[bolger] Re: motor for Micro
The few 2hp that I know have no reverse, you have to turn the motor 180º for
going back, but I think there isn't room enough in Micro's transom to do
that. Im I wrong?
I was asking myself how would work an ash oar instead (or in adition to) a
motor.
Regards
Francisco
going back, but I think there isn't room enough in Micro's transom to do
that. Im I wrong?
I was asking myself how would work an ash oar instead (or in adition to) a
motor.
Regards
Francisco
Dept. "Unspeakable..."
www.egroups.com- Simplifying group communications
Clyde, you guilty of blasphemy putting a 2HP on LILY - will she ever be the same again? Perhaps it is time for an excorcism! No - not of you - LILY the poor thing... What is this world coming to!
Good test though. Good point on power need per given hull. For those not too familiar with her, she (ours) usually draws 35-37amp at 24V on full throttle for 3.8kn (limited by 4"pitch of 11" prop!). That means, around 1.1+HP is what moves her, likely somewhat more (up to 45amp max.rating) if there was a stock prop available with 6-7" of pitch.
"Clyde S. Wisner" wrote:
I have a Honda 2 which I have tried on (or in) my Lily, 15'8", no keel but quite a load of batteries etc, about one third throttle produces about 5.5 knts. More power only produces more wake. Lily probably has similar rocker to a Micro, I've never compared them. Can't find my Micro plans. Clyde Wisner
Lincoln Ross wrote:
"david jost" <djos-@...> wrote:
original article:http://www.egroups.com/group/bolger/?start=3248
> I think that I need at least a 5hp to maintain hull speed through
Woods
> Hole and Quicks Hole. These are nasty places that I frequently go
> through between Buzzards Bay and vinyard Sound. Do you think the 3.3
> will keep it up to speed?
>snip
>From a theoretical point of view, especially at relatively low speeds,
the propellor diameter is very important. If you can get a reasonably
flat pitch, a big diameter should be much more efficient for you. I
don't know if different motors of the same horsepower often swing a
different size prop, but if they do, you know what to look for. Barring
reduction gears, I'd expect a 4 stroke to have more torque and a larger
prop for a given horsepower. Above is per my old ocean engineering
courses, and is consistent with my experiences with other kinds of
propellors and engines (model airplanes). The small outboard motors
I've seen in the past seemed to send a ridiculously small stream of
water astern, ridiculously fast, with much wasted energy. I think this
big prop was the idea with the old British Seagull, though apparently
it had other troubles. Somewhere on the web there are some hilarious
accounts of this particular engine (I think), possibly on the Light
Schooner site.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
GET A NEXTCARD VISA, in 30 seconds! Get rates
as low as 0.0% Intro APR and no hidden fees.
Apply NOW!
http://click.egroups.com/1/975/5/_/3457/_/951785927/
-- Create a poll/survey for your group!
--http://www.egroups.com/vote?listname=bolger&m=1
www.egroups.com- Simplifying group communications
I have a Honda 2 which I have tried on (or in) my Lily, 15'8", no keel
but quite a load of batteries etc, about one third throttle produces about
5.5 knts. More power only produces more wake. Lily probably has similar
rocker to a Micro, I've never compared them. Can't find my Micro plans.
Clyde Wisner
Lincoln Ross wrote:
"david jost" <djos-@...> wrote:
original article:http://www.egroups.com/group/bolger/?start=3248
> I think that I need at least a 5hp to maintain hull speed through
Woods
> Hole and Quicks Hole. These are nasty places that I frequently go
> through between Buzzards Bay and vinyard Sound. Do you think the 3.3
> will keep it up to speed?
>snip
>From a theoretical point of view, especially at relatively low speeds,
the propellor diameter is very important. If you can get a reasonably
flat pitch, a big diameter should be much more efficient for you. I
don't know if different motors of the same horsepower often swing a
different size prop, but if they do, you know what to look for. Barring
reduction gears, I'd expect a 4 stroke to have more torque and a larger
prop for a given horsepower. Above is per my old ocean engineering
courses, and is consistent with my experiences with other kinds of
propellors and engines (model airplanes). The small outboard motors
I've seen in the past seemed to send a ridiculously small stream of
water astern, ridiculously fast, with much wasted energy. I think this
big prop was the idea with the old British Seagull, though apparently
it had other troubles. Somewhere on the web there are some hilarious
accounts of this particular engine (I think), possibly on the Light
Schooner site.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
GET A NEXTCARD VISA, in 30 seconds! Get rates
as low as 0.0% Intro APR and no hidden fees.
Apply NOW!
http://click.egroups.com/1/975/5/_/3457/_/951785927/
-- Create a poll/survey for your group!
--http://www.egroups.com/vote?listname=bolger&m=1
"david jost" <djos-@...> wrote:
original article:http://www.egroups.com/group/bolger/?start=3248
the propellor diameter is very important. If you can get a reasonably
flat pitch, a big diameter should be much more efficient for you. I
don't know if different motors of the same horsepower often swing a
different size prop, but if they do, you know what to look for. Barring
reduction gears, I'd expect a 4 stroke to have more torque and a larger
prop for a given horsepower. Above is per my old ocean engineering
courses, and is consistent with my experiences with other kinds of
propellors and engines (model airplanes). The small outboard motors
I've seen in the past seemed to send a ridiculously small stream of
water astern, ridiculously fast, with much wasted energy. I think this
big prop was the idea with the old British Seagull, though apparently
it had other troubles. Somewhere on the web there are some hilarious
accounts of this particular engine (I think), possibly on the Light
Schooner site.
original article:http://www.egroups.com/group/bolger/?start=3248
> I think that I need at least a 5hp to maintain hull speed throughWoods
> Hole and Quicks Hole. These are nasty places that I frequently goFrom a theoretical point of view, especially at relatively low speeds,
> through between Buzzards Bay and vinyard Sound. Do you think the 3.3
> will keep it up to speed?
>snip
the propellor diameter is very important. If you can get a reasonably
flat pitch, a big diameter should be much more efficient for you. I
don't know if different motors of the same horsepower often swing a
different size prop, but if they do, you know what to look for. Barring
reduction gears, I'd expect a 4 stroke to have more torque and a larger
prop for a given horsepower. Above is per my old ocean engineering
courses, and is consistent with my experiences with other kinds of
propellors and engines (model airplanes). The small outboard motors
I've seen in the past seemed to send a ridiculously small stream of
water astern, ridiculously fast, with much wasted energy. I think this
big prop was the idea with the old British Seagull, though apparently
it had other troubles. Somewhere on the web there are some hilarious
accounts of this particular engine (I think), possibly on the Light
Schooner site.
I think that I need at least a 5hp to maintain hull speed through Woods
Hole and Quicks Hole. These are nasty places that I frequently go
through between Buzzards Bay and vinyard Sound. Do you think the 3.3
will keep it up to speed?
David Jost djost @...
"lm2" <lm-@...> wrote:
original article:http://www.egroups.com/group/bolger/?start=3235
Hole and Quicks Hole. These are nasty places that I frequently go
through between Buzzards Bay and vinyard Sound. Do you think the 3.3
will keep it up to speed?
David Jost djost @...
"lm2" <lm-@...> wrote:
original article:http://www.egroups.com/group/bolger/?start=3235
> I gathered that you had a 9.9..but I was speaking in general terms aswell
> as to you...quite a
>
> A new 3.3 hp only runs about $500. here in the islands and we pay
> bit more than you do on the mainland. Just out of curiousity Ichecked on
> some used 2 hp motors and it would seem the figure of $150. is morelikely
> what you would be spending.on its
>
> Just hate to see someone put a motor so badly suited to a great boat
> transom.am
>
> Bob
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David Jost" <djost@...>
> To: <bolger@...>
> Sent: Monday, February 28, 2000 12:47 PM
> Subject: [bolger] Re: motor for Micro
>
>
> > for clarity purposes,
> > It is not that I desire more horsepower, It is what I own. I
> > not crazy about spending another $1000 for another motor. Call me
> > cheap.
>
>
I gathered that you had a 9.9..but I was speaking in general terms as well
as to you...
A new 3.3 hp only runs about $500. here in the islands and we pay quite a
bit more than you do on the mainland. Just out of curiousity I checked on
some used 2 hp motors and it would seem the figure of $150. is more likely
what you would be spending.
Just hate to see someone put a motor so badly suited to a great boat on its
transom.
Bob
as to you...
A new 3.3 hp only runs about $500. here in the islands and we pay quite a
bit more than you do on the mainland. Just out of curiousity I checked on
some used 2 hp motors and it would seem the figure of $150. is more likely
what you would be spending.
Just hate to see someone put a motor so badly suited to a great boat on its
transom.
Bob
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Jost" <djost@...>
To: <bolger@...>
Sent: Monday, February 28, 2000 12:47 PM
Subject: [bolger] Re: motor for Micro
> for clarity purposes,
> It is not that I desire more horsepower, It is what I own. I am
> not crazy about spending another $1000 for another motor. Call me
> cheap.
for clarity purposes,
It is not that I desire more horsepower, It is what I own. I am
not crazy about spending another $1000 for another motor. Call me
cheap.
David Jost
"lm2" <lm-@...> wrote:
original article:http://www.egroups.com/group/bolger/?start=3224
It is not that I desire more horsepower, It is what I own. I am
not crazy about spending another $1000 for another motor. Call me
cheap.
David Jost
"lm2" <lm-@...> wrote:
original article:http://www.egroups.com/group/bolger/?start=3224
> When I had our Micro we did very well with only a two horse outboardand
> later when we switched to 4hp we found that it worked no better andwent
> back to the 2. Loose Moose 2 was more than well served by a 9.9 ( andthat
> included over 2000 miles of canal and river cruising)Moose
>
> The main reason not to use the 9.9 on a Micro is the weight...
>
> Of course if you really must have MORE horsepower I still have Loose
> 2's spare unused Honda four stroke long shaft for sale but I wouldrather
> see you using a small...2 to 4 horse...
>
> Bob & Sheila
> St Thomas USVI
>http://www.paradiseconnections.com
>
When I had our Micro we did very well with only a two horse outboard and
later when we switched to 4hp we found that it worked no better and went
back to the 2. Loose Moose 2 was more than well served by a 9.9 ( and that
included over 2000 miles of canal and river cruising)
The main reason not to use the 9.9 on a Micro is the weight...
Of course if you really must have MORE horsepower I still have Loose Moose
2's spare unused Honda four stroke long shaft for sale but I would rather
see you using a small...2 to 4 horse...
Bob & Sheila
St Thomas USVI
http://www.paradiseconnections.com
later when we switched to 4hp we found that it worked no better and went
back to the 2. Loose Moose 2 was more than well served by a 9.9 ( and that
included over 2000 miles of canal and river cruising)
The main reason not to use the 9.9 on a Micro is the weight...
Of course if you really must have MORE horsepower I still have Loose Moose
2's spare unused Honda four stroke long shaft for sale but I would rather
see you using a small...2 to 4 horse...
Bob & Sheila
St Thomas USVI
http://www.paradiseconnections.com
Date sent: Sun, 27 Feb 2000 17:04:30 -0800
From: "David Jost" <djost@...>
To:bolger@...
Send reply to:bolger@egroups.com
Subject: [bolger] motor for Micro
David, one consideration is that the motor head will hit the top
cross beam when tilted. I actually cut out the beam the same
width as the motor opening, and fitted two struts across to the
bulkhead. It is very strong, and makes boarding easy when
working on the boat, or when the motor is not shipped.
Don
From: "David Jost" <djost@...>
To:bolger@...
Send reply to:bolger@egroups.com
Subject: [bolger] motor for Micro
David, one consideration is that the motor head will hit the top
cross beam when tilted. I actually cut out the beam the same
width as the motor opening, and fitted two struts across to the
bulkhead. It is very strong, and makes boarding easy when
working on the boat, or when the motor is not shipped.
Don
> I went to the boat show yesterday. Rather depressing. All of that
> fiberglass and multi thousand dollar boats. Nothing really impressive
> that cannot be done on a much smaller scale and cheaper.
> good points : Corsair folding tri 50K, Bullseye sloop (timeless
> classic) 13k, 24' Shamrock keel drive power boats (if you are going to
> go this way, go for the best)
> Here is the dilemma. I have been planning to sell my Diablo to
> finance the motor for Micro. I figured a new Yamaha 5hp with forward,
> neutral, and reverse would be perfect, when all of a sudden it hit me.
> Wham! Why not use the 10hp longshaft Johnson for Micro. Yes, it is a
> bit of overkill as we will only get to hull speed and then dig a
> tremendous chop. But a new motor will cost about a grand! This is
> absolutely the right price, free. I could probably pick up some extra
> money towing larger keel boats off sand bars.
> Does anyone know if Micro's transom will support the weight of a
> 10hp? I know I would have to make some adjustments to the transom top
> to accomodate the larger cowl. What other considerations should there
> be?
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> GET A NEXTCARD VISA, in 30 seconds! Get rates
> as low as 0.0% Intro APR and no hidden fees.
> Apply NOW!
>http://click.egroups.com/1/975/5/_/3457/_/951699876/
>
> eGroups.com Home:http://www.egroups.com/group/bolger/
>http://www.egroups.com- Simplifying group communications
>
>
>
I would be concerned with the trust a 10hp can develop.
I have a 9.9 Yachtwin and it develops more power that its
rating. I am not familiar with Micro's transom, but if you
can spread the load over a wider area it will help.
I my case I laminated a piece of 3/4" ply twice the size of
the motor mount under it. You might also consider to build
ribs for rigidity and re-enforce transom to other members
joints.
Incidentally, that extra power comes very handy when you
have to go against a strong wind and waves. I was caught
once in such conditions with my 5hp and was barely making
1 knot.
alex
I have a 9.9 Yachtwin and it develops more power that its
rating. I am not familiar with Micro's transom, but if you
can spread the load over a wider area it will help.
I my case I laminated a piece of 3/4" ply twice the size of
the motor mount under it. You might also consider to build
ribs for rigidity and re-enforce transom to other members
joints.
Incidentally, that extra power comes very handy when you
have to go against a strong wind and waves. I was caught
once in such conditions with my 5hp and was barely making
1 knot.
alex
> Does anyone know if Micro's transom will support the weight of a
> 10hp? I know I would have to make some adjustments to the transom top
> to accomodate the larger cowl. What other considerations should there
> be?
Another advantage will be the low throttle setting. I bet 10 HP will
be a little quieter at a little higher speed. A comparison of fuel
consumption is another thing, but both will only sip fuel compared to
the Shamrock!
And hooray for displacement-speed power boats. Faster than a speeding
monohull sailboat.
Phil Lea
Russellville, Arkansas
"david jost" <djos-@...> wrote:
original article:http://www.egroups.com/group/bolger/?start=3210
be a little quieter at a little higher speed. A comparison of fuel
consumption is another thing, but both will only sip fuel compared to
the Shamrock!
And hooray for displacement-speed power boats. Faster than a speeding
monohull sailboat.
Phil Lea
Russellville, Arkansas
"david jost" <djos-@...> wrote:
original article:http://www.egroups.com/group/bolger/?start=3210
> I went to the boat show yesterday. Rather depressing. All of thatto
> fiberglass and multi thousand dollar boats. Nothing really impressive
> that cannot be done on a much smaller scale and cheaper.
> good points : Corsair folding tri 50K, Bullseye sloop (timeless
> classic) 13k, 24' Shamrock keel drive power boats (if you are going
> go this way, go for the best)me.
> Here is the dilemma. I have been planning to sell my Diablo to
> finance the motor for Micro. I figured a new Yamaha 5hp with forward,
> neutral, and reverse would be perfect, when all of a sudden it hit
> Wham! Why not use the 10hp longshaft Johnson for Micro. Yes, it is a
> bit of overkill as we will only get to hull speed and then dig a
> tremendous chop. But a new motor will cost about a grand! This is
> absolutely the right price, free. I could probably pick up some extra
> money towing larger keel boats off sand bars.
> Does anyone know if Micro's transom will support the weight of a
> 10hp? I know I would have to make some adjustments to the transom top
> to accomodate the larger cowl. What other considerations should there
> be?
>
On Sun, 27 Feb 2000, David Jost wrote:
high power prop. It'll cost about $60, but it'll be worth it.
Chris Crandallcrandall@...(785) 864-4131
Department of Psychology University of Kansas Lawrence, KS 66045
I have data convincingly disconfirming the Duhem-Quine hypothesis.
> Here is the dilemma. I have been planning to sell my Diablo toIt's probably fine. However, don't forget to re-prop it with a low pitch,
> finance the motor for Micro. I figured a new Yamaha 5hp with forward,
> neutral, and reverse would be perfect, when all of a sudden it hit me.
> Wham! Why not use the 10hp longshaft Johnson for Micro. Yes, it is a
> bit of overkill as we will only get to hull speed and then dig a
> tremendous chop. But a new motor will cost about a grand! This is
> absolutely the right price, free. I could probably pick up some extra
> money towing larger keel boats off sand bars.
high power prop. It'll cost about $60, but it'll be worth it.
Chris Crandallcrandall@...(785) 864-4131
Department of Psychology University of Kansas Lawrence, KS 66045
I have data convincingly disconfirming the Duhem-Quine hypothesis.
I went to the boat show yesterday. Rather depressing. All of that
fiberglass and multi thousand dollar boats. Nothing really impressive
that cannot be done on a much smaller scale and cheaper.
good points : Corsair folding tri 50K, Bullseye sloop (timeless
classic) 13k, 24' Shamrock keel drive power boats (if you are going to
go this way, go for the best)
Here is the dilemma. I have been planning to sell my Diablo to
finance the motor for Micro. I figured a new Yamaha 5hp with forward,
neutral, and reverse would be perfect, when all of a sudden it hit me.
Wham! Why not use the 10hp longshaft Johnson for Micro. Yes, it is a
bit of overkill as we will only get to hull speed and then dig a
tremendous chop. But a new motor will cost about a grand! This is
absolutely the right price, free. I could probably pick up some extra
money towing larger keel boats off sand bars.
Does anyone know if Micro's transom will support the weight of a
10hp? I know I would have to make some adjustments to the transom top
to accomodate the larger cowl. What other considerations should there
be?
fiberglass and multi thousand dollar boats. Nothing really impressive
that cannot be done on a much smaller scale and cheaper.
good points : Corsair folding tri 50K, Bullseye sloop (timeless
classic) 13k, 24' Shamrock keel drive power boats (if you are going to
go this way, go for the best)
Here is the dilemma. I have been planning to sell my Diablo to
finance the motor for Micro. I figured a new Yamaha 5hp with forward,
neutral, and reverse would be perfect, when all of a sudden it hit me.
Wham! Why not use the 10hp longshaft Johnson for Micro. Yes, it is a
bit of overkill as we will only get to hull speed and then dig a
tremendous chop. But a new motor will cost about a grand! This is
absolutely the right price, free. I could probably pick up some extra
money towing larger keel boats off sand bars.
Does anyone know if Micro's transom will support the weight of a
10hp? I know I would have to make some adjustments to the transom top
to accomodate the larger cowl. What other considerations should there
be?