Re: Suzuki DF4 vs. DF6
Bruce in Bangkok
<jay-smi...@excite.com> wrote:
>I'm not certain what I'm talking about her would qualify as
>"cruising," maybe "slow cruising" but here's my query.
>
>We have a 14' open aluminum boat that weighs about 195 lbs. (the same
>style one sees for rowboat rentals at lots of marinas) and we never
>have a total payload (passengers and gear) that exceeds about 480
>lbs.
>
>Most of our boating is putting around the lake about 3-5 mph
>(depending on how much Sunny Delight I've guzzled before starting to
>row -- lol), sometimes just dropping anchor and relaxing for a book
>read or a quick nap.
>
>So, the point here is that I'm getting tired of rowing and am looking
>for a small outboard that'll shove that 14 footer around the lake at
>trolling speed. No need to plane, just putting along about like we
>did when I was rowing.
>
>I understand that Suzuki 4-stroke outboards have a good reputation and
>am trying to decide between the DF4 or the DF6. They both have the
>exact same displacement motor and I would like to go with the 4HP
>(less money) if it would do the job.
>
>Remember now, we're talking about the first notch above rowing speed,
>nothing more! Maybe I could even fit the DF4 with a propeller with
>more of a low-end torque pitch?
>
>So it's just between the two motors---the DF4 or the DF6? Anyone had
>experience with either or both of those two specific motors and can
>offer some insight as to the better of the two for our very limited
>purpose? Thanx.
>
>-Jay
One of the most common outboards on cruising yachts are 2 HP engines.
A 4 HP will push you boar at walking speed quire easily.
Bruce-in-Bangkok
(correct email address for reply)
Don White
"Bruce in Bangkok" <b*paige*125@g*mail.com> wrote in message
news:ds0fv3phjvgb7tfkq...@4ax.com...
A good high thrust outboard suitable for displacement hulls would do.
Too bad the British Seagull people went out of business.
I have a 14.5' open aluminum boat with a 25hp Johnson, but will carry my 54
year old 40 Plus as a kicker. (3hp)
Gordon
Go electric!
G
Bruce in Bangkok
I hate to sound like an old man (even if I am) but in my younger days
a 5 H.P. motor was considered a "fishing boat" motor. A fishing boat
being a well built (i.e., heavy) wooden 14 - 16 foot boat. Now 'a days
it seems to take at least 50 H.P to push he same boat -- maybe the
horses are getting smaller?
Wilbur Hubbard
>> I hate to sound like an old man (even if I am) but in my younger days
> a 5 H.P. motor was considered a "fishing boat" motor. A fishing boat
> being a well built (i.e., heavy) wooden 14 - 16 foot boat. Now 'a days
> it seems to take at least 50 H.P to push he same boat -- maybe the
> horses are getting smaller?
In your younger days motors ran on steam!
Wilbur Hubbard
Don White
"Jay" <jay-smi...@excite.com> wrote in message
news:f40d3b28-a90e-4c83...@8g2000hsu.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 5, 8:09 am, Gordon <gaz...@olypen.com> wrote:
> Go electric!
> G
<<<I have a 30 lb. thrust Minn-Kota we used on a dinghy we once had
but didn't think that would even budge the 14' aluminum boat. What
thrust rating would you think it would take in an electric to achieve
the same speed/power as the 4HP Suzuki DF4M?
My 2004 Princecraft Yukon (14.5' open aluminum boat) came with an electric
trolling motor.. and from what I've seen it's only good for creeping along
as long as you're in protected calm water with no wind. I use it to take me
from the launch ramp to a nearby dock and back again when it's time to
retrieve.
I think oars would do just as good a job and be more reliable.
Bruce in Bangkok
<jay-smi...@excite.com> wrote:
>On Apr 5, 7:20 pm, "Wilbur Hubbard" <wilburhubb...@thefarm.invalid>
>wrote:
>> "Bruce in Bangkok" <b*paige*125@g*mail.com> wrote in messagenews:lhcgv3tmnc4on4g66...@4ax.com...
>>
>> >> I hate to sound like an old man (even if I am) but in my younger days
>> > a 5 H.P. motor was considered a "fishing boat" motor. A fishing boat
>> > being a well built (i.e., heavy) wooden 14 - 16 foot boat. Now 'a days
>> > it seems to take at least 50 H.P to push he same boat -- maybe the
>> > horses are getting smaller?
>>
>> In your younger days motors ran on steam!
>>
>> Wilbur Hubbard
>
><<<<Bruce, was Wilbur being unkind to you? Actually, the horses
>aren't getting smaller, it's just that the hardwiring in the brains of
>some today can only produce one thought---there is no substitute for
>having the biggest one in the group. Although they're talking about
>their boat motors, we all know the basis for that psychological
>affliction of only the biggest is the best. LOLOL But all we wanna
>do is putt-putt-putt around the nice quiet, placid lake and soak up
>some rays...no water skiing, no planing, no drag racing, no attempts
>to cross the Pacific via Hawaii...just putt, putt, putt, putt, putt,
>putt....................................so ya think the DF4 will do
>that huh?
>
>-Jay
Actually I have Willie-boy kill filed so the only time I see his
messages are when someone quotes him. Strangely, I don't miss him at
all :-)
No, when I was a young fella outboards were the thing.
I have seen an 18 ft. dory with an inboard, New Foundland built, one
cylinder engine with an external flywheel and crank, directly coupled
to the prop shaft . If you retarded the spark (and you were both
adroit and lucky) you could get the thing to stall and restart in
reverse. Probably a four H.P. engine and the guy was running abou100
lobster traps with the boat - pulling 50 traps a day -- by hand.
Funny how people used to get along without the SUV's and color TV. My
grandpa cut all the wood to heat a two bedroom house in upstate New
England, by himself. Took most of the month of September. With a hand
saw and an axe and he was in his 70's. Never owned a chain saw.
Don White
probably an old 'Make & Break' engine... once popular and a familiar sound
in the Maritimes and Newfoundland.
http://www.gasenginemagazine.com/complete-archive/3908/
http://museum.gov.ns.ca/fma/gallery-pages/aeng.html
Bruce in Bangkok
The second URL is the engine I remember (except it had a longer shaft
and no holes in the bock :-) From what some of the older fishermen
said they were the engine of choice at one time.
Jere Lull
> Rats! I was hoping that at least one member of this group would have
> had personal experience with the Suzuki portable outboards, especially
> the 4hp and the 6hp to offer some insights as to their functionality,
> endurance, noise level, trolling , etc. Haven't received too many
> replies in the other boat group either so guess Suzuki's don't have
> that many users. Thanx to the ones who responded though. Jay
I don't have direct experience with them, but if you really are just
trolling around, the 4 will beat oars handily.
MY concern with any outboard is that you have adequate support where
you live and/or cruise. We have a wonderful ancient Honda, but no
dealers that I can get to without taking time off of work.
I'd feel safest with two nearby shops with good reputations, and at
least one day they're open past 5 PM.
--
Jere Lull
Tanzer 28 #4 out of Tolchester, MD
Xan's pages: http://web.mac.com/jerelull/iWeb/Xan/
Our BVI trips & tips: http://homepage.mac.com/jerelull/BVI/
Bruce in Bangkok
<jay-smi...@excite.com> wrote:
>Forgot to mention a harebrained (?) idea a friend of mine had. He
>said to just putt-putt that 14 footer around these calm ponds in the
>area all I would need would be the Suzuki 2.5 HP but that sounds more
>like a motor for an inflatable, dinghy or a little 8 or 10 foot Walker
>Bay to me.
>
>He also mentioned that if I was going to shell out a $1100 for the
>Suzuki DF4, I should pick up the Briggs and Stratton 5HP online for
>$750 delivered. (One more horse at work for $350 less). Hmmmm...too
>many damn decisions.
>-Jay
I think your problem is in your description of what you want to do. I
have a Mercury 3 H.P. and I'll guarantee it will push your boat around
a lake. Not too quickly, but it will push it and since speed will be
more a factor of water line length then anything else the 2.5/3 H.P
will probably push your 14 footer about as fast as my 8 foot dinghy
(with the same number of people aboard).
The Briggs & Stratton will probably work as well as anything and last
as long. At least for the weekend and holiday use you will likely put
it to. Or get a good used second hand 4 - 5 H.P. if you can locate
one.
Wayne.B
<b*paige*125@g*mail.com> wrote:
>The Briggs & Stratton will probably work as well as anything and last
>as long. At least for the weekend and holiday use you will likely put
>it to. Or get a good used second hand 4 - 5 H.P. if you can locate
>one.
The Briggs and Stratton is air cooled and *very* noisy. I think it
would be a poor choice. The 2.5 will definitely move you around
although not very fast. If you want to optimize light weight and low
cost the 2.5 would be the best option (if you have dealer support).
For low speed on a small pond you might be happy with an electric
trolling motor and a deep cycle battery.
Vic Smith
<waynebatr...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 08 Apr 2008 17:44:36 +0700, Bruce in Bangkok
><b*paige*125@g*mail.com> wrote:
>
>>The Briggs & Stratton will probably work as well as anything and last
>>as long. At least for the weekend and holiday use you will likely put
>>it to. Or get a good used second hand 4 - 5 H.P. if you can locate
>>one.
>
>The Briggs and Stratton is air cooled and *very* noisy. I think it
>would be a poor choice. The 2.5 will definitely move you around
>although not very fast. If you want to optimize light weight and low
>cost the 2.5 would be the best option (if you have dealer support).
>
Second that. Ran an air-cooled 5hp for years. Cheap Sears thing.
Always regretted not kicking in the extra cash for a water cooled.
It was noisy as hell.
--Vic
Ryk
<dpumv3hjpgio82trr...@4ax.com>
Vic Smith <thismaila...@comcast.net> wrote:
The two horse Honda I had stolen last year was surprisingly quiet,
even though air cooled. I just bought a Suzuki 2.5, but haven't had
the chance to use it just yet -- the harbour's still full of ice.
Ryk
Bruce in Bangkok
On the other hand, I'll bet you that the water pump impeller never
wore out :-)
Jere Lull
> The Briggs & Stratton will probably work as well as anything and last
> as long. At least for the weekend and holiday use you will likely put
> it to. Or get a good used second hand 4 - 5 H.P. if you can locate
> one.
A B&S outboard? It's been years since I had a gas lawnmower (went
electric 20 years ago), but I wonder how reliable they are and how
easily serviced....
Search shows they're air cooled & OHV, so they're a bit different than
way back when.
Anyone have experience with them?
cavelamb himself
> On 2008-04-08 06:44:36 -0400, Bruce in Bangkok <b*paige*125@g*mail.com>
> said:
>
>> The Briggs & Stratton will probably work as well as anything and last
>> as long. At least for the weekend and holiday use you will likely put
>> it to. Or get a good used second hand 4 - 5 H.P. if you can locate
>> one.
>
>
> A B&S outboard? It's been years since I had a gas lawnmower (went
> electric 20 years ago), but I wonder how reliable they are and how
> easily serviced....
>
> Search shows they're air cooled & OHV, so they're a bit different than
> way back when.
>
> Anyone have experience with them?
>
I've had two of them.
One was an old beater used in salt water (a no-no for this engine)
Never missed a beat, though.
Just not quite as stong as...
The other one was brand new from Academy - on sale for $650)
Up Side:
It's a Briggs.
Starts, runs, does exactly what it's supposed to do.
Service centers everywhere.
It's a 4 stroke engine - no oil mixed in the gas.
Reliable as can be.
Lots-O-Torque.
This was the motor on my Capri 18 - 1500 pounds of small boat.
It would make hull speed at about 75% power
and could push the boat into a 25 mph headwind at a couple knots.
Strong motor...
Electronic RPM limiter to prevent damage from overspeed - like
when the prop comes out of the water or you turn and cavitate.
VERY miserly fuel consumption compared to equal powered two strokes.
ANd lastly, no water pick up for engine cooling - no exhaust water
tube either. A bit lowder, maybe at full boil, but not bad.
Down Side:
It's a 4 stroke, so it has oil in the sump.
You can't lay it down on it's side like a two stroke.
It's heavy for a 5 horse at 56 pounds.
External fuel tank required.
For what that's worth...
Richard
Motor mods page:
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~cavelamb/c18-mot.htm#top
--
(remove the X to email)
Now just why the HELL do I have to press 1 for English?
John Wayne
Vic Smith
True enough! To be more clear, I never did any maintenance on it
except change the plug and gear oil a couple times.
It was very light - maybe 40 lbs. - and reliable.
I would toss it in the trunk a few times a year and clamp it on rented
boats at different fishing spots in north Illinois and Wisconsin.
It shook pretty bad at trolling speed, and since the thing is a few
feet from your head, the noise can wear on you.
Bought it new at Sears in '71 I think, for about 189 bucks.
5 hp Johnsons/Evinrudes/Mercs cost about 3-4 times as much then.
So all considered, I really don't want to bitch about it. I made my
bed, and was actually a bit fond of it.
Wouldn't do it now though, and it *was* noisy.
--Vic
Richard Casady
>On 2008-04-08 06:44:36 -0400, Bruce in Bangkok <b*paige*125@g*mail.com> said:
>
>> The Briggs & Stratton will probably work as well as anything and last
>> as long. At least for the weekend and holiday use you will likely put
>> it to. Or get a good used second hand 4 - 5 H.P. if you can locate
>> one.
>
>A B&S outboard? It's been years since I had a gas lawnmower (went
>electric 20 years ago), but I wonder how reliable they are and how
>easily serviced....
>
>Search shows they're air cooled & OHV, so they're a bit different than
>way back when.
>
>Anyone have experience with them?
.
I had a go cart with a 5 HP Briggs. It burned methanol and needless to
say, had lots of power. Of course it drank like a fish,
Casady
Ryk
<5a9f0963-56af-42a8...@e39g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>
Jay <jay-smi...@excite.com> wrote:
>On Apr 8, 12:49 pm, Ryk <r...@wellingtonhouse.org> wrote: I just
>bought a Suzuki 2.5, but haven't had the chance to use it just yet --
>the harbour's still full of ice.
>> Ryk
>
><<<Well, jeez, call the U.S.Navy or someone and get them there with
>the icebreaker. I need a report on that Suzuki 2.5 HP! -Jay
Given the record of the US Military (as directed by the US Government)
I am reluctant to invite them anywhere off campus for polite
assistance except in dire need. The ice is going out fine on its own,
thanks...
Ryk
Bruce in Bangkok
<jay-smi...@excite.com> wrote:
>Not trying to gum up the motor search too much but have one more
>possibility to offer the great boating minds on rec.boats.cruising.
>At least you folks answer. On rec.boats, there's hardly a peep. But
>it's already April and I gotta get a motor on my machine so I can give
>up those $%$#$ oars!
>
>At a local boat/motor store I found a brand-new in the box 2005
>Tohatsu 3.5B (3.5 HP 2-stroke, 75 cc 1-cylinder) outboard for about
>$500. It has forward/neutral only (360 degree steering), a 2:15:1
>gear ratio, 7.4" diameter x 7" pitch prop, built-in .37 gallon gas
>tank, 47 x 43 mm bore and stroke, 4200-5300 rpms and weighs in at 29
>lbs.
>
>So whaddya think? If some say the Suzuki 4hp and even the 2.5 hp
>would push that 14 footer around the nice quiet lake at 5-6 mph,
>wouldn't that screamin' Tohatsu 3.5 hp two-stroke do the job too?
>BTW, the exhaust is under the water.
>
>-Jay
>(Still keeping one eye on the boat and the other on his wallet).
The Tohatsu 2 - 3 H.P. motors are probably the most commonly seen
dinghy motor on cruising yachts in this area. They are extremely
reliable. Probably the most common problem is leaving fuel in the tank
while the motor is hanging on the stern rail for a season and getting
the carb gummed up. Taking it off and washing with fresh gasoline
usually cleans it.
I've seen them used on 12 - 14 ft. fiberglass boats, in fact there is
one that has been tying up down the jetty for three years or more so I
guess the guy is happy with it.
My Mercury 3.5 is basically the same motor and it has been running for
10 years now.
If it were for sale here I would buy it.
Phan...@nospam.invalid
>For low speed on a small pond you might be happy with an electric
>trolling motor and a deep cycle battery.
That's what I've been thiinkin' from the start.
What's wrong with that idea?
Rick
Bruce in Bangkok
Mostly that a can of gas is a lot easier to wrestle down the dock and
into the boat then a truck battery.
Phan...@nospam.invalid
>into the boat then a truck battery.
Under most circumstances I would agree. But for his fairly specific
single purpose (small boat, small lake, prolly doesn't even HAVE a
dock), a small non-spill battery would suffice. And it, plus a
trolling motor, would be easier to wrestle than an outboard, never
mind the gas tank. And for a lot less money to purchase AND maintain
over the years. Btw, he could just leave the battery in the boat with
a $10 solar panel during the week. Maybe I've got the wrong picture of
the situation though.
Rick
Richard Casady
>On Fri, 11 Apr 08 Bruce in Bangkok
>>Mostly that a can of gas is a lot easier to wrestle down the dock and
>>into the boat then a truck battery.
Gas engines drink about 1/2 pound per HP per hour. One pound of gas
delivers as much energy as a 125 AH battery. A 5gal can of gas equals
more than` a ton of batteries.
>
>Under most circumstances I would agree. But for his fairly specific
>single purpose (small boat, small lake, prolly doesn't even HAVE a
>dock), a small non-spill battery would suffice.
Maybe
I think you might be overestimating the energy content of batteries.
> And it, plus a
>trolling motor, would be easier to wrestle than an outboard, never
>mind the gas tank.
A five horse gas engine weighs less than a useful size battery [50
lbs]
>And for a lot less money to purchase AND maintain
This is likely true.
>over the years. Btw, he could just leave the battery in the boat with
>a $10 solar panel during the week.
You underestimate the size and cost of a useful size solar panel by a
large factor.
> Maybe I've got the wrong picture of the situation though.
The trolling motor would not buck a headwind very well, or at all.
Range would be tiny.
I have the 'calculator that takes no prisoners' the HP 48. It is big
enough to fit a hand, and the keys are far enough apart. It has the
conversion from HP to watts, and lots more. Highly recommended if you
like to post on technical matters. [1 HP equals 745 watts]..
I have used a trolling motor, for trolling, with a 16 foot runabout.
It also had a 10 horse gas engine.
Casady
Jere Lull
Casady) said:
>> over the years. Btw, he could just leave the battery in the boat with
>> a $10 solar panel during the week.
>
> You underestimate the size and cost of a useful size solar panel by a
> large factor.
I was going to disagree with your post, but luckily re-read it.
IF electric could serve his purposes, a little 12w panel would normally
recharge 100 or so amps between weekends. That happens to be our setup
and it's worked like a charm for a few years. (Our 12w panel cost a bit
more than $10, though.)
Something I haven't pursued, though, is that I recall someone saying
that VWs are shipped with small solar cells to keep their batteries up,
and that those cells can be gotten for very cheap. A few of those might
be sufficient, and may cost in the $10 range.
Phan...@nospam.invalid
>> You underestimate the size and cost of a useful size solar panel by a
>> large factor.
Jere Lull wrote
>IF electric could serve his purposes, a little 12w panel would normally
>recharge 100 or so amps between weekends. That happens to be our setup
>and it's worked like a charm for a few years. (Our 12w panel cost a bit
>more than $10, though.)
I thought he just wants something to free up his hands. Not an
increase in power or range. Normally, you don't think of oars for
range or to be used against headwinds or current or tides. None of
which will he likely encounter on a small lake anyway (I'm thinkin'
SMALL lake). And on a 14' 195 lb open boat? Even 2.5hp would be a
big increase in power over oars..I'm just sayin', it takes very little
mechanical effort to do the same job as oars on a small lake with a
boat that small/light. -shrug- but maybe I'm misunderstanding what
he's trying to accomplish.
Rick
Richard Casady
My family has three outboard motors a 1/2, a one, and a three. T.he 5
1/2 went to Davey Jones locker, with a nice fiberglass duckboat.
Casady
Richard Casady
>> You underestimate the size and cost of a useful size solar panel by a
>> large factor.
Maybe a small one would do, and how much do they cost? I should have
found out before I posted. Large factor may be too strong. It depends
on some unknowns.
>I was going to disagree with your post, but luckily re-read it.
>
>IF electric could serve his purposes, a little 12w panel would normally
>recharge 100 or so amps between weekends. That happens to be our setup
>and it's worked like a charm for a few years. (Our 12w panel cost a bit
>more than $10, though.):
Maybe. I never put it to the test, I just do a few calculations.
Since you need 125 AH to charge the battery that much, and there are
only 168 hours in a week, it would seem those are some strong healthy
watts. 12 regular watts give you just one amp, and what about not
always facing the sun squarely? Days _are_ longer during the summer,
when most of the boating takes place, of course. Whatever, it might be
enough, if the power required is small. We are both guessing about
that all important figure In any case, that would require maybe an 8D
battery, at 150 lbs, If you don't run it down below half.
I figure a solar panel should be big enough to run a small ventilation
fan, pump out any rainwater or leakage, and run an anchor light as
well as just keep a battery charged.. However big that is. What do
solar cells cost these days? I understand lead batteries have the
lowest self discharge rate of any type rechargable battery, by the
way.
It is true that a battery will last longer if kept fully charged,
maybe saving enough to cover the solar cells. [Dream on, nothing on a
boat is cheap, let alone free]
Casady.
Bruce in Bangkok
>On 2008-04-12 11:56:41 -0400, richar...@earthlink.net (Richard
>Casady) said:
>
>>> over the years. Btw, he could just leave the battery in the boat with
>>> a $10 solar panel during the week.
>>
>> You underestimate the size and cost of a useful size solar panel by a
>> large factor.
>
>I was going to disagree with your post, but luckily re-read it.
>
>IF electric could serve his purposes, a little 12w panel would normally
>recharge 100 or so amps between weekends. That happens to be our setup
>and it's worked like a charm for a few years. (Our 12w panel cost a bit
>more than $10, though.)
>
>Something I haven't pursued, though, is that I recall someone saying
>that VWs are shipped with small solar cells to keep their batteries up,
>and that those cells can be gotten for very cheap. A few of those might
>be sufficient, and may cost in the $10 range.
Then, along comes the three day weekend and the guy wants to use the
boat three days in a row......
Or to put it another way, I know a lot of people who's only source of
power is an internal combustion engine but I don't know anyone who's
only source of power is a solar panel.
Marty
>
> I have the 'calculator that takes no prisoners' the HP 48. It is big
> enough to fit a hand, and the keys are far enough apart. It has the
> conversion from HP to watts, and lots more. Highly recommended if you
> like to post on technical matters. [1 HP equals 745 watts]..
Time to get that '48 calibrated, 1 Hp = 745.69987, even if you round it
to three significant figures you 746. (I know, nitpicking)
Cheers
Marty
Marty
>
> So whaddya think? If some say the Suzuki 4hp and even the 2.5 hp
> would push that 14 footer around the nice quiet lake at 5-6 mph,
> wouldn't that screamin' Tohatsu 3.5 hp two-stroke do the job too?
> BTW, the exhaust is under the water.
Capital Jay! I push a 14' Al. all over the bay I live on with an old 2
HP Evenrude, works just fine. Hell I've towed a 27' 6500lb sailboat with it.
Cheers
Marty
Phan...@nospam.invalid
>if the power required is small. We are both guessing about
>that all important figure In any case, that would require maybe an 8D
>battery, at 150 lbs, If you don't run it down below half.
>I figure a solar panel should be big enough to run a small ventilation
>fan, pump out any rainwater or leakage, and run an anchor light as
>well as just keep a battery charged.
Somehow, my reading of the OPs message gave me a completely different
impression. No mention of anchor light, ventilation, bilge pump, none
of that. Just a simple row boat that he wants to push with power
instead of oars. Just wants to putter around a bit, anchor a bit,
snooze, read, and float. No range increase and no speed increase
necessary. Ufortunately, no mention of a number of details like
whether or not he trailers the boat or how/where he stores it.
So I made some assumptions (and I should never have mentioned solar
panel). I'm thinkin' 40-50 lb battery, not 150 lb. No electrical drain
other than the trolling motor. Leave the battery in the boat on a
trailer, (or not, remember it's only 40-50lbs) use a 110v battery
charger to keep it up if a solar panel won't do. It's just a simple
row boat.
I have a 14' fiberglass skiff that's 225 lbs. I can almost plane it
with a 6hp Evinrude if I sit amidships with a tiller extension (I'm
170 lbs). So I know 6hp is a lot more than he wants. From his post,
I'm thinkin' even 2.5 is more than adequate for his needs..
Anyhow, you're right. We're all guessing ... and plugging our own
wants and needs into his situation.
Rick
Phan...@nospam.invalid
>you're understanding perfectly what I'm looking for.
>Something that will provide push a notch above oars and save me from
>rowing.
Nice boat :-)
Frankly, I don't think you can go wrong with anything that's been
mentioned so far. By the sounds of your current needs, electric will
work fine. And it has price and maintenance advantages over gas.
Problem is, your boat has potential to be so much more. If you think
you may ever expand your horizons, you might do better spending the
extra $$ now on gas, just in case.
Electric is almost dead silent. I would especially like that on a
small quiet lake. And if you store it for years, it'll work when you
drag it out. Gas can be more cantankerous when out of mind for that
long. There's advantages/disadvantages to both.
Another consideration. It's natural for people to want more than they
have. We'll always want something a little bigger, a little faster, a
little more. So if you fall into that category, you might as well
consider 15-20hp and be done with it lol! OR go electric for very few
dollars now and start saving for when the expansion bug bites. You
have no wrong options here (nothing wrong with oars either).
My 2 cents............. ;-)
Rick
Phan...@nospam.invalid
>I already own a 30 lb. thrust Minn-Kota electric motor and have a
>big marine deep cycle battery but didn't think that would even get the
>Guide V14 moving at all.
Try it!
And let us know. Don't forget to take your oars just in case lol!
On a lake with no wind, no current, and a fresh battery, 30lbs will
move it. Maybe not fast enough (I had 40-50 lbs in mind), but since
you already have it, it won't cost a dime to experiment. There's no
better way to find out what it'll do.
What do you use your trolling motor for currently? (I'm thinking about
30lbs for my canoe).
Meanwhile, sounds like you're set on a gasoline engine and there's
certainly nothing wrong with that idea. To each his own.
(but seriously, just try 30lbs and let us know)
Rick
Edgar
On A
"Jay" <jay-smi...@excite.com> wrote in message
news:d408ebdb-ce34-4ac7...@k1g2000prb.googlegroups.com...
<<<Not true, there IS something wrong with oars. I have to use my
arms and hands to make them move! That's what this whole gig is
about.
Oars are the way to go if you have a decent dinghy and decent oars to row it
with. I have proper dinghies and have often rowed out to my boat on the
mooring and got there before the other guy had mounted his o/b and got it
running to try and catch up with me..
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
Suzuki's DF2.5 is the world's most fuel efficient tender outboard,
reports Andrew Norton
The DF2.5 is the smallest and lightest four-stroke outboard Suzuki
Marine has released. Weighing just 30 lbs., the DF2.5 has a 68cc
single-cylinder OHV powerhead with thermostatically-controlled
watercooling.
For cases where a motor is needed (inflatable dinghy with lousy plastic
oars)I have a Yamaha F2.5a. Nice little four-stroke motor which does all
that you say but is a bit heavier at 371/2 lb.
And for a seldom used 2.5 hp o/b fuel consumption is hardly an issue.
Jere Lull
> Decisions, decisions.....any preferences out there for one of
> these if my 30 lb. Minn-Kota electric won't push it around with 500
> lbs. on board?
If you've got the electric already, why not try it and see how it
works? From what you say, it sounds good enough, but only you can
accurately assess that.
30 pounds continuous could get our 28 footer moving at perhaps a knot
or two in flat water.
Richard Casady
<jay-smi...@excite.com> wrote:
>On Apr 14, 5:50 pm, Jere Lull <jerel...@mac.com> wrote: If you've got
>the electric already, why not try it and see how it works? From what
>you say, it sounds good enough, but only you can accurately assess
>that. 30 pounds continuous could get our 28 footer moving at perhaps
>a knot or two in flat water.
>> Jere Lull
>
>
><<<I'll give it a try. Does anyone know of a formula to roughly
>equate electric motors to horsepower? Would be curious as to the
>horsepower equivalent of my Minn-Kota Endura 30. -J
Yes. Pounds of thrust times speed in feet per second equals foot
pounds per second. 550 of them equals one HP. And its not 'roughly',
its exact. It is also true that 746 watts equals one HP.Thats rounded
off.
Casady
Brian Whatcott
<jay-smi...@excite.com> wrote:
>On Apr 14, 5:50 pm, Jere Lull <jerel...@mac.com> wrote: If you've got
>the electric already, why not try it and see how it works? From what
>you say, it sounds good enough, but only you can accurately assess
>that. 30 pounds continuous could get our 28 footer moving at perhaps
>a knot or two in flat water.
>> Jere Lull
>
>
><<<I'll give it a try. Does anyone know of a formula to roughly
>equate electric motors to horsepower? Would be curious as to the
>horsepower equivalent of my Minn-Kota Endura 30. -J
Thrust is a treacherous unit for power. It needs an effective speed to
make it sufficiently specified.
30 lb thrust at 2 mph =
134 Newton at 0.9 meters/second =
120 watts =
1/4 HP (say)
But: 30 lb thrust at 4 mph = closer to 1/2 HP.
Brian W
Martin Baxter
> On Apr 14, 5:50 pm, Jere Lull <jerel...@mac.com> wrote: If you've got
> the electric already, why not try it and see how it works? From what
> you say, it sounds good enough, but only you can accurately assess
> that. 30 pounds continuous could get our 28 footer moving at perhaps
> a knot or two in flat water.
>
>
> <<<I'll give it a try. Does anyone know of a formula to roughly
> equate electric motors to horsepower? Would be curious as to the
> horsepower equivalent of my Minn-Kota Endura 30. -J
>
The easiest way would be to find out much current the thing uses.
I*E=P, assume about 90% effeciency, so HP= (P*0.9)/746
If you want that in simpler terms HP= ((volts x amps)*0.9)/746
Cheers
Marty
------------ And now a word from our sponsor ------------------
Want to have instant messaging, and chat rooms, and discussion
groups for your local users or business, you need dbabble!
-- See http://netwinsite.com/sponsor/sponsor_dbabble.htm ----
Martin Baxter
>>>
>> The easiest way would be to find out much current the thing uses.
>>
>> I*E=P, assume about 90% effeciency, so HP= (P*0.9)/746
>>
>> If you want that in simpler terms HP= ((volts x amps)*0.9)/746
>>
>> Cheers
>> Marty
>
>
> produced directly at the prop. There is significant power loss in a
> gas outboard between where it is produced and the prop that does the
> work.
Hmm, I don't really know, but I don't think the losses should be all
that big, one little water pump to turn, on set of crown and pinion
gears. Intuitively I don't think you'd lose more than 15%..
I'll bet that most outboard manufactures measure output of just the
head, no shaft, no water pump.
Cheers
Marty
>
>
------------ And now a word from our sponsor ------------------
For a quality usenet news server, try DNEWS, easy to install,
fast, efficient and reliable. For home servers or carrier class
installations with millions of users it will allow you to grow!
---- See http://netwinsite.com/sponsor/sponsor_dnews.htm ----
Edgar
"Martin Baxter" <baxt...@rmc.ca> wrote in message
news:4804bfbc$1...@win9.rmc.ca...
>> Don't leave out the fact that the electric trolling motor power is
>> produced directly at the prop. There is significant power loss in a
>> gas outboard between where it is produced and the prop that does the
>> work.
>
> Hmm, I don't really know, but I don't think the losses should be all that
> big, one little water pump to turn, on set of crown and pinion gears.
> Intuitively I don't think you'd lose more than 15%..
>
> I'll bet that most outboard manufactures measure output of just the head,
> no shaft, no water pump.
It would not be as much as that. 3-5% would be about the right amount.
Phan...@nospam.invalid
>power loss in a
>gas outboard between where it is produced and the prop that does the
>work.
Years ago they measured outboard hp at the crankshaft but I thought
they'd switched to measuring it at the prop at some point.... seems
like in the early 1980's, not sure, it's been awhile back. And for a
few years after that, it was difficult to compare the new X hp engines
with an older engine of the same X hp.
Does anybody besides me remember it that way?
Rick
spu...@sbcglobal.net
I drove myself about half nuts choosing a small outboard for my
inflatable. Decided firmly on the Suzuki DF2.5 four stroke. UPS just
delivered it a few minutes ago. It's a far cry from the old
Johnnyrudes, lemmetellya. Lovely piece of gear indeed.
The $729 you list is actually a pretty decent price, but, in the
interest of not starving, I'm pretty good at finding the rock bottom
lowest prices on stuff. Local dealers wanted almost a grand including
sales tax, so that wouldn't cut it. Found a real nice guy named Ray
Jr. at The Boat Place, Naples Florida, 239-200-9597. Who sold me one
new in factory box, shipped to godforsaken scumhole known as Dallas,
Texas, for over $100 less than your price. He shipped promptly, sent
tracking # immediately, and provided a pleasant buying experience.
Seemed like something you might want to know.
And, as far as I know, 30 lb thrust is roughly one horsepower.
Peace out...........
On Apr 13, 7:15 am, Jay <jay-smith-1...@excite.com> wrote:
> On Apr 13, 4:19 am, Phant...@nospam.invalid wrote:> Nice boat :-) Frankly, I don't think you can go wrong with anything that's been
>
> mentioned so far. By the sounds of your current needs, electric will
> work fine. And it has price and maintenance advantages over gas.
> Problem is, your boat has potential to be so much more. If you think
> you may ever expand your horizons, you might do better spending the
> extra $$ now on gas, just in case.
>
> <<<Actually, the next boat, if there is one in the future, will be a
> 21' Party Barge pontoon type. I've already received the "word" on
> that from above. And it will come with a mega-horsepower motor so
> that won't be a decision I'll have to make.
>
> > Electric is almost dead silent. I would especially like that on a small quiet lake. And if you store it for years, it'll work when you drag it out. Gas can be more cantankerous when out of mind for that long. There's advantages/disadvantages to both.
>
> <<<I already own a 30 lb. thrust Minn-Kota electric motor and have a
> big marine deep cycle battery but didn't think that would even get the
> Guide V14 moving at all. How does a 30 lb. thrust electric equate to
> a gas outboard. What equivalent horsepower?
>
> > Another consideration. It's natural for people to want more than they have. We'll always want something a little bigger, a little faster, a little more. So if you fall into that category, you might as well consider 15-20hp and be done with it lol! OR go electric for very few dollars now and start saving for when the expansion bug bites.
>
> <<<I don't fall into that category nor do I buy compulsively I
> carefully choose my purchases after looking into possible future needs
> and if I'm gonna pull water skiers or jet across the reservoir at Mach
> 1 it won't be in that G3 Guide V14. Nope, that boat has been strictly
> designated the floating raft that moves occasionally to a shady nook
> or inlet to the lake while the babe and I relax on the water. And I
> can relax more if I not rowing.
>
> >You have no wrong options here (nothing wrong with oars either). My 2 cents............. ;-)
> > Rick
>
> <<<Not true, there IS something wrong with oars. I have to use my
> arms and hands to make them move! That's what this whole gig is
> about. Hiowever, with all of the input I'm sorta leaning between the
> Suzuki 2.5 HP 4-stroke, the Tohatsu 4 HP 4-stroke and the Tohatsu 3.5
> HP 2-stroke. Check out this nice review on the Suzuki 2.5 hp which I
> can have delivered to my front door for $721.00.
>
> vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
>
> Suzuki's DF2.5 is the world's most fuel efficient tender outboard,
> reports Andrew Norton
>
> The DF2.5 is the smallest and lightest four-stroke outboard Suzuki
> Marine has released. Weighing just 30 lbs., the DF2.5 has a 68cc
> single-cylinder OHV powerhead with thermostatically-controlled
> watercooling.
>
> Developing 2.4hp at 5500 revs (based on 1hp equaling 746W) with a Wide
> Open Throttle operating range of 5250 to 5750rpm, the DF2.5 has a
> forward-neutral gearshift, 360-degree steering, twist-grip throttle
> control, four easily-adjusted trim positions and an automatically-
> engaging full tilt lock. Sensibly, Suzuki has incorporated a stopper
> device that prevents the powerhead rotating more than a few degrees
> when the outboard is fully tilted. Effective steering and throttle
> friction adjusters are provided.
>
> Unlike its Honda BF2D competition, the DF2.5 has a moulded carry
> handle on the aft end of the lower cowl, ensuring the outboard will
> always be carried the correct way to prevent sump oil from flooding
> the cylinder. Alternatively, the outboard may be stored on its side on
> the moulded lower cowl lugs provided.
>
> Like the Honda, the DF2.5 has an easily-read oil level sight glass in
> the lower cowl, with the sump accessed by unscrewing a plug to one
> side of the sump, which holds 0.38lt of oil. But, unlike the Honda,
> which relies on splash or 'mist' lubrication and can only use Honda
> SAE 10W30 oil that's rated to a maximum ambient temperature of 32
> degrees, the pressure-lubricated DF2.5 can use oils from 10W30 up to
> 20W40. However the Quicksilver four-cycle watercooled 10W30 oil used
> by my local Suzuki dealer can be used in all ambient temperatures from
> minus 20 degrees to over 40 degrees and provides rapid crankshaft,
> piston ring and rocker gear lubrication on cold starting.
>
> Servicing intervals for the DF2.5 are every 50 hours or six months
> after the initial check-up at 20 hours. The waterpump impeller should
> be checked and/or replaced every 100 hours or once a year. A nice
> touch is the chrome rocker cover, which allows for valve clearance
> adjustment by removing four bolts, whereas this adjustment in the
> Honda necessitates removing the entire air cooling shroud, including
> the overhead recoil starter.
>
> The DF2.5's large-capacity zinc anode just above the anti-ventilation
> plate should handle any leg electrolysis when the tender is rafted up
> alongside a yacht or cruiser.
>
> Compared to the BF2D, the DF2.5 swings a relatively coarse-pitch prop
> for such a small outboard, even allowing for its 2.15:1 reduction
> ratio. But whereas the Honda has a 2.42:1 gear reduction and a 4.5-
> inch pitch prop compared to 5.4 inches for the Suzuki, the latter's
> prop is weedless and able to 'slip' a lot more under load compared to
> the Honda's 'high thrust' prop. The swept-back weedless blades also
> catch less weed than the Honda's prop.
>
> The DF2.5 normally starts first pull, hot or cold, and reaches normal
> operating temperature in about two minutes from cold. The lack of
> water spraying from the exhaust relief holes until the thermostat has
> opened is a bit disconcerting and Suzuki should fit a separate pilot
> water discharge similar to the DF4 to DF6 range of four strokes.
>
> Because of its small displacement powerhead, the DF2.5 idles in
> neutral at around 2000rpm and 1500 in gear, whereas with its
> centrifugal clutch the Honda idles at about 1500 in neutral. But, when
> trolling, the Suzuki would run for up to 10 hours on a litre of fuel
> compared to eight for the Honda. And, despite its 19 per cent greater
> piston displacement, the Suzuki has lower vibration levels and, being
> watercooled, it is significantly quieter across the entire rev range.
>
> xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> <<<So Tohatsu 3.5 HP <2-stroke> ($650), Suzuki 2.5 HP <4-stroke>
> ($721), Tohatsu 3.5 HP <4-stroke> ($835) or Tohatsu 4 HP <4-stroke)
> $965? Decisions, decisions.....any preferences out there for one of
> these if my 30 lb. Minn-Kota electric won't push it around with 500
> lbs. on board?
>
> -Jay
Martin Baxter
I think you're right Edgar, on a slightly larger motor, but two horse is
pretty small and the losses would be more significant, frankly I'd be
surprised though if they were more than 10%
>>
>
> I think it would be a bit more than that. The drive train has to turn
> a 90 degree corner. And don't forget the power consumed by the
> alternator, along with the already mentioned water pump. These things
> add up.
>
>
Alternator? On a two horse?,
Cheers
Marty
Marty
>
> http://www.suzukimarine.com/sr_07/df6-4/features/
Ok, so twice the two horse, now the gear loss becomes less percentage
wise. Six amps, fourteen volts, is 84 watts, just a bit bigger than
1/10 hp, even at 80% efficiency, even if the alternator is actually
putting out the full six amps, still not not significant.
Cheers
Marty
>
>
Martin Baxter
>
> So before I pick up that telephone and order in the next day or two,
> any last minute observations, criticisms, etc. on what I hope to be
> our final choice so we can quit agonizing over this outboard thing and
> get out on the lake where we belong. Thanx again.
>
> -Jay
>
> +++The Tohatsu 4HP 4-Stroke
>
> http://www.tohatsu.com/outboards/4_4st.html
>
> +++Our G3 Guide V14 yacht
Jay, I'm sure the Tohatsu will move you V14 along at 5 or 6 knots, it
won't get up and plane, you won't be doing any water skiing. Compared
to the Briggs, it'll be quiet. It will be very easy on gas, I think
it's a good choice. FWIW, I have a canoe, 12ft aluminum punt, 14 and 15
ft runabouts, Evenrude 2Hp, Merc. 2.2., Scott-Attwater 5.5, Evenrude 6,
Johnson 8, Johnson 60, Merc 140 I/O, so I do have some experience.
Cheers
Marty
Phan...@nospam.invalid
>FWIW, I have a canoe
Which motor do you use to power the canoe? I've been thinkin'
"trolling motor" so I can keep most of the weight low and amidships
instead of all hanging over the side near the stern. A 30lb thrust
Minn Kota is on sale near me for $67 but since Jay's experiment, I'm
thinkin' more like 50lbs so I can use it on a skiff as well. The
smallest gasoline outboard I have at the moment is 6hp at 58lbs which
is fine for the skiff but too much weight for the canoe.
Rick
Martin Baxter
The little 2 HP 'rude works just fine, pushes the canoe with two people
aboard faster than you could paddle it.
Cheers
marty
Phan...@nospam.invalid
>>I've been thinkin'
>>"trolling motor" so I can keep most of the weight low and amidships
>> instead of all hanging over the side near the stern.
Martin Baxter wrote:
>The little 2 HP 'rude works just fine, pushes the canoe with two people
>aboard faster than you could paddle it.
Yeah, but I wasn't concerned about push power. I was wondering what
happens when the two people get out and leave the canoe to balance and
float on its own. It doesn't tend towards capsize huh?
Rick
Phan...@nospam.invalid
>>Yeah, but I wasn't concerned about push power. I was wondering what
>>happens when the two people get out and leave the canoe to balance and
>>float on its own. It doesn't tend towards capsize huh?
saltydog wrote:
>The real thrill waiting for you is the first time you try a sharp turn, and the
>prop thrust rolls you over instead of turning the canoe.
lol! No doubt there'll be some trial and error involved ;-) I've
considered an outrigger, or rafting two canoes along side each other.
I'd rather keep it as simple as I can though.
Rick <---- still thinkin'
Marty
Motor or not, getting out of a canoe and back in in open water quite
often results in lots of water in the canoe. A small motor on a 2 x 4
lashed to the gunwales at the stern doesn't have too bad of an affect on
an empty canoe, the motor is still inboard of a line parallel to the
keel and projected aft from the widest beam.
Cheers
Marty
Marty
>
> The real thrill waiting for you is the first time you try a sharp turn, and the
> prop thrust rolls you over instead of turning the canoe.
Ah ha! I see you have some experience.
Cheers
Marty
>
>
Marty
Two canoes is most stable, you can have fun with sails too. The
outrigger works well and doesn't have to be particularly large, I've
done it with a few branches of about 4" diameter lashed to a six foot by
six inch log. The mass more than anything provides a lot of stability,
but it does slow you down.
Cheers
Marty
Phan...@nospam.invalid
>the motor is still inboard of a line parallel to the
>keel and projected aft from the widest beam.
I have a Penobscot 16. It's fast but it's narrow with a rounded
bottom and primary stability isn't its strong point.
Martin Baxter
Which is a good reason not to try to put too much horsepower on the
thing, the average paddler is unlikely to be able to exert more about
one eighth of a horsepower, put 16 times that on your canoe and you can
understand the need for prudence.
Cheers
Marty
Phan...@nospam.invalid
>>> the motor is still inboard of a line parallel to the
>>> keel and projected aft from the widest beam.
PhantMan wrote:
>> I have a Penobscot 16. It's fast but it's narrow with a rounded
>> bottom and primary stability isn't its strong point.
Martin Baxter
>Which is a good reason not to try to put too much horsepower on the
>thing, the average paddler is unlikely to be able to exert more about
>one eighth of a horsepower, put 16 times that on your canoe and you can
>understand the need for prudence.
I completely agreee. That's why I'm thinkin' 30lb - 50lb trolling
motor. I'm only curious about how my canoe would handle the weight of
an outboard, not the horsepower. No question that even 1hp would be
more than enough.
How stable is your canoe? Wide beam? Flat bottom? Mine has neither.
Rick
Richard Casady
> A small motor on a 2 x 4
>lashed to the gunwales at the stern doesn't have too bad of an affect on
>an empty canoe, the motor is still inboard of a line parallel to the
>keel and projected aft from the widest beam.
The family Grumman canoe has a square stern, handy for mounting the
rudder for sailing, as well as the 1/2, 1, or 3 HP outboard motors.
Casady
Phan...@nospam.invalid
>An electric motor weighs about 20+ pounds, and requires at least 1 60 pound
>battery to operate.
I can use the battery weight low and forward for trim when I'm solo..
>That gives you two hours of operation before you need to
>start looking for an electrical outlet.
That'll work. That's two fewer hours of paddling than I'd be doing
without it.
>My 3.5 hp outboard with a "neutral/forward" transmission weighs 29 pounds.
That weight is impressive. But isn't that a two stroke? I'm thinkin'
the new o/b's (4 stroke) would be more than that.
But my main attraction to electric is silence. Even more quiet than a
paddle. That matters in a dead silent swamp when you're sneakin' up on
wildlife with a camera. Or sneakin' up on fish for that matter. I see
your point though. And for the purpose of pushing the boat without the
other considerations, it does make more sense.
Rick
Marty
> Marty wrote:
>
> I completely agreee. That's why I'm thinkin' 30lb - 50lb trolling
> motor. I'm only curious about how my canoe would handle the weight of
> an outboard, not the horsepower. No question that even 1hp would be
> more than enough.
> How stable is your canoe? Wide beam? Flat bottom? Mine has neither.
Point taken, mine is 18' beam about 3'6", flat bottom, triple keel, much
more stable than yours. Which provides another reason for going
electric, you get to put some ballast (the battery) down low.
Cheers
Marty
Martin Baxter
> Suzuki 4-stroke for $600 delivered but I opted for the extra oomph of
> the 4hp Tohatsu and the 7-hour run time with the auxiliary tank. I
> figure it'll be $300 more well spent in the long run.
Good, let us know how it works out.
Cheers
Marty
Marty
[sipped Jay's saga of disreputable dealers}
>
> PS---Once we get the Suzuki and strap that powerhouse on, I'll offer a
> full report on how it works out. And if it doesn't, check for a hot
> deal on a Suzuki 2.5 on Ebay. LOL
Too bad about the Tohatsu, but I'm sure you'll fine the Suzuki moves you
along just fine, great for trolling, easy on gas. I've used my Merc 2.2
and a backup on my 15' Springbok, it pushed me home just fine when the
Johnson 60 conked. About 5 miles, took an hour, but beat the hell out
of rowing.
Cheers
Marty
>
Bruce in Bangkok
<jay-smi...@excite.com> wrote:
>On Apr 25, 4:36 pm, Marty <baxt...@kos.net> wrote: I've used my Merc
>2.2 and a backup on my 15' Springbok, it pushed me home just fine when
>the Johnson 60 conked. About 5 miles, took an hour, but beat the hell
>out of rowing.
>Cheers
>Marty
>
><<<Marty, anything beats the hell out of rowing especially if you're
>in the middle of a large reservoir and the wind comes up. lol
>
>-Jay
>
>I realize all of you are probably tired of all of these questions from
>the outboard rookie here but indulge me one more time.
>
>If a person strapped TWO of those Suzuki 2.5hp outboards (only 29 lbs.
>each) to the back of the boat, one on each side, what would be the
>effect? 5hp? Double the speed? Double the noise? Nothing? Just
>curious...
>
>-Jay
Well, it will be double the noise and approximately double the fuel
consumption but perhaps not double the speed. You might "Ping" Roger
as to why doubling the Horse Power doesn't necessarily mean double the
speed. Has to do with all kind of hull forms and hydrodynamics and too
much of it will make your eyes cross.
But why stop with two, three, or even four! I see a lot of boats here
with a couple of 250 h.p. engines strapped on the tail.
I wonder what the "per minute" cost is for a couple of 2 stroke 250 hp
engines at full song is?
Bruce-in-Bangkok
(correct email address for reply)
Richard Casady
<b*paige*125@g*mail.com> wrote:
>You might "Ping" Roger
>as to why doubling the Horse Power doesn't necessarily mean double the
>speed. Has to do with all kind of hull forms and hydrodynamics and too
>much of it will make your eyes cross.
Its very simple. Power required is proportional to the cube of the
speed, and, [gets out the calculator that takes no prisoners], you get
1.26 times the speed. Mileage is inversely proportional to speed. That
you can check for yourself, with your car.
Casady
cavelamb himself
ASSuming the props are pitched for a higher speed than you alreaady get?
Phan...@nospam.invalid
>If a person strapped TWO of those Suzuki 2.5hp outboards (only 29 lbs.
>each) to the back of the boat, one on each side, what would be the
>effect? 5hp? Double the speed? Double the noise? Nothing?
In your case, not much.
At 2.5 - 5.0 hp, you're dealing with a displacement hull. So the
difference in those two hp's doesn't do much for speed (noise yes,
fuel yes, speed no).
But if you started with 10hp, which would almost plane (but not quite)
your boat, doubling the hp to 20hp would make a huge difference in
speed. That would be enought to switch from displacement speeds to
planing speeds. Big difference.
So everything matters. Weight, drag, hull shape, like that. But the
biggest difference in hp/speed ratio is when the hp is enough to get
the mass over the displacement/planning hump.
Rick
Bruce in Bangkok
Right! Up to the time that the boat begins to plane, then all the
calculations go to hell.
Or right up to the time you exceed hull speed and the calculations go
to hell again.
I keep telling the guy, "call Roger". He don;t listen.