Re: Smaller Sneakeasy
I got a little farther with the design. Still need to refine the
sheer a little. I raked the bow stem a tiny bit so if you trim the
weight a little forward to lift the transom to the waterline for lower
drag at displacement speeds it will not look nose down and still looks
correct when trimmed level.
Also trying as an option a shallow V in the forward 1/3 of the hull
bottom. This may reduce pounding and drumming without the complexity
of a box keel.
I am still trying to decide on the minimum plywood thickness. I think
the origional had 3/8" sides and a 1/2" bottom. I am sure that I
could get by with 6mm(1/4") sides and 9mm(3/8") bottom if I use Okoume
but I wonder if I could get by with 4mm sides and 6mm bottom?
I want to make it as light as possible and still handle at least 8HP.
sheer a little. I raked the bow stem a tiny bit so if you trim the
weight a little forward to lift the transom to the waterline for lower
drag at displacement speeds it will not look nose down and still looks
correct when trimmed level.
Also trying as an option a shallow V in the forward 1/3 of the hull
bottom. This may reduce pounding and drumming without the complexity
of a box keel.
I am still trying to decide on the minimum plywood thickness. I think
the origional had 3/8" sides and a 1/2" bottom. I am sure that I
could get by with 6mm(1/4") sides and 9mm(3/8") bottom if I use Okoume
but I wonder if I could get by with 4mm sides and 6mm bottom?
I want to make it as light as possible and still handle at least 8HP.
Skins and oils or pitch depending on where you where building canoes
but then dugouts needed nothing and where steamed to get more beam.
Jon
but then dugouts needed nothing and where steamed to get more beam.
Jon
> Ron Schroeder <rjs@...> wrote:Tar was used for waterproofing many years ago.
> --- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, dave seeton <daveseeton@> wrote:I
> >
> > Thanks
> > How were boats made before white lead & or resin & glass cloth?
> don't mean to be a smart ass but cant you build a pretty watertite
> boat with out resin & glass?when
> > will the sneakeasy you plan to build have a step down keel?
> > Please keep my e-mail address as I would like a set of plans
> your done.Travel.
> > Dave
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Need a vacation? Get great deals to amazing places on Yahoo!
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
I guess I asked for that, Its resin & glass or pick up my club & get back in my cave. I have 9.9 OB is that large enough do you think?
Dave
Ron Schroeder <rjs@...> wrote: Tar was used for waterproofing many years ago.
I am probably not going to go with a box keel on this one. I think
the keel would be to heavily loaded to plane with only 8 HP with
more than one person and would be a slight deterement at
displacement speeds. Probably be OK with a 15.
Ron
Dave
Ron Schroeder <rjs@...> wrote: Tar was used for waterproofing many years ago.
I am probably not going to go with a box keel on this one. I think
the keel would be to heavily loaded to plane with only 8 HP with
more than one person and would be a slight deterement at
displacement speeds. Probably be OK with a 15.
Ron
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, dave seeton <daveseeton@...> wrote:
>
> Thanks
> How were boats made before white lead & or resin & glass cloth? I
don't mean to be a smart ass but cant you build a pretty water tite
boat with out resin & glass?
> will the sneakeasy you plan to build have a step down keel?
> Please keep my e-mail address as I would like a set of plans when
your done.
> Dave
---------------------------------
Need a vacation? Get great deals to amazing places on Yahoo! Travel.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Tar was used for waterproofing many years ago.
I am probably not going to go with a box keel on this one. I think
the keel would be to heavily loaded to plane with only 8 HP with
more than one person and would be a slight deterement at
displacement speeds. Probably be OK with a 15.
Ron
I am probably not going to go with a box keel on this one. I think
the keel would be to heavily loaded to plane with only 8 HP with
more than one person and would be a slight deterement at
displacement speeds. Probably be OK with a 15.
Ron
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, dave seeton <daveseeton@...> wrote:
>
> Thanks
> How were boats made before white lead & or resin & glass cloth? I
don't mean to be a smart ass but cant you build a pretty water tite
boat with out resin & glass?
> will the sneakeasy you plan to build have a step down keel?
> Please keep my e-mail address as I would like a set of plans when
your done.
> Dave
Thanks
How were boats made before white lead & or resin & glass cloth? I don't mean to be a smart ass but cant you build a pretty water tite boat with out resin & glass?
will the sneakeasy you plan to build have a step down keel?
Please keep my e-mail address as I would like a set of plans when your done.
Dave
Ron Schroeder <rjs@...> wrote: Hi Dave,
I haven't built THIS boat before but I have built a few boats over
the years.
You can build a boat without resin and glass but I would at leat
glass the below waterline seams.
My plans would be somewhere between $25 and $100 depending on how
much effort I go into.
Freeboard is basically he height of the sides.
I am in Long Island NY.
Ron
How were boats made before white lead & or resin & glass cloth? I don't mean to be a smart ass but cant you build a pretty water tite boat with out resin & glass?
will the sneakeasy you plan to build have a step down keel?
Please keep my e-mail address as I would like a set of plans when your done.
Dave
Ron Schroeder <rjs@...> wrote: Hi Dave,
I haven't built THIS boat before but I have built a few boats over
the years.
You can build a boat without resin and glass but I would at leat
glass the below waterline seams.
My plans would be somewhere between $25 and $100 depending on how
much effort I go into.
Freeboard is basically he height of the sides.
I am in Long Island NY.
Ron
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, dave seeton <daveseeton@...> wrote:
>
> Thanks
> A couple of questions..
> Have you built the boat before? Would the extra with make it more
stable. Can a boat be built without resin & glass cloth?
> What would you as for the full modified plans?
> I'm very new to boat building.(16" ceder strip canoe & 16" pointed
flat bottomed ,2 board lapstrake boat, both are BRITE) so I probly
wont use the proper terms, hope this doesn't confuz things, like
whats the free board?
> Thanks
> Dave
> where are you? I'm in SC
---------------------------------
Building a website is a piece of cake.
Yahoo! Small Business gives you all the tools to get online.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Hi Dave,
I haven't built THIS boat before but I have built a few boats over
the years.
You can build a boat without resin and glass but I would at leat
glass the below waterline seams.
My plans would be somewhere between $25 and $100 depending on how
much effort I go into.
Freeboard is basically he height of the sides.
I am in Long Island NY.
Ron
I haven't built THIS boat before but I have built a few boats over
the years.
You can build a boat without resin and glass but I would at leat
glass the below waterline seams.
My plans would be somewhere between $25 and $100 depending on how
much effort I go into.
Freeboard is basically he height of the sides.
I am in Long Island NY.
Ron
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, dave seeton <daveseeton@...> wrote:
>
> Thanks
> A couple of questions..
> Have you built the boat before? Would the extra with make it more
stable. Can a boat be built without resin & glass cloth?
> What would you as for the full modified plans?
> I'm very new to boat building.(16" ceder strip canoe & 16" pointed
flat bottomed ,2 board lapstrake boat, both are BRITE) so I probly
wont use the proper terms, hope this doesn't confuz things, like
whats the free board?
> Thanks
> Dave
> where are you? I'm in SC
How about PCB & Friends?
Tim Anderson wrote:
Tim Anderson wrote:
> Bernie Wolford (sp?)[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
> _____
>
> From:bolger@yahoogroups.com<mailto:bolger%40yahoogroups.com>
> [mailto:bolger@yahoogroups.com<mailto:bolger%40yahoogroups.com>] On
> Behalf Of
> Kristine Bennett
> Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2007 9:49 PM
> To:bolger@yahoogroups.com<mailto:bolger%40yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: RE: [bolger] Re: Smaller Sneakeasy
>
> Hey Tim where did you get the plans for the Bee? I
> think I have asked before but I don't remember if
> anyone told me where to find the plans.
>
> Krissie
>
> --- Tim Anderson <lebateautim@ <mailto:lebateautim%40earthlink.net>
> earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> > I Stretched a Bolger "BEE" ( the test bed for the
> > box keel) to 10 feet and I
> > added the beavertails to finish at 11' 6"; it ran at
> > 18knts with 8hrs Honda.
> > I put 14" x 5.5" x .625" wedges under the aft end
> > off the beavertails when
> > looking for a solution to Tony Groves planning
> > problems on the Retriever. It
> > worked great! The boat ran like it was on rails and
> > banked beautifully in
> > the corners. My one regret is that I used Luan
> > Under-layment Ply which is
> > void free but the glue was not waterproof so I have
> > to cut it up to throw it
> > away. It was so exciting to run that we named it
> > Kamikaze skiff. Tim P
> > Anderson
> >
> >
>
> __________________________________________________________
> Boardwalk for $500? In 2007? Ha! Play Monopoly Here and Now (it's updated
> for today's economy) at Yahoo! Games.
>http://get.games
> <http://get.games.yahoo.com/proddesc?gamekey=monopolyherenow
> <http://get.games.yahoo.com/proddesc?gamekey=monopolyherenow>>
> yahoo.com/proddesc?gamekey=monopolyherenow
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
Bernie Wolford (sp?)
_____
From:bolger@yahoogroups.com[mailto:bolger@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Kristine Bennett
Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2007 9:49 PM
To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [bolger] Re: Smaller Sneakeasy
Hey Tim where did you get the plans for the Bee? I
think I have asked before but I don't remember if
anyone told me where to find the plans.
Krissie
--- Tim Anderson <lebateautim@ <mailto:lebateautim%40earthlink.net>
earthlink.net> wrote:
Boardwalk for $500? In 2007? Ha! Play Monopoly Here and Now (it's updated
for today's economy) at Yahoo! Games.
http://get.games
<http://get.games.yahoo.com/proddesc?gamekey=monopolyherenow>
yahoo.com/proddesc?gamekey=monopolyherenow
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
_____
From:bolger@yahoogroups.com[mailto:bolger@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Kristine Bennett
Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2007 9:49 PM
To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [bolger] Re: Smaller Sneakeasy
Hey Tim where did you get the plans for the Bee? I
think I have asked before but I don't remember if
anyone told me where to find the plans.
Krissie
--- Tim Anderson <lebateautim@ <mailto:lebateautim%40earthlink.net>
earthlink.net> wrote:
> I Stretched a Bolger "BEE" ( the test bed for the__________________________________________________________
> box keel) to 10 feet and I
> added the beavertails to finish at 11' 6"; it ran at
> 18knts with 8hrs Honda.
> I put 14" x 5.5" x .625" wedges under the aft end
> off the beavertails when
> looking for a solution to Tony Groves planning
> problems on the Retriever. It
> worked great! The boat ran like it was on rails and
> banked beautifully in
> the corners. My one regret is that I used Luan
> Under-layment Ply which is
> void free but the glue was not waterproof so I have
> to cut it up to throw it
> away. It was so exciting to run that we named it
> Kamikaze skiff. Tim P
> Anderson
>
>
Boardwalk for $500? In 2007? Ha! Play Monopoly Here and Now (it's updated
for today's economy) at Yahoo! Games.
http://get.games
<http://get.games.yahoo.com/proddesc?gamekey=monopolyherenow>
yahoo.com/proddesc?gamekey=monopolyherenow
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Hey Tim where did you get the plans for the Bee? I
think I have asked before but I don't remember if
anyone told me where to find the plans.
Krissie
--- Tim Anderson <lebateautim@...> wrote:
Boardwalk for $500? In 2007? Ha! Play Monopoly Here and Now (it's updated for today's economy) at Yahoo! Games.
http://get.games.yahoo.com/proddesc?gamekey=monopolyherenow
think I have asked before but I don't remember if
anyone told me where to find the plans.
Krissie
--- Tim Anderson <lebateautim@...> wrote:
> I Stretched a Bolger "BEE" ( the test bed for the____________________________________________________________________________________
> box keel) to 10 feet and I
> added the beavertails to finish at 11' 6"; it ran at
> 18knts with 8hrs Honda.
> I put 14" x 5.5" x .625" wedges under the aft end
> off the beavertails when
> looking for a solution to Tony Groves planning
> problems on the Retriever. It
> worked great! The boat ran like it was on rails and
> banked beautifully in
> the corners. My one regret is that I used Luan
> Under-layment Ply which is
> void free but the glue was not waterproof so I have
> to cut it up to throw it
> away. It was so exciting to run that we named it
> Kamikaze skiff. Tim P
> Anderson
>
>
Boardwalk for $500? In 2007? Ha! Play Monopoly Here and Now (it's updated for today's economy) at Yahoo! Games.
http://get.games.yahoo.com/proddesc?gamekey=monopolyherenow
The bottom of the box Keel was ½ inch, all else was ¼ inch. I only glassed
the outboard faces with 4 oz. I put in longitudinal seats of ¼ ply spaced 1
½ inches above the upper hull bottom, the void was filled with pour in
place foam. TA
_____
From:bolger@yahoogroups.com[mailto:bolger@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Ron Schroeder
Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2007 1:50 PM
To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [bolger] Re: Smaller Sneakeasy
--- In bolger@yahoogroups. <mailto:bolger%40yahoogroups.com> com, "Tim
Anderson" <lebateautim@...>
wrote:
Did you run it both with and without the wedges? Was it a single
layer of 1/4" for the bottom? Was it strong enough before it got
waterlogged?
Ron
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
the outboard faces with 4 oz. I put in longitudinal seats of ¼ ply spaced 1
½ inches above the upper hull bottom, the void was filled with pour in
place foam. TA
_____
From:bolger@yahoogroups.com[mailto:bolger@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Ron Schroeder
Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2007 1:50 PM
To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [bolger] Re: Smaller Sneakeasy
--- In bolger@yahoogroups. <mailto:bolger%40yahoogroups.com> com, "Tim
Anderson" <lebateautim@...>
wrote:
>feet and I
> I Stretched a Bolger "BEE" ( the test bed for the box keel) to 10
> added the beavertails to finish at 11' 6"; it ran at 18knts with8hrs Honda.
> I put 14" x 5.5" x .625" wedges under the aft end off thebeavertails when
> looking for a solution to Tony Groves planning problems on theRetriever. It
> worked great! The boat ran like it was on rails and bankedbeautifully in
> the corners. My one regret is that I used Luan Under-layment Plywhich is
> void free but the glue was not waterproof so I have to cut it upto throw it
> away. It was so exciting to run that we named it Kamikaze skiff.Tim P
> AndersonHi Tim,
Did you run it both with and without the wedges? Was it a single
layer of 1/4" for the bottom? Was it strong enough before it got
waterlogged?
Ron
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
In NMHO it lost all of sneakeasy's charm & class
Dave
Ron Schroeder <rjs@...> wrote: --- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Bryant Owen" <mariner@...> wrote:
Cute little boat but I think a little too small for the waves in the
bay.
Ron
---------------------------------
Sick sense of humor? Visit Yahoo! TV's Comedy with an Edge to see what's on, when.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Dave
Ron Schroeder <rjs@...> wrote: --- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Bryant Owen" <mariner@...> wrote:
>Hi Bryant,
> FYI
>
> Steve Bosquette built a Mini-Sneakeasy and brought it to the 2005
> Kingston Messabout. I've a pic of it in my Flikr account. See
>http://tinyurl.com/25yyef. Here's a Duckworks article about how he
> built ithttp://tinyurl.com/24prkoand here's the article about the
> Messabout showing some more picshttp://tinyurl.com/ytcl8v.
>
> This was a great little runabout and very stable. IIRC he had it
> planing on a 4 hp.
>
> Bryant
>
Cute little boat but I think a little too small for the waves in the
bay.
Ron
---------------------------------
Sick sense of humor? Visit Yahoo! TV's Comedy with an Edge to see what's on, when.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Thanks
A couple of questions..
Have you built the boat before? Would the extra with make it more stable. Can a boat be built without resin & glass cloth?
What would you as for the full modified plans?
I'm very new to boat building.(16" ceder strip canoe & 16" pointed flat bottomed ,2 board lapstrake boat, both are BRITE) so I probly wont use the proper terms, hope this doesn't confuz things, like whats the free board?
Thanks
Dave
where are you? I'm in SC
Ron Schroeder <rjs@...> wrote: Hi Dave,
Of course I would sell them (or just give them away depending on how
much work I put into them).
If I just do offset tables, you would need the Payson or Bolger plans
but If I draw it up compleatly, you wouldn't need any other plans.
So far the biggest difference in construction will be in the transom
area to handle the lower freeboard with still the same transom height
and also to optimize cockpit area.
Ron
A couple of questions..
Have you built the boat before? Would the extra with make it more stable. Can a boat be built without resin & glass cloth?
What would you as for the full modified plans?
I'm very new to boat building.(16" ceder strip canoe & 16" pointed flat bottomed ,2 board lapstrake boat, both are BRITE) so I probly wont use the proper terms, hope this doesn't confuz things, like whats the free board?
Thanks
Dave
where are you? I'm in SC
Ron Schroeder <rjs@...> wrote: Hi Dave,
Of course I would sell them (or just give them away depending on how
much work I put into them).
If I just do offset tables, you would need the Payson or Bolger plans
but If I draw it up compleatly, you wouldn't need any other plans.
So far the biggest difference in construction will be in the transom
area to handle the lower freeboard with still the same transom height
and also to optimize cockpit area.
Ron
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, dave seeton <daveseeton@...> wrote:
>
> Once you get the figures right would you sell them? I love the S-
Easy style but it's to large for my garage. Would I need to buy the
plans from Payson & the mods from you or could you sell me the plans
& mods complete?
> Thanks
> Dave
---------------------------------
Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect. Join Yahoo!'s user panel and lay it on us.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Tim Anderson" <lebateautim@...>
wrote:
Did you run it both with and without the wedges? Was it a single
layer of 1/4" for the bottom? Was it strong enough before it got
waterlogged?
Ron
wrote:
>feet and I
> I Stretched a Bolger "BEE" ( the test bed for the box keel) to 10
> added the beavertails to finish at 11' 6"; it ran at 18knts with8hrs Honda.
> I put 14" x 5.5" x .625" wedges under the aft end off thebeavertails when
> looking for a solution to Tony Groves planning problems on theRetriever. It
> worked great! The boat ran like it was on rails and bankedbeautifully in
> the corners. My one regret is that I used Luan Under-layment Plywhich is
> void free but the glue was not waterproof so I have to cut it upto throw it
> away. It was so exciting to run that we named it Kamikaze skiff.Tim P
> AndersonHi Tim,
Did you run it both with and without the wedges? Was it a single
layer of 1/4" for the bottom? Was it strong enough before it got
waterlogged?
Ron
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Bryant Owen" <mariner@...> wrote:
Cute little boat but I think a little too small for the waves in the
bay.
Ron
>Hi Bryant,
> FYI
>
> Steve Bosquette built a Mini-Sneakeasy and brought it to the 2005
> Kingston Messabout. I've a pic of it in my Flikr account. See
>http://tinyurl.com/25yyef. Here's a Duckworks article about how he
> built ithttp://tinyurl.com/24prkoand here's the article about the
> Messabout showing some more picshttp://tinyurl.com/ytcl8v.
>
> This was a great little runabout and very stable. IIRC he had it
> planing on a 4 hp.
>
> Bryant
>
Cute little boat but I think a little too small for the waves in the
bay.
Ron
FYI
Steve Bosquette built a Mini-Sneakeasy and brought it to the 2005
Kingston Messabout. I've a pic of it in my Flikr account. See
http://tinyurl.com/25yyef. Here's a Duckworks article about how he
built ithttp://tinyurl.com/24prkoand here's the article about the
Messabout showing some more picshttp://tinyurl.com/ytcl8v.
This was a great little runabout and very stable. IIRC he had it
planing on a 4 hp.
Bryant
Steve Bosquette built a Mini-Sneakeasy and brought it to the 2005
Kingston Messabout. I've a pic of it in my Flikr account. See
http://tinyurl.com/25yyef. Here's a Duckworks article about how he
built ithttp://tinyurl.com/24prkoand here's the article about the
Messabout showing some more picshttp://tinyurl.com/ytcl8v.
This was a great little runabout and very stable. IIRC he had it
planing on a 4 hp.
Bryant
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, dave seeton <daveseeton@...> wrote:
>
> Once you get the figures right would you sell them? I love the
S-Easy style but it's to large for my garage. Would I need to buy the
plans from Payson & the mods from you or could you sell me the plans &
mods complete?
> Thanks
> Dave
>
> Ron Schroeder <rjs@...> wrote:
Well, I started drawing up a smaller Sneakeasy that I can drag up the
> beach. I am going for just barely under 20 feet overall length and
> about 18' bow to transom (.75 of origional length) or 18'10" over all
> length and about 17' bow to transom (.708 of origional length). This
> would be 18" or 17" respectivly between stations rather than 24".
> Width at waterline will be between 3' and 3'6" to keep nearly the same
> long lean proportions and be able to be stored between canoes.
> Freeboard will be .80 of origional and will allow 2 sides to be cut
> from 48" wide plywood. I will probably increase forward rocker by
> about 10% to get about 800 pounds displacement at the same draft as
the
> 26' 6" origional.
>
> I am trying to decide on 4mm sides/6mm bottom or 6mm sides/ 9mm
> bottom. Power will be either an 8HP outboard or electric drive.
>
> I will probably calculate up a set of tables for a 17' x 32"
version if
> anybody is interested.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Yahoo! oneSearch: Finally, mobile search that gives answers, not
web links.
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
I Stretched a Bolger "BEE" ( the test bed for the box keel) to 10 feet and I
added the beavertails to finish at 11' 6"; it ran at 18knts with 8hrs Honda.
I put 14" x 5.5" x .625" wedges under the aft end off the beavertails when
looking for a solution to Tony Groves planning problems on the Retriever. It
worked great! The boat ran like it was on rails and banked beautifully in
the corners. My one regret is that I used Luan Under-layment Ply which is
void free but the glue was not waterproof so I have to cut it up to throw it
away. It was so exciting to run that we named it Kamikaze skiff. Tim P
Anderson
_____
From:bolger@yahoogroups.com[mailto:bolger@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Ron Schroeder
Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2007 5:21 AM
To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [bolger] Re: Smaller Sneakeasy
Hi Kristine,
I have seen the cartoon of the shortened Sneakeasy. To me it just
doesn't look right with a 48" beam when it is shortened that much.
Not including the beaver tails, the origional bow to transom/beam
ratio is 6:1. I don't think it would look right or perform right
with a ratio below 5:1. Possibly with more power a shortened but
wide Sneakeasy might perform OK with the box keel but I don't think
it would perform as well off plane. It would be almost like a
Microtrawler or a Hawkeye with a Sneakeasy hood.
Personally, I am not interested in fishing (somehow I missed that
gene from my father) so the 48" beam isn't needed for me. Primary
use will be cruising up the creak and small rivers or shooting across
the bay to Fire Island.
For fishing, if you want something small and light with a box keel,
you might want to look at a lengthened Bolger Bee.
As much as I like the unique look of a box keel, I think at the power
level I am going to be using, I don't think there would be much
advantage for the added complexity and weight. If I was going to run
15HP, I would probably go with it.
If you remember the Motor Canoe in "Different Boats", that would
serve my usage but it just wouldn't look right with plywood
construction. The long covered cowl of the Sneakeasy really sets off
the slab sides while still allowing very light weight. The Motor
Canoe would require a lot more time to build and probably be
heavier.
This boat will probably be a lazy project while recovering from heart
surgery.
I am still trying to decide on side and bottom thickness.
Ron
--- In bolger@yahoogroups. <mailto:bolger%40yahoogroups.com> com, Kristine
Bennett <femmpaws@...> wrote:
added the beavertails to finish at 11' 6"; it ran at 18knts with 8hrs Honda.
I put 14" x 5.5" x .625" wedges under the aft end off the beavertails when
looking for a solution to Tony Groves planning problems on the Retriever. It
worked great! The boat ran like it was on rails and banked beautifully in
the corners. My one regret is that I used Luan Under-layment Ply which is
void free but the glue was not waterproof so I have to cut it up to throw it
away. It was so exciting to run that we named it Kamikaze skiff. Tim P
Anderson
_____
From:bolger@yahoogroups.com[mailto:bolger@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Ron Schroeder
Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2007 5:21 AM
To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [bolger] Re: Smaller Sneakeasy
Hi Kristine,
I have seen the cartoon of the shortened Sneakeasy. To me it just
doesn't look right with a 48" beam when it is shortened that much.
Not including the beaver tails, the origional bow to transom/beam
ratio is 6:1. I don't think it would look right or perform right
with a ratio below 5:1. Possibly with more power a shortened but
wide Sneakeasy might perform OK with the box keel but I don't think
it would perform as well off plane. It would be almost like a
Microtrawler or a Hawkeye with a Sneakeasy hood.
Personally, I am not interested in fishing (somehow I missed that
gene from my father) so the 48" beam isn't needed for me. Primary
use will be cruising up the creak and small rivers or shooting across
the bay to Fire Island.
For fishing, if you want something small and light with a box keel,
you might want to look at a lengthened Bolger Bee.
As much as I like the unique look of a box keel, I think at the power
level I am going to be using, I don't think there would be much
advantage for the added complexity and weight. If I was going to run
15HP, I would probably go with it.
If you remember the Motor Canoe in "Different Boats", that would
serve my usage but it just wouldn't look right with plywood
construction. The long covered cowl of the Sneakeasy really sets off
the slab sides while still allowing very light weight. The Motor
Canoe would require a lot more time to build and probably be
heavier.
This boat will probably be a lazy project while recovering from heart
surgery.
I am still trying to decide on side and bottom thickness.
Ron
--- In bolger@yahoogroups. <mailto:bolger%40yahoogroups.com> com, Kristine
Bennett <femmpaws@...> wrote:
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> Ron if you are going to use up to an 8hp motor on the
> boat why not make it 48 inches of beam? I recall in
> BWAOM there were drawings for a Sneakeasy with a
> cutwater keel. In my mind that would be the hull I
> would look at useing.
>
> Yes I know it would not be as long and lean looking as
> the full size Sneakeasy. But if you use it for fishing
> now and then you will be able to stand up in the hull
> to fight the fish and not have a lot of worry flipping
> the hull.
>
> At one point I looked at the Sneakeasy and tossed
> around the same idea a few times, of doing what you
> are planing. There were two things that stopped me,
> there was the lack of time to do a nice job on it and
> not having a DRY place to work on it!
>
> Now I do have a dry place to work and I also have a
> bit more time on my hands. But now I'm waiting on
> aircraft drawings.
>
> I also need to remember you want to keep it light, and
> where you want to store it when it's not in use.
>
> Blessings Kristine
Hi Kristine,
I have seen the cartoon of the shortened Sneakeasy. To me it just
doesn't look right with a 48" beam when it is shortened that much.
Not including the beaver tails, the origional bow to transom/beam
ratio is 6:1. I don't think it would look right or perform right
with a ratio below 5:1. Possibly with more power a shortened but
wide Sneakeasy might perform OK with the box keel but I don't think
it would perform as well off plane. It would be almost like a
Microtrawler or a Hawkeye with a Sneakeasy hood.
Personally, I am not interested in fishing (somehow I missed that
gene from my father) so the 48" beam isn't needed for me. Primary
use will be cruising up the creak and small rivers or shooting across
the bay to Fire Island.
For fishing, if you want something small and light with a box keel,
you might want to look at a lengthened Bolger Bee.
As much as I like the unique look of a box keel, I think at the power
level I am going to be using, I don't think there would be much
advantage for the added complexity and weight. If I was going to run
15HP, I would probably go with it.
If you remember the Motor Canoe in "Different Boats", that would
serve my usage but it just wouldn't look right with plywood
construction. The long covered cowl of the Sneakeasy really sets off
the slab sides while still allowing very light weight. The Motor
Canoe would require a lot more time to build and probably be
heavier.
This boat will probably be a lazy project while recovering from heart
surgery.
I am still trying to decide on side and bottom thickness.
Ron
I have seen the cartoon of the shortened Sneakeasy. To me it just
doesn't look right with a 48" beam when it is shortened that much.
Not including the beaver tails, the origional bow to transom/beam
ratio is 6:1. I don't think it would look right or perform right
with a ratio below 5:1. Possibly with more power a shortened but
wide Sneakeasy might perform OK with the box keel but I don't think
it would perform as well off plane. It would be almost like a
Microtrawler or a Hawkeye with a Sneakeasy hood.
Personally, I am not interested in fishing (somehow I missed that
gene from my father) so the 48" beam isn't needed for me. Primary
use will be cruising up the creak and small rivers or shooting across
the bay to Fire Island.
For fishing, if you want something small and light with a box keel,
you might want to look at a lengthened Bolger Bee.
As much as I like the unique look of a box keel, I think at the power
level I am going to be using, I don't think there would be much
advantage for the added complexity and weight. If I was going to run
15HP, I would probably go with it.
If you remember the Motor Canoe in "Different Boats", that would
serve my usage but it just wouldn't look right with plywood
construction. The long covered cowl of the Sneakeasy really sets off
the slab sides while still allowing very light weight. The Motor
Canoe would require a lot more time to build and probably be
heavier.
This boat will probably be a lazy project while recovering from heart
surgery.
I am still trying to decide on side and bottom thickness.
Ron
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, Kristine Bennett <femmpaws@...> wrote:
>
> Ron if you are going to use up to an 8hp motor on the
> boat why not make it 48 inches of beam? I recall in
> BWAOM there were drawings for a Sneakeasy with a
> cutwater keel. In my mind that would be the hull I
> would look at useing.
>
> Yes I know it would not be as long and lean looking as
> the full size Sneakeasy. But if you use it for fishing
> now and then you will be able to stand up in the hull
> to fight the fish and not have a lot of worry flipping
> the hull.
>
> At one point I looked at the Sneakeasy and tossed
> around the same idea a few times, of doing what you
> are planing. There were two things that stopped me,
> there was the lack of time to do a nice job on it and
> not having a DRY place to work on it!
>
> Now I do have a dry place to work and I also have a
> bit more time on my hands. But now I'm waiting on
> aircraft drawings.
>
> I also need to remember you want to keep it light, and
> where you want to store it when it's not in use.
>
> Blessings Kristine
Hi Dave,
Of course I would sell them (or just give them away depending on how
much work I put into them).
If I just do offset tables, you would need the Payson or Bolger plans
but If I draw it up compleatly, you wouldn't need any other plans.
So far the biggest difference in construction will be in the transom
area to handle the lower freeboard with still the same transom height
and also to optimize cockpit area.
Ron
Of course I would sell them (or just give them away depending on how
much work I put into them).
If I just do offset tables, you would need the Payson or Bolger plans
but If I draw it up compleatly, you wouldn't need any other plans.
So far the biggest difference in construction will be in the transom
area to handle the lower freeboard with still the same transom height
and also to optimize cockpit area.
Ron
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, dave seeton <daveseeton@...> wrote:
>
> Once you get the figures right would you sell them? I love the S-
Easy style but it's to large for my garage. Would I need to buy the
plans from Payson & the mods from you or could you sell me the plans
& mods complete?
> Thanks
> Dave
Ron if you are going to use up to an 8hp motor on the
boat why not make it 48 inches of beam? I recall in
BWAOM there were drawings for a Sneakeasy with a
cutwater keel. In my mind that would be the hull I
would look at useing.
Yes I know it would not be as long and lean looking as
the full size Sneakeasy. But if you use it for fishing
now and then you will be able to stand up in the hull
to fight the fish and not have a lot of worry flipping
the hull.
At one point I looked at the Sneakeasy and tossed
around the same idea a few times, of doing what you
are planing. There were two things that stopped me,
there was the lack of time to do a nice job on it and
not having a DRY place to work on it!
Now I do have a dry place to work and I also have a
bit more time on my hands. But now I'm waiting on
aircraft drawings.
I also need to remember you want to keep it light, and
where you want to store it when it's not in use.
Blessings Kristine
--- Ron Schroeder <rjs@...> wrote:
Park yourself in front of a world of choices in alternative vehicles. Visit the Yahoo! Auto Green Center.
http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/
boat why not make it 48 inches of beam? I recall in
BWAOM there were drawings for a Sneakeasy with a
cutwater keel. In my mind that would be the hull I
would look at useing.
Yes I know it would not be as long and lean looking as
the full size Sneakeasy. But if you use it for fishing
now and then you will be able to stand up in the hull
to fight the fish and not have a lot of worry flipping
the hull.
At one point I looked at the Sneakeasy and tossed
around the same idea a few times, of doing what you
are planing. There were two things that stopped me,
there was the lack of time to do a nice job on it and
not having a DRY place to work on it!
Now I do have a dry place to work and I also have a
bit more time on my hands. But now I'm waiting on
aircraft drawings.
I also need to remember you want to keep it light, and
where you want to store it when it's not in use.
Blessings Kristine
--- Ron Schroeder <rjs@...> wrote:
> Well, I started drawing up a smaller Sneakeasy that____________________________________________________________________________________
> I can drag up the
> beach. I am going for just barely under 20 feet
> overall length and
> about 18' bow to transom (.75 of origional length)
> or 18'10" over all
> length and about 17' bow to transom (.708 of
> origional length). This
> would be 18" or 17" respectivly between stations
> rather than 24".
> Width at waterline will be between 3' and 3'6" to
> keep nearly the same
> long lean proportions and be able to be stored
> between canoes.
> Freeboard will be .80 of origional and will allow 2
> sides to be cut
> from 48" wide plywood. I will probably increase
> forward rocker by
> about 10% to get about 800 pounds displacement at
> the same draft as the
> 26' 6" origional.
>
> I am trying to decide on 4mm sides/6mm bottom or 6mm
> sides/ 9mm
> bottom. Power will be either an 8HP outboard or
> electric drive.
>
> I will probably calculate up a set of tables for a
> 17' x 32" version if
> anybody is interested.
>
>
Park yourself in front of a world of choices in alternative vehicles. Visit the Yahoo! Auto Green Center.
http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/
Once you get the figures right would you sell them? I love the S-Easy style but it's to large for my garage. Would I need to buy the plans from Payson & the mods from you or could you sell me the plans & mods complete?
Thanks
Dave
Ron Schroeder <rjs@...> wrote: Well, I started drawing up a smaller Sneakeasy that I can drag up the
beach. I am going for just barely under 20 feet overall length and
about 18' bow to transom (.75 of origional length) or 18'10" over all
length and about 17' bow to transom (.708 of origional length). This
would be 18" or 17" respectivly between stations rather than 24".
Width at waterline will be between 3' and 3'6" to keep nearly the same
long lean proportions and be able to be stored between canoes.
Freeboard will be .80 of origional and will allow 2 sides to be cut
from 48" wide plywood. I will probably increase forward rocker by
about 10% to get about 800 pounds displacement at the same draft as the
26' 6" origional.
I am trying to decide on 4mm sides/6mm bottom or 6mm sides/ 9mm
bottom. Power will be either an 8HP outboard or electric drive.
I will probably calculate up a set of tables for a 17' x 32" version if
anybody is interested.
---------------------------------
Yahoo! oneSearch: Finally, mobile search that gives answers, not web links.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Thanks
Dave
Ron Schroeder <rjs@...> wrote: Well, I started drawing up a smaller Sneakeasy that I can drag up the
beach. I am going for just barely under 20 feet overall length and
about 18' bow to transom (.75 of origional length) or 18'10" over all
length and about 17' bow to transom (.708 of origional length). This
would be 18" or 17" respectivly between stations rather than 24".
Width at waterline will be between 3' and 3'6" to keep nearly the same
long lean proportions and be able to be stored between canoes.
Freeboard will be .80 of origional and will allow 2 sides to be cut
from 48" wide plywood. I will probably increase forward rocker by
about 10% to get about 800 pounds displacement at the same draft as the
26' 6" origional.
I am trying to decide on 4mm sides/6mm bottom or 6mm sides/ 9mm
bottom. Power will be either an 8HP outboard or electric drive.
I will probably calculate up a set of tables for a 17' x 32" version if
anybody is interested.
---------------------------------
Yahoo! oneSearch: Finally, mobile search that gives answers, not web links.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Well, I started drawing up a smaller Sneakeasy that I can drag up the
beach. I am going for just barely under 20 feet overall length and
about 18' bow to transom (.75 of origional length) or 18'10" over all
length and about 17' bow to transom (.708 of origional length). This
would be 18" or 17" respectivly between stations rather than 24".
Width at waterline will be between 3' and 3'6" to keep nearly the same
long lean proportions and be able to be stored between canoes.
Freeboard will be .80 of origional and will allow 2 sides to be cut
from 48" wide plywood. I will probably increase forward rocker by
about 10% to get about 800 pounds displacement at the same draft as the
26' 6" origional.
I am trying to decide on 4mm sides/6mm bottom or 6mm sides/ 9mm
bottom. Power will be either an 8HP outboard or electric drive.
I will probably calculate up a set of tables for a 17' x 32" version if
anybody is interested.
beach. I am going for just barely under 20 feet overall length and
about 18' bow to transom (.75 of origional length) or 18'10" over all
length and about 17' bow to transom (.708 of origional length). This
would be 18" or 17" respectivly between stations rather than 24".
Width at waterline will be between 3' and 3'6" to keep nearly the same
long lean proportions and be able to be stored between canoes.
Freeboard will be .80 of origional and will allow 2 sides to be cut
from 48" wide plywood. I will probably increase forward rocker by
about 10% to get about 800 pounds displacement at the same draft as the
26' 6" origional.
I am trying to decide on 4mm sides/6mm bottom or 6mm sides/ 9mm
bottom. Power will be either an 8HP outboard or electric drive.
I will probably calculate up a set of tables for a 17' x 32" version if
anybody is interested.