Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
OK, sometimes I am a slow learner or maybe just too stubborn but after
many years of sailing, I realized a sailboat just was not going to get me to many interesting places in a timely fashion. Then I read about the Tolman Skiffs and the amazing voyages some have taken in them and how seaworthy they are and how fuel efficient they are and thought "That's the boat I need". Although I had never even been at the helm of a power boat, I figgered I'd learn. Not knowing anything about characteristics of powerboats did not stop me and neither did the fact that the motor I bought on e-bay came without any wiring instructions or controls didn't either. All in all, the 20' Tolman is a good boat being rugged, seaworthy, very fuel efficient (5 mpg at 20 kts with 2 cycle 90 hp, top speed of 30 kts with 6 people aboard) and I am proud of her. However, her fuel efficiency and planing at 9 kts means she has small deadrise at the transom, 9 degrees which radically increases toward the bow. In 2' chop, at anything over 12 kts, she pounds enough to be uncomfy after about a half hour. Also being so lightweight, about half the weight of the same size fiberglass boat, she can get pushed around by seas easily. This means I am hesitant to take her across the Gulf Stream to the Bahamas or to Dry Tortugas and other things I'd like to do. However, the family likes her because we can use her for pulling the tube behind and scalloping in shallow water etc. There is a 23' Tolman design with a full cabin and much greater deadrise that is still fuel efficient. It would use a 125 hp 4 stroke and get similar MPG. Would a boat this much bigger be as much "fun"? |
#2
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 4/16/10 11:48 AM, Frogwatch wrote:
OK, sometimes I am a slow learner or maybe just too stubborn but after many years of sailing, I realized a sailboat just was not going to get me to many interesting places in a timely fashion. Then I read about the Tolman Skiffs and the amazing voyages some have taken in them and how seaworthy they are and how fuel efficient they are and thought "That's the boat I need". Although I had never even been at the helm of a power boat, I figgered I'd learn. Not knowing anything about characteristics of powerboats did not stop me and neither did the fact that the motor I bought on e-bay came without any wiring instructions or controls didn't either. All in all, the 20' Tolman is a good boat being rugged, seaworthy, very fuel efficient (5 mpg at 20 kts with 2 cycle 90 hp, top speed of 30 kts with 6 people aboard) and I am proud of her. However, her fuel efficiency and planing at 9 kts means she has small deadrise at the transom, 9 degrees which radically increases toward the bow. In 2' chop, at anything over 12 kts, she pounds enough to be uncomfy after about a half hour. Also being so lightweight, about half the weight of the same size fiberglass boat, she can get pushed around by seas easily. This means I am hesitant to take her across the Gulf Stream to the Bahamas or to Dry Tortugas and other things I'd like to do. However, the family likes her because we can use her for pulling the tube behind and scalloping in shallow water etc. There is a 23' Tolman design with a full cabin and much greater deadrise that is still fuel efficient. It would use a 125 hp 4 stroke and get similar MPG. Would a boat this much bigger be as much "fun"? I won't comment on the "fun" quotient, but I will comment on the "deadrise" quotient. I used to own a 25' Parker, a heavy boat (7000 pounds, wet) with 16 degrees of deadrise at the transom with, obviously, a much sharper forefoot at the bow. We frequently have a 2' chop in Chesapeake Bay. Well, the Parker was up to the challenge at planing speeds in that chop, but because of the far forward seating positing in the cabin, I kept the speeds at 20 mph or less in hard chop. Now if I moved to the rear steering position, the chop was hardly noticeable because at that part of the boat, the hull did not really leave the water. My new Parker has 21 degrees of deadrise at the transom and in my opinion does a better job in the chop. If I were building a new boat in the size you are considering, I'd avoid a hard-chined boat like the Tolman, and find a hull with round chines. They slide back into the water much more gently. Ohhh...a 125 hp outboard would not be enough power for that boat, in my opinion. My 150 Yamaha is a really good match for my 21' Parker...and you are talking a bigger boat with less power. -- http://tinyurl.com/ykxp2ym |
#3
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Apr 16, 12:05*pm, hk wrote:
On 4/16/10 11:48 AM, Frogwatch wrote: OK, sometimes I am a slow learner or maybe just too stubborn but after many years of sailing, I realized a sailboat just was not going to get me to many interesting places in a timely fashion. *Then I read about the Tolman Skiffs and the amazing voyages some have taken in them and how seaworthy they are and how fuel efficient they are and thought "That's the boat I need". *Although I had never even been at the helm of a power boat, I figgered I'd learn. *Not knowing anything about characteristics of powerboats did not stop me and neither did the fact that the motor I bought on e-bay came without any wiring instructions or controls didn't either. All in all, the 20' Tolman is a good boat being rugged, seaworthy, very fuel efficient (5 mpg at 20 kts with 2 cycle 90 hp, top speed of 30 kts with 6 people aboard) and I am proud of her. *However, her fuel efficiency and planing at 9 kts means she has small deadrise at the transom, 9 degrees which radically increases toward the bow. *In 2' chop, at anything over 12 kts, she pounds enough to be uncomfy after about a half hour. Also being so lightweight, about half the weight of the same size fiberglass boat, she can get pushed around by seas easily. *This means I am hesitant to take her across the Gulf Stream to the Bahamas or to Dry Tortugas and other things I'd like to do. However, the family likes her because we can use her for pulling the tube behind and scalloping in shallow water etc. There is a 23' Tolman design with a full cabin and much greater deadrise that is still fuel efficient. It would use a 125 hp 4 stroke and get similar MPG. *Would a boat this much bigger be as much "fun"? I won't comment on the "fun" quotient, but I will comment on the "deadrise" quotient. I used to own a 25' Parker, a heavy boat (7000 pounds, wet) with 16 degrees of deadrise at the transom with, obviously, a much sharper forefoot at the bow. We frequently have a 2' chop in Chesapeake Bay. Well, the Parker was up to the challenge at planing speeds in that chop, but because of the far forward seating positing in the cabin, I kept the speeds at 20 mph or less in hard chop. Now if I moved to the rear steering position, the chop was hardly noticeable because at that part of the boat, the hull did not really leave the water. My new Parker has 21 degrees of deadrise at the transom and in my opinion does a better job in the chop. If I were building a new boat in the size you are considering, I'd avoid a hard-chined boat like the Tolman, and find a hull with round chines. They slide back into the water much more gently. Ohhh...a 125 hp outboard would not be enough power for that boat, in my opinion. My 150 Yamaha is a really good match for my 21' Parker...and you are talking a bigger boat with less power. --http://tinyurl.com/ykxp2ym The 23' Tolman bare hull and cabin is only about 1800 lbs, hence the 125 hp. |
#4
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Apr 16, 12:05*pm, hk wrote:
Ohhh...a 125 hp outboard would not be enough power for that boat, in my opinion. My 150 Yamaha is a really good match for my 21' Parker...and you are talking a bigger boat with less power. How do you know that? I didn't see where Frog stated the weight of the boat. LOA has little bearing on engine performance other than drag. |
#5
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Apr 16, 12:13*pm, Frogwatch wrote:
On Apr 16, 12:05*pm, hk wrote: On 4/16/10 11:48 AM, Frogwatch wrote: OK, sometimes I am a slow learner or maybe just too stubborn but after many years of sailing, I realized a sailboat just was not going to get me to many interesting places in a timely fashion. *Then I read about the Tolman Skiffs and the amazing voyages some have taken in them and how seaworthy they are and how fuel efficient they are and thought "That's the boat I need". *Although I had never even been at the helm of a power boat, I figgered I'd learn. *Not knowing anything about characteristics of powerboats did not stop me and neither did the fact that the motor I bought on e-bay came without any wiring instructions or controls didn't either. All in all, the 20' Tolman is a good boat being rugged, seaworthy, very fuel efficient (5 mpg at 20 kts with 2 cycle 90 hp, top speed of 30 kts with 6 people aboard) and I am proud of her. *However, her fuel efficiency and planing at 9 kts means she has small deadrise at the transom, 9 degrees which radically increases toward the bow. *In 2' chop, at anything over 12 kts, she pounds enough to be uncomfy after about a half hour. Also being so lightweight, about half the weight of the same size fiberglass boat, she can get pushed around by seas easily. *This means I am hesitant to take her across the Gulf Stream to the Bahamas or to Dry Tortugas and other things I'd like to do. However, the family likes her because we can use her for pulling the tube behind and scalloping in shallow water etc. There is a 23' Tolman design with a full cabin and much greater deadrise that is still fuel efficient. It would use a 125 hp 4 stroke and get similar MPG. *Would a boat this much bigger be as much "fun"? I won't comment on the "fun" quotient, but I will comment on the "deadrise" quotient. I used to own a 25' Parker, a heavy boat (7000 pounds, wet) with 16 degrees of deadrise at the transom with, obviously, a much sharper forefoot at the bow. We frequently have a 2' chop in Chesapeake Bay. Well, the Parker was up to the challenge at planing speeds in that chop, but because of the far forward seating positing in the cabin, I kept the speeds at 20 mph or less in hard chop. Now if I moved to the rear steering position, the chop was hardly noticeable because at that part of the boat, the hull did not really leave the water. My new Parker has 21 degrees of deadrise at the transom and in my opinion does a better job in the chop. If I were building a new boat in the size you are considering, I'd avoid a hard-chined boat like the Tolman, and find a hull with round chines. They slide back into the water much more gently. Ohhh...a 125 hp outboard would not be enough power for that boat, in my opinion. My 150 Yamaha is a really good match for my 21' Parker...and you are talking a bigger boat with less power. --http://tinyurl.com/ykxp2ym The 23' Tolman bare hull and cabin is only about 1800 lbs, hence the 125 hp. I think I would prefer the hard chines for stability but I have no experience from which to judge, just what I have read. On fuel efficiency, here there is a very good free ramp 5 miles upriver from the gulf and a poor ramp on the gulf which costs $5. Many people drive their boat and trailer to the poor ramp and launch there because their boats use so much fuel going up or downriver. The Tolman is so fuel efficient that it simply is not an issue. On motors, Tolman specs a 60 hp for the 20'. He says no more than 350 lbs of motor on the transom because it affects performance. I knew I would be taking at least 4 people most of the time and I wanted a "get home" kicker too so I asked about a 90 hp and kicker weight, The suggestion was to put 3 batteries up in the bow to balance her and make extra people sit forward of the console underway. On the 23', the 125 hp plus kicker will be beyond the specs for transom weight. |
#6
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 4/16/10 12:28 PM, Frogwatch wrote:
On Apr 16, 12:13 pm, wrote: On Apr 16, 12:05 pm, wrote: On 4/16/10 11:48 AM, Frogwatch wrote: OK, sometimes I am a slow learner or maybe just too stubborn but after many years of sailing, I realized a sailboat just was not going to get me to many interesting places in a timely fashion. Then I read about the Tolman Skiffs and the amazing voyages some have taken in them and how seaworthy they are and how fuel efficient they are and thought "That's the boat I need". Although I had never even been at the helm of a power boat, I figgered I'd learn. Not knowing anything about characteristics of powerboats did not stop me and neither did the fact that the motor I bought on e-bay came without any wiring instructions or controls didn't either. All in all, the 20' Tolman is a good boat being rugged, seaworthy, very fuel efficient (5 mpg at 20 kts with 2 cycle 90 hp, top speed of 30 kts with 6 people aboard) and I am proud of her. However, her fuel efficiency and planing at 9 kts means she has small deadrise at the transom, 9 degrees which radically increases toward the bow. In 2' chop, at anything over 12 kts, she pounds enough to be uncomfy after about a half hour. Also being so lightweight, about half the weight of the same size fiberglass boat, she can get pushed around by seas easily. This means I am hesitant to take her across the Gulf Stream to the Bahamas or to Dry Tortugas and other things I'd like to do. However, the family likes her because we can use her for pulling the tube behind and scalloping in shallow water etc. There is a 23' Tolman design with a full cabin and much greater deadrise that is still fuel efficient. It would use a 125 hp 4 stroke and get similar MPG. Would a boat this much bigger be as much "fun"? I won't comment on the "fun" quotient, but I will comment on the "deadrise" quotient. I used to own a 25' Parker, a heavy boat (7000 pounds, wet) with 16 degrees of deadrise at the transom with, obviously, a much sharper forefoot at the bow. We frequently have a 2' chop in Chesapeake Bay. Well, the Parker was up to the challenge at planing speeds in that chop, but because of the far forward seating positing in the cabin, I kept the speeds at 20 mph or less in hard chop. Now if I moved to the rear steering position, the chop was hardly noticeable because at that part of the boat, the hull did not really leave the water. My new Parker has 21 degrees of deadrise at the transom and in my opinion does a better job in the chop. If I were building a new boat in the size you are considering, I'd avoid a hard-chined boat like the Tolman, and find a hull with round chines. They slide back into the water much more gently. Ohhh...a 125 hp outboard would not be enough power for that boat, in my opinion. My 150 Yamaha is a really good match for my 21' Parker...and you are talking a bigger boat with less power. --http://tinyurl.com/ykxp2ym The 23' Tolman bare hull and cabin is only about 1800 lbs, hence the 125 hp. I think I would prefer the hard chines for stability but I have no experience from which to judge, just what I have read. On fuel efficiency, here there is a very good free ramp 5 miles upriver from the gulf and a poor ramp on the gulf which costs $5. Many people drive their boat and trailer to the poor ramp and launch there because their boats use so much fuel going up or downriver. The Tolman is so fuel efficient that it simply is not an issue. On motors, Tolman specs a 60 hp for the 20'. He says no more than 350 lbs of motor on the transom because it affects performance. I knew I would be taking at least 4 people most of the time and I wanted a "get home" kicker too so I asked about a 90 hp and kicker weight, The suggestion was to put 3 batteries up in the bow to balance her and make extra people sit forward of the console underway. On the 23', the 125 hp plus kicker will be beyond the specs for transom weight. Oh, there is no question a boat with rounded bilges will roll a bit. If you ever get the chance, take a look at the bottom of a nice old Lyman or other open boat from that period...nice gently rounded chines, far less pounding in the chop. Trade-offs everywhere, eh? Gentler ride, more roll, in the case of the rounded bilge boat. The Tolman is "fuel efficient" because it has relatively flat bottom, is narrow at the bilges, and is lightly built, especially in comparison to a 'glass boat of the same length. If you have four sitting ahead of the console, they are going to get the worst of the pounding, right? -- http://tinyurl.com/ykxp2ym |
#7
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Apr 16, 12:46*pm, hk wrote:
On 4/16/10 12:28 PM, Frogwatch wrote: On Apr 16, 12:13 pm, *wrote: On Apr 16, 12:05 pm, *wrote: On 4/16/10 11:48 AM, Frogwatch wrote: OK, sometimes I am a slow learner or maybe just too stubborn but after many years of sailing, I realized a sailboat just was not going to get me to many interesting places in a timely fashion. *Then I read about the Tolman Skiffs and the amazing voyages some have taken in them and how seaworthy they are and how fuel efficient they are and thought "That's the boat I need". *Although I had never even been at the helm of a power boat, I figgered I'd learn. *Not knowing anything about characteristics of powerboats did not stop me and neither did the fact that the motor I bought on e-bay came without any wiring instructions or controls didn't either. All in all, the 20' Tolman is a good boat being rugged, seaworthy, very fuel efficient (5 mpg at 20 kts with 2 cycle 90 hp, top speed of 30 kts with 6 people aboard) and I am proud of her. *However, her fuel efficiency and planing at 9 kts means she has small deadrise at the transom, 9 degrees which radically increases toward the bow. *In 2' chop, at anything over 12 kts, she pounds enough to be uncomfy after about a half hour. Also being so lightweight, about half the weight of the same size fiberglass boat, she can get pushed around by seas easily. *This means I am hesitant to take her across the Gulf Stream to the Bahamas or to Dry Tortugas and other things I'd like to do. However, the family likes her because we can use her for pulling the tube behind and scalloping in shallow water etc. There is a 23' Tolman design with a full cabin and much greater deadrise that is still fuel efficient. It would use a 125 hp 4 stroke and get similar MPG. *Would a boat this much bigger be as much "fun"? I won't comment on the "fun" quotient, but I will comment on the "deadrise" quotient. I used to own a 25' Parker, a heavy boat (7000 pounds, wet) with 16 degrees of deadrise at the transom with, obviously, a much sharper forefoot at the bow. We frequently have a 2' chop in Chesapeake Bay. Well, the Parker was up to the challenge at planing speeds in that chop, but because of the far forward seating positing in the cabin, I kept the speeds at 20 mph or less in hard chop. Now if I moved to the rear steering position, the chop was hardly noticeable because at that part of the boat, the hull did not really leave the water. My new Parker has 21 degrees of deadrise at the transom and in my opinion does a better job in the chop. If I were building a new boat in the size you are considering, I'd avoid a hard-chined boat like the Tolman, and find a hull with round chines.. They slide back into the water much more gently. Ohhh...a 125 hp outboard would not be enough power for that boat, in my opinion. My 150 Yamaha is a really good match for my 21' Parker...and you are talking a bigger boat with less power. --http://tinyurl.com/ykxp2ym The 23' Tolman bare hull and cabin is only about 1800 lbs, hence the 125 hp. I think I would prefer the hard chines for stability but I have no experience from which to judge, just what I have read. On fuel efficiency, here there is a very good free ramp 5 miles upriver from the gulf and a poor ramp on the gulf which costs $5. Many people drive their boat and trailer to the poor ramp and launch there because their boats use so much fuel going up or downriver. *The Tolman is so fuel efficient that it simply is not an issue. On motors, Tolman specs a 60 hp for the 20'. *He says no more than 350 lbs of motor on the transom because it affects performance. *I knew I would be taking at least 4 people most of the time and I wanted a "get home" kicker too so I asked *about a 90 hp and kicker weight, *The suggestion was to put 3 batteries up in the bow to balance her and make extra people sit forward of the console underway. On the 23', the 125 hp plus kicker will be beyond the specs for transom weight. Oh, there is no question a boat with rounded bilges will roll a bit. If you ever get the chance, take a look at the bottom of a nice old Lyman or other open boat from that period...nice gently rounded chines, far less pounding in the chop. Trade-offs everywhere, eh? Gentler ride, more roll, in the case of the rounded bilge boat. The Tolman is "fuel efficient" because it has relatively flat bottom, is narrow at the bilges, and is lightly built, especially in comparison to a 'glass boat of the same length. If you have four sitting ahead of the console, they are going to get the worst of the pounding, right? --http://tinyurl.com/ykxp2ym HK mistakes "lightly built" and "built light". From what I can tell, most power boats are built heavy and poorly with little thought to structural integrity. Read some of David Pasco's stuff to get an idea of it. OTOH, the Tolman is very well thought out using material that is stronger than fiberglass construction but lighter. Then it is designed with the material being bent to make the hull structural even without the continuous stringers or other interior supports or the structural Thwart" across her beam in front of the console. THEN, where nearly all commercial builders simply use 8 oz/yard glass at joints, Tolman uses 18 oz BIAXIAL glass covered with 4 oz glass at all stressed joints. The resulting structure is less than half the weight of an all fiberglass boat and considerably stronger. |
#8
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Apr 16, 4:29*pm, Frogwatch wrote:
On Apr 16, 12:46*pm, hk wrote: On 4/16/10 12:28 PM, Frogwatch wrote: On Apr 16, 12:13 pm, *wrote: On Apr 16, 12:05 pm, *wrote: On 4/16/10 11:48 AM, Frogwatch wrote: OK, sometimes I am a slow learner or maybe just too stubborn but after many years of sailing, I realized a sailboat just was not going to get me to many interesting places in a timely fashion. *Then I read about the Tolman Skiffs and the amazing voyages some have taken in them and how seaworthy they are and how fuel efficient they are and thought "That's the boat I need". *Although I had never even been at the helm of a power boat, I figgered I'd learn. *Not knowing anything about characteristics of powerboats did not stop me and neither did the fact that the motor I bought on e-bay came without any wiring instructions or controls didn't either. All in all, the 20' Tolman is a good boat being rugged, seaworthy, very fuel efficient (5 mpg at 20 kts with 2 cycle 90 hp, top speed of 30 kts with 6 people aboard) and I am proud of her. *However, her fuel efficiency and planing at 9 kts means she has small deadrise at the transom, 9 degrees which radically increases toward the bow. *In 2' chop, at anything over 12 kts, she pounds enough to be uncomfy after about a half hour. Also being so lightweight, about half the weight of the same size fiberglass boat, she can get pushed around by seas easily. *This means I am hesitant to take her across the Gulf Stream to the Bahamas or to Dry Tortugas and other things I'd like to do. However, the family likes her because we can use her for pulling the tube behind and scalloping in shallow water etc. There is a 23' Tolman design with a full cabin and much greater deadrise that is still fuel efficient. It would use a 125 hp 4 stroke and get similar MPG. *Would a boat this much bigger be as much "fun"? I won't comment on the "fun" quotient, but I will comment on the "deadrise" quotient. I used to own a 25' Parker, a heavy boat (7000 pounds, wet) with 16 degrees of deadrise at the transom with, obviously, a much sharper forefoot at the bow. We frequently have a 2' chop in Chesapeake Bay.. Well, the Parker was up to the challenge at planing speeds in that chop, but because of the far forward seating positing in the cabin, I kept the speeds at 20 mph or less in hard chop. Now if I moved to the rear steering position, the chop was hardly noticeable because at that part of the boat, the hull did not really leave the water. My new Parker has 21 degrees of deadrise at the transom and in my opinion does a better job in the chop. If I were building a new boat in the size you are considering, I'd avoid a hard-chined boat like the Tolman, and find a hull with round chines. They slide back into the water much more gently. Ohhh...a 125 hp outboard would not be enough power for that boat, in my opinion. My 150 Yamaha is a really good match for my 21' Parker...and you are talking a bigger boat with less power. --http://tinyurl.com/ykxp2ym The 23' Tolman bare hull and cabin is only about 1800 lbs, hence the 125 hp. I think I would prefer the hard chines for stability but I have no experience from which to judge, just what I have read. On fuel efficiency, here there is a very good free ramp 5 miles upriver from the gulf and a poor ramp on the gulf which costs $5. Many people drive their boat and trailer to the poor ramp and launch there because their boats use so much fuel going up or downriver. *The Tolman is so fuel efficient that it simply is not an issue. On motors, Tolman specs a 60 hp for the 20'. *He says no more than 350 lbs of motor on the transom because it affects performance. *I knew I would be taking at least 4 people most of the time and I wanted a "get home" kicker too so I asked *about a 90 hp and kicker weight, *The suggestion was to put 3 batteries up in the bow to balance her and make extra people sit forward of the console underway. On the 23', the 125 hp plus kicker will be beyond the specs for transom weight. Oh, there is no question a boat with rounded bilges will roll a bit. If you ever get the chance, take a look at the bottom of a nice old Lyman or other open boat from that period...nice gently rounded chines, far less pounding in the chop. Trade-offs everywhere, eh? Gentler ride, more roll, in the case of the rounded bilge boat. The Tolman is "fuel efficient" because it has relatively flat bottom, is narrow at the bilges, and is lightly built, especially in comparison to a 'glass boat of the same length. If you have four sitting ahead of the console, they are going to get the worst of the pounding, right? --http://tinyurl.com/ykxp2ym HK mistakes "lightly built" and "built light". *From what I can tell, most power boats are built heavy and poorly with little thought to structural integrity. *Read some of David Pasco's stuff to get an idea of it. *OTOH, the Tolman is very well thought out using material that is stronger than fiberglass construction but lighter. *Then it is designed *with the material being bent to make the hull structural even without the continuous stringers or other interior supports or the structural Thwart" across her beam in front of the console. *THEN, where nearly all commercial builders simply use 8 oz/yard glass at joints, Tolman uses 18 oz BIAXIAL glass covered with 4 oz glass at all stressed joints. *The resulting structure is less than half the weight of an all fiberglass boat and considerably stronger. Two boats on a plane differ in fuel efficiency only due to their weight (OK, some small drag diffs but minor). Thus a deep V and a flat hull at the same speed on a plane should get the same mpg if they weigh the same. Thus, it is not the flat hull of the Tolman but the low weight that gives it its fuel effciency. |
#9
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 4/16/10 4:29 PM, Frogwatch wrote:
On Apr 16, 12:46 pm, wrote: On 4/16/10 12:28 PM, Frogwatch wrote: On Apr 16, 12:13 pm, wrote: On Apr 16, 12:05 pm, wrote: On 4/16/10 11:48 AM, Frogwatch wrote: OK, sometimes I am a slow learner or maybe just too stubborn but after many years of sailing, I realized a sailboat just was not going to get me to many interesting places in a timely fashion. Then I read about the Tolman Skiffs and the amazing voyages some have taken in them and how seaworthy they are and how fuel efficient they are and thought "That's the boat I need". Although I had never even been at the helm of a power boat, I figgered I'd learn. Not knowing anything about characteristics of powerboats did not stop me and neither did the fact that the motor I bought on e-bay came without any wiring instructions or controls didn't either. All in all, the 20' Tolman is a good boat being rugged, seaworthy, very fuel efficient (5 mpg at 20 kts with 2 cycle 90 hp, top speed of 30 kts with 6 people aboard) and I am proud of her. However, her fuel efficiency and planing at 9 kts means she has small deadrise at the transom, 9 degrees which radically increases toward the bow. In 2' chop, at anything over 12 kts, she pounds enough to be uncomfy after about a half hour. Also being so lightweight, about half the weight of the same size fiberglass boat, she can get pushed around by seas easily. This means I am hesitant to take her across the Gulf Stream to the Bahamas or to Dry Tortugas and other things I'd like to do. However, the family likes her because we can use her for pulling the tube behind and scalloping in shallow water etc. There is a 23' Tolman design with a full cabin and much greater deadrise that is still fuel efficient. It would use a 125 hp 4 stroke and get similar MPG. Would a boat this much bigger be as much "fun"? I won't comment on the "fun" quotient, but I will comment on the "deadrise" quotient. I used to own a 25' Parker, a heavy boat (7000 pounds, wet) with 16 degrees of deadrise at the transom with, obviously, a much sharper forefoot at the bow. We frequently have a 2' chop in Chesapeake Bay. Well, the Parker was up to the challenge at planing speeds in that chop, but because of the far forward seating positing in the cabin, I kept the speeds at 20 mph or less in hard chop. Now if I moved to the rear steering position, the chop was hardly noticeable because at that part of the boat, the hull did not really leave the water. My new Parker has 21 degrees of deadrise at the transom and in my opinion does a better job in the chop. If I were building a new boat in the size you are considering, I'd avoid a hard-chined boat like the Tolman, and find a hull with round chines. They slide back into the water much more gently. Ohhh...a 125 hp outboard would not be enough power for that boat, in my opinion. My 150 Yamaha is a really good match for my 21' Parker...and you are talking a bigger boat with less power. --http://tinyurl.com/ykxp2ym The 23' Tolman bare hull and cabin is only about 1800 lbs, hence the 125 hp. I think I would prefer the hard chines for stability but I have no experience from which to judge, just what I have read. On fuel efficiency, here there is a very good free ramp 5 miles upriver from the gulf and a poor ramp on the gulf which costs $5. Many people drive their boat and trailer to the poor ramp and launch there because their boats use so much fuel going up or downriver. The Tolman is so fuel efficient that it simply is not an issue. On motors, Tolman specs a 60 hp for the 20'. He says no more than 350 lbs of motor on the transom because it affects performance. I knew I would be taking at least 4 people most of the time and I wanted a "get home" kicker too so I asked about a 90 hp and kicker weight, The suggestion was to put 3 batteries up in the bow to balance her and make extra people sit forward of the console underway. On the 23', the 125 hp plus kicker will be beyond the specs for transom weight. Oh, there is no question a boat with rounded bilges will roll a bit. If you ever get the chance, take a look at the bottom of a nice old Lyman or other open boat from that period...nice gently rounded chines, far less pounding in the chop. Trade-offs everywhere, eh? Gentler ride, more roll, in the case of the rounded bilge boat. The Tolman is "fuel efficient" because it has relatively flat bottom, is narrow at the bilges, and is lightly built, especially in comparison to a 'glass boat of the same length. If you have four sitting ahead of the console, they are going to get the worst of the pounding, right? --http://tinyurl.com/ykxp2ym HK mistakes "lightly built" and "built light". From what I can tell, most power boats are built heavy and poorly with little thought to structural integrity. Read some of David Pasco's stuff to get an idea of it. OTOH, the Tolman is very well thought out using material that is stronger than fiberglass construction but lighter. Then it is designed with the material being bent to make the hull structural even without the continuous stringers or other interior supports or the structural Thwart" across her beam in front of the console. THEN, where nearly all commercial builders simply use 8 oz/yard glass at joints, Tolman uses 18 oz BIAXIAL glass covered with 4 oz glass at all stressed joints. The resulting structure is less than half the weight of an all fiberglass boat and considerably stronger. My comment about weight was in relation to riding through the chop, not about the structural integrity of one boat over another. All else being equal, a heavier boat will ride better. Thus, if you could find a Tolman with a deep vee hull and the same dimensions and angles of a deep vee fiberglass boat, the heavier boat will ride the chop better, with less bounce. I don't buy your arguments regarding hull strength. If the Tolman specs call for that heavy a glass, it is because they have to to beef up a lightly built wood shell, and that the boats are assembled by amateurs. That larger Tolman you are considering has 12 degrees of deadrise at the transom. Try pushing that boat at 20 knots through our typical 2' chop in Bay, and your fillings will fall out. -- http://tinyurl.com/ykxp2ym |
#10
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Frogwatch wrote:
OK, sometimes I am a slow learner or maybe just too stubborn but after many years of sailing, I realized a sailboat just was not going to get me to many interesting places in a timely fashion. Then I read about the Tolman Skiffs and the amazing voyages some have taken in them and how seaworthy they are and how fuel efficient they are and thought "That's the boat I need". Although I had never even been at the helm of a power boat, I figgered I'd learn. Not knowing anything about characteristics of powerboats did not stop me and neither did the fact that the motor I bought on e-bay came without any wiring instructions or controls didn't either. All in all, the 20' Tolman is a good boat being rugged, seaworthy, very fuel efficient (5 mpg at 20 kts with 2 cycle 90 hp, top speed of 30 kts with 6 people aboard) and I am proud of her. However, her fuel efficiency and planing at 9 kts means she has small deadrise at the transom, 9 degrees which radically increases toward the bow. In 2' chop, at anything over 12 kts, she pounds enough to be uncomfy after about a half hour. Also being so lightweight, about half the weight of the same size fiberglass boat, she can get pushed around by seas easily. This means I am hesitant to take her across the Gulf Stream to the Bahamas or to Dry Tortugas and other things I'd like to do. However, the family likes her because we can use her for pulling the tube behind and scalloping in shallow water etc. There is a 23' Tolman design with a full cabin and much greater deadrise that is still fuel efficient. It would use a 125 hp 4 stroke and get similar MPG. Would a boat this much bigger be as much "fun"? Does anyone make a 125 four stroke? You might have to look at a 115 or 150. |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Who is the bigger... | General | |||
The bigger the boat, the bigger the mess | General | |||
Bigger is stupider! | Cruising | |||
A bigger demonstration! OT | General | |||
Bigger than Clinton!!!!!! | ASA |