Glen-L.com

Okay, I give up. I must be unable to ask questions correctly or decipher the information given in such a way that helps me. Thank you all for your replies but, I feel more confused now than when I started.

Raymacke
Yes they are bennett trim tabs , 12"x24". I also like the tabs to correct any list I might have, either wind or people on board , as most of my seating is on the port side. My tabs are usually no more then 50% down, so I never gain more then a knot more . Actually I can gain more or lose speed depending on where I have my leg trimmed. I run with the leg trimmed up a little.
One negative thing about the larger engine is now at idle I can't go slow enough for fishing(trolling), which I do alot. So now I have to install a kicker, can't win them all!
I was wondering what weight your boat was?

Triple-d

Clay Korn – Don’t give up you're are doing fine. I took your remark about the CC and the Hercules being the same to mean they are both semi-displacement which is true.

Finally, getting back to your garage! The hull of both the Coastal Cruiser and the Hercules are built upside down on a building form and I think building the hull in you garage is workable. The trick will come when it is time to roll it. With the CC you will probably need a little more than 9’ head clearances (a little less with the Hercules). But make no mistake these are large bulky and somewhat heavy hulls. Your are not just going to have a few friends over to the shop and flip it by hand. If you can’t make the swing it could be moved out side, rolled and then brought back in to continue work.

Once rolled the interior could be sealed, the tanks installed and the added. If you are going with an I/B it could be fitted and aligned with the shaft. But I don’t think you could start adding the cabin sides until you move it out. A 7’ door is going to hold you back at that point. Sitting on the floor my TG measured about 9’ 4” tall and I believe the CC is about 8 “ to 12” taller. Not sure about the Hercules but I am betting it is near the same. Looking at the photo with the engine installed it is obviously a deep hull. And I would think the headroom above the deck is similar so the heights are also probably similar.

Unfortunately at that point there is still a LOT of work to complete. My guess is you are only about 30 % done. Maybe a little more if you are keeping it very basic with minimal systems – plumbing, electrical, electronic and so on.

Triple-d – my empty weight is about 5500 lbs. At max fuel & water add another 1100 lbs and who know how much for gear . Do you have any photos of you boat? Sure like to see her.

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

Normal, in forum settings people target on certain areas that they are familiar with, which may not always be the area that you are targetting either. A side note it we see many folks new to these types of projects are used to spreadsheets and cut and dry contractor type comparisons too which rarely occur in these projects either. So in most cases, pick your priorities and start back in the beginning, IMO.

FWIW, this guy built this hull in his single car garage, in two pieces. He moved the hull outside and did the complete top in a single unit also in the single residential garage.







As far as the engine needs, do it right the first time around. To be sure costs are a factor. I don't really know what works and what doesn't in each and every boat since we all have different needs in a boat. Heck my present boat defies all logic, but meets every single criteria in power, speed, and efficency. But it would probably be a huge compromise for the loop trip in so many areas even though its a few inches under 24 feet.

But I never suggests that anyone under power any boat if a designer specs a certain power plant out without discussing the changes with a pedigreed N.A. or even an experienced boatyard either. I never tell someone to forgo some of the basic quality materials thats rarely visually seen either even though you can get by with some pretty nonconventional materials of the same flavor.
.

But all of these boats are a foolish pleasure. Once you get into these builds the numbers seems to disappear no matter how we try to keep track of each expenditures. Over time the angst that pops up in the early stages of these builds when attempting to budget and plan rarely is remembered even in the finished stages of just the hulls.
I would never suggest to get involved into any project though that you may think that you cannot see to fruition either. But build the right compromise, since all these boats are compromises anyway.

Hopefully you can use some of this Java ramblings. If you have questions feel free to ask them, even taking one question at a time. We aim to answer them and this thread has a lot of previous experiences in many areas to address like type hulls thats simular to your own interests too.

Thank you. The above information is what I was originally looking for. I apologize for my rash response. The snowball effect of these threads can be overwhelming.

Actually evolution is good. As far as my comments and opinion, personally I have not taken the time to look at the two side by side. Ray has covered some incredible miles and has also done many using a much smaller boat too. He has an incredible amount of information under a lot of diverse conditions too. So I would not discount his approach at all given that he has some real time knowledge too after going the same route that you are going now, looking at what is best overall. Now he has some additional time on his new hull, even limited by comparison to his smaller boat. So as far as I am concerned, his information carries a lot of weight IMO.

Its not the way I personally would go since I have boated with diesels for several decades and the issue of smell really has not been much of an issue, even inside of mega million dollar yachts either. Maintainance is targetted to clean fuel for a lot of successfull hours in return, or has been my experiences not withstanding the economy for pushing heavy hulls because of the torgue differences too.

Sure exhausts can be an issue for the performance diesels and the issue of suck back into cabins also comes into play in some of the models.

Yachts and yacht makers have also designed and redesigned underwater exhaust systems to deal with some of the issues in the larger mega hp engines too. But if you scan around the boating world, almost all production long range trawlers are diesels and are used by retirees and seniors with little problem in the slower boat hulls.
But with all that being said, installation of inboards does complicate the issues for novices with the I/O inboards being the least involved for an inboard engine. The downside of those engines is the hoses and hydraulic hoses for the lower units. These two can ruin your day if you do not inspect them regularly. Heck inboard gas engines stinks to me. I can walk down the dock blindfolded and smell one running at idle too.
Hopefully this clears up some of my bias opinions too, stemming from my own witnessing of the same.

Raymacke
Here are a few pictures
Triple-D

Raymacke
A few more
Triple-D

Wow, she's a real beauty and I love the rear swim platform / boarding setup. That was a great idea you had there.

George

_________________
I Peter 2:17

I think Oyster really summed it up. The power of this forum is that we have a great group of builders willing to contribute information based on their experience. BUT remember we are all bias. We build our boats and equipped them based on our own personal preferences and we usually have strong feeling about them. BUT, these preferences may or may not be something that suits you particular goals and desires. So read what we all have to say but then step back and use the information to decide what works best for you.

And here again I feel he is on target. I am sure my True Grit will not be my last build but it will be the largest. Any boat project of this size is not an inexpensive venture and trying to keep cost under control is a continuous battle. But the absolute worst error I feel we can make is deciding on a compromise to save money (even substantial money) and end up with a completed project we are unhappy with. Some smaller things could be corrected down the road but something like "power type" it is really best to get right first time. If you install a diesel and later decide you want more HP it can usually be accommodated. But if you decide on O/B gas and later want to go the I/B diesel you are talking a major reworking of the boat.

On my boat the O/B was a solid choice and works well for me but if I lived in an area where diesels were more prevalent and installation knowledge was readily available I very well might have made some "compromises" to my goals and went with a 60 to 80 HP diesel. Even if it cost a good bit more the difference would still be a reasonable upgrade when looking at the entire project cost. And once the build is paid for - it's paid for - but fuel bills will go on for ever! You just have the weigh the pros and cons and how they relate to your situation.


Triple-d - I asked for some photos of your boat not some expensive factory boat you bought!

VERY NICE!!!! Your extension does indeed look factory - or better. The whole boat inside and out looks just excellent. The photo of the head really caught my attention. I could not figure how to make a small sink fit in there but now I going to seriously consider a "mod". Also, is the arch self fabricated or liberated from something else?

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

Clay Korn:
I would echo other's comments that in looking at boat types, power plant options, and such you first need to determine your specific needs. It appears that you have done that very well. Next you have to take all the opinions you get from other boaters, and weigh them against YOUR NEEDS.

I knew my BoJest would be outboard powered for a number of reasons, so my only question was how big it should be. Glen-L recommeded 7-10 SHP, and specifically one of the High Thrust 4 strokes. I've lost count of how many people I asked for opinions about what size OB to get, but it was a couple dozen. Many of those were experienced boatbuilders, and overwhelmingly the votes were for something in the 25 hp range, with one person suggesting a 40 hp!

Although they were all knowledgable boaters and/or boatbuilders, very few of them had done the type of boating I intended to do. As my hull was almost finished, I met a man who had built a NOYO trawler (similar but MUCH bigger than my Bojest). He described his 5-6mph cruises on various rivers over the last few years, with his boat powered by a 9.9 Yamaha High Thrust 4 stroke!

Since his boating experience was most similar to my needs, and since his success with such a small engine meshed with the designer's recommnedation, I went with the same 9.9 hp engine. Although I have been 100% satisfied with my power choice, that does not mean that all those people who thought (and some who still think) I was crazy, did not have a solid basis for thier opinions that I needed more power. It's just that their opinions were based on their experiences and needs, and not mine.

Sorry for the long post, but my point is to decide what is important to YOU - speed, space, economy, etc., and then find someone who has experience and whose boating style is similar to yours, and ask all the questions you can think of.

Personally, I think the "dependability" issue is a wash. There are great engines in all styles and fuels available now.

It sounds like your needs are very similar to Ray M.'s, and I would definately put a lot of weight in his opinions!

_________________
Tom
------------------------------
Knot-So-Fast (A stretched Bo-Jest design)
Travel Log at www.tomstug.blogspot.com

"It's amazing what one can do when one doesn't know what one can't do." - Garfield

My intent was not to discount the vast amount of knowlege and experience on this forum. I truely respect and value the information. Forgive me if I'm not "quick enough" to process it all in a manner that helps me decide what the best "compromise" is for me.

I think that for me, at this point in my decision, there is too much infomation or said another way, too many details. The original intent of the thread was to determine the actual minimum power requirements of the Coastal Cruiser. I wanted to know this because while compairing it's design to other similar designs, it seemed to have a higher minimum power requirement. The other designs of similar size and displacement are calling for engines in the 20 to 40 hp range where Coastal Cruiser was callling for power in the 45 up range. I realize that the difference between 40 and 45 is almost negligible. But, it's more of a boat operating in it's upper performance curve with a 40hp vs. It's lower performance curve with a 45hp.

Once I determin which of these best fits my needs, then I can move on to the decision of inboard vs. Outboard vs. I/O. And with some of the designs I'm considering, that decision would already been made since they only come with one option in that respect.

Honestly, I feel farther away from making a decision now than when I started. With this being such a HUGE undertaking, the thought of ending up with a boat that does not fit my needs is very unsettling.

Clay Korn - Sorry again as I was probably one of the leaders in dragging this thread off base!

I think the best way I can answer your question is to say for me about 60 HP works well on the TG/CC and I have no regrets about the size. At about 7 mph I am running fairly efficiently - hull still reasonably level with the water line and not creating much wake. At the 3100 rpms the engine is not working hard, in fact, kind of loafing along (in my Cabin Skiff with a 50 hp Honda I cruise at about 4200 to 4400 rpms). When I start pushing beyond that the bow starts to rise as the transom squats and the wake is increasing. If you look at my MPG readings you see the fuel penalty as the speed and drag increases. At 10 to 12 mph I am plowing a lot of water. If I had a bigger engine I am thinking the mpg would continue to drop until the hull as pushed enough to plane. At that point the mpg would probably get a little better but still higher than I care to accommodate.



Since I have no interest in pushing it to plane adding more HP doesn't serve much purpose. I am satisfied with the 60 HP. I can make 10 to 12 MPH if needed but because of the severe cost of fuel economy it will rarely happen. But as Triple-d stated in his theater of operation extra speed is desirable because of higher currents so more HP makes a lot of sense for him. As they say different stroke for different folks.

About being confused - I feel your pain - but you are not alone. We all go through this when trying to sort out the options. And the bigger the boat the more options there are to sort. But now is the time to do it. As you work through the choices it will all start to fall in place. And when you do decide you will have confidence the decision was made with forethought and knowledge.

Then go make some sawdust!

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

While economy is probably on the top of your lists, it is my opinion and my belief that engine torgue and power at low speeds would be the single biggest criteria in which to select an engine that pushes the boat with proper handling features at the low end of speeds. Cruising inland waters and getting the most enjoyment from the trip is really not about doing it fast at all. Sure we like to cover ground. But running with my wife and or kids in the past, six hours is tops and doing so without hanging on and watching water spray along the hull sides has also been just under the radar of efficency. You really need to consider approx finished weights coupled with the bottom design. The deeper the hull draft which includes skegs or full keel features, the more power that it will take along with a bigger wheel for optimum low end efficency and handling. But having said that you do not have to use all the engine as long as low speeds does not load the engine up either causing plugged injectors or even turbos on small diesels lugging. This is really where the HT outboards are key. Small performing outboards don't do well with high performance wheels and setups geared to on plane crusing speeds.
By the way thats one heck of a boat Triple d!

Understanding that the original question was about engine power, excuse me if I'm steering a different course, and maybe it's not a concern to you ClayKorn.

My earlier post was to point out that Coastal Cruiser is built as a simple plywood planked hull, and the Hercules is built in the cold molded style, double diagonal strips of plywood applied in mutiple layers rather than the one pass planking job on the CC.

Once again, it may not be a concern to you, but I'm guessing the construction time for the Hercules might be significantly longer than the CC. Not that there's anything wrong with that, just a different way of getting there.

Best wishes to you, good luck with your project!

_________________
Noah was a first-time boatbuilder