Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

## Re: [AtkinBoats] Has anyone ever actually built Restless?

Expand Messages
• Darryl, There seem to be no two of us who prefer the same make of motor. This writer has found that all are pretty reliable if carefully and properly
Message 1 of 19 , Feb 15, 2007
Darryl,

"There seem to be no two of us who prefer the same
make of motor. This writer has found that all are
pretty reliable if carefully and properly installed;
that is most important. In the plans the motor shown
is a four cylinder 133 cubic inch unit weighing
approximately 350 pounds; this is about the right
size, type and power. I would not advise anything much
different. A motor of this power will propel the boat
at a speed of between 25 and 26 miles an hour. There
is a gasoline tank of 22 gallons capacity under the
after deck which will be ample for the usual service
expected of a boat of this character."

Right from the designer, recommends a motor weighing
no more than 350 lbs...

Dirt

____________________________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Music Unlimited
Access over 1 million songs.
http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited
• You estimate: 175hp at 400lbs So figure the whole boat, with engine gear and crew, might weigh 1200 lbs. Using Crouches formula for speed (from Gerr s
Message 2 of 19 , Feb 16, 2007
You estimate: 175hp at 400lbs

So figure the whole boat, with engine gear and crew, might weigh 1200 lbs.

Using Crouches formula for speed (from Gerr's Propeller handbook)
Crouch's Constant (C) is approx 150 for average runabouts, cruisers...
Knots = C * Sqrt(lbs/ShaftHP)
Est top speed approx 55 knots, or better than 60 mph.

There is NO WAY Restless is designed for this kind of speed. I think it would be really dangerous; remember that when Atkin designed it, marine engines were MUCH heavier per HP.

I suspect he had in mind something like 40HP, about right for a fun, stylish, ship-shape 14' runabout.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
• Then it sounds like Restless is a dead design. I don t see any modern 40hp inboards being made. And I dont think you can mate a jetski motor to a ZF
Message 3 of 19 , Feb 16, 2007
Then it sounds like Restless is a dead design. I don't see any modern 40hp inboards being
made. And I dont think you can mate a jetski motor to a ZF transmission

Darryl

--- In AtkinBoats@yahoogroups.com, "Sal's Dad" <sals_dad@...> wrote:
>
> You estimate: 175hp at 400lbs
>
> So figure the whole boat, with engine gear and crew, might weigh 1200 lbs.
>
> Using Crouches formula for speed (from Gerr's Propeller handbook)
> Crouch's Constant (C) is approx 150 for average runabouts, cruisers...
> Knots = C * Sqrt(lbs/ShaftHP)
> Est top speed approx 55 knots, or better than 60 mph.
>
> There is NO WAY Restless is designed for this kind of speed. I think it would be really
dangerous; remember that when Atkin designed it, marine engines were MUCH heavier per
HP.
>
> I suspect he had in mind something like 40HP, about right for a fun, stylish, ship-shape
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
• ... Yanmar makes lots of them in sizes as small as 9.1 HP -- mated to their own sail drive units or for use with standard propeller shafts:
Message 4 of 19 , Feb 16, 2007
> I don't see any modern 40hp inboards being made.

Yanmar makes lots of them in sizes as small as 9.1 HP -- mated to their own
"sail drive" units or for use with standard propeller shafts:

http://www.yanmar.com.au/marine.htm

Sincerely,
Kenneth Grome
Bagacay Boatworks
www.bagacayboatworks.com
• Well I think I found a good solution. Mercury is set to begin production of a GM based 1.6L sterndrive in March. I went to the GM website and downloaded the
Message 5 of 19 , Feb 16, 2007
Well I think I found a good solution. Mercury is set to begin production of a GM based
1.6L sterndrive in March. I went to the GM website and downloaded the PDF for the 1.6L
Vortec engine. It is 100hp at 6000rpm and 66hp at 4000 rpm. The engine with no
transmission is 220lbs. With a 8 degree downangle transmission at around 1.8:1 it should
be a pretty good application. I figure once Mercury gets done marinizing it it will be
around 300lbs once I put a ZF drive on it. It looks like it will take a normal SAE
bellhousing like the rest of the GM based engines.

Darryl

--- In AtkinBoats@yahoogroups.com, Ken Grome <bagacayboatworks@...> wrote:
>
> > I don't see any modern 40hp inboards being made.
>
>
> Yanmar makes lots of them in sizes as small as 9.1 HP -- mated to their own
> "sail drive" units or for use with standard propeller shafts:
>
> http://www.yanmar.com.au/marine.htm
>
> Sincerely,
> Kenneth Grome
> Bagacay Boatworks
> www.bagacayboatworks.com
>
• The 133 cu. in. engine Wm. Atkin speced for Restless probably put out about 50 hp., maybe less. That was enough to push Restless plenty fast enough, 175 hp. is
Message 6 of 19 , Feb 16, 2007
The 133 cu. in. engine Wm. Atkin speced for Restless probably put out
about 50 hp., maybe less. That was enough to push Restless plenty fast
enough, 175 hp. is ridiculous overpowering.

On Thu, 15 Feb 2007 02:46:28 -0800, darryl wrote:

> Has anyone ever actually built Restless? I am an experienced
> woodworker and this will be my first boat. I got the set of plans
> from an old copy of MoToR BoatinG Vol. 8 that I bought off of eBay.
> I am going to put an Atkins Marine Mazada 13B engine in it. 175hp at
> 400lbs with ZF tranny. I just think that a Volvo 3.0L/ZF Trans would
> be too much weight for this little boat. Any thoughts?

--
John <jkohnen@...>
One of the best ways to get yourself a reputation as a dangerous
citizen these days is to go about repeating the very phrases
which our founding fathers used in the great struggle for
independence. <Charles A. Beard>
• Modern high-speed diesels actually have more horsepower per pound than most of the old gas inboards, and there are plenty of diesel inboards under 50 hp. ...
Message 7 of 19 , Feb 16, 2007
Modern high-speed diesels actually have more horsepower per pound than
most of the old gas inboards, and there are plenty of diesel inboards
under 50 hp.

On Fri, 16 Feb 2007 05:15:32 -0800, darryl wrote:

> Then it sounds like Restless is a dead design. I don't see any modern
> 40hp inboards being
> made. And I dont think you can mate a jetski motor to a ZF transmission

--
John <jkohnen@...>
One of the best ways to get yourself a reputation as a dangerous
citizen these days is to go about repeating the very phrases
which our founding fathers used in the great struggle for
independence. <Charles A. Beard>
• While I agree that modern diesels have more HP per LBS I do not see them as a better solution either. I went to Yanmar s and Westerbeke s website among
Message 8 of 19 , Feb 16, 2007
While I agree that modern diesels have more HP per LBS I do not see them as a better
solution either. I went to Yanmar's and Westerbeke's website among others. Those 40hp
engines weight over 500lbs with tranny. That will not work. Additionally the cost of a
diesel is a deal breaker. While I agree (and knew all along) that 175hp is a lot of
horsepower there are things to mitigate output RPMs such as reduction drives. HP is just
one factor in a powertrain, as I know many of you know. However with Mercruiser putting
out a new 1.6L I/O in a few months my dilema is solved providing I can hook a ZF tranny
to it instead of the stern drive it comes with.

Darryl

--- In AtkinBoats@yahoogroups.com, "John Kohnen" <jkohnen@...> wrote:
>
> Modern high-speed diesels actually have more horsepower per pound than
> most of the old gas inboards, and there are plenty of diesel inboards
> under 50 hp.
>
> On Fri, 16 Feb 2007 05:15:32 -0800, darryl wrote:
>
> > Then it sounds like Restless is a dead design. I don't see any modern
> > 40hp inboards being
> > made. And I dont think you can mate a jetski motor to a ZF transmission
>
> --
> John <jkohnen@...>
> One of the best ways to get yourself a reputation as a dangerous
> citizen these days is to go about repeating the very phrases
> which our founding fathers used in the great struggle for
> independence. <Charles A. Beard>
>
• I wonder where Wm. Atkin found a 133 cu. in. engine with reverse gear that only weighed 350 lbs.? I don t have any data for engines in the thirties, but a post
Message 9 of 19 , Feb 18, 2007
I wonder where Wm. Atkin found a 133 cu. in. engine with reverse gear that
only weighed 350 lbs.? I don't have any data for engines in the thirties,
but a post 1939 Graymarine 140 cu. in. four weighs 510 lbs. with reverse
gear but no reduction and in the "high speed" model put out 62 hp. at
3,600 rpm. <shrug> Atkin must have not been counting the reverse gear.
Westerbeke's 133 cu. in. diesel engine weighs 448 lbs. with reverse gear
and puts out 55 hp. at 3,000 rpm., and their 133 cu. in. gasoline engine
weighs 421 lbs. and puts out 66 hp. at 3,600 rpm. Either of those engines
would be a reasonable choice for Restless. The 44 hp. Westerbeke diesel
only weighs 416 lbs. with gear and would still make Restless scoot. I
don't know what Westerbeke bases their gas engine on (they're just
marinizers, not engine manufacturers) but I believe their diesels are
based on Kubota engines. Can't get much better than that... The Westerbeke
gas engine is ready to go into a boat and on the market today. A friend of
mine put one into a 22' Bartender and he was real impressed with the
performance and quality. The Westerbeke pushed the Bartender about 27 mph.
It's probably a bit much for Restless, but not crazy, and I think it's a
better choice than the Mercruiser (do you really want a GM motor?).

A reduction gear won't do anything to reduce horsepower (except the little
bit lost in the gears). You can reduce horsepower by overpropping the
engine so it doesn't spin up to where it makes peak horsepower, but you
can only do so much of that...

On Fri, 16 Feb 2007 22:55:15 -0800, darryl wrote:

> While I agree that modern diesels have more HP per LBS I do not see them
> as a better
> solution either. I went to Yanmar's and Westerbeke's website among
> others. Those 40hp
> engines weight over 500lbs with tranny. That will not work.
> Additionally the cost of a
> diesel is a deal breaker. While I agree (and knew all along) that 175hp
> is a lot of
> horsepower there are things to mitigate output RPMs such as reduction
> drives. HP is just
> one factor in a powertrain, as I know many of you know. However with
> Mercruiser putting
> out a new 1.6L I/O in a few months my dilema is solved providing I can
> hook a ZF tranny
> to it instead of the stern drive it comes with.

--
John <jkohnen@...>
There are two means of refuge from the misery of life - music
and cats. <Albert Schweitzer>
• John, thanks for the reply. That was good information. I asked Westerbeke if the W70GA could be used with a 1:1 transmission (since it comes bobtail) vice
Message 10 of 19 , Feb 18, 2007
John, thanks for the reply. That was good information. I asked Westerbeke if the W70GA
could be used with a 1:1 transmission (since it comes bobtail) vice the 2.7:1 that it usually
comes with. They said a ZF45C could easily be used. I sent some emails to a few dealers
but no answer as of yet to the cost. Westerbeke wouldn't answer that question either. I
can't "just call" as I am in Iraq right now. Do you know how much your friend paid?

Thanks,
Darryl

--- In AtkinBoats@yahoogroups.com, "John Kohnen" <jkohnen@...> wrote:
>
> I wonder where Wm. Atkin found a 133 cu. in. engine with reverse gear that
> only weighed 350 lbs.? I don't have any data for engines in the thirties,
> but a post 1939 Graymarine 140 cu. in. four weighs 510 lbs. with reverse
> gear but no reduction and in the "high speed" model put out 62 hp. at
> 3,600 rpm. <shrug> Atkin must have not been counting the reverse gear.
> Westerbeke's 133 cu. in. diesel engine weighs 448 lbs. with reverse gear
> and puts out 55 hp. at 3,000 rpm., and their 133 cu. in. gasoline engine
> weighs 421 lbs. and puts out 66 hp. at 3,600 rpm. Either of those engines
> would be a reasonable choice for Restless. The 44 hp. Westerbeke diesel
> only weighs 416 lbs. with gear and would still make Restless scoot. I
> don't know what Westerbeke bases their gas engine on (they're just
> marinizers, not engine manufacturers) but I believe their diesels are
> based on Kubota engines. Can't get much better than that... The Westerbeke
> gas engine is ready to go into a boat and on the market today. A friend of
> mine put one into a 22' Bartender and he was real impressed with the
> performance and quality. The Westerbeke pushed the Bartender about 27 mph.
> It's probably a bit much for Restless, but not crazy, and I think it's a
> better choice than the Mercruiser (do you really want a GM motor?).
>
> A reduction gear won't do anything to reduce horsepower (except the little
> bit lost in the gears). You can reduce horsepower by overpropping the
> engine so it doesn't spin up to where it makes peak horsepower, but you
> can only do so much of that...
>
> On Fri, 16 Feb 2007 22:55:15 -0800, darryl wrote:
>
> > While I agree that modern diesels have more HP per LBS I do not see them
> > as a better
> > solution either. I went to Yanmar's and Westerbeke's website among
> > others. Those 40hp
> > engines weight over 500lbs with tranny. That will not work.
> > Additionally the cost of a
> > diesel is a deal breaker. While I agree (and knew all along) that 175hp
> > is a lot of
> > horsepower there are things to mitigate output RPMs such as reduction
> > drives. HP is just
> > one factor in a powertrain, as I know many of you know. However with
> > Mercruiser putting
> > out a new 1.6L I/O in a few months my dilema is solved providing I can
> > hook a ZF tranny
> > to it instead of the stern drive it comes with.
>
> --
> John <jkohnen@...>
> There are two means of refuge from the misery of life - music
> and cats. <Albert Schweitzer>
>
• I ll ask my friend how much he paid for the Westerbeke gas four he put into that Bartender. The engine manufacturers and marinizers think that all those under
Message 11 of 19 , Feb 18, 2007
I'll ask my friend how much he paid for the Westerbeke gas four he put
into that Bartender. The engine manufacturers and marinizers think that
all those under 100 hp. engines are going to go into sailboats, so they
come standard with a hefty reduction. A 1:1 reverse gear would work better
in a light runabout like Restless.

There _were_ lightweight 133" engines in the '30s. I've got a borrowed
copy of the "boatshow" issue of MoToR BoatinG from 1937 that has a table
of "America's Leading Marine Engines." Here are a couple of lightweights
(weights w. reverse gear):

Falcon (US Motors) 46 134" 46 hp. @ 3,200 324 lb.
Kermath Sea Bird 134" 50 hp. @ 3200 315 lb.

Too new for the list is:

"A newcomer to the series of marine engines manufactured by the Red Wing
Motor Company of Red Wing, Minn., is the Arrowhead Junior model, a 4
cylinder, 4 cycle type, with a bore of 3 1/4 inches, stroke of 4 inches,
and piston displacement of 133 cubic inches. This engine is similar in
design and construction to the Arrowhead 25-45 h.p. type which has been so
popular during the past three years. The new engine is lighter in weight
and is particularly compact, being only 35 inches overall.

"The Arrowhead, Jr., will be furnished in two types. A medium-duty type
with gray iron pistons and castings has a rating of 20-40 h.p. The weight
is approximately 450 pounds. It will also be available in a special
high-speed type having alloy pistons and aluminum castings for the oil-
pan, reverse gear cover and flywheel housing. This engine will develop
from 40 to 55 h.p. at speeds of approximately 3,500 r.p.m. Weight will be
under 400 pounds. Deliveries have already begun on this model. It is
especially suited to fast runabouts, yet rugged enough for cruiser or
auxiliary service. It has a 2 1/8-inch crankshaft and lubrication is of
the full pressure feed type. Regular equipment includes the two-unit
6-volt electric starting system and Paragon reverse gear. Optional
equipment includes 2 to 1 ratio reduction gear furnished as an integral
unit."

On Sun, 18 Feb 2007 06:39:31 -0800, darryl wrote:

> John, thanks for the reply. That was good information. I asked
> Westerbeke if the W70GA
> could be used with a 1:1 transmission (since it comes bobtail) vice the
> 2.7:1 that it usually
> comes with. They said a ZF45C could easily be used. I sent some emails
> to a few dealers
> but no answer as of yet to the cost. Westerbeke wouldn't answer that
> question either. I
> can't "just call" as I am in Iraq right now. Do you know how much your
> friend paid?

--
John <jkohnen@...>
Never put off until tomorrow what you can do the day after
tomorrow. <Mark Twain>
• Below is an email from a Westerbeke dealer in California concerning the W70GA engine I was considering for Restless. Dear Mr. Hammonds, Thank you for your
Message 12 of 19 , Feb 19, 2007
Below is an email from a Westerbeke dealer in California concerning the W70GA engine I
was considering for Restless.

Dear Mr. Hammonds,

Thank you for your inquiry on the Westerbeke W-70GA. Pricing is as follows:

W-70 w/ ZF 25M 2.7:1 Transmission 11,232.00 + Shipping
W-70 - Bobtail 8,698.00 + Shipping.

This engine would have to be built and shipped from Westerbeke in Taunton, MA.

If you have any questions, please contact me at 714/ 373-8099 or e-mail @
info@....

Best regards,

Rod Mendenhall
TDC Equipment Inc.
15886 Manufacture Lane
Huntington Beach, CA. 92649
714/ 373-8099
714/ 898-1996-fax

Wow, thats alot of money for a 66hp gas engine considering I can get a brand new Volvo
Penta 3.0L with ZF45C trans for about \$6 grand! I suppose Restless is a dead design as I
am definately not putting that kind of cash out. I suppose I need to go to Westlawn and
lean how to design runabouts for todays motors.

Darryl

--- In AtkinBoats@yahoogroups.com, "John Kohnen" <jkohnen@...> wrote:
>
> I'll ask my friend how much he paid for the Westerbeke gas four he put
> into that Bartender. The engine manufacturers and marinizers think that
> all those under 100 hp. engines are going to go into sailboats, so they
> come standard with a hefty reduction. A 1:1 reverse gear would work better
> in a light runabout like Restless.
>
> There _were_ lightweight 133" engines in the '30s. I've got a borrowed
> copy of the "boatshow" issue of MoToR BoatinG from 1937 that has a table
> of "America's Leading Marine Engines." Here are a couple of lightweights
> (weights w. reverse gear):
>
> Falcon (US Motors) 46 134" 46 hp. @ 3,200 324 lb.
> Kermath Sea Bird 134" 50 hp. @ 3200 315 lb.
>
> Too new for the list is:
>
> "A newcomer to the series of marine engines manufactured by the Red Wing
> Motor Company of Red Wing, Minn., is the Arrowhead Junior model, a 4
> cylinder, 4 cycle type, with a bore of 3 1/4 inches, stroke of 4 inches,
> and piston displacement of 133 cubic inches. This engine is similar in
> design and construction to the Arrowhead 25-45 h.p. type which has been so
> popular during the past three years. The new engine is lighter in weight
> and is particularly compact, being only 35 inches overall.
>
> "The Arrowhead, Jr., will be furnished in two types. A medium-duty type
> with gray iron pistons and castings has a rating of 20-40 h.p. The weight
> is approximately 450 pounds. It will also be available in a special
> high-speed type having alloy pistons and aluminum castings for the oil-
> pan, reverse gear cover and flywheel housing. This engine will develop
> from 40 to 55 h.p. at speeds of approximately 3,500 r.p.m. Weight will be
> under 400 pounds. Deliveries have already begun on this model. It is
> especially suited to fast runabouts, yet rugged enough for cruiser or
> auxiliary service. It has a 2 1/8-inch crankshaft and lubrication is of
> the full pressure feed type. Regular equipment includes the two-unit
> 6-volt electric starting system and Paragon reverse gear. Optional
> equipment includes 2 to 1 ratio reduction gear furnished as an integral
> unit."
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, 18 Feb 2007 06:39:31 -0800, darryl wrote:
>
> > John, thanks for the reply. That was good information. I asked
> > Westerbeke if the W70GA
> > could be used with a 1:1 transmission (since it comes bobtail) vice the
> > 2.7:1 that it usually
> > comes with. They said a ZF45C could easily be used. I sent some emails
> > to a few dealers
> > but no answer as of yet to the cost. Westerbeke wouldn't answer that
> > question either. I
> > can't "just call" as I am in Iraq right now. Do you know how much your
> > friend paid?
>
> --
> John <jkohnen@...>
> Never put off until tomorrow what you can do the day after
> tomorrow. <Mark Twain>
>
• Yep, that Westerbeke is mighty expensive! It s a marinized Mazda industrial engine, BTW. I looked at the GM 1600 Vortec and it looks pretty good on
Message 13 of 19 , Feb 19, 2007
Yep, that Westerbeke is mighty expensive! <whew!> It's a marinized Mazda
industrial engine, BTW.

I looked at the GM 1600 Vortec and it looks pretty good on paper. It's not
just something they yanked out of a cheap economy car. It's kinda revvy
for a marine engine, but it might work alright running at lower RPM, and
lower hp.:

http://tinyurl.com/2sqoj5

http://tinyurl.com/3dc6pd

You might consider getting a Kubota industrial engine and mating it to a
reverse gear. If you use a keel cooler (let into the bottom planking) you
really don't need to do much marinizing. Robb White used a Kubota in his
"Rescue Minor" with a jackleg reverse and a keel cooler. He used an
agricultural diaphragm pump and some imagination for cooling the exhaust:

http://www.engine.kubota.ne.jp/english/catalog/

Glen-L has some runabout designs more suited for overpowering than
Restless, many designed by Ken Hankinson:

http://www.boatdesigns.com/departments.asp?dept=9

On Mon, 19 Feb 2007 10:46:36 -0800, darryl wrote:

> Below is an email from a Westerbeke dealer in California concerning the
> W70GA engine I
> was considering for Restless.
>
> Dear Mr. Hammonds,
> Thank you for your inquiry on the Westerbeke W-70GA. Pricing is as
> follows:
> W-70 w/ ZF 25M 2.7:1 Transmission 11,232.00 + Shipping
> W-70 - Bobtail 8,698.00 + Shipping.
> This engine would have to be built and shipped from Westerbeke in
> Taunton, MA.
> ...

--
John <jkohnen@...>
I have no truck with lettuce, cabbage, and similar chlorophyll.
Any dietician will tell you that a running foot of apple strudel
contains four times the vitamins of a bushel of beans. <S. J.
Perelman>
• I don t remember what size or horsepower engine you re looking for, and the Restless web page only provides numbers for cubic inch displacement and engine
Message 14 of 19 , Feb 19, 2007
I don't remember what size or horsepower engine you're looking for, and the
Restless web page only provides numbers for cubic inch displacement and
engine weight, not recommended horsepower:

... but Kawasaki makes a nice looking power plant that appears to be a good
fit for some inboard designs. These two links show the biggest (29 HP) and
smallest (16 HP) in Kawasaki's line of overhead valve water-cooled v-twin
engines. They have five more models in between these sizes:

http://www.kawpowr.com/4cycle/horiz_fd791d.asp
http://www.kawpowr.com/4cycle/horiz_fd501d.asp

The ATV guys rave about these engines. Maybe they know something that the
boating community does not?

If Restless needs more HP than one of these engines can provide, a person
might buy and install two of them. Two of the largest 29 HP Kawasaki's will
weigh a total of only 250 pounds -- and that's 100 pounds LESS than the
engine weight specified by William Atkin.

Just think, a twin-engine Restless with a total of 58 HP, and each engine
driving its own propeller. Two completely independent drive systems for the
ultimate in safety and redundancy.

And wow, what a hot rod!

Sincerely,
Kenneth Grome
Bagacay Boatworks
www.bagacayboatworks.com

On Tuesday 20 February 2007 07:07:51 am John Kohnen wrote:
> Yep, that Westerbeke is mighty expensive! <whew!> It's a marinized Mazda
> industrial engine, BTW.
>
> I looked at the GM 1600 Vortec and it looks pretty good on paper. It's not
> just something they yanked out of a cheap economy car. It's kinda revvy
> for a marine engine, but it might work alright running at lower RPM, and
> lower hp.:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/2sqoj5
>
> http://tinyurl.com/3dc6pd
>
> You might consider getting a Kubota industrial engine and mating it to a
> reverse gear. If you use a keel cooler (let into the bottom planking) you
> really don't need to do much marinizing. Robb White used a Kubota in his
> "Rescue Minor" with a jackleg reverse and a keel cooler. He used an
> agricultural diaphragm pump and some imagination for cooling the exhaust:
>
> http://www.engine.kubota.ne.jp/english/catalog/
>
> Glen-L has some runabout designs more suited for overpowering than
> Restless, many designed by Ken Hankinson:
>
> http://www.boatdesigns.com/departments.asp?dept=9
>
> On Mon, 19 Feb 2007 10:46:36 -0800, darryl wrote:
> > Below is an email from a Westerbeke dealer in California concerning the
> > W70GA engine I
> > was considering for Restless.
> >
> > Dear Mr. Hammonds,
> > Thank you for your inquiry on the Westerbeke W-70GA. Pricing is as
> > follows:
> > W-70 w/ ZF 25M 2.7:1 Transmission 11,232.00 + Shipping
> > W-70 - Bobtail 8,698.00 + Shipping.
> > This engine would have to be built and shipped from Westerbeke in
> > Taunton, MA.
> > ...

--
Sincerely,
Kenneth Grome
Bagacay Boatworks
www.bagacayboatworks.com
• The biggest of those Kawasakis might _just_ do for a Restless. Restless wants 40-50 hp., but those V-twins are so much lighter than the old 133 cu. in. engines
Message 15 of 19 , Feb 28, 2007
The biggest of those Kawasakis might _just_ do for a Restless. Restless
wants 40-50 hp., but those V-twins are so much lighter than the old 133
cu. in. engines that one of them might just do the trick.

BUT, there's a big "but." The Kawasaki V-twins aren't marine engines. You
could use one in an open boat, but if you're gonna put one in an enclosed
engine compartment, or below deck, you'll have to use a marine carburettor
and marine electrical equipment (the electronic ignition may be fine as it
is if it doesn't use a distributor). Hooking up a conventional reverse
gear would also be a problem.

On Mon, 19 Feb 2007 19:15:18 -0800, Ken G wrote:

> ...
> ... but Kawasaki makes a nice looking power plant that appears to be a
> good
> fit for some inboard designs. These two links show the biggest (29 HP)
> and
> smallest (16 HP) in Kawasaki's line of overhead valve water-cooled v-twin
> engines. They have five more models in between these sizes:
>
> http://www.kawpowr.com/4cycle/horiz_fd791d.asp
> http://www.kawpowr.com/4cycle/horiz_fd501d.asp
> ...

--
John <jkohnen@...>
We cannot defend freedom abroad by deserting it at home. <Edward
R. Murrow>
• Oops! The 16 hp. Kawasaki has a carburettor, but the 29 hp. one uses fuel injection. I don t know what the Powers That Be have to say about fuel injection in
Message 16 of 19 , Feb 28, 2007
Oops! The 16 hp. Kawasaki has a carburettor, but the 29 hp. one uses fuel
injection. I don't know what the Powers That Be have to say about fuel
injection in boats... You'd still need a marine alternator and marine
starter.

--
John <jkohnen@...>
We cannot defend freedom abroad by deserting it at home. <Edward
R. Murrow>
• ... I would simply use a semi-enclosed compartment. The USCG regs are easy to follow here. If you want to avoid using a blower and special marinized engine
Message 17 of 19 , Feb 28, 2007
> The biggest of those Kawasakis might _just_ do for a Restless. Restless
> wants 40-50 hp., but those V-twins are so much lighter than the old 133
> cu. in. engines that one of them might just do the trick.
>
> BUT, there's a big "but." The Kawasaki V-twins aren't marine engines. You
> could use one in an open boat, but if you're gonna put one in an enclosed
> engine compartment ...

I would simply use a semi-enclosed compartment. The USCG regs are easy to
follow here. If you want to avoid using a blower and special marinized
engine parts just provide a certain number of square inches of open
ventilation for every cubic foot of volume in the container ... and that's
easy to do as follows:

Build a box the width of the boat over the front and top of the engine, then
leave the back side of the box completely open. Not only does this provide
all the ventilation the USCG requires (and all the air the engine needs to
remain cool) but it also strengthens the boat -- and gives you a nice wide
seat in front of the engine ... :)

> Hooking up a conventional reverse
> gear would also be a problem.

A cheap trolling motor would provide reverse in most situations where it might
actually be needed, such as when docking or maneuvering in the harbor in
close quarters. Most of the rest of the time reverse is not needed anyways,
and during these times a simple belt drive and idler gear would provide
neutral and forward.

Sincerely,
Kenneth Grome
Bagacay Boatworks
www.bagacayboatworks.com

> > ... but Kawasaki makes a nice looking power plant that appears to be a
> > good
> > fit for some inboard designs. These two links show the biggest (29 HP)
> > and
> > smallest (16 HP) in Kawasaki's line of overhead valve water-cooled v-twin
> > engines. They have five more models in between these sizes:
> >
> > http://www.kawpowr.com/4cycle/horiz_fd791d.asp
> > http://www.kawpowr.com/4cycle/horiz_fd501d.asp
> > ...
• ... I think you only need a marine alternator and marine starter when you enclose the engine so much that fumes can possibly collect instead of dissipate. With
Message 18 of 19 , Feb 28, 2007
> Oops! The 16 hp. Kawasaki has a carburettor, but the 29 hp. one uses fuel
> injection. I don't know what the Powers That Be have to say about fuel
> injection in boats... You'd still need a marine alternator and marine
> starter.

I think you only need a marine alternator and marine starter when you enclose
the engine so much that fumes can possibly collect instead of dissipate.
With enough ventilation (as per the regs) the fumes cannot collect so you
don't need the special marine equipment. At least that's my read on this
stuff the last time I looked at the regs ...

Sincerely,
Kenneth Grome
Bagacay Boatworks
www.bagacayboatworks.com
Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.