Lee, Yure the MAN! TK
----- Original Message -----
From: "omc-boats-digest" <owner-omc-boats-digest@...>
To: <omc-boats-digest@...>
Sent: Monday, July 10, 2006 12:00 PM
Subject: omc-boats-digest V1 #531
>
> omc-boats-digest Monday, July 10 2006 Volume 01 : Number
> 531
>
>
>
> [omc-boats] I'm a newbie
> Re: [omc-boats] I'm a newbie
> Re: [omc-boats] I'm a newbie
> [omc-boats] A sad day...
> [omc-boats] rough Rogue up in Seattle
> RE: [omc-boats] I'm a newbie
> [omc-boats] New to list
> Published Boats Weights vs Reality; WAS Re: [omc-boats] I'm a newbie
> [omc-boats] Weighing-In on Waterlogging
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2006 14:13:17 -0400
> From: Beth David <YASNY@...>
> Subject: [omc-boats] I'm a newbie
>
> Hi everybody,
> I'm a newbie. I've had a 16-foot, Evinrude tri-hull (probably from
> 1960-something) in my yard for a bunch of years. From the pictures on the
> website, I think it's a "Sweet." I'm trying to get it fit for the water.
> Needs a new transom....and, well, everything else.
>
> Meanwhile, I need to buy a trailer for it. No one will work on it until I
> get a trailer. But when I tried to buy a trailer for it, they all wanted
> to
> know how heavy the thing is. So....I guess that's my first question.
>
> Any idea how heavy this thing is?
>
> Thanks,
> bd
>
> - -----
> To get off this list send mail to omc-boats-unsubscribe@...
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2006 12:59:49 -0600
> From: "jim orfino" <jorfino@...>
> Subject: Re: [omc-boats] I'm a newbie
>
> The outboard version was listed at 810 lbs. Add weight of engine, fuel,
> battery, and other junk. Boat could weigh more if the foam has become
> waterlogged
> If it is an I/O, I don't have the spec for it
>
> jim
>
> - ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Beth David" <YASNY@...>
> To: <omc-boats@...>
> Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 12:13 PM
> Subject: [omc-boats] I'm a newbie
>
>
>> Hi everybody,
>> I'm a newbie. I've had a 16-foot, Evinrude tri-hull (probably from
>> 1960-something) in my yard for a bunch of years. From the pictures on the
>> website, I think it's a "Sweet." I'm trying to get it fit for the water.
>> Needs a new transom....and, well, everything else.
>>
>> Meanwhile, I need to buy a trailer for it. No one will work on it until I
>> get a trailer. But when I tried to buy a trailer for it, they all wanted
>> to
>> know how heavy the thing is. So....I guess that's my first question.
>>
>> Any idea how heavy this thing is?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> bd
>>
>> -----
>> To get off this list send mail to omc-boats-unsubscribe@...
>>
>
>
> - -----
> To get off this list send mail to omc-boats-unsubscribe@...
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2006 15:09:50 -0400
> From: Beth David <Yasny@...>
> Subject: Re: [omc-boats] I'm a newbie
>
> Wow. That was quick. Thanks. It's an outboard. I don't know if the foam is
> waterlogged or not, but at least now I have a starting point.
>
>
>
>> From: "jim orfino" <jorfino@...>
>> Reply-To: omc-boats@...
>> Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2006 12:59:49 -0600
>> To: <omc-boats@...>
>> Subject: Re: [omc-boats] I'm a newbie
>>
>> The outboard version was listed at 810 lbs. Add weight of engine, fuel,
>> battery, and other junk. Boat could weigh more if the foam has become
>> waterlogged
>> If it is an I/O, I don't have the spec for it
>>
>> jim
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Beth David" <YASNY@...>
>> To: <omc-boats@...>
>> Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 12:13 PM
>> Subject: [omc-boats] I'm a newbie
>>
>>
>>> Hi everybody,
>>> I'm a newbie. I've had a 16-foot, Evinrude tri-hull (probably from
>>> 1960-something) in my yard for a bunch of years. From the pictures on
>>> the
>>> website, I think it's a "Sweet." I'm trying to get it fit for the water.
>>> Needs a new transom....and, well, everything else.
>>>
>>> Meanwhile, I need to buy a trailer for it. No one will work on it until
>>> I
>>> get a trailer. But when I tried to buy a trailer for it, they all wanted
>>> to
>>> know how heavy the thing is. So....I guess that's my first question.
>>>
>>> Any idea how heavy this thing is?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> bd
>>>
>>> -----
>>> To get off this list send mail to omc-boats-unsubscribe@...
>>>
>>
>>
>> -----
>> To get off this list send mail to omc-boats-unsubscribe@...
>
> - -----
> To get off this list send mail to omc-boats-unsubscribe@...
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2006 12:16:27 -0700
> From: "Scott E. Veazie" <scottveazie@...>
> Subject: [omc-boats] A sad day...
>
> It was like losing a family member, as I saw my Seasport for the last time
> being towed down the road. I sold her pretty quick, I just hope this
> cuddy
> cabin can serve me just as well as she did. I do still want to receive
> mailings as I am still interested, who knows, maybe I'll change my mind
> and
> go get that Dolphin up north.
>
> ~Scott
>
> - -----
> To get off this list send mail to omc-boats-unsubscribe@...
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2006 12:17:44 -0700
> From: "Scott E. Veazie" <scottveazie@...>
> Subject: [omc-boats] rough Rogue up in Seattle
>
> http://seattle.craigslist.org/sno/boa/180039681.html
> - -----
> To get off this list send mail to omc-boats-unsubscribe@...
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2006 23:13:43 -0700
> From: "jdood" <jdood@...>
> Subject: RE: [omc-boats] I'm a newbie
>
> Hey mr weight knower.....do you happen to know the spec weight of a
> "deluxe" i/o? (less water logged foam). I might just take mine to a
> truck scale somewhere and see how it compares. If I am way over, I
> guess that means water logged foam.
>
>
>
> - -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-omc-boats@... [mailto:owner-omc-boats@...]
> On Behalf Of jim orfino
> Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 12:00 PM
> To: omc-boats@...
> Subject: Re: [omc-boats] I'm a newbie
>
> The outboard version was listed at 810 lbs. Add weight of engine, fuel,
> battery, and other junk. Boat could weigh more if the foam has become
> waterlogged
> If it is an I/O, I don't have the spec for it
>
> jim
>
> - ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Beth David" <YASNY@...>
> To: <omc-boats@...>
> Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 12:13 PM
> Subject: [omc-boats] I'm a newbie
>
>
>> Hi everybody,
>> I'm a newbie. I've had a 16-foot, Evinrude tri-hull (probably from
>> 1960-something) in my yard for a bunch of years. From the pictures on
> the
>> website, I think it's a "Sweet." I'm trying to get it fit for the
> water.
>> Needs a new transom....and, well, everything else.
>>
>> Meanwhile, I need to buy a trailer for it. No one will work on it
> until I
>> get a trailer. But when I tried to buy a trailer for it, they all
> wanted
>> to
>> know how heavy the thing is. So....I guess that's my first question.
>>
>> Any idea how heavy this thing is?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> bd
>>
>> -----
>> To get off this list send mail to omc-boats-unsubscribe@...
>>
>
>
> - -----
> To get off this list send mail to omc-boats-unsubscribe@...
>
> - -----
> To get off this list send mail to omc-boats-unsubscribe@...
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2006 06:36:39 -0700 (GMT-07:00)
> From: Michael Cain <mgcain@...>
> Subject: [omc-boats] New to list
>
> <HEAD>
> <META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1555" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
> <BODY>
> <DIV><FONT face=geneva,arial,sans-serif size=4>Hello to All!</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=geneva,arial,sans-serif size=4></FONT> </DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=geneva,arial,sans-serif size=4>I am new to this list. I
> have a 1968 Chris Craft Corsair Sport V. She's 17.5 feet in length, has
> the 225 cid Buick V-6 155 hp, with the OMC stringer outdrive. She is
> currently residing on a lake in west-central Florida. I bought her 3 years
> ago via an eBay auction from some nice folks near Annapolis, MD. What
> a great boat! She gets no salt water and no fish (unless they are
> pre-cooked) to keep her nice & clean.</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=geneva,arial,sans-serif size=4></FONT> </DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=geneva,arial,sans-serif size=4>I look forward to learning
> more about OMC from you folks.</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=geneva,arial,sans-serif size=4></FONT> </DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=geneva,arial,sans-serif size=4>Happy Boating!</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=geneva,arial,sans-serif size=4></FONT> </DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=geneva,arial,sans-serif size=4>Mike Cain</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=geneva,arial,sans-serif size=4>Inverness,
> FL</FONT></DIV></BODY>
> - -----
> To get off this list send mail to omc-boats-unsubscribe@...
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2006 07:49:12 -0600
> From: <lib1@...>
> Subject: Published Boats Weights vs Reality; WAS Re: [omc-boats] I'm a
> newbie
>
> Just a note about OMC published weights vs reality and alternative trailer
> selection: Excellent question and topic, BTW and one that's often
> overlooked
> and misunderstood.
>
> Back in the sixties it was not uncommon for boat dealers to "under-spec"
> boat trailers. OMC was years ahead of the industry when they designed and
> "over-built" their trailers to "match" their boats. Before boat
> manufactures
> would "package" boats, motors and trailers, the dealer would often try to
> "save" the customer money by shaving a few dollars of the deal and placing
> a
> "weakling" trailer under the boat. Result: blown tires, over-heating axle
> bearings, and poor or unsafe handling (trailer sways at speed). I know
> because I worked at one such marine dealer in the sixties.
>
> Also the Evi/John/OMC boats are typically built heavier than even many
> modern boats of similar size and power class. Add some water logging or
> extra necessary gear like fuel, anchor, skiis, PFD's and before long you
> are
> a hundreds (maybe a thousand?) pounds over the OMC published weight.
>
> BTW, I have researched and published some of the E/J/O I/O weights on my
> website (at least for 16 and 19-ft hulls, scroll to the bottom of the
> page).
> I did this not so much for trailer info, but for calculating maximum
> speed,
> as a function of the vessel's power to weight ratio. See:
> http://hhscott.com/evinrude/omc_stringer.htm
>
> As far as trailers go, pay specific attention to the axle and tire load
> rating. You'll have to calculate the entire GROSS load, which includes the
> weight of the hull (plus any water logging), the engine or power package,
> the fuel, the battery, the top and covers, anchors, the paddle, the boat
> hook, the ladder, PFD's, skis, ropes, lines, etc. Last winter I took all
> this stuff out of my boat and weighed it -- it all came in at 327 pounds.
> And we haven't even mentioned the stuff people throw in when taking a long
> vacation, to Uncle John's cabin! Let's continue with my example:
>
> I have a 16-ft Sportsman I/O that weighs (empty, with it's small block
> Chevy
> V8) right at 2000 pounds dry. My trailer weighs in right at 700 pounds.
> Throw the gear in the boat and a full tank of gas and I'm now a tad over
> 3000 pounds. My trailer (see:
> http://hhscott.com/evinrude/escort_trailers.htm ) has a GVWR (Gross
> Vehicle
> Weight Rating) of 4000 pounds, which is primarily determined by the
> trailer's axle, springs and tire ratings. But to get the trailer's true
> rated load capacity, you have to subtract the weight of the trailer, thus
> you get a load capacity of 3300 pounds. In my case a slim reserve capacity
> of only 10 percent.
>
> I'd recommend in the case of you Sweet 16 outboard the following: Let's do
> the math: 1) Bare Boat 825 - 1000 pounds depending on waterlogging. 2)
> Outboard Motor and all rigging 400 - 500 pounds. 3) Necessary fuel and
> safety gear carried in boat: 500 pounds. So you're looking at a minimum
> of
> a 2000 pound capacity trailer. Most likely your weight on the scales will
> be
> pushing 2500 pounds when you factor in the trailer's weight.
>
> And don't forget trailer brakes. Depending on your state laws you'll be
> over
> or at least near the legal limit. Unless your tow vehicle has four wheel
> discs and weighs in at 5000 pounds, you'll appreciate the added safety
> advantage of hydraulic surge brakes on your trailer. E/J/O again was
> light-years ahead of the industry. Their testing revealed a typical
> full-size car of the sixties (typically with four-wheel drums) could stop
> in
> a shorter distance with thier trailers in tow than the vehicle could stop
> on
> it's own! That's one amazing fact!
>
> Bottom line, please don't cut corners on trailer capacities. Take
> advantage
> of the forty years of industry-wide experience and get a wide-stance
> trailer
> with brakes, which permits a lower center of gravity for better towing
> performance and ease of use on the launch ramp. Any decent trailer dealer
> will be able to custom-fit the trailer bunkers and keel rollers to provide
> adequate fit and support for your E/J/O tri-hull. Good luck!
>
> Lee Shuster
> Salt Lake City
>
>
> - ----- Original Message -----
> From: "jdood" <jdood@...>
> To: <omc-boats@...>
> Sent: Monday, July 10, 2006 12:13 AM
> Subject: RE: [omc-boats] I'm a newbie
>
>
>> Hey mr weight knower.....do you happen to know the spec weight of a
>> "deluxe" i/o? (less water logged foam). I might just take mine to a
>> truck scale somewhere and see how it compares. If I am way over, I
>> guess that means water logged foam.
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-omc-boats@... [mailto:owner-omc-boats@...]
>> On Behalf Of jim orfino
>> Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 12:00 PM
>> To: omc-boats@...
>> Subject: Re: [omc-boats] I'm a newbie
>>
>> The outboard version was listed at 810 lbs. Add weight of engine, fuel,
>> battery, and other junk. Boat could weigh more if the foam has become
>> waterlogged
>> If it is an I/O, I don't have the spec for it
>>
>> jim
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Beth David" <YASNY@...>
>> To: <omc-boats@...>
>> Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 12:13 PM
>> Subject: [omc-boats] I'm a newbie
>>
>>
>>> Hi everybody,
>>> I'm a newbie. I've had a 16-foot, Evinrude tri-hull (probably from
>>> 1960-something) in my yard for a bunch of years. From the pictures on
>> the
>>> website, I think it's a "Sweet." I'm trying to get it fit for the
>> water.
>>> Needs a new transom....and, well, everything else.
>>>
>>> Meanwhile, I need to buy a trailer for it. No one will work on it
>> until I
>>> get a trailer. But when I tried to buy a trailer for it, they all
>> wanted
>>> to
>>> know how heavy the thing is. So....I guess that's my first question.
>>>
>>> Any idea how heavy this thing is?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> bd
>>>
>>> -----
>>> To get off this list send mail to omc-boats-unsubscribe@...
>>>
>>
>>
>> -----
>> To get off this list send mail to omc-boats-unsubscribe@...
>>
>> -----
>> To get off this list send mail to omc-boats-unsubscribe@...
>>
>
> - -----
> To get off this list send mail to omc-boats-unsubscribe@...
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2006 08:51:05 -0600
> From: <lib1@...>
> Subject: [omc-boats] Weighing-In on Waterlogging
>
> This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
>
> - ------=_NextPart_000_0687_01C6A3FD.FAF19EB0
> Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> Sorry for the pun.....But......
>
> With the recent interesting discussions on water-logged foam and then =
> more recently replacement trailers and weights, I thought I'd add this =
> note of caution.
>
> Weighing on public scales should NOT be your only method for discovery =
> of water-logged foam.
> Here's why:
>
> Establishing a "dry" baseline or reference weight is very difficult. =
> There are just too many variables. When the factory published their =
> weights, obviously the boats/motors had no owner accessories or mods =
> added. Forty years have passed. A lot can change.
>
> Also, each year the E/J/O boats were subjected to rigorous testing. When =
> anything broke or vibrated loose, it was re-designed or strengthen, =
> sometimes in mid-model year. What that means is that there were and are =
> significant weight differences between otherwise identical boats. (Some =
> of the published weights actually reflect this gradual weight increase =
> from year to year in the brochures.)
>
> The other difficulty in establishing a "dry" weight baseline is =
> determining a dry hull displacement (weight) vs. a combined trailer-hull =
> and even tow vehicle weight on a public scale. My guess is the factory =
> had the advantage of weighing the boats and trailers separately, where =
> we typically don't. Unless you know the accurate weight of just your =
> trailer, dragging your rig across a public scale is sort of meaningless =
> and of course you have to eliminate the tow vehicle weight from the =
> weigh-in, duh!
>
> I'm suggesting that unless you take everything out of your boat =
> (including fuel) you most likely are going to be surprised at how heavy =
> your scale slips read. This could leave you to believe your boat is =
> (falsely) water-logged, when it actually isn't. IMHO, the other methods =
> that have already been described in recent posts for determining if =
> underfloor waterlogged foam conditions exist are all far better methods, =
> than trying to measure weight increases.
>
> One thing for sure, weight is the enemy when it comes to performance and =
> fuel economy. I was out with our kids skiing this weekend and I'll =
> always amazed at how I can feel the different weights of various skiers =
> coming up out of the "hole." And that's with a the torque of a V8 =
> swinging a 13-inch pitch prop.
>
> Speaking of props ...Keep 'em spinning!
>
> Lee Shuster
> Salt Lake City
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> - ------=_NextPart_000_0687_01C6A3FD.FAF19EB0
> Content-Type: text/html;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
> <HTML><HEAD>
> <META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
> charset=3Diso-8859-1">
> <META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.2912" name=3DGENERATOR>
> <STYLE></STYLE>
> </HEAD>
> <BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Sorry for the =
> pun.....But......</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>With the recent interesting discussions =
> on=20
> water-logged foam and then more recently replacement trailers and =
> weights, I=20
> thought I'd add this note of caution.</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Weighing on public scales =
> should NOT be your=20
> only method for discovery of water-logged foam.</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Here's why:</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Establishing a "dry" baseline or =
> reference=20
> weight is very difficult. There are just too many variables. When =
> the=20
> factory published their weights, obviously the boats/motors had no owner =
>
> accessories or mods added. Forty years have passed. A lot can=20
> change.</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Also, each year the E/J/O boats were =
> subjected to=20
> rigorous testing. When anything broke or vibrated loose, it was =
> re-designed or=20
> strengthen, sometimes in mid-model year. What that means is that there =
> were and=20
> are significant weight differences between otherwise identical boats. =
> (Some of=20
> the published weights actually reflect this gradual weight increase from =
> year to=20
> year in the brochures.)</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>The other difficulty in establishing a =
> "dry" weight=20
> baseline is determining a dry hull displacement (weight) vs. a combined=20
> trailer-hull and even tow vehicle weight on a public scale. My guess is =
> the=20
> factory had the advantage of weighing the boats and trailers separately, =
> where=20
> we typically don't. Unless you know the accurate weight of just your =
> trailer,=20
> dragging your rig across a public scale is sort of meaningless and of=20
> course you have to eliminate the tow vehicle weight from the =
> weigh-in,=20
> duh!</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I'm suggesting that unless you take =
> everything out=20
> of your boat (including fuel) you most likely are going to be surprised =
> at how=20
> heavy your scale slips read. This could leave you to believe your boat =
> is=20
> (falsely) water-logged, when it actually isn't. IMHO, the other methods =
> that=20
> have already been described in recent posts for determining if =
> underfloor=20
> waterlogged foam conditions exist are all far better methods, than =
> trying to=20
> measure weight increases.</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>One thing for sure, weight is the enemy =
> when it=20
> comes to performance and fuel economy. I was out with our kids skiing =
> this=20
> weekend and I'll always amazed at how I can feel the different =
> weights=20
> of various skiers coming up out of the "hole." And that's with a =
> the torque=20
> of a V8 swinging a 13-inch pitch prop.</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Speaking of props ...Keep 'em=20
> spinning!</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Lee Shuster</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Salt Lake City</FONT></DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV></BODY></HTML>
>
> - ------=_NextPart_000_0687_01C6A3FD.FAF19EB0--
>
> - -----
> To get off this list send mail to omc-boats-unsubscribe@...
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of omc-boats-digest V1 #531
> *******************************
>
> -----
> To get off this list send mail to
> omc-boats-digest-unsubscribe@...
-----
To get off this list send mail to omc-boats-unsubscribe@...
Received on Monday, 10 July 2006
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Tuesday, 29 July 2014 EDT