Pylasteki's Story.

[Zach]

Here she is:







Lost forward and reverse back in August when bringing her home, thought it was a lost prop. Turns out the key sheared on the transmission side of the coupling.

Now the engine is out for ease of access, deciding whether or not to rebuild the A4 and reinstall or leave the outboard. The 6 horse outboard I put on the back burned about ten gallons of gas from Coinjock to Morehead City! Between parts cost and gas... (grin)

An idea that is tempting; installing an electric motor in place of the A4, and utilizing it as a generator when underway. Haven't thought through the details as of yet... but a silent drive on a sailboat sure seems fitting.

On to more pressing issues... any thoughts on fairing out the inner fiberglass skin? The P.O. caused an angle grinder massacre in the bow.

[Tim]

...any thoughts on fairing out the inner fiberglass skin? The P.O. caused an angle grinder massacre in the bow.

Remove the port, grind away the old paint, and refair properly with appropriate material. You'll never get it if you leave the port in place.

[Figment]

I've thought about the electric motor route myself a few times. I can never really come up with a good way to get the boat to swallow that many batteries, though. The regeneration capability is hindered by the propellor's location in the shadow of the keel. I think you'd need to be doing at least 5knots to make any juice.

I know I've been wrong about this before, but man that mast looks to be raked WAY forward! How's the helm balance?

[bcooke]

An idea that is tempting; installing an electric motor in place of the A4...

I know of an installation like this but the boat hasn't been launched yet so I can't tell you how it worked out. Personally, from what I have heard, I am skeptical but the idea is very intriguing.

The main problem I see is the limited total battery capacity or total motoring time. If you only use the motor for getting into an out of a harbor now and then I would say it might work out. In the case of the installation I know of they are estimating 4-6 hours of 'motoring' on a single battery charge and that is with twelve big batteries in the bilge. I don't know where I would put that many batteries in my Triton. I am waiting to hear about how much actual charging current is produced while under sail. If I hear anything I will post it.

The idea of silent, fuel free, low maintenance power is very interesting. Very cutting edge so you would be a pioneer which can be an expensive position to be in.

any thoughts on fairing out the inner fiberglass skin?

Learn to live with it :-)

Seriously though, it would bother me and I would probably dig into it but I would be willing to bet that it will be a first step down a very slippery slope of a full interior grinding, fairing, sanding, and painting. Think about it first.

-Britton

[Zach]

Thanks for the thoughts guys. I'm thinking a one to two hour run time would be enough to get off of most any dock or mooring and out into water open enough to either warrant hanging the outboard or hanging some sails! Generator as its primary purpose, and power as a secondary. Lastly, the option of being under sail and getting out of dodge with the flip of a lever.

Yes, the mast is raked forward, with an aft bend about half way up. when a weight is dropped from the main halyard it ends up around the goose neck. She has a lot of weather helm, and I have no idea if she is sitting on her lines.

I'm thinking epoxy with some microspheres would be ideal to fair it out, and maybe regain some strength.

[Zach]

With Pylasteki came some blue prints...

Here is a copy of the sail plan: http://www.mediafire.com/?8zmzdme9xd9

I've also started a web page for her restoration: http://pylasteki.blogspot.com/

[Rachel]

Nice blog. Sounds like you had some adventures on the trip south, but persevered.

I noticed that you had a couple of comments from folks who raced long-term on Pylasteki in Annapolis, and they mentioned that (then) it was pronounced "plass-teak-ie" because it was made of plastic and teak. I'd been mentally pronouncing it as "Plasticky."

Of course, as they mentioned, now you get to choose how to pronounce it - but I liked that bit of history. Neat that your boat was owned by the same people for so long, and that it was active in the Annapolis fleet.

[suntreader]

Wow, I always sorta wondered what it would look like if I just painted over all my grinder work without fairing, nice to know!

I saw on your blog that the first time you took the helm was on True North in St. Martin. I didn't get the helm job (mainsheet) but that was my first big boat experience, the rest had been on Lake Lanier. Of course now I'm hooked too.

This is the part where I have to be a wet blanket.

There are some charlatans out there selling electric drives for boats, they seem to crop up periodically. Let's run the numbers to get an idea of what it would take to provide electric power for a Triton.

We can use the 6 hp outboard as a baseline (to say nothing of the 25HP A4.) A horsepower is 746 watts, so that 6hp represents 4476 watts of power per hour of motor operation. At 12V that is 373 amps per hour. If you want a two hour total run time (you said to get off the dock, do you need more to get back?) that represents 8952 watts, or 746 amp hours for two hours running. Assuming not discharging the battery bank more than 50% we're talking about a battery bank of about 1500 amp hours. 8D AGM batteries are at about 250 amp hours each these days. That means we'd need six fully charged 8D batteries for a two hour run time. At 166 pounds each thats about a thousand pounds of batteries and about $3700 from Apex Battery.

You can't get a 6hp 12V motor so the motor is going to be a high voltage DC one at the very least, so now you can't use the big bank for house loads, there is an expensive charger for use at the dock that will be required, a fancy motor controller system, and you've got dangerous voltages running around the boat.

As for charging under sail, dragging props to generate juice has been tried a thousand times and no one has ever been pleased with the results. Here's a quick chart from a company in the UK selling water generator:

http://www.duogen.co.uk/wtr_gph.htm

Their numbers (which look very optimistic to me) indicate that at 5 knots the generator is making about 5-6 amps.

This chart shows drag:

http://www.duogen.co.uk/drg_gph.htm

At five knows you'd have about 25 pounds of drag force (anyone know if this would be the same as a 25 pound thrust trolling motor turned around?)

Even if we accept these numbers from the DuoGen at 6 amps of power at 5 knots of speed it would take about 133 hours of sailing to replenish the power lost from those two hours of motoring out. I know I've never kept up 5 knots for that long, in fact if I did the math even on a good day when I was "doing 5 knots" I was probably averaging three or four. At three knots you're only making two amps. Worst of all the drag would be terrible! Even when cruising or day sailing the thought of all that extra drag is just a downer!

I've tried to plan a workable electric drive six ways to Sunday; solar, tiny motors, exotic batteries, you name it; it just doesn't work out. The current limiting factor is battery technology, liquid fuel is still the only practical solution to storing enough energy on board to motor for any length of time. This is a topic I've really gotten into so if anyone has any good ideas then let them rip! That was just a quick run down of the numbers too so if I got my math wrong let me know so I can fix it.

The best electric solution right now is probably to get yourself a pretty big house bank, the biggest trolling motor you can find, a high quality multi-stage battery charger for time at the dock, and hope for good weather! If you're just day sailing that will probably do in most situations and it will be quiet, relatively inexpensive, the weight will be down low in the hull and not on the stern bracket.

Dave

[jhenson]

I spent probably at least 25-30 hours of work smoothing out the interior of my Triton. It’s a big, big job. I went through almost 3 gallons of filler to do the whole interior, as well.





Joe

[keelbolts]

The electric power question hinges on much you motor. If you're one of those sailors that motor for half hour getting out of your slip and a half hour getting back into your slip, then electric could be the way to go for you. If you're one of those sailors who motor when the wind is blowing or spend a lot of time on the ICW then it's probably not. Using your free wheeling prop to recharge your batteries doesn't seem to work so well, but pushing your boat with an electric motor has been done successfully a bunch of times. Do some research on the web. There is an electric boat forum that's worth looking at. Also, because of the differences in torque curves and some other stuff that I don't want to think about, electric 'hp' and diesel/gas hp aren't the same. There is about a 2 to 1 relationship. If you have a 6 hp gas motor, you will need a 3 hp electric motor to get the same results. If you can find a place to stow them, generic 6v electric cart batteries are the best.

[suntreader]

A horsepower is by definition 746 watts no matter how it is produced there is no difference between a gas horsepower or an electric horsepower.

The difference in practice is that gas engines are rated at their maximum output and are generally not capable of either producing that much or that much for any length of time. An electric motor however is generally rated more 'honestly' even if not for continuous operation. So in practice if you were happy with a six hp gas, probably running at half throttle most of the time, then you'll be happy with a three hp electric. Another quirk though is that gas engines produce maximum torque only at high running speed, electrics are the opposite, they produce their maximum torque at their lowest speed. In practice this means that an electric feels really strong off the line but doesn't have much 'top end' because it is already operating at max torque right when it is turned on.

In the case of the Triton, the Atomic 4 was probably installed not because it was the best engine for the job, but because it was inexpensive (like every other boat from 22 to 45 feet in that era.) If we look at the repowers people are doing today I'd guess that most new engines are in the 15-30 hp range, with 30 being quite a lot for the boat, and 15 being more than enough for most cases. My last boat weighed in at about 9000 lbs loaded, the 8 hp diesel pushed it around fine in calm water, but I also spend a lot of time doing half a knot or so. In that boat a 4 hp electric wouldn't have keep the boat going in less than ideal conditions.

I think too there is some wishful thinking going on with people who have installed electric drives, after all the money and effort is spent even a marginal performance can feel like a major victory.

I do think electric is very appropriate for day sailors or other small boats that don't need much power but then those boats probably wouldn't have inboards to begin with. I don't think there is any over lap between boats that have inboards and boats that can use electric drives. There is plenty of overlap of boats with small outboards and boats that can use electric drives.

Just as a side note, there is an argument that electric drives are more 'green' than internal combustion engines. Without knowing how the energy being used to charge the batteries is produced there is no way to make that assertion. I know locally our power is produces via natural gas fired power plants. By charging a battery here and then using it move the boat around I'm just displacing the pollution from the point of use to the power plant. It is also true that power plants operate more efficiently than the little engines that are being replaced by electric, but there are transmission losses associated with bringing the power to the point of use, those can run as high as 40%. 2-strokes are probably the exception where we can say confidently that they are less 'green' than electrics, but 4 strokes we can't really say without running the numbers for a specific locality or situation. Even charging with solar doesn't get us into the 'green' column since the current thinking in life cycle assessment research is indicating that the energy required to manufacture solar panels is greater than the energy produced by the panel over their useful life. That balance is right on the edge and is expected to shift soon. I just wanted to point out some of the additional issues in using electric power when the environment or resource use become part of the equation. I won't even get into what we do with the 1000 lbs of lead that in those batteries after a few years and they need to be replaced!

Dave

[Tim]

Nothing is easy.

[Zach]

I've actually set this idea aside. For one, I'm lacking funds for such an experiment... and the used drives I had my line on were geared for 220ac. What I had been thinking was to rewire them at the rectifier bridge... and use a step up transformer to get the DC voltage they wanted. 12 volts is out of the question just in the amps required to do anything... and wire size. All said and done, I'd rather go cruising.

Instead: I'll fair in the prop aperture in the hull and rudder for better sailing performance. Its worth more to me than the ability to use the prop shaft as a generator. One less hole in the hull, and another set of systems gone. I'm thinking about leaving the shaft log place and glassing over the outside and inside... as i can think of a few jobs I'd rather do than figuring how to put that back in the future!

In the meantime I'm in search of a way to mount an outboard that won't interfere with a windvane...

[Figment]

Bracket on the hip.

[Rachel]

Hi Zach,

You may have seen these already, but for the "bracket on the hip" that Figment mentions, have a look at Yves Gelinas' site. He has an inboard-engine-less Alberg 30 - and also invented the Cape Horn windvane - so he made up an interesting lifting bracket to install an outboard motor on the port quarter (he wanted to keep the transom free of anything but the windvane). He admits that it's useless for backing up, but is willing to accept that trade-off and is well pleased with the set-up after many years. Here's a link to Yves' site: www.capehorn.com





On the other hand, James Baldwin has a Monitor windvane on his Triton, and finds room for an outboard motor + bracket on the transom along with it. If you haven't seen his website, I think you'll find it inspirational. It's at www.atomvoyages.com

[Tim]

Outboards work best when they're inboard diesels. :<)

[Rachel]

He couldn't not say it

:grin:

[keelbolts]

I'm not all that 'green', but after reading about disposal of batteries and carbon emissions from internal combustion engines, I've decided that there's only one solution.

Get a sailboat & learn to sail it.

I don't know why we didn't think of that sooner.

Probably because if I can sail out of my marina I can't sail back in, & vice versa.

[Zach]

Yup, I've seen Yves boat and Atom. Yves's concept is interesting, but reverse with a transom mounted outboard is simply spectacular. No such thing as prop walk, and thrust is directional! Makes docking a breeze.

On Atom, can anyone make how its mounted? I've emailed James about it, but haven't heard back...

Tim: I like that... diesel inboard outboard. Wonder if one of those new volvo outdrives that faces the wrong way would fit? (Grin)

Had a revelation today... So long as the prop can't get into the vanes rudder, theres no real reason why one side of the vane's frame couldn't have a box welded around it to mount the outboard behind all the stuff going on the transom. I've been looking for an excuse to build a tiller extender and gear shift that can be controlled from the cockpit. (Current position involves a wedgie from a traveler track.)

Might look a bit funny, but probably no funnier than my current aluminum "Wheel chock from the space shuttle" mounting block system. (I'm ashamed, so no picture.)

Jeff, She is a sailboat first after all! Though when my jibs tack shackle parted, I was pleased to have an engine to head her up into the wind... I am getting pretty decent at sailing - into - docks, main sail gets stuck about 1/3rd the way down... broad reaching into a piling while coming along side made me glad to own a triton with its mighty bronze stem fitting.

P.S. Web page has a new update.

[triton #227]

Has any one ever tryed a golf cart motor They seam to have alot of power. most run on 36 volts and use three batteries. not shure what the HP is but it seams like it would be enough to get you in and out of the marina.

[Rachel]

Zach,

Atom's motor is mounted on what I believe is a custom-fabricated bracket on the port side of the transom. I have a photo, but I can't post it directly from my computer. Picture a typically shaped, fixed outboard bracket with motor pad, but with the addition of two vertical "tracks" that the whole rig can slide up and down on (at least I think this is how it works from looking at my photo).

I'm sure James will be happy to talk with you about it, but if you get to the stage of wanting to build one and haven't heard back, I could send you the photo (I don't think he would mind).

Rachel

[Figment]

The golfcart motor idea is always intriguing. Electric drives are always intriguing, I think. All notions of efficiency or greeny-ness aside, they're attractive because they're QUIET.

Solomon have made some pretty nice developments in their systems, but the last I checked they were all oriented toward larger craft.
Battery stowage is another hurdle. Really, unless the boat is designed around the battery bank, it's tough to get something the size of a Triton to comfortably swallow enough battery capacity for a system robust enough to be considered something comparable to an A4.

But if you're not looking for that, if you're just looking for "marina power", and if you're leaning toward an outboard motor anyway, why not borrow from the R&D funded by our bass-fishing buddies? They make some SERIOUSLY powerful electric trolling motors, and lately they're making them for salt water as well. They even have the whole flip-up-and-away bracket thing all figured out.

Just a thought.

[jollyboat]

Zach,

I have used a side mount engine system for the last year on 466. This arrangement does work with varying degrees of success and frustration. I purchased new from Spartan Marine their cast bronze removable outboard bracket. Because of the lack of weight of 466 in general not to mention the lack of the Atomic Four the stern of the 466 sits very high on her lines so I bolted to the Spartan bracket a 2 X 10 and then bolted to that yet another stainless steel transome outboard mounts effectively lowering the hanging bracket position. (very hard on bad backs of 40 year olds) When the outboard is lowered onto the bracket the propeller is 90 degrees to the boats hull and so the motor needs to be turned 90 degrees to get the propeller to face aft or forward if need be. (reverse). This set up has allow me to move the boat around as needed in it's "in the water rebuild" but without further refinement this arrangment would be difficult to use as a long term solution. Zach - you would be better off with an inboard again.

[Zach]

Brian,

I've been meaning to ask... how does yours sail with atomic four out? (I've still got a lot of work to do before I can take her for a sail...)

Does she lift the stern with a big genoa? Do you have a picture of your mounting brackets?

I like the golf cart motor idea, I'll swing by the mechanic off highway 70 next time I'm headed to the boat. Curious about the voltage they use, and motor size. Do they use a gear box, or switch polarity to reverse? Sure would lower the costs to find a junk golfcart and harvest the parts from it.

Figment, you just gave me an idea... Wonder if a trolling motor could be wired to be used as a water generator?

[bcooke]

In theory, DC motors and generators are the same thing. A motor can generate and a generator can motor. It is all about where the energy input is. In practice I think the details favor one purpose over the other (types of bearings, heat dissipation, etc.) A propeller designed to push is also not of the ideal shape to be driven.

She is a sailboat first after all!

And getting nit-picky, the Triton is a sailing auxiliary. The engine is an integral part of the design. If you keep to the windy parts of the world, sail only can work out pretty well. In other parts you are going to spend a lot of time drifting with the tides. Lin and Larry Pardey have sailed around a long time with no motor so we all know it can be done. They also spent very little time exploring Maine when they were in the area - most likely because there just wasn't enough wind to enjoy some of the best cruising grounds the U.S. has to offer. Being a quarter mile from a destination harbor entrance and being sucked away at a knot and a half + on the tide can lose its appeal after awhile. Trust me on that one. I was once a purist too.

How about keeping it real simple and using a set of oars or a single scull off the stern? I hear you can keep a Triton going at a knot or two with a reasonable amount of effort.

-Britton

[Zach]

I'll probably give oars a try for the sake of learning... but I do like engines. My reasoning for an outboard on a cruising boat is that I can have a complete spare drive ready to run. Lose a prop, pull the spare out and drop it on the mount... repair at your own leisure. Anything but a fuel issue and the boat will still have propulsion. Put a nipple on a jerry can and even fuel contamination is relative.

For the most part though, I'm shooting for reduced operating expenses. Removing the inboard cuts fuel burn, and parts prices. Less working, more time cruising!

[Figment]

If you're shooting for reduced operating expenses, I think you need to work on your aim, or at least find bigger targets.

[bcooke]

Well, expect the A4 to burn about 0.7 gallons an hour. If you throttled it back to a power setting that would have comparable thrust to an outboard you are probably burning 0.5 or less.

I think Mike may have been a bit crude but I also think he is right in that there won't be much cost savings switching to an outboard. There will definitely be a performance loss though. Reverse might be an exception to that statement. Real sailors don't back up.

Maintaining an A4 is dead cheap too. The problem is that most of us inherit engines that have been neglected for far too long - as in decades frequently. Moyer Marine is a great resource but parts can usually be obtained much cheaper at NAPA. The A4 is also a lot less technologically sophisticated than most outboard engines (I am ignoring Seagull outboards which I hate with a passion after owning a couple for too long) and is really a much simpler engine that your typical outboard. True, you can't just unbolt the A4 and lug it to your local mechanic but the A4 does come out easily and hiring a mechanic is going to blow any cost savings anyway.

You have a point with changing the prop but I think you are going to find that needing to remove a prop on a Triton is an exceptionaly rare event. The full keel not only cuts the prop efficiency in half but it protects it from most stray lines and such that are going to foul it. An outboard on the other hand is going to be a stray line magnet.

I do like my Atomic Four and perhaps you should take my opinion for the biased opinion that it is. It definitely works for me. The only other option I might consider is a diesel replacement and since my engine is in great shape I won't even consider it for another 30-40 years. I don't use the engine much after all. Maybe by then they will have figured out a decent electric drive system

-Britton

[Rachel]

I don't mean to speak for Zach here, but perhaps he's getting at the simplicity of the outboard, when he thinks of expenses, etc.

I'm not saying that an outboard is better than an inboard -- or even remotely as good, in many ways. But I think where inboards get "expensive" is in all the other things that come along with them. By that I mean everything from the intake seacock to hosing, spare parts, a more elaborate fuel tank (perhaps), the shaft, stuffing box, cutless bearing, blower, instrument panel, cables, gauges, wiring, exhaust, etc.

If you're on a budget, you don't already have a good inboard, and you're trying to stick with a system that you can afford to keep "clean" (i.e. nicely done and with quality parts) and all working properly, I can see the appeal of an outboard. It may not propel one as nicely at all times, but it could be nicer than an old "hulky" inboard with a ton of worn out, ugly systems.

Of course there's the argument that if you can't keep an inboard up properly you can't afford a boat, but perhaps in the case of something like a Triton that could be waived. I mean, someone with a small budget can buy one, fix it up with sweat equity to make it sound, put on an outboard (accepting its limitations), spend their "propulsion budget" on new sails, and have a wonderful time sailing.

Again, not saying that an outboard is better, or even necessarily as good, but I can see where it could be cheaper and "cleaner" in some situations. I actually made a point of looking for a Triton-ish type boat that was designed with an outboard in a well partly for this reason. An outboard was something I knew I could "maintain in the fashion it was accustomed to," whereas I wasn't sure I could do that with an inboard and its systems.

Rachel

[bcooke]

Yes, but my 'argument' is exactly that an A4 is simpler than an outboard.

By that I mean everything from the intake seacock to hosing, spare parts, a more elaborate fuel tank (perhaps), the shaft, stuffing box, cutless bearing, blower, instrument panel, cables, gauges, wiring, exhaust, etc.

1.) intake seacock is an expense. A one time expense and not really that much in the big scheme of things.
2.) Hoses are dirt cheap and not worth mentioning.
3.) Spare parts should be carried regardless of motor used.
4.) Elaborate fuel tank? I have never heard of a tank being 'eleborate'. Mine certainly isn't.
5.) shaft, stuffing box, cutless bearing. Okay, outboards don't have these but they have their own shafting/pumps/electrical systems.
6.) instrument panel /guages. A4's don't need them any more than outboards do. Which is to say that if you cared about your outboard you would have guages on it too.
7.) Exhaust. Okay, you have that one.

The only accessory that an A4 has that an outboard might not have is a starter. (and boy is pushing a button and hearing the engine start nicer than pulling on a string while hanging off the back of the boat!)

Not to get anyone upset but my point is that the differences between a 1950's designed A4 and a modern outboard is more perceived than real. Gas engines are gas engines and they all work exactly the same. The A4 is just bigger and clunkier than a modern outboard. I would argue that newish outboards are really far more complex than an A4.

My 5hp Honda four stroke is a great outboard motor but it is more finiky and sensitive to things like fuel quality and regular maintenance, than my A4 ever thought of being.

'nuff said.

-Britton

[Figment]

My point, however crudely and (evidently) poorly made, was that fuel and general engine maintenance is a really small component of a Triton's ownership expense. The difference between these costs in terms of A4 vs. outboard is smaller still.

In context; you'll probably spend much more on ice. I certainly do.

[triton #227]

How hard is it to build a outboard well in the back of the boat, can it be done.

[bcooke]

And you sir need a new icebox!

I may have described Mike's reply as 'crude' more as a way to setup my own poetic comments rather than any true measure of Mike's writing ability. I for one figured out what he meant instantaneously so I wouldn't describe it as 'poorly made' either. I do carry on a bit sometimes.

Can an outboard well be built into a boat? Certainly! Would you want to do it? Not if you have a sane brain cell left in your head!

Really though, it would be a big project IMHO and the return would be marginal. If you really wanted it then it might be better to simply buy a boat already designed and built with an outboard well in it. No sense in re-designing the wheel after all.

-Britton

[Bluenose]

I will add my vote to rowing but for a slightly different reason. Sure oars are cheap and they promote fitness. But for me they are great teachers of sailing. Every time I row I think about how I could sail in lighter and lighter wind. I don't think things aren't possible I just know that I haven't learned how yet. Rowing gives me some time to figure it out.

There was also a comment about being a "purist" by sailing without an engine. I just think that there are choices. People boat for many different reasons and as hard as it is for me to see those Macgregor 26's, there aren't any rights or wrongs. I sail without an engine because I am mechanically inept, I love the peace and quite of sailing and I love to learn.

[Tim]

Everyone needs to do what they need to do when it comes to this ever-present engine question. There are sound reasons behind each possible choice, whether engineless, diesel, Atomic 4, or outboard, and also reasons why another choice is "better".

All fun and ribbing aside--and this topic usually brings up good-natured teasing amongst those of happily differing opinions--it's silly to try and convince others of a particular point of view if they're not really asking to be convinced. We all know that one size doesn't fit all.

Be happy with your choice. Make the choice for the reasons that are right for you, but do be sure they're truly realistic reasons, not fantasy. Perhaps some of these posts can actually help with that wherever one happens to fall on the engine scale.

And remember that choosing to have and use an engine isn't immediately synonymous with being a poor sailor, a bad seaman, a wimp, or a loser worthy of the derision of others who made a different choice. I truly dislike that particular generalization because it's just simply so untrue.

[Bluenose]

And remember that choosing to have and use an engine isn't immediately synonymous with being a poor sailor, a bad seaman, a wimp, or a loser worthy of the derision of others who made a different choice. I truly dislike that particular generalization because it's just simply so untrue.

Tim,

I really hope that it wasn't my comment that inspired this response. Nothing could be further from my intentions. I completely agree about making the right choice for yourself and being happy with that choice.

[Rachel]

I agree, Tim. Although I posted the bit about why someone might want an outboard, inboard-mounted engines certainly have a lot going for them. And oars are fabulous too. Like you say, it's all about what suits.

Britton: Tell me more about gauges on an outboard. I love information, and I like outboards (not necessarily on boats like ours), so of course I like gauges! It just never occurred to me to have them.

Triton #227: here's a link to an article James Baldwin (Triton sailor) wrote about fabricating an outboard well in a Taipan 28. This is a pretty sophisticated well, in that it has plugs both for when the motor is in and when it isn't; some are more like "just a square hole" in the boat. He does note that he does not believe he could fabricate such a well on his Triton (he wanted to), because there is not enough clearance behind the rudder post.

http://www.atomvoyages.com/projects/outboard.htm

Rachel

[Tim]

And remember that choosing to have and use an engine isn't immediately synonymous with being a poor sailor, a bad seaman, a wimp, or a loser worthy of the derision of others who made a different choice. I truly dislike that particular generalization because it's just simply so untrue.

Tim,

I really hope that it wasn't my comment that inspired this response. Nothing could be further from my intentions. I completely agree about making the right choice for yourself and being happy with that choice.

My post wasn't directed at anyone specifically--just a general thought that seemed appropriate given the direction of the thread. Sorry for any confusion.

[Hirilondë]

I think the discussion here is proving that the answer isn't simple. I think the single largest factor in any one person's conclusion is where they start out when they first get their boat. In other words: what kind of auxilary did the boat come with, if any, and what shape is it in?

For some the inboard will be cherried up regardless of cost, or even replaced. On a similar note, an inboard will be added when none came installed. Some boats, the Renegade is one, came with and without A4s. Mine came without one, has an outboard well in the lazarette.

I mean, someone with a small budget can buy one, fix it up with sweat equity to make it sound, put on an outboard (accepting its limitations), spend their "propulsion budget" on new sails, and have a wonderful time sailing.

I don't think Rachel was meaning to describe my situation, but with the exception of boat model, she did so with precise accuracy.

I could install a used A4 (a friend has 2 in his garage), but the invasive surgery, the extensive time, along with some expense isn't worth it to me. I have been using a 20 year old Yamaha 8 h.p. 2-stroke the last two seasons. It has worked, well sort of, and my wife can't start it, which bothers her from a safety point of view (should I be hurt ).

One of my winter projects will be to do a little surgery to the lazarette access and install a new electric start Honda 9.9 h.p. 4-stroke. The result will be most of the convenience of an inboard auxillary, especially the operational functions. If I had to install my outboard on a transom bracket I would have a hard time dealing with the cosmetic issue. Part of me is a little vain, well, concerning my boat anyway.

If you look closely under the transom you can just see a little of the outboard shaft as it comes through the hull before it enters the water. Not quite as nice as an inboard, but I can live with it.



I find the drag from a permanently submerged outboard minimal. Little if any more than a shaft and prop of an inboard unless you have a folding prop. I always leave it in gear under sail as a free spinning prop is more drag than a stationary one.

If I were younger, didn't care so much for creature comforts and more adventurous, I would use oars!

[Rachel]

Dave,

You certainly should feel good about the looks of your boat - wow, bristol! And I just know it was nothing like that when you started.

Did those gorgeous bronze cowls come with the boat? Mmmm. I also like the way your non-skid has that "traditional" all-one-panel look. How have you liked that?

You must be one of the select few who have a wheel and an outboard 8-)

Rachel

[Hirilondë]

Thanks Rachel (blushes). The cowls did come with the boat, but they weren't original equipment. They were made by ABI but unfortunately that model has been discontinued for the permanently bright goldish looking (shudders) some kind of metal version. Why do some companies think everything can be improved? I am quite pleased with the non-skid. I wish it were easier to clean, but I don't know of a better solution.

[Robert The Gray]

On my triton I can gain steerage in about 30 seconds and get up to 1.5 knots in 1.5 minutes with my sweeps. But only on flat water with no wind if in chop or wakes I slow way down. If I lived on a lake, oars would be all I need, except for the lakes of great of course. In tidal waters, in waters with wind shadows, and around commercial shipping, drifting free with the will of nature can quickly lose it's zen like effects. Rowing a 4 ton sail boat in an obviously ineffectual attempt to remove oneself from the shipping lanes is not getting back to nature, it's dodging cars on the interstate with a pogo stick. Back to nature is being swept over the bar on an ebb tide during a rising onshore storm, or drifting inexorably onto the rocks at 2 knots while rowing away desperately at 1.5 knots.

Net .5 to the rocks.

As far as the inboard/out board debate, aesthetics aside, an auxillary can be thought of as a means to propel the boat when the sails won't. In a calm the outboard and the inboard seem equal with the edge to the outboard for noise and vibration. During inclement weather, especially in instances with waves, the outboard on the transom can be pulled out of the water during the excessive rocking, the inboard, with a good fuel system, will keep going.

Just a few lobs into this wonderful game of opinion tennis.

r

[Zach]

About the cost:

I am the mechanic... I've got the micrometers, torque wrenches and gauges to rebuild an engine, fitting my tool boxes engine stands and work bench into a triton would be nice but its not gonna happen! (Grin)

I can rebuild outboards and sell them along the way, hard to do with inboards... icing on the cake is the use of them while earning a profit. Currently I'm hobbiest grade... I'm looking to be diesel certified and HVAC certified by the time to go cruising.

Besides... My Atomic Four needs some parts rebuilt! Its a great running engine, as my magic wrench was waived over it... but its worn out. Good solid rebuildable engine, I'd just rather not rebuild it and use it. May end up rebuilding it to sell, but at this point I'm wanting to go sailing! Perhaps not the best economic move... but hey I'm more artist than tycoon anyway.

[bcooke]

I see Zach, so you are referring to the initial aquisition cost. In that case then yes, you can get an outboard much cheaper than an inboard. I was only thinking of the day to day operating costs. And if you intend to make a business proposition out of it then that certainly will lead you to a different conclusion than me.

Obviously, converting a boat to accept an inboard is going to be an expensive operation. In a boat that already has an inboard, dropping in a replacement is not such a big deal.

Robert,

...drifting free with the will of nature can quickly lose it's zen ...

Great poetry as usual with a keen sense of reality for spice.

Rachel, I mentioned guages in outboards because the same reasons we put guages on inboards should lead us to put guages on outboards. It often doesn't though. Guages give you an intimate look at what is happening and what the trends are in an engine. I guess with outboards most people accept the fact that the first warning of a failure is probably going to be rather catastrophic. For example, If the water pump starts failing on an outboard motor you might catch the reduce water flow but more likely your first indication of an overheated motor will be the sound of a motor in its death throes. A cheap temp guage on an inboard tells me how well the cooling system is operating, how it compares with yesterday, and when I really need to look deeper into the problem.

Now that I think of it, those big humungous outboards do have guages. It is just the little ones that are often considered not worth the effort. More like your lawnmower.

I think the single largest factor in any one person's conclusion is where they start out when they first get their boat. In other words: what kind of auxilary did the boat come with, if any, and what shape is it in?

Very true.

-Britton

[Bluenose]

Robert The Gray wrote

In tidal waters, in waters with wind shadows, and around commercial shipping, drifting free with the will of nature can quickly lose it's zen like effects. Rowing a 4 ton sail boat in an obviously ineffectual attempt to remove oneself from the shipping lanes is not getting back to nature, it's dodging cars on the interstate with a pogo stick. Back to nature is being swept over the bar on an ebb tide during a rising onshore storm, or drifting inexorably onto the rocks at 2 knots while rowing away desperately at 1.5 knots.

Net .5 to the rocks.

In my experience the engine verses engineless debate eventually comes down to examples like this which implies that having an engine is a safety feature. One engineless sailer / writer put it this way. An engine is only a safety device to save yourself from a situation that you shouldn't have been in in the first place. I think this idea has a lot of merit. If we are in a situation where our lives and boat our dependent on our engine my question is: Are we displaying good seamanship? The Pardey's once said that people don't die on boats because of failures or accidents, they die because they run out of options. This is how I sail. I may be sailing along and I wonder what if the mast fails? What are my options? What if I hit a deadhead and hole the boat? What then? I like having lots of options. When I am sailing I only have one option I don't think that I am displaying prudent seamanship and I feel a bit uncomfortable.

I have often found myself in tidal flows with light wind. In my experience the tidal current is much stronger in the deeper water at the center of our channels. So if I am rowing or rowing/sailing I head for shallow water. The current in my experience is much less and often there are back eddies in the coves. And since I am going pretty slow I am not so worried about running aground.

As far as being caught in a shipping lane with my oars: I can't tell you how many mistakes I will have already to be there. But even then for a short while I can row at 2 kts that would get me across the shipping lanes in the Puget Sound in about 30 minutes or less.

For anything I can't sail or row out of, my last option (which I have only had to use once) is my anchor.

I think that there are a great number of reasons to decide on an auxiliary powered sailboat and convenience being right up there. Almost all of my option our inconvenient. I readily admit that. But for me it works.

[Triton106]

Have to agree with Britton that A4's are very simple engines because a complete non-mechanical person like me can keep it running (after a few mistakes). Having said that I also considered what I will do after my beloved A4 "retires". I have debated between the outboard and diesel inboard options. I currently have an outboard bracket installed off to the starboard side and a 3 HP Evinrude hung on the pushpit just in case. Whie I have not measured it I eyeballed the space on the center part of the transom and feel that I can probably squeeze a small windvane in there (something like a Capehorn or Norvane). I probably will have to pull up the Evinrude if the windvane blade is in the water. But one almost never run windvane and outboard at the same time so that should not be a problem. As matter of fact when cruising one should pull the outboard out of water and stored in the cockpit locker anyways.

I have also worked on the Evinrude (2 stroke) and would have to say that it is not that much more complex than the A4 and it sure is a lot easier to work on the Evinrude since I can just throw it in the car and take it back home work in the well lite and spacious garage instead trying to squeeze myself into the tiny engine room on my Triton.

[Zach]

Website for a 43 foot sailboat fit with an electric motor:

http://huberman.org/prestissimo/main.htm

Heading down to the boat tomorrow, so progress pictures should be around monday! (Grin)

Zach

[Zach]

Well... had difficulties tracking down the new fittings for the cockpit drains. I like matching hardware, particularly at an economic price. Both couldn't happen this trip... so no progress was made on that front.

Instead, I finished gutting the galley. The icebox came out in one piece, though it took some serious fiddling to get all the hardware loosened up. After measuring the opening to the companionway... and the icebox, I came to the conclusion that it wasn't going to exit without some work. The companionway is 22 inches wide. After removing the one inch thick slot that captures the drop boards on either side it was 24 1/2-5/8in... My icebox, 24 1/4in. Had to pull the door and table mount off. It slid out, but I couldn't do it alone!

The hull number, 101, was written all over the icebox. Its also engraved in the bottom of the step over the battery, and in the lower shelf behind the galley. I feel for you guys that are numberless, but I wonder how many more scribbles will be found in Pylasteki.

Look Ma, No icebox.


She is starting to look like an A30 from the side...


Soon enough though, the weight will go back as water tanks and batteries. At this point though, I don't think the outboard would be of much use! She's tied up the way she is to find deep water off the dock at the yard. Along side she listed a bit at low tide...

Edit: I'm going to try a different camera. The mast doesn't rake forward THAT far in real life...

[triton #227]

Mine has the hull number on the bottom of every shelf and panel in the boat.

[jollyboat]

Zach,

Great job so far on the boat. I do not know what your plans are for ice box but with your future intentions including some long range cruising this might be a good time to rebuild the ice box that will 1. hold ice longer 2. is of a design that will allow for you to remove the ice box in the future with less "fiddling around" and in such a way that it can be taken in and out of the companionway with less effort.
The ice box discussions as with motors are real PCF favorites so I am sure this thread will weave on even further. In bringing that up, may I add that I also have removed my stock Triton ice box on 466 and as with 346 I intend to use this space on 466 for my batteries, heat-exchanger, battery switch, inverter and battery charger and vacume cleaner (stinger). In that I am only doing light inshore sailing and cruising my cooler needs can be met with off the shelf commercial units.