FishyFish Tolman Alaskan Skiff and Boat Building Forums Back to Fishyfish
May 29, 2015, 02:04:38 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
CNC Sign Carving

Sign cutting, & carving. CNC milling. SaltWaterWorkshop.com

News: How to build a boat. How to build your own boat. How to build a skiff. Do it Yourself Boat Building. Stitch and Glue Boat Building. Wood, Epoxy, and Fiberglass Boats.
 
   Home   Help Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 10
 51 
 on: May 27, 2015, 11:11:08 PM 
Started by captainfogfish - Last post by Johnnerlad
Hi eddie,

Its been a long time since we last chatted but i have been keeping an eye on your build, looking great and i am sure you will be happy with it when you get it in the water!!

Mark


 52 
 on: May 27, 2015, 11:06:36 PM 
Started by badger27 - Last post by Dave Wright
If you look at the Greenough when it's not in a turn, see:

http://img542.imageshack.us/img542/3605/dscf3017.jpg

I think that you will agree that it's running as "clean" as a Standard without chine flats. Spray volume is simply a function of greater displacement, and spray patterns not that much different, although the Standard seems to throw spray up a bit higher.

http://woodenboatblog.com/photos/tog_06/img008.jpeg.medium.jpeg

Sorry, I can't be bothered to reduce photo size to be accepted by the forum attacments limits.

 53 
 on: May 27, 2015, 10:31:23 PM 
Started by badger27 - Last post by starbright55
I don't know the particular boat you are wanting to compare with and they make lots of custom variants from what I can tell.  To be very general, it's not so much a hull shape or design issue I see as it is just weight.  From what I have read, they are both heavy boats and demand a lot of HP and lift to get them up on plane.  A Tolman is 1/2 to 2/3rds the weight.

Here is a pretty good build thread on a Andersen Greenhough 21.  It weighs in at 3800 lb.  The Radon Signature 26 is 5500 dry. Compare those to the Tolman weights and you can see why planning aids might be needed.

They also do not appear to run as clean if this shot is any indicator of how dry they ride.  Maybe this is just a bad marketing shot?

yep

I would never argue with anyone as to them being heavy - they are.

Bob, I guess I asked the question because Badgers initial question mentioned "double chines like on the Radons or Andersons" and then you said "those modifications are to correct issues with planning."  Radons/Andersons seem to be very popular and have a cult following here on the west coast so saying that they have issues with planing is a pretty broad statement.  I would think needing more horsepower would be more a factor of weight than hull shape.

Second, I just couldn't see how double chines (ok, really just the second chine since we all understand how the lower/wider chine works) could have any substantial effect on how one of those hulls ride (good or bad).  I can't see a 2nd/upper, say 1" wide chine, doing much at all for planing since they're small and mostly out of the water.  Is the 2nd chine for ascetics? Ok, what about old, coveted Radon 26' triple chine?  Do the next upper two chines help planing or are they just a stepped version of "dory flare"? (i.e. they help with stability when carrying more load or when the boat is heeling over by providing more displacement).

Now bleu has ridden a couple of Radons/Andersons/Wilsons/Davis.  What are your thoughts?

Does Ed Anderson still pop on here every now and then??? Awaiting his response!  Grin

(not trying to be argumentative here, mostly thinking out loud here and asking questions as they pop into my head)

 54 
 on: May 27, 2015, 09:37:07 PM 
Started by badger27 - Last post by bleu
yep

 55 
 on: May 27, 2015, 09:19:05 PM 
Started by AlasKen - Last post by Randy Zimmerman
Ken - thanks for sharing that post. Sounds like it was a great trip. If we lived there my wife and daughter would insist on the heater once they found out it was an option. It was 80 here today and my wife was a little "cool" at one point riding in the wind.

 56 
 on: May 27, 2015, 09:18:14 PM 
Started by elkhunter338 - Last post by BobC
Elkhunter,

Only the anti-fouling or ablative bottom paints are designed to wear off.  There are bottom paints that are much harder and designed not to wear off.

I'm not anti-Wetlander, just skeptical of how much benefit you get for your $.  I wathced a video of it being applied and it didn;t seem to self level very well, leaving an orange peel like texture.

Sherwin Williams has quite a long list of industrial coatings that are made for full immersion duty and extremely durable.  They are high solids and high build as well as wear resistant.  You can even get them with super tough glass fiber flakes embedded.

I would bet they are considerably cheaper, especially if all you are looking for is plain old black.

If you want the slick silicon oil stuff then they have that too.  It is certified as a commercial marine coating and used on tug boats, work boats, navy vessels and ocean liners.  They can verify a 10% fuel savings on ships using it but this is likley due to the fact that no marine growth adheres to it so there is less resistance.

I'm not trying to advertise SW paints, just about all industrial paint manufacturers have an equivalent.  DuPont comes to mind as well.  Your $ and your time. Might pay dividends to give them a call.

Take a look at this list:

http://protective.sherwin-williams.com/coatings/categories/template.jsp?N=23


Carry on with the good work.

 57 
 on: May 27, 2015, 09:00:30 PM 
Started by Eddy C - Last post by Randy Zimmerman
Here is the hole from the side scupper. I pulled the scupper out after I got back from a second trial run today. I will post an update on the repair....in my opinion one of the great things about the skiff. It's easy to repair.
 

You can see the scupper near the rear of the skiff.


 58 
 on: May 27, 2015, 08:59:37 PM 
Started by badger27 - Last post by BobC
Starbright,

I don't know the particular boat you are wanting to compare with and they make lots of custom variants from what I can tell.  To be very general, it's not so much a hull shape or design issue I see as it is just weight.  From what I have read, they are both heavy boats and demand a lot of HP and lift to get them up on plane.  A Tolman is 1/2 to 2/3rds the weight.

Here is a pretty good build thread on a Andersen Greenhough 21.  It weighs in at 3800 lb.  The Radon Signature 26 is 5500 dry. Compare those to the Tolman weights and you can see why planning aids might be needed.

They also do not appear to run as clean if this shot is any indicator of how dry they ride.  Maybe this is just a bad marketing shot?



http://www.bdoutdoors.com/forums/threads/my-new-anderson-greenough-21.370008/

 59 
 on: May 27, 2015, 08:55:13 PM 
Started by elkhunter338 - Last post by Randy Zimmerman
I checked my keel guard after the trip today and saw I had a little piece of it coming off the skiff. I knew that I hadn't scuffed the bottom quite enough when I pulled it on. I'll continue to monitor it.


 60 
 on: May 27, 2015, 08:52:05 PM 
Started by Randy Zimmerman - Last post by Randy Zimmerman
Went out on trip #2 today with my wife Jackie and our dog Bella. It was a great day on the water. We ran the motor at various speeds for about 90 minutes and had a great time. Here are a few pictures from the trip.







Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 10
CNC Sign Carving

Sign cutting, & carving. CNC milling. SaltWaterWorkshop.com

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!