
>>From what I could see of it it looks too good to be true however the add was set up around a Player that doesn't work, or at least I never heard of and couldn't get it to work.
>Are you sure this isn't spam to get you to download a player?
>Harry James <welshman@...> wrote:Or DBD drive
>
>http://www.dbdmarine.com/dbdmarine.htm
>
>HJ
>
>Don Tyson wrote:
>
>
>
>

> with an aircooled Deutz diesel FL1011
> motor, with no 'through hull' fittings.
> They argue that their system is dependable
> and safe. [Also, they spec an elaborate
> and redundant diesel fuel filtration system.]

--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, Don Tyson <tysond99@y...> wrote:
> Charles,
> I'm from Nursery / farm background and think Deutz are impressive
enough. Can't get used to thier sound although in a boat w/wet
exhaust that shouldn't be a problem.
> By the way when converting these over to boat engine should we go
with fresh air or raw air cooling?
> What size engines are you talking? tthey have to be nicer and
quieter than Gm671's I see on alot of irrigation
>
> Don
>
>
> chodges31711 <chodges@a...> wrote:
>
> PB&F then couple the Sonic drive
> > with an aircooled Deutz diesel FL1011
> > motor, with no 'through hull' fittings.
> > They argue that their system is dependable
> > and safe. [Also, they spec an elaborate
> > and redundant diesel fuel filtration system.]
>
> I have some experience with Deutz engines used in irrigation
systems
> for pumps and generators. The are very fuel efficient and long
> lasting. Efficiency is proportional to temperature and they operate
> at a higher cylinderhead temperature. Air cools the head and oil
> cools the bottom. They are less forgiving of overload or blocked
air
> than a water-cooled engine but with proper monitoring sensors
(Murphy
> switches) that should not be a problem. With proper care you should
> get 10,000+ hours (12-15 years on a pump, 20-25 years for a
tractor,
> boat??)
> They are lighter and more compact than water-cooled with a radiator.
>
> Charles
>
>
>
> Bolger rules!!!
> - no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
> - stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred'
posts
> - Pls add your comments at the TOP, SIGN your posts, and snip away
> - Plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box 1209, Gloucester, MA,
01930, Fax: (978) 282-1349
> - Unsubscribe:bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> - Open discussion:bolger_coffee_lounge-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>Harry,
>>From what I could see of it it looks too good to be true however the add was set up around a Player that doesn't work, or at least I never heard of and couldn't get it to work.
>Are you sure this isn't spam to get you to download a player?
>Harry James <welshman@...> wrote:Or DBD drive
>
>http://www.dbdmarine.com/dbdmarine.htm
>
>HJ
>
>Don Tyson wrote:
>
>
>
>

> with an aircooled Deutz diesel FL1011
> motor, with no 'through hull' fittings.
> They argue that their system is dependable
> and safe. [Also, they spec an elaborate
> and redundant diesel fuel filtration system.]

> with an aircooled Deutz diesel FL1011
> motor, with no 'through hull' fittings.
> They argue that their system is dependable
> and safe. [Also, they spec an elaborate
> and redundant diesel fuel filtration system.]

> can someone tell me the
> advantages of this unit?

>Can we settle the speed question? Can we install a V-drive Deisel? Can we use inboard or outboard Jets (especially outboard)?
>Imagine a Wyo with 1' draft engine down. Or a wyo deisel pushing though a jet outdrive(9" draft).
>
>
>Hal Lynch wrote:
>
>On Monday, September 15, 2003, at 02:22 PM, Jeff wrote:
>
>
>
>>Though I'm not against the skegs on the Wyoming but Mr. Bolger insist
>>they
>>are a hindrance at higher speeds and after all the Wyo is built to go
>>upwards 25 MPH where turning her sharply could cause her to trip. I
>>can't
>>imagine pushing the Wyo that fast, it goes against my idea of
>>cruising, but
>>it's nice to know if you have to run you can.
>>
>>
>
>Imagine it. There are time in everyones life when they just
>want to be there.
>
>hal
>
>
>
>

>Can we settle the speed question? Can we install a V-drive Deisel? Can we use inboard or outboard Jets (especially outboard)?
>Imagine a Wyo with 1' draft engine down. Or a wyo deisel pushing though a jet outdrive(9" draft).
>
>
>Hal Lynch <hal@...> wrote:
>
>On Monday, September 15, 2003, at 02:22 PM, Jeff wrote:
>
>
>
>>Though I'm not against the skegs on the Wyoming but Mr. Bolger insist
>>they
>>are a hindrance at higher speeds and after all the Wyo is built to go
>>upwards 25 MPH where turning her sharply could cause her to trip. I
>>can't
>>imagine pushing the Wyo that fast, it goes against my idea of
>>cruising, but
>>it's nice to know if you have to run you can.
>>
>>
>
>Imagine it. There are time in everyones life when they just
>want to be there.
>
>hal
>
>
>
>

> --- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff" <boatbuilding@g...> wrote:
> > Agreed on the quartering seas but the Wyo's center of gravity is
> fairly low
> > but nothing like a ballasted boat
>
> An eye opening event regarding sharpie stability had to be Bruce
> Hectors 95 foot long by 4 foot wide TIMS project(yes,that's right,a
> 23 to 1 beam length ratio!).Prior to the sea-trials, I over-heard
> someone say that she" can sit 20 and drown 30!" I think some folks
> saw something akin to a huge log just waiting to roll
> over.Nevertheless,she went out Sunday without incident after

----- Original Message -----
From: "Don Tyson" <tysond99@...>
To: <bolger@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 10:49 AM
Subject: Re: [bolger] Re: shoal draft cruising


> Can we settle the speed question? Can we install a V-drive Deisel? Can we
use inboard or outboard Jets (especially outboard)?
> Imagine a Wyo with 1' draft engine down. Or a wyo deisel pushing though a
jet outdrive(9" draft).
>
>
> Hal Lynch <hal@...> wrote:
>
> On Monday, September 15, 2003, at 02:22 PM, Jeff wrote:
>
> > Though I'm not against the skegs on the Wyoming but Mr. Bolger insist
> > they
> > are a hindrance at higher speeds and after all the Wyo is built to go
> > upwards 25 MPH where turning her sharply could cause her to trip. I
> > can't
> > imagine pushing the Wyo that fast, it goes against my idea of
> > cruising, but
> > it's nice to know if you have to run you can.
>
> Imagine it. There are time in everyones life when they just
> want to be there.
>
> hal
>
>
>
> Bolger rules!!!
> - no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
> - stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred' posts
> - Pls add your comments at the TOP, SIGN your posts, and snip away
> - Plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box 1209, Gloucester, MA, 01930, Fax:
(978) 282-1349
> - Unsubscribe:bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> - Open discussion:bolger_coffee_lounge-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject tohttp://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> Bolger rules!!!
> - no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
> - stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred' posts
> - Pls add your comments at the TOP, SIGN your posts, and snip away
> - Plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box 1209, Gloucester, MA, 01930, Fax:
(978) 282-1349
> - Unsubscribe:bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> - Open discussion:bolger_coffee_lounge-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject tohttp://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

On Monday, September 15, 2003, at 02:22 PM, Jeff wrote:

> Though I'm not against the skegs on the Wyoming but Mr. Bolger insist
> they
> are a hindrance at higher speeds and after all the Wyo is built to go
> upwards 25 MPH where turning her sharply could cause her to trip. I
> can't
> imagine pushing the Wyo that fast, it goes against my idea of
> cruising, but
> it's nice to know if you have to run you can.

Imagine it. There are time in everyones life when they just
want to be there.

hal



Bolger rules!!!
- no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
- stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred' posts
- Pls add your comments at the TOP, SIGN your posts, and snip away
- Plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box 1209, Gloucester, MA, 01930, Fax: (978) 282-1349
- Unsubscribe:bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
- Open discussion:bolger_coffee_lounge-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject tohttp://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



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



Bolger rules!!!
- no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
- stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred' posts
- Pls add your comments at the TOP, SIGN your posts, and snip away
- Plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box 1209, Gloucester, MA, 01930, Fax: (978) 282-1349
- Unsubscribe:bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
- Open discussion:bolger_coffee_lounge-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject tohttp://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



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

On Monday, September 15, 2003, at 02:22 PM, Jeff wrote:

> Though I'm not against the skegs on the Wyoming but Mr. Bolger insist
> they
> are a hindrance at higher speeds and after all the Wyo is built to go
> upwards 25 MPH where turning her sharply could cause her to trip. I
> can't
> imagine pushing the Wyo that fast, it goes against my idea of
> cruising, but
> it's nice to know if you have to run you can.

Imagine it. There are time in everyones life when they just
want to be there.

hal



Bolger rules!!!
- no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
- stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred' posts
- Pls add your comments at the TOP, SIGN your posts, and snip away
- Plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box 1209, Gloucester, MA, 01930, Fax: (978) 282-1349
- Unsubscribe:bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
- Open discussion:bolger_coffee_lounge-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject tohttp://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



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

> Though I'm not against the skegs on the Wyoming but Mr. Bolger insist
> they
> are a hindrance at higher speeds and after all the Wyo is built to go
> upwards 25 MPH where turning her sharply could cause her to trip. I
> can't
> imagine pushing the Wyo that fast, it goes against my idea of
> cruising, but
> it's nice to know if you have to run you can.

> I think any of the Bolger state series except maybe Idaho would make
> acceptable ICW boats. You may just have a smaller weather window

> areas but at the same time, you can explore places the most other

> would not dare to enter.
>
> No boat is perfect in all weather and sea conditions, just the ones

> where designed to handle, the rest of the time we just need

>
> Jeff

> I think any of the Bolger state series except maybe Idaho would make
> acceptable ICW boats. You may just have a smaller weather window

> areas but at the same time, you can explore places the most other

> would not dare to enter.
>
> No boat is perfect in all weather and sea conditions, just the ones

> where designed to handle, the rest of the time we just need

>
> Jeff

> I think any of the Bolger state series except maybe Idaho would make
> acceptable ICW boats. You may just have a smaller weather window

> areas but at the same time, you can explore places the most other

> would not dare to enter.
>
> No boat is perfect in all weather and sea conditions, just the ones

> where designed to handle, the rest of the time we just need

>
> Jeff

----- Original Message -----
From:


>
> Bolger also has some heavy weather sailboats that are pretty shoal
> draft, tho I don't remember names right now. And aren't those two
> power cruisers he designed recently for ocean crossing pretty
> shallow draft?

> Don Tyson wrote:
>
> interest lies in the along-shore or shallow estuaries that I
> currently can't reach in my 4' draft sailboat. If the Sharpies are
> as shallow as stated I could conceivably go right into many of the
> back creek and swampy areas that I currently have to paddle or
> wade to.
>
> So my real question is just how seaworthy are the bigger sharpies
> such as Tennesee, Dakota, Wyo ect? How can we measure the term
> seaworthy?




Bolger rules!!!
- no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
- stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred' posts
- Pls add your comments at the TOP, SIGN your posts, and snip away
- Plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box 1209, Gloucester, MA, 01930, Fax: (978) 282-1349
- Unsubscribe:bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
- Open discussion:bolger_coffee_lounge-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject tohttp://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




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

----- Original Message -----
From: <lincolnr@...>

>
> Bolger also has some heavy weather sailboats that are pretty shoal
> draft, tho I don't remember names right now. And aren't those two
> power cruisers he designed recently for ocean crossing pretty
> shallow draft?

> Don Tyson wrote:
> <snip>
> interest lies in the along-shore or shallow estuaries that I
> currently can't reach in my 4' draft sailboat. If the Sharpies are
> as shallow as stated I could conceivably go right into many of the
> back creek and swampy areas that I currently have to paddle or
> wade to.
> <snip>
> So my real question is just how seaworthy are the bigger sharpies
> such as Tennesee, Dakota, Wyo ect? How can we measure the term
> seaworthy?

----- Original Message -----
From: "Sam Glasscock" <glasscocklanding@...>
To: <bolger@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, September 15, 2003 2:29 PM
Subject: Re: [bolger] Re: shoal draft cruising


> Jeff, what kind of power plant is required to get the
> Wyo up to that speed (25mph)? That is really moving.
> I agree about lower speeds for comfortable cruising,
> but it would be something just to see a boat that size
> charging along like that.
> --- Jeff <boatbuilding@...> wrote:
>

> Though I'm not against the skegs on the Wyoming but
> Mr. Bolger insist they
> are a hindrance at higher speeds and after all the
> Wyo is built to go
> upwards 25 MPH where turning her sharply could cause
> her to trip. I can't
> imagine pushing the Wyo that fast, it goes against
> my idea of cruising, but
> it's nice to know if you have to run you can.
>
> Jeff
>
>
>

> Well...waddya know! Sam Glasscock comes through with
> all you really
> need to know! No more excuses now Jack!!!

> >
> "A car traveling on Interstate 77 just north of Charlotte N. C. was
> hit by a flying speedboat at 2:20 a.m. on Aug. 21; the boat was
> dashing across adjacent Lake Norman, became airborne,
> clipped the car and landed on the median, but the only
> casualties were the boaters."
>
> I suspect the helmsman was pushing the envelope a bit. And I'll
> bet the boaters didn't have seat belts.
>
> Vance

> Hi All -
>
> Perhaps Peter Lanihan would be the best to answere this -

>
> Thanks & Aloha -

>

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

> Agreed on the quartering seas but the Wyo's center of gravity is

> but nothing like a ballasted boat

> crane shows two lift points with no problems and it doesn't have the
> intercoastals built per plans.

>
> The problem with the Wyo and swells is the inherent problem of

> where the pressure on the sides is stronger than the pressure

> the hull bottom which makes water force itself down and under the

> creating a lot of air bubbles and turbulence making the bow want to

> down, then as buoyancy takes over it will popup again creating a

> bobbing effect. When it dives down the stern will want to swing

> the boat digs in so the handling becomes erratic though Bolger

> Wyo is less prone to it than most because of her 6:1 length to beam

> and total length.

>
> Either way it would be an experience to say the least. Mark Van

> his 39' river sharpie across the Gulf and had a tough time steering

> bounced around a fair amount. He added twin skegs which solved a

> problems and he feels much better about taking the boat out in big

> it can be done. The accepted solution is to add deep skegs to

> yawing about when the nose is burying itself before it pops back

> center board is supposed to handle that on the Wyo but I may end up

> skegs as well, we'll just have to see how it goes once I have her

> water.

> Hi All -
>
> Perhaps Peter Lanihan would be the best to answere this -

>
> Thanks & Aloha -

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

>
> Which Asylum. Maybe we've met. Ha!
> Peter Lenihan,enjoying a tranquile night at the asylum despite the
> roundness of the lunar face...........

>
>
> Bolger rules!!!
> - no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
> - stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred'

> - Pls add your comments at the TOP, SIGN your posts, and snip away
> - Plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box 1209, Gloucester, MA,

> - Unsubscribe:bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> - Open discussion:bolger_coffee_lounge-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to

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

>With a shallow draft Bolger sharpie, however, after
>cruising the Cheasapeake I would think about running
>up the east side of the Eastern Shore of Virginia and
>Maryland, which (until the Assawoman canal is
>redredged) requires a run of 15 miles outside from
>Ocean City, Maryland to Indian River Inlet, Delaware,
>but allows you to miss the long run down Delaware Bay,
>which is often rough and largely without any
>reasonable harbors (unlike the Chesapeake).

> Would the group please consider a new discussion
> with a new member?
> I am new to the concept of flat bottom boats. I
> know that when I
> anchor out or cruise around the Jersey/Chesapeake
> area my real
> interest lies in the along-shore or shallow
> estuaries that I
> currently can't reach in my 4' draft sailboat. If
> the Sharpies are
> as shallow as stated I could conceivably go right
> into many of the
> back creek and swampy areas that I currently have to
> paddle or wade
> to. There is mile upon endless mile of waters in the
> above areas
> which are 1-3' at low tide (Great Bay, Little egg,
> Barnegat, Choptank
> ect.)
> So my real question is just how seaworthy are the
> bigger sharpies
> such as Tennesee, Dakota, Wyo ect? How can we
> measure the term
> seaworthy?
> I know that in my Pearson Triton the boat can
> litterally take the
> very worst of weather...much more than I could
> survive inside the
> boat.
> I've heard satisfied owners brag about how good
> the boats go and
> how comfy they ride but would they round Alcatraz in
> winter or leave
> Anapolis in a blow? Would the operator of a Mundo
> style Tennesee hop
> from Raritan Bay(Sandy Hook) outside to Manasquan in
> good waether?
> Would a Dakota or Wyoming steam from Fischers Is. or
> New London to
> Block Is, and the Bristol in average summer
> conditions? Cape May to
> C&D...... Well you get the Idea.
> If I lived on the ohio river system I wouldn't
> even question the
> seaworthiness of these boat but you see I cross
> small bodies of open
> water to get to my cruising areas and want to turn
> turtle.
> So help me if you will todetermine just how harsh
> of an environment
> is appropriate for these boats.
>
> Sincerely,
> Don Tyson
> Easton, PA
> Owner, Triton "Number Twenty"
>
>
>

> A very large component of the seaworthy focus which rarely
> appears to be mentioned is seamanship.

> I would think that even if a wyo could take the torsional stresses related

> Hi All -
>
> Perhaps Peter Lanihan would be the best to
> answere this - When our "Champlain" is completed
> Barbara & I are planning to cruise her up the
> Intercoastal to Long Island, New York. Since there
> are places along the way that are really not in the
> Big Ditch such as Chesapeak Bay and NY harbor would
> it be necessary even in good weather to skirt the
> shoreline in these places ?
>
>
> Thanks & Aloha - Jack Spoering - Ft Lauderdale, Fl
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been
> removed]
>
>

> I would think that even if a wyo could take the torsional stresses related

>
> Would the group please consider a new discussion with a new member?
> I am new to the concept of flat bottom boats. I know that when I
> anchor out or cruise around the Jersey/Chesapeake area my real
> interest lies in the along-shore or shallow estuaries that I
> currently can't reach in my 4' draft sailboat. If the Sharpies are
> as shallow as stated I could conceivably go right into many of the
> back creek and swampy areas that I currently have to paddle or wade
> to. There is mile upon endless mile of waters in the above areas
> which are 1-3' at low tide (Great Bay, Little egg, Barnegat, Choptank
> ect.)
> So my real question is just how seaworthy are the bigger sharpies
> such as Tennesee, Dakota, Wyo ect? How can we measure the term
> seaworthy?
> I know that in my Pearson Triton the boat can litterally take the
> very worst of weather...much more than I could survive inside the
> boat.
> I've heard satisfied owners brag about how good the boats go and
> how comfy they ride but would they round Alcatraz in winter or leave
> Anapolis in a blow? Would the operator of a Mundo style Tennesee hop
> from Raritan Bay(Sandy Hook) outside to Manasquan in good waether?
> Would a Dakota or Wyoming steam from Fischers Is. or New London to
> Block Is, and the Bristol in average summer conditions? Cape May to
> C&D...... Well you get the Idea.
> If I lived on the ohio river system I wouldn't even question the
> seaworthiness of these boat but you see I cross small bodies of open
> water to get to my cruising areas and want to turn turtle.
> So help me if you will todetermine just how harsh of an environment
> is appropriate for these boats.
>
> Sincerely,
> Don Tyson
> Easton, PA
> Owner, Triton "Number Twenty"

> I've heard satisfied owners brag about how good the boats go and
>how comfy they ride but would they round Alcatraz in winter or leave
>Anapolis in a blow? Would the operator of a Mundo style Tennesee hop
>from Raritan Bay(Sandy Hook) outside to Manasquan in good waether?
>Would a Dakota or Wyoming steam from Fischers Is. or New London to
>Block Is, and the Bristol in average summer conditions? Cape May to
>C&D...... Well you get the Idea.

>
> Would the group please consider a new discussion with a new member?
> I am new to the concept of flat bottom boats. I know that when I
> anchor out or cruise around the Jersey/Chesapeake area my real
> interest lies in the along-shore or shallow estuaries that I
> currently can't reach in my 4' draft sailboat. If the Sharpies are
> as shallow as stated I could conceivably go right into many of the
> back creek and swampy areas that I currently have to paddle or wade
> to. There is mile upon endless mile of waters in the above areas
> which are 1-3' at low tide (Great Bay, Little egg, Barnegat, Choptank
> ect.)
> So my real question is just how seaworthy are the bigger sharpies
> such as Tennesee, Dakota, Wyo ect? How can we measure the term
> seaworthy?
> I know that in my Pearson Triton the boat can litterally take the
> very worst of weather...much more than I could survive inside the
> boat.
> I've heard satisfied owners brag about how good the boats go and
> how comfy they ride but would they round Alcatraz in winter or leave
> Anapolis in a blow? Would the operator of a Mundo style Tennesee hop
> from Raritan Bay(Sandy Hook) outside to Manasquan in good waether?
> Would a Dakota or Wyoming steam from Fischers Is. or New London to
> Block Is, and the Bristol in average summer conditions? Cape May to
> C&D...... Well you get the Idea.
> If I lived on the ohio river system I wouldn't even question the
> seaworthiness of these boat but you see I cross small bodies of open
> water to get to my cruising areas and want to turn turtle.
> So help me if you will todetermine just how harsh of an environment
> is appropriate for these boats.
>
> Sincerely,
> Don Tyson
> Easton, PA
> Owner, Triton "Number Twenty"

>> So my real question is just how seaworthy are the bigger

> such as Tennesee, Dakota, Wyo ect? How can we measure the term
> seaworthy?

> So my real question is just how seaworthy are the bigger sharpies
> such as Tennesee, Dakota, Wyo ect? How can we measure the term
> seaworthy?

> So my real question is just how seaworthy are the bigger sharpies
> such as Tennesee, Dakota, Wyo ect? How can we measure the term
> seaworthy?