Glen-L.com

Why have the bracket at all?
Just extend the hull to the same length as the bracket and you get all the storage space + floatation. Why would you not want all that storage space for fuel, batteries, + floatation?
Unless you got a very very high speed hull that likes a aft CG;
I still dont understand the bracket mount.

_________________
God Bless our Troops; especially our Snipers

A short answer in my case is that I plan on running offshore and need as much transom height in a low hullsides for starters. But we as a family do lots of messing around barrier islands and old folks need and enjoy a better swim platform setup than an off the shelf one purchased at West marine for starters.
My last one extended past most ones purchased too, to 21 plus inches. You cannot get that as a rule, for starters.

But anyway lets look at why I am doing this. First thing is it makes for a cleaner cockpit area and makes use of limited space in some cabin boats, for the sake of this particular discussion. If you got the route of adding to an existing hull , this is a bit more involved in the area of engineering as Ray has expressed too in the past in both of his boats, even though he did not go the route of a bracket in his cabin skiff. So a lot of people go the purchase and install an alumimum bracket route. On wooden boats, IMO aluminum brackets do not look the part. Another area that supports the added bracket is sound especially for the bigger engines. Many people argue about the semi closed engine well configuration, which deals with many things, one big one being the down side of looks for a big refrigerator hanging off the back of the boats, especially nicely done wooden boats.

I could write along and lengthy reply on the details, but felt that I could give some general description of how to incorporate one early on and not be plagued with the worry, IMO of what Ray expresses on this thread, addon weights of heavier components. ONe thing that I have personally addressed is that I personally feel that I have incorporated a bit more engineering into the back end of the boat that also addresses the allowance of bigger engines which will be running in rougher waters too unlike how Ray uses his boat. So I think I actually needed more involved building steps and bits and pieces.

So to close sir, no one has to read or even follow my approach and if you take issue with me adding content, please take it up with the moderators. You never miss a chance to undercut many of my contributions, the last one being the inboard route that you continue to take shots at when amateurs ask about the contrasting two power plants. For some reason designers sell outboard powered designs which also cannot be modified for an inboard, for many reasons and to promote that route continuously does absolutely nothing to assist people dealing with designs that also need the weight to be placed in one particular area of a boat too. So while we discuss areas in which to tweak the outboard setup, more harmfull affects can come about when promoting inboards solely because of what one person has enjoyed. No they are not difficult if you have done them, but there is more involved, including parts and costs and for sure work for the first timer only to yield a lot more work and side affects unless absolutes are not followed either.
Now I am out of here.

I see these all the time back home and have'n been on a boat that almost sank in the GOM becasue the transon was cut down so the outboard would be low enough in the water (factory) I can say that these add ons are a great invention, so as Oyster said, to have the highest transom possible to keep water from coming in.

I have talked to Ray about his add on because I just didn't like the idea of cutting in the the stern of my boat and leave a big hole there. Even though I should not be in heavy seas. but i have seen some lakes get pretty nasty in bad weather. And I agree that building this addition Is better done at this stage of the build. Increasing the strength of the mounting. And lets face it the metal mounts are just ugly, and look cheap why after putting all this time and money into this build would I want to do a ugly cheap fix. I thank you Oyster for your Post I will be looking at it closer when the time comes, for a old grump you have good experience and know how from another old grump

_________________
Don't be afraid to attempt anything. You might surprise your self in the attempt.
http://www.facebook.com/Home.Made.Boat.Building
Modified Jubilee-"Wild Flower" 40' house boat
14' Mr John-Wild Flower 2
32' Supper Huck- Wild flower 3

Rod H

Building it in like Oyster is doing makes a ton of sense.

It distributes the stresses through out the hull instead of adding localized leverage stress at the transom.

Both ways do work as Ray has shown, but an add on has to be done correctly to cover the added stresses.

As to the bracket/extension VS motor on transom,both have merits depending on the intended uses and waters boated on.

_________________
Boat building can best be defined as an endless series of
tragedies obscured by the occasional miracle, followed by a good bottle of beer.

Don't Dream Your Life, Live Your Dream

Personally, I think Oyster's method will be both stronger and lighter than just adding a box like I did. A bolt on bracket may be an easier solution but integrating in to the hull structure will yield superior results. There are several reasons why I use a bracket rather than just extending the hull. The first was that I had already stretched the hull 10% which was the maximum the plans suggested but still didn't want to loose the fairly large space the interior splashwell would require.

Plus, as mentioned by others I would be cutting a large hole in the transom to accommodate engine. Just to get an idea of the size I have included a photo below. Looks huge to me! In reality the cut probably would have needed to be even wider to provide clearance for the motor to flop to the sides when trimmed up. The Honda 60 pivots about 15 degrees more than the std O/B making the situation even worse. Don't want the motor hood to hit the edge of the transom cut-out.

As to appearance, on the trailer I think my mount up looks fairly ugly but once on the water the swimplatforms and water mask the view making it acceptable to my eye. But I just didn't think there would be any way to hide the huge cut-out if the O/B was transom mounted. Just thought it would be extremely unattractive.

And one final thought, I guarantee mounting behind the transom rather than on the transom will yield a MUCH quieter boat as the engine noise is isolate outside the hull.

_________________
So Many Rivers,
So Little Time....

Ya know Ray, just in you saying that, I reckon the Sea Quinn is REALLY quite with that lil outboard back yonder. I bet you don't even hear her... Man, almost like sailing! lol

per request with no further comment...

Soooo, it looks to me anyways, that Oyster has basically built his boat two feet longer, adding it to the back of the hull, instead of at each frame, right?
And of course the relevance to the original question by Clay Horn would be?

Doug

I must add that this is not entirely correct. The devil is in the details, as I have previously stated. But anyway I will provide the chain of events. From page 1, You make the call.




If you will also note, he was a bit timid with going the inboard route, leaning more towards an outboard setup. I aim to please and provided content that was directly targeted to answering his question and concerns. This is why I personally got involved and continued to dig deeper into this discussion, much to my own demise, which I don't enjoy.

The entire thread has been about outboards, efficent use of the interior space and how to deal with what amounts to a redesign without radically redesigning to a measurable point. When you just add a bracket, there is no real change to the hull. When you incorporate an entire component and want to maintain the basic perimeters of the drawn designs, you do have to wing it a bit. You will need to begin your changes foward of the final station. If you compound these issues like Ray did, stretched the hull and then also had incorporated another add on, he would have also completely modified the back end of the boat further in regards to beam and bottom angles too.

Please allow me one more post to detail my thinking and approach throughout this thread.

At the expense of sounding like I am lecturing here, there are numerous reasons for bracketed outboard setups. We have discussed several. But when a person walks casually by one hanging off the backend of any hull, there is a lot of issues that one may not see. For the sake of this discussion, displacement hulls in open waters that have become rough experience several issues that’s not apparent when just looking at the setup. First off slow moving hulls bog down in a combination of swell and wind seas until they catch up with the seas. Even if an outboard is hung on some form of bracket, the outboard itself can experience water in and around the engine block itself until the boat regains its momentum in an open seaway condition.

In most of the mid range and bigger outboards, they come on 20 inch shaft and also the extra long shaft of 25 inches. Selecting the right outboard is key too, not withstanding the issues of reserve bouyancy that is addressed with a full platform and bracketed add on. Most of the production aluminum bracket makers add foam to the lower portion of their brackets to give some margin of reserve lift to the aft portion of the hull. A simple box will not give you the same feature.

If you go back to the first page of this thread, you will find that right out of the gate I suggested a straight inboard engine. but without getting into a long and drawn out explanation that also went off the reservation, there was indeed a method to my own madness solely addressing the safety issues involved with displacement hulls and setups. Ray gets by with his rig because of where he boats and how he uses his boats. So unlike what many people like to see in replies to numerous threads, answers are not always a straight up and down deal. As Ray has shown here even if he went with the hang on the transom outboard setup and even used the 25 inch shaft, for me personally I am not sure if he would be happier with the loss of space not withstanding the added noise either inside of his cabin space. For sure in his many compromises in his build, all of his rigging is confined outside of his enjoyable space for sure.

So while I sometimes come across as a royal pain in the butt and for sure anal, I attempt to look pass just a short reply and make any and all attempts to address a larger picture when it comes to more than just a runabout build and have done since the very first page. If my detail shots are also boring, pass along to a more interesting shot of glits and gingerbread stuff.


I love to look under the hoods of most all automobiles at the car shows too, and do the same with boats. Its just my nature to do so. I like to see what makes things work and use some of the ideas that spawn from others too. The intent is the same when I also get into these types of threads too. So in closing, My sincere apologizes to one and all, as I will attempt to better in the future. Its very hard to type what goes through most of my thinking and ramblings and make attempts to shorten them but when doing so there are numerous missing items that have created the thinking. When all else fails, just move along for your own sanity and appease me as I knowith not how my typing comes across on the other end somedays.

As a newbie I have found this thread to be many things; i.e. confusing, frustrating, informative, challanging, educating and entertaining. So allow me a few observations.

I've certainly felt the pain of Clay Horn as it "appeared" that his thread got completely highjacked and he was left out in the cold somewhere, lonely and frustrated. But that opinion changed as I became more educated by the posts and was able to see where it was all leading. I must admit though I had to read and reread the thread several times. It is hard. when learning something new and such detailed thoughts are hung out there side by side; but that is not a negative or wrong thing for those who post. Simply a learning experience for the likes of me.

I feel to encourage Oyster and other "long winded" posters to keep posting. I for one am learning more from these discussions than I ever would from just reading books. No offense to Glen-L's books, they are great, but practical on the job discussions are invaluable to me and others just like me. As I plan to build the Delta Q, eventually, and would like a swim deck and plan outboards, this has been great learning.

This forum is worth its weight in gold and is my first port of call every time I set sail on the internet.

Graham.

_________________
God bless all who sail here

I have been ask to provide a finish shot of the setup. I penciled in the shape on the side of the hull planking, which gets one more layer to finish off the side plank scantling.

Just a follow up,,,,, Well after multiple steps to finish off the chines with reverse strakes and chine rails and gluing up the hardwood veneers from some leftover teak, the bracket is done and ready for finishing. I reinforced the sides so if I want to install the 300 hp on it, I think it will be okay, bullet proof like. The full transom will get the teak if I have can dig up another small piece around the dirt pile.

I like that white Captain's chair down there! hehehe Looking good man!