Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

AF4/G motor bracket and hardtop

Expand Messages
  • owwin@live.com
    Received my AF4 and AF4 grande plans this week. Will start one of them this later this spring. I m considering a couple of minor modifications and would
    Message 1 of 17 , Mar 2, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      Received my AF4 and AF4 grande plans this week. Will start one of them this later this spring. I'm considering a couple of minor modifications and would appreciate any feedback (or warning!) before I commit them to epoxy.

      In the description of the AF4 there is a picture of Bayard Cook's implementation with a Honda outboard mounted on a bracket extended aft of the transom. My question is, if using a motor bracket can the motorwell box be eliminated and the space converted to lengthen the cockpit? Are there other advantages to mounting the engine on an extended bracket?

      Secondly, I'd like to add a rigid canopy with standing room clearance - say 74 inches - over the rear open cockpit. I imagine something simple with four 2x4 posts at the corners of the cockpit and a flat top of 1/4 plywood and minimal stiffeners. No sides, just a roof. Is something like this feasible or would it raise the CG too high for comfort?

      Thanks.
    • stephen pepper
      I m no expert, I haven t completed my AF4-G yet as its been in the works for three weeks now.  My opinion on the splash well for the motor is that you can t
      Message 2 of 17 , Mar 3, 2011
      • 0 Attachment
        I'm no expert, I haven't completed my AF4-G yet as its been in the works for three weeks now.  My opinion on the splash well for the motor is that you can't get rid of it.  I wanted to also, but realized that it structuraly spread the thrust pressure from the outboard out over a larger area of the hull.




        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • daschultz2000
        Some dedicated Googling will bring up a website with several photos of Cooks AF4 on the water and including construction photos, and some text about
        Message 3 of 17 , Mar 3, 2011
        • 0 Attachment
          Some dedicated Googling will bring up a website with several photos of Cooks AF4 on the water and including construction photos, and some text about construction details. The standard AF4 stern adds stiffness via the motorwell panels. The forces conveyed by the bracket into the hull need to be managed effectively.

          I think an advantage of the bracket is that by getting the motor back further from the hull, it can be raised a bit for less draft, and still not cavitate. This is apparent in the pics of Cook's AF4 at speed and at rest.

          IMO the hard dodger you want to build, if constructed lightly, will have greater aerodynamic effects than CG impact. It will catch a lot of air and have significant leverage.

          Don

          --- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, owwin@... wrote:
          >
          >...My question is, if using a motor bracket can the motorwell box be eliminated and the space converted to lengthen the cockpit? Are there other advantages to mounting the engine on an extended bracket?...
          >
        • christiancrandall
          ... The splashwell creates a box which holds the stern in place and transfers forces to the hull more elegantly than with a mere bracket/extension. You can,
          Message 4 of 17 , Mar 3, 2011
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, owwin@... wrote:
            > In the description of the AF4 there is a picture of Bayard Cook's implementation with a Honda outboard mounted on a bracket extended aft of the transom. My question is, if using a motor bracket can the motorwell box be eliminated and the space converted to lengthen the cockpit? Are there other advantages to mounting the engine on an extended bracket?

            The splashwell creates a "box" which holds the stern in place and transfers forces to the hull more elegantly than with a mere bracket/extension. You can, however, replace this with a thicker transom (*more than double*) and with some knees (quarter knees where the transom meets the hull and I would also recommend a knee from the transom to the hull bottom/cabin sole).

            But why would you want to? You shouldn't put humans back there (concentrating weight in the stern = bad idea), and you can use the splashwell for storage of wet and dirty things (rarely a shortage of those on my boats).

            > Secondly, I'd like to add a rigid canopy with standing room clearance - say 74 inches - over the rear open cockpit. I imagine something simple with four 2x4 posts at the corners of the cockpit and a flat top of 1/4 plywood and minimal stiffeners. No sides, just a roof. Is something like this feasible or would it raise the CG too high for comfort?

            Why rigid? This is a lot of engineering and materials. Consider purchasing a nice big bimini--it will collapse out of the way when you don't want it, the price will be somewhat higher (but the amount of time not-building-but-using will increase), and you needn't worry about weight, etc. Plus, on the right days, you can enjoy the sun. At the very least, a fabric top is a better idea.
          • KEN
            the extended motor bracket has advantages and disadvantages both.. prop further back from hull will run in cleaner water, maybe less prop slip and cavitation,
            Message 5 of 17 , Mar 3, 2011
            • 0 Attachment
              the extended motor bracket has advantages and disadvantages both..
              prop further back from hull will run in cleaner water, maybe less prop slip and cavitation, and run a bit higher-faster. the cav plate also has more leverage against the hull for trimming angle at speeds. also look where his controls are, much further forward balancing.
               
              disadvantages.. thats a long reach if a spark plug or anything else acts up!
              more work (and money!) to hook up steering shifting and throttle controls..
               
              personally, I'm wanting to go with an AF4-AF4b, putting a motor-board inset about a foot.
              engine is easy access if I have to pop the bonnet, and the weight, tiller (and myself) are a foot further forward. the resultant "tails" acting as -flat- trim tabs helping the bow run flatter..
              -which might take 1-2 mph off the top speed potential, and will give up maybe a sq ft of surface area buoyancy, or less, but its a camper not a racer anyhow.
              the motor-board would be the 15 degree slant, but the 2 tails left-right wouldnt have to be, and could be a really convenient place for a swim ladder one side, a bilge pumped shower stall corner the other side for a simple yard sprayer-kitchen sink sprayer.
              the inset motor board also lends itself to mounting a cantilevered folding table, is some of the ideas I have for "overcomplicating" an af4 (not like its all that complex) to include a little more creature comforts. I have other ideas for the cabin bulkhead.. a " |\ " triangular and hollow, making for batteries at the floor amidship, "glove boxes", a drop table for a camp stove on 1 side and a place for switches and some instruments the other side, running lights, bilge pump, voltmeter, or whatever else. the slanted wall inside the cabin makes for sitting up a bit reclined, for reading or watchin a movie before laying down going to sleep.. as well as making for places to put little essentials and batteries.
               
              I'm thinking 2 marine batteries midship left and right, a short tiller extension, is placing the weight of 1-2 in the cabin while cruising, not one in the berth-cuddy trying to balance it.
              -probably less issue with af4g being larger and heavier, but some of the ideas in my head for af4 might be nice in the other af's too. the triangular box bulkhead could be more rigidity and strength to the floor, having 2 footings instead of 1 vertical, and the shelf spaces in em.. lighter sheeting used in making em "3D". a shelf-step extension off the anchorbox would help boarding, and make a place to park a portable 12v dvd player, being 12v is gonna go up front anyhow for red/green marker lights, why not? outside on the bow where the anchor box is (inside) lends its strength to putting a little V step to the outside.
              (have sketches but no scanner to just show ya how JM inspires my noggin)
               
              more on (or moron?) motor brackets and jackplates..
              my buddies bass boat..(dragster!) has a 10" extension jackplate on it, which put the big V6's weight that much further back, yes the prop runs in cleaner water, a little higher, and goes faster too.. but it can be UGLY with 3 aboard trying to get on plane from stopped.
              one of us had to be on the forward deck because it'd try to "dig plow swamp(?)".
              with 2 aboard, no problem, it digs bites and launches, good holeshots!
              -but thats a completely different type of beast of a boat, when its running at speeds, the hull itself is just running on its tail, maybe 2-3 sq ft of wetted surface, "flying" (scary too!)
              before that plate, it ran on about 1/4 the hull, was more wetted surface drag.
              150 merc V6 with 225 milled heads, 0 clearance plugs, and 225 intake/fuel injectors..
              yeah, its an insane dragster of a "bass boat" that'll do 80-85 mph, 18' PROcraft hull.
              it wasnt as ugly with 3 aboard before the jackplate, but wasnt near as fast with 2 aboard after the jackplate was installed and dialed in.. before, 62-63 mph, after "oh shit!".
              hull rated for 150hp and it "says" 150 on the casing, but he's probably cranking 210+ hp.
              I cant imagine feeding 4-5 gallon per hour for just trying to catch a darn fish.. hello?!
              -of course thats probably a 20-25 mile blast to a spot, trolling, then racing back..
               
              hardtop.. doable yes, but a bimini is probably lots more convenient. get a look to duckworks hardware stuff, you can make a tops hoops however tall you like with conduit tubing, they sell the nice hinges etc pretty darn reasonable. a hardtop might be creating problems towing and getting into some places, or if some wind kicks up on the lake..
              you'd be out there without option of taking the top down, could be a bummer.
              I can also picture being on a 2 lane highway doing 50-55 and here comes a semi the other direction, might be "OMG!"
               
              anyhowz.. those my thoughts on the stuff.
               


              --- On Thu, 3/3/11, owwin@... <owwin@...> wrote:


              From: owwin@... <owwin@...>
              Subject: [Michalak] AF4/G motor bracket and hardtop
              To: Michalak@yahoogroups.com
              Date: Thursday, March 3, 2011, 1:54 AM


               



              Received my AF4 and AF4 grande plans this week. Will start one of them this later this spring. I'm considering a couple of minor modifications and would appreciate any feedback (or warning!) before I commit them to epoxy.

              In the description of the AF4 there is a picture of Bayard Cook's implementation with a Honda outboard mounted on a bracket extended aft of the transom. My question is, if using a motor bracket can the motorwell box be eliminated and the space converted to lengthen the cockpit? Are there other advantages to mounting the engine on an extended bracket?

              Secondly, I'd like to add a rigid canopy with standing room clearance - say 74 inches - over the rear open cockpit. I imagine something simple with four 2x4 posts at the corners of the cockpit and a flat top of 1/4 plywood and minimal stiffeners. No sides, just a roof. Is something like this feasible or would it raise the CG too high for comfort?

              Thanks.











              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • Brian Nimmo
              Based on feedback I ll build the motor-well as scripted. As much as I value uncomitted standing space in my small boats, I m also a huge fan of transoms that
              Message 6 of 17 , Mar 3, 2011
              • 0 Attachment
                Based on feedback I'll build the motor-well as scripted. As much as I value uncomitted standing space in my small boats, I'm also a huge fan of transoms that tend to remain attached to the boat.

                I've spent considerable time camping aboard small boats. All of my improvised camping rigs - to date - have been "polytops". And every trip I spend a couple of nights listening to them flap in the wind . . . all . . . night . . . long. To be fair, none of them have been aftermarket bimini tops - too many poles and tethers interfere with fishing access.

                Although my AF4/G will be specialized for long-range crusiing and rarely fished, I'm no longer rational on the subject of using tarps or tarp-like technology on my boats.








                To: Michalak@yahoogroups.com
                From: crandall@...
                Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 16:24:28 +0000
                Subject: [Michalak] Re: AF4/G motor bracket and hardtop








                --- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, owwin@... wrote:
                > In the description of the AF4 there is a picture of Bayard Cook's implementation with a Honda outboard mounted on a bracket extended aft of the transom. My question is, if using a motor bracket can the motorwell box be eliminated and the space converted to lengthen the cockpit? Are there other advantages to mounting the engine on an extended bracket?

                The splashwell creates a "box" which holds the stern in place and transfers forces to the hull more elegantly than with a mere bracket/extension. You can, however, replace this with a thicker transom (*more than double*) and with some knees (quarter knees where the transom meets the hull and I would also recommend a knee from the transom to the hull bottom/cabin sole).

                But why would you want to? You shouldn't put humans back there (concentrating weight in the stern = bad idea), and you can use the splashwell for storage of wet and dirty things (rarely a shortage of those on my boats).

                > Secondly, I'd like to add a rigid canopy with standing room clearance - say 74 inches - over the rear open cockpit. I imagine something simple with four 2x4 posts at the corners of the cockpit and a flat top of 1/4 plywood and minimal stiffeners. No sides, just a roof. Is something like this feasible or would it raise the CG too high for comfort?

                Why rigid? This is a lot of engineering and materials. Consider purchasing a nice big bimini--it will collapse out of the way when you don't want it, the price will be somewhat higher (but the amount of time not-building-but-using will increase), and you needn't worry about weight, etc. Plus, on the right days, you can enjoy the sun. At the very least, a fabric top is a better idea.





                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • Brian Nimmo
                Lots of good ideas. The most significant driver of my AF4/G layout will be an outrageous range requirement, on the order of 500 miles, to survive sparse
                Message 7 of 17 , Mar 3, 2011
                • 0 Attachment
                  Lots of good ideas.

                  The most significant driver of my AF4/G layout will be an outrageous range requirement, on the order of 500 miles, to survive sparse refueling options along the lower Missouri river and non-existant refueling options on some big rivers in the Canadian outback. Your shower box sounds nice. On bath day I'll be standing on top of a fuel tank with a washcloth and a bucket of river water.

                  I got to say I don't understand the appeal of the inboard outboard motor board arrangement. It looks like a waste of prime cockpit space to me. It's as if the designer is self-conscious about the outboard and ashamed to have anyone see it! I see them in enough designs and gotta believe there's a more practical justification, but I'd rather have the space.





                  To: Michalak@yahoogroups.com
                  From: rekkamurd@...
                  Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 09:22:38 -0800
                  Subject: Re: [Michalak] AF4/G motor bracket and hardtop






                  the extended motor bracket has advantages and disadvantages both..
                  prop further back from hull will run in cleaner water, maybe less prop slip and cavitation, and run a bit higher-faster. the cav plate also has more leverage against the hull for trimming angle at speeds. also look where his controls are, much further forward balancing.

                  disadvantages.. thats a long reach if a spark plug or anything else acts up!
                  more work (and money!) to hook up steering shifting and throttle controls..

                  personally, I'm wanting to go with an AF4-AF4b, putting a motor-board inset about a foot.
                  engine is easy access if I have to pop the bonnet, and the weight, tiller (and myself) are a foot further forward. the resultant "tails" acting as -flat- trim tabs helping the bow run flatter..
                  -which might take 1-2 mph off the top speed potential, and will give up maybe a sq ft of surface area buoyancy, or less, but its a camper not a racer anyhow.
                  the motor-board would be the 15 degree slant, but the 2 tails left-right wouldnt have to be, and could be a really convenient place for a swim ladder one side, a bilge pumped shower stall corner the other side for a simple yard sprayer-kitchen sink sprayer.
                  the inset motor board also lends itself to mounting a cantilevered folding table, is some of the ideas I have for "overcomplicating" an af4 (not like its all that complex) to include a little more creature comforts. I have other ideas for the cabin bulkhead.. a " |\ " triangular and hollow, making for batteries at the floor amidship, "glove boxes", a drop table for a camp stove on 1 side and a place for switches and some instruments the other side, running lights, bilge pump, voltmeter, or whatever else. the slanted wall inside the cabin makes for sitting up a bit reclined, for reading or watchin a movie before laying down going to sleep.. as well as making for places to put little essentials and batteries.

                  I'm thinking 2 marine batteries midship left and right, a short tiller extension, is placing the weight of 1-2 in the cabin while cruising, not one in the berth-cuddy trying to balance it.
                  -probably less issue with af4g being larger and heavier, but some of the ideas in my head for af4 might be nice in the other af's too. the triangular box bulkhead could be more rigidity and strength to the floor, having 2 footings instead of 1 vertical, and the shelf spaces in em.. lighter sheeting used in making em "3D". a shelf-step extension off the anchorbox would help boarding, and make a place to park a portable 12v dvd player, being 12v is gonna go up front anyhow for red/green marker lights, why not? outside on the bow where the anchor box is (inside) lends its strength to putting a little V step to the outside.
                  (have sketches but no scanner to just show ya how JM inspires my noggin)

                  more on (or moron?) motor brackets and jackplates..
                  my buddies bass boat..(dragster!) has a 10" extension jackplate on it, which put the big V6's weight that much further back, yes the prop runs in cleaner water, a little higher, and goes faster too.. but it can be UGLY with 3 aboard trying to get on plane from stopped.
                  one of us had to be on the forward deck because it'd try to "dig plow swamp(?)".
                  with 2 aboard, no problem, it digs bites and launches, good holeshots!
                  -but thats a completely different type of beast of a boat, when its running at speeds, the hull itself is just running on its tail, maybe 2-3 sq ft of wetted surface, "flying" (scary too!)
                  before that plate, it ran on about 1/4 the hull, was more wetted surface drag.
                  150 merc V6 with 225 milled heads, 0 clearance plugs, and 225 intake/fuel injectors..
                  yeah, its an insane dragster of a "bass boat" that'll do 80-85 mph, 18' PROcraft hull.
                  it wasnt as ugly with 3 aboard before the jackplate, but wasnt near as fast with 2 aboard after the jackplate was installed and dialed in.. before, 62-63 mph, after "oh shit!".
                  hull rated for 150hp and it "says" 150 on the casing, but he's probably cranking 210+ hp.
                  I cant imagine feeding 4-5 gallon per hour for just trying to catch a darn fish.. hello?!
                  -of course thats probably a 20-25 mile blast to a spot, trolling, then racing back..

                  hardtop.. doable yes, but a bimini is probably lots more convenient. get a look to duckworks hardware stuff, you can make a tops hoops however tall you like with conduit tubing, they sell the nice hinges etc pretty darn reasonable. a hardtop might be creating problems towing and getting into some places, or if some wind kicks up on the lake..
                  you'd be out there without option of taking the top down, could be a bummer.
                  I can also picture being on a 2 lane highway doing 50-55 and here comes a semi the other direction, might be "OMG!"

                  anyhowz.. those my thoughts on the stuff.


                  --- On Thu, 3/3/11, owwin@... <owwin@...> wrote:

                  From: owwin@... <owwin@...>
                  Subject: [Michalak] AF4/G motor bracket and hardtop
                  To: Michalak@yahoogroups.com
                  Date: Thursday, March 3, 2011, 1:54 AM



                  Received my AF4 and AF4 grande plans this week. Will start one of them this later this spring. I'm considering a couple of minor modifications and would appreciate any feedback (or warning!) before I commit them to epoxy.

                  In the description of the AF4 there is a picture of Bayard Cook's implementation with a Honda outboard mounted on a bracket extended aft of the transom. My question is, if using a motor bracket can the motorwell box be eliminated and the space converted to lengthen the cockpit? Are there other advantages to mounting the engine on an extended bracket?

                  Secondly, I'd like to add a rigid canopy with standing room clearance - say 74 inches - over the rear open cockpit. I imagine something simple with four 2x4 posts at the corners of the cockpit and a flat top of 1/4 plywood and minimal stiffeners. No sides, just a roof. Is something like this feasible or would it raise the CG too high for comfort?

                  Thanks.

                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • Brian Nimmo
                  Dang I hadn t considered that. Perhaps an angled windshield connecting the rear top of the cabin to underneath the canopy. IMO the hard dodger you want to
                  Message 8 of 17 , Mar 3, 2011
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Dang I hadn't considered that. Perhaps an angled windshield connecting the rear top of the cabin to underneath the canopy.




                    IMO the hard dodger you want to build, if constructed lightly, will have greater aerodynamic effects than CG impact. It will catch a lot of air and have significant leverage.







                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • KEN
                    poles and tether lines getting in the way of casting is a reality too, with the shade up, break out the shorty fishin poles! -or, fish from up front when the
                    Message 9 of 17 , Mar 3, 2011
                    • 0 Attachment
                      poles and tether lines getting in the way of casting is a reality too,
                      with the shade up, break out the shorty fishin poles! -or, fish from up front when the top is up maybe? a couple seasons ago I didnt have a bow mounted foot controlled trolling motor, like is on my fishin boat now.
                      had a 40" shaft minn kota clamped to a block up front, 1 screw and nut to spin the motors tiller head 180, worked pretty nice. I'd thought about the same for af4, with an inset motor-board, where is a trolling motor going to mount? if the engine quits I'd rather a trolling motor than paddling..
                      a seat to pop in across the 2x3 behind the anchor box would be a pretty good perch. front mounted reversed transom mount trolling motor was decent, slide it up and lock it back flat, easily removable etc.


                      --- On Thu, 3/3/11, Brian Nimmo <owwin@...> wrote:

                      > From: Brian Nimmo <owwin@...>
                      > Subject: RE: [Michalak] Re: AF4/G motor bracket and hardtop
                      > To: michalak@yahoogroups.com
                      > Date: Thursday, March 3, 2011, 3:45 PM
                      >
                      >
                      > Based on feedback I'll build the motor-well as
                      > scripted.  As much as I value uncomitted standing space
                      > in my small boats, I'm also a huge fan of transoms that tend
                      > to remain attached to the boat.
                      >
                      > I've spent considerable time camping aboard small
                      > boats.  All of my improvised camping rigs - to date -
                      > have been "polytops".  And every trip I spend a couple
                      > of nights listening to them flap in the wind . . . all . . .
                      > night . . . long.  To be fair, none of them have been
                      > aftermarket bimini tops - too many poles and tethers
                      > interfere with fishing access.
                      >
                      > Although my AF4/G will be specialized for long-range
                      > crusiing and rarely fished, I'm no longer rational on the
                      > subject of using tarps or tarp-like technology on my boats.
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > To: Michalak@yahoogroups.com
                      > From: crandall@...
                      > Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 16:24:28 +0000
                      > Subject: [Michalak] Re: AF4/G motor bracket and hardtop
                      >
                      >
                      >  
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > --- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com,
                      > owwin@... wrote:
                      > > In the description of the AF4 there is a picture of
                      > Bayard Cook's implementation with a Honda outboard mounted
                      > on a bracket extended aft of the transom. My question is, if
                      > using a motor bracket can the motorwell box be eliminated
                      > and the space converted to lengthen the cockpit? Are there
                      > other advantages to mounting the engine on an extended
                      > bracket?
                      >
                      > The splashwell creates a "box" which holds the stern in
                      > place and transfers forces to the hull more elegantly than
                      > with a mere bracket/extension. You can, however, replace
                      > this with a thicker transom (*more than double*) and with
                      > some knees (quarter knees where the transom meets the hull
                      > and I would also recommend a knee from the transom to the
                      > hull bottom/cabin sole).
                      >
                      > But why would you want to? You shouldn't put humans back
                      > there (concentrating weight in the stern = bad idea), and
                      > you can use the splashwell for storage of wet and dirty
                      > things (rarely a shortage of those on my boats).
                      >
                      > > Secondly, I'd like to add a rigid canopy with standing
                      > room clearance - say 74 inches - over the rear open cockpit.
                      > I imagine something simple with four 2x4 posts at the
                      > corners of the cockpit and a flat top of 1/4 plywood and
                      > minimal stiffeners. No sides, just a roof. Is something like
                      > this feasible or would it raise the CG too high for
                      > comfort?
                      >
                      > Why rigid? This is a lot of engineering and materials.
                      > Consider purchasing a nice big bimini--it will collapse out
                      > of the way when you don't want it, the price will be
                      > somewhat higher (but the amount of time
                      > not-building-but-using will increase), and you needn't worry
                      > about weight, etc. Plus, on the right days, you can enjoy
                      > the sun. At the very least, a fabric top is a better idea.
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >    
                      >         
                      >           
                      >  
                      >
                      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > ------------------------------------
                      >
                      > Yahoo! Groups Links
                      >
                      >
                      >     Michalak-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
                      >
                      >
                      >
                    • KEN
                      whatcha got for power? my fishin boat is a new 20hp tohatsu/nissan 4 stroke and it only pulls about 2/3 - 3/4 gph, tops out at 25 mph by gps. gave it an 11
                      Message 10 of 17 , Mar 3, 2011
                      • 0 Attachment
                        whatcha got for power? my fishin boat is a new 20hp tohatsu/nissan 4 stroke and it only pulls about 2/3 - 3/4 gph, tops out at 25 mph by gps.
                        gave it an 11 pitch solas prop instead of the stock 10 pitch.
                        100 miles is honestly only 3-4 gallons, 2-3 gallons if not flailing it.
                        500 mile range doesnt seem outrageous to me a bit, 3 6 gallon tanks.

                        was thinking I'd need a tach to set it up and properly prop it, but didnt.
                        the online speed calculator http://go-fast.com/boat_speed_predictions.htm
                        and prop slip calculator.. with gear ratio, pitch, and everything else..
                        by gps speed says WOT is spinning 5550-5650 rpm (2 aboard).
                        below 25 it'd been lower calculated rpm, and 5720+ wouldda registered 26 mph by gps, a cheepo I got for my car to help navigate "flatland hell".
                        at 6100 the rev limiter would be kicking in, choking it out.

                        wouldnt want to make the inset motor-board more than 11-12", my 10hp long shaft honda 4 stroke sure isnt gonna be hidden. I'm more thinking being comfortable sitting a foot further forward, or if I have to pop the bonnet to swap a fouled plug. theres also the outboard overhanging weight, the thought is weight distribution more forward, planing a bit flatter, and maybe planing at slightly lower speeds too (lower rpm more mpg).

                        more crazy thoughts?
                        AF4G has the length in its favor, what if the floors beam were narrowed some 6-8" worth? what might happen to hp requirements and speeds with that thought? a little less hull weight, a little less engine weight, and a little less energy going to pushing water aside..
                        might make for some better fuel efficiency.

                        af4 and af4b are 5' wide up top (4'floor), af4g is 18" wider and probably nearer 5'4" at the floor.. what'd happen with 4'8" instead? would probably land about 5'10" up top with 7" worth of flare both sides..
                        I contemplate widening af4 6" too for the berth space being so tight for 2 at just 48", and 6" more surface -can be- lower speed slow planing..
                        more shoving water aside when not planing too of course, and its also in conflict with standard lumber sheet widths. a 6" strip right up the middle with a 14" plate right up the bottom over it (4" grab both sides) isnt gonna come apart, and a 3/8 floor is now 3/4 down the center. not much weight saving over 1/2", but its some 6-7 sq ft surface area gained with that little width increase. the 3/4" thickness up the center 14" wide would probably come up being pretty darn rigid too.

                        the stuff isnt "exactly" Jims designs, but its all his inspiration!
                        -isnt very far away from his designs either, which ARE pretty awesome.

                        --- On Thu, 3/3/11, Brian Nimmo <owwin@...> wrote:

                        > From: Brian Nimmo <owwin@...>
                        > Subject: RE: [Michalak] AF4/G motor bracket and hardtop
                        > To: michalak@yahoogroups.com
                        > Date: Thursday, March 3, 2011, 5:08 PM
                        >
                        > Lots of good ideas. 
                        >
                        > The most significant driver of my AF4/G layout will be an
                        > outrageous range requirement, on the order of 500 miles, to
                        > survive sparse refueling options along the lower Missouri
                        > river and non-existant refueling options on some big rivers
                        > in the Canadian outback.  Your shower box sounds
                        > nice.  On bath day I'll be standing on top of a fuel
                        > tank with a washcloth and a bucket of river water.
                        >
                        > I got to say I don't understand the appeal of the inboard
                        > outboard motor board arrangement.   It looks
                        > like a waste of prime cockpit space to me.  It's as if
                        > the designer is self-conscious about the outboard and
                        > ashamed to have anyone see it!  I see them in enough
                        > designs and gotta believe there's a more practical
                        > justification, but I'd rather have the space.
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > To: Michalak@yahoogroups.com
                        > From: rekkamurd@...
                        > Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 09:22:38 -0800
                        > Subject: Re: [Michalak] AF4/G motor bracket and hardtop
                        >
                        >
                        >  
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > the extended motor bracket has advantages and disadvantages
                        > both..
                        > prop further back from hull will run in cleaner water,
                        > maybe less prop slip and cavitation, and run a bit
                        > higher-faster. the cav plate also has more leverage against
                        > the hull for trimming angle at speeds. also look where his
                        > controls are, much further forward balancing.
                        >
                        > disadvantages.. thats a long reach if a spark plug or
                        > anything else acts up!
                        > more work (and money!) to hook up steering shifting and
                        > throttle controls..
                        >
                        > personally, I'm wanting to go with an AF4-AF4b, putting a
                        > motor-board inset about a foot.
                        > engine is easy access if I have to pop the bonnet, and the
                        > weight, tiller (and myself) are a foot further forward. the
                        > resultant "tails" acting as -flat- trim tabs helping the bow
                        > run flatter..
                        > -which might take 1-2 mph off the top speed potential, and
                        > will give up maybe a sq ft of surface area buoyancy, or
                        > less, but its a camper not a racer anyhow.
                        > the motor-board would be the 15 degree slant, but the 2
                        > tails left-right wouldnt have to be, and could be a really
                        > convenient place for a swim ladder one side, a bilge pumped
                        > shower stall corner the other side for a simple yard
                        > sprayer-kitchen sink sprayer.
                        > the inset motor board also lends itself to mounting a
                        > cantilevered folding table, is some of the ideas I have for
                        > "overcomplicating" an af4 (not like its all that complex) to
                        > include a little more creature comforts. I have other ideas
                        > for the cabin bulkhead.. a " |\ " triangular and hollow,
                        > making for batteries at the floor amidship, "glove boxes", a
                        > drop table for a camp stove on 1 side and a place for
                        > switches and some instruments the other side, running
                        > lights, bilge pump, voltmeter, or whatever else. the slanted
                        > wall inside the cabin makes for sitting up a bit reclined,
                        > for reading or watchin a movie before laying down going to
                        > sleep.. as well as making for places to put little
                        > essentials and batteries.
                        >
                        > I'm thinking 2 marine batteries midship left and right, a
                        > short tiller extension, is placing the weight of 1-2 in the
                        > cabin while cruising, not one in the berth-cuddy trying to
                        > balance it.
                        > -probably less issue with af4g being larger and heavier,
                        > but some of the ideas in my head for af4 might be nice in
                        > the other af's too. the triangular box bulkhead could be
                        > more rigidity and strength to the floor, having 2 footings
                        > instead of 1 vertical, and the shelf spaces in em.. lighter
                        > sheeting used in making em "3D". a shelf-step extension off
                        > the anchorbox would help boarding, and make a place to park
                        > a portable 12v dvd player, being 12v is gonna go up front
                        > anyhow for red/green marker lights, why not? outside on the
                        > bow where the anchor box is (inside) lends its strength to
                        > putting a little V step to the outside.
                        > (have sketches but no scanner to just show ya how JM
                        > inspires my noggin)
                        >
                        > more on (or moron?) motor brackets and jackplates..
                        > my buddies bass boat..(dragster!) has a 10" extension
                        > jackplate on it, which put the big V6's weight that much
                        > further back, yes the prop runs in cleaner water, a little
                        > higher, and goes faster too.. but it can be UGLY with 3
                        > aboard trying to get on plane from stopped.
                        > one of us had to be on the forward deck because it'd try to
                        > "dig plow swamp(?)".
                        > with 2 aboard, no problem, it digs bites and launches, good
                        > holeshots!
                        > -but thats a completely different type of beast of a boat,
                        > when its running at speeds, the hull itself is just running
                        > on its tail, maybe 2-3 sq ft of wetted surface, "flying"
                        > (scary too!)
                        > before that plate, it ran on about 1/4 the hull, was more
                        > wetted surface drag.
                        > 150 merc V6 with 225 milled heads, 0 clearance plugs, and
                        > 225 intake/fuel injectors..
                        > yeah, its an insane dragster of a "bass boat" that'll do
                        > 80-85 mph, 18' PROcraft hull.
                        > it wasnt as ugly with 3 aboard before the jackplate, but
                        > wasnt near as fast with 2 aboard after the jackplate was
                        > installed and dialed in.. before, 62-63 mph, after "oh
                        > shit!".
                        > hull rated for 150hp and it "says" 150 on the casing, but
                        > he's probably cranking 210+ hp.
                        > I cant imagine feeding 4-5 gallon per hour for just trying
                        > to catch a darn fish.. hello?!
                        > -of course thats probably a 20-25 mile blast to a spot,
                        > trolling, then racing back..
                        >
                        > hardtop.. doable yes, but a bimini is probably lots more
                        > convenient. get a look to duckworks hardware stuff, you can
                        > make a tops hoops however tall you like with conduit tubing,
                        > they sell the nice hinges etc pretty darn reasonable. a
                        > hardtop might be creating problems towing and getting into
                        > some places, or if some wind kicks up on the lake..
                        > you'd be out there without option of taking the top down,
                        > could be a bummer.
                        > I can also picture being on a 2 lane highway doing 50-55
                        > and here comes a semi the other direction, might be "OMG!"
                        >
                        > anyhowz.. those my thoughts on the stuff.
                        >
                        >
                        > --- On Thu, 3/3/11, owwin@...
                        > <owwin@...>
                        > wrote:
                        >
                        > From: owwin@...
                        > <owwin@...>
                        > Subject: [Michalak] AF4/G motor bracket and hardtop
                        > To: Michalak@yahoogroups.com
                        > Date: Thursday, March 3, 2011, 1:54 AM
                        >
                        >  
                        >
                        > Received my AF4 and AF4 grande plans this week. Will start
                        > one of them this later this spring. I'm considering a couple
                        > of minor modifications and would appreciate any feedback (or
                        > warning!) before I commit them to epoxy.
                        >
                        > In the description of the AF4 there is a picture of Bayard
                        > Cook's implementation with a Honda outboard mounted on a
                        > bracket extended aft of the transom. My question is, if
                        > using a motor bracket can the motorwell box be eliminated
                        > and the space converted to lengthen the cockpit? Are there
                        > other advantages to mounting the engine on an extended
                        > bracket?
                        >
                        > Secondly, I'd like to add a rigid canopy with standing room
                        > clearance - say 74 inches - over the rear open cockpit. I
                        > imagine something simple with four 2x4 posts at the corners
                        > of the cockpit and a flat top of 1/4 plywood and minimal
                        > stiffeners. No sides, just a roof. Is something like this
                        > feasible or would it raise the CG too high for comfort?
                        >
                        > Thanks.
                        >
                        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >    
                        >         
                        >           
                        >  
                        >
                        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > ------------------------------------
                        >
                        > Yahoo! Groups Links
                        >
                        >
                        >     Michalak-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
                        >
                        >
                        >
                      • owwin@live.com
                        My current stable of motors are mid 80 s Evinrude 4hp and 8hp, and an E-TEC 75 I absolutely love. For the AF4/G cruiser project I ll get a new 4-stroke, either
                        Message 11 of 17 , Mar 3, 2011
                        • 0 Attachment
                          My current stable of motors are mid 80's Evinrude 4hp and 8hp, and an E-TEC 75 I absolutely love.

                          For the AF4/G cruiser project I'll get a new 4-stroke, either a 15 for the AF4 or a 30 for the AF4G. I really like the AF4 for its efficiency - a marked contrast from my current one-ton polytopped aluminum scow and its 58 gallon fuel tankage.

                          What I haven't determined is if the AF4 will hold 500 miles of fuel and enough other stuff to keep me comfortable for a week at a time. Your mileage numbers are encouraging.

                          Has anyone posted fuel consumption numbers for an AF4 at various speeds/displacements?



                          --- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, KEN <rekkamurd@...> wrote:
                          >
                          > whatcha got for power? my fishin boat is a new 20hp tohatsu/nissan 4 stroke and it only pulls about 2/3 - 3/4 gph, tops out at 25 mph by gps.
                          > gave it an 11 pitch solas prop instead of the stock 10 pitch.
                          > 100 miles is honestly only 3-4 gallons, 2-3 gallons if not flailing it.
                          > 500 mile range doesnt seem outrageous to me a bit, 3 6 gallon tanks.
                          >
                        • daschultz2000
                          I think you are building an AF4G then. You ll need the displacement to haul the fuel. Don
                          Message 12 of 17 , Mar 4, 2011
                          • 0 Attachment
                            I think you are building an AF4G then. You'll need the displacement to haul the fuel.

                            Don

                            --- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, Brian Nimmo <owwin@...> wrote:
                            >
                            >
                            > Lots of good ideas.
                            >
                            > The most significant driver of my AF4/G layout will be an outrageous range requirement, on the order of 500 miles, to survive sparse refueling options along the lower Missouri river...
                          • John Huft
                            Get a pole and long sweeps, then sign-on Bigfoot Mason to help you. John Boy If you could kick the person in the pants responsible for most of your
                            Message 13 of 17 , Mar 4, 2011
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Get a pole and long sweeps, then sign-on Bigfoot Mason to help you. <g>
                              John Boy
                              If you could kick the person in the pants responsible for most of your trouble,
                              you wouldn't sit for a month.
                              Theodore Roosevelt







                              ________________________________
                              From: daschultz2000 <daschultz8275@...>
                              To: Michalak@yahoogroups.com
                              Sent: Fri, March 4, 2011 10:19:46 AM
                              Subject: [Michalak] Re: AF4/G motor bracket and hardtop




                              I think you are building an AF4G then. You'll need the displacement to haul the
                              fuel.

                              Don

                              --- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, Brian Nimmo <owwin@...> wrote:
                              >
                              >
                              > Lots of good ideas.
                              >
                              > The most significant driver of my AF4/G layout will be an outrageous range
                              >requirement, on the order of 500 miles, to survive sparse refueling options
                              >along the lower Missouri river...







                              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                            • Brian Nimmo
                              That s my unresearched presumption. When I finish up the Ozarkian build I ll spend some time in the AF4 plans to guesstimate how much fuel tankage is
                              Message 14 of 17 , Mar 4, 2011
                              • 0 Attachment
                                That's my unresearched presumption. When I finish up the Ozarkian build I'll spend some time in the AF4 plans to guesstimate how much fuel tankage is practical, or even moderately impractical, and extrapolate a maximum range.

                                It'd really help to have some empirical fuel consumption data from existing AF4 pilots.





                                To: Michalak@yahoogroups.com
                                From: daschultz8275@...
                                Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 16:19:46 +0000
                                Subject: [Michalak] Re: AF4/G motor bracket and hardtop








                                I think you are building an AF4G then. You'll need the displacement to haul the fuel.

                                Don

                                --- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, Brian Nimmo <owwin@...> wrote:
                                >
                                >
                                > Lots of good ideas.
                                >
                                > The most significant driver of my AF4/G layout will be an outrageous range requirement, on the order of 500 miles, to survive sparse refueling options along the lower Missouri river...





                                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                              • Joseph Stromski
                                Isn t fuel consumption largely dependent upon motor? Yes, the hull figures into the equation, but my 1964 18hp Johnson s mileage will vary greatly from other
                                Message 15 of 17 , Mar 4, 2011
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Isn't fuel consumption largely dependent upon motor? Yes, the hull figures into
                                  the equation, but my 1964 18hp Johnson's mileage will vary greatly from other
                                  motors. My gas gauge is to inaccurate (inoperable, actually!) to come to
                                  anything more accurate than "fill the 6 gal tank for a typical day out
                                  picnicking".




                                  ________________________________
                                  From: Brian Nimmo <owwin@...>
                                  To: michalak@yahoogroups.com
                                  Sent: Fri, March 4, 2011 11:11:50 AM
                                  Subject: RE: [Michalak] Re: AF4/G motor bracket and hardtop


                                  That's my unresearched presumption. When I finish up the Ozarkian build I'll
                                  spend some time in the AF4 plans to guesstimate how much fuel tankage is
                                  practical, or even moderately impractical, and extrapolate a maximum range.

                                  It'd really help to have some empirical fuel consumption data from existing AF4
                                  pilots.






                                  To: Michalak@yahoogroups.com
                                  From: daschultz8275@...
                                  Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 16:19:46 +0000
                                  Subject: [Michalak] Re: AF4/G motor bracket and hardtop








                                  I think you are building an AF4G then. You'll need the displacement to haul the
                                  fuel.

                                  Don

                                  --- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, Brian Nimmo <owwin@...> wrote:
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > Lots of good ideas.
                                  >
                                  > The most significant driver of my AF4/G layout will be an outrageous range
                                  >requirement, on the order of 500 miles, to survive sparse refueling options
                                  >along the lower Missouri river...





                                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



                                  ------------------------------------

                                  Yahoo! Groups Links



                                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                • KEN
                                  look to fuel consumption specs of engines for sure. my 20hp nissan drinks a max of 1.1 gph WOT doing 25mph with the 11 pitch solas prop. it drinks less at
                                  Message 16 of 17 , Mar 4, 2011
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    look to fuel consumption specs of engines for sure. my 20hp nissan drinks a max of 1.1 gph WOT doing 25mph with the 11 pitch solas prop. it drinks less at 19-20 mph.
                                    hull is a "traveller" 14' f/g, V front, near flat rear, so kinda comparable. probably a bit heavier than an af4 if looking at lbs/sq.ft surface area. it used to be a 2+2 40hp fish-n-ski type, now it has forward casting deck, floor, rear bench casting deck, livewell up center bench seat..
                                    -all that is built 1/2" ply easy 3 sheets worth. then theres the battery, trolling motor, railings I'd made after scrapping the original deck, fishing thrones, its NOT real light.

                                    --- On Fri, 3/4/11, Joseph Stromski <j.stromski@...> wrote:


                                    From: Joseph Stromski <j.stromski@...>
                                    Subject: Re: [Michalak] Re: AF4/G motor bracket and hardtop
                                    To: Michalak@yahoogroups.com
                                    Date: Friday, March 4, 2011, 2:12 PM


                                     



                                    Isn't fuel consumption largely dependent upon motor? Yes, the hull figures into
                                    the equation, but my 1964 18hp Johnson's mileage will vary greatly from other
                                    motors. My gas gauge is to inaccurate (inoperable, actually!) to come to
                                    anything more accurate than "fill the 6 gal tank for a typical day out
                                    picnicking".

                                    ________________________________
                                    From: Brian Nimmo <owwin@...>
                                    To: michalak@yahoogroups.com
                                    Sent: Fri, March 4, 2011 11:11:50 AM
                                    Subject: RE: [Michalak] Re: AF4/G motor bracket and hardtop

                                    That's my unresearched presumption. When I finish up the Ozarkian build I'll
                                    spend some time in the AF4 plans to guesstimate how much fuel tankage is
                                    practical, or even moderately impractical, and extrapolate a maximum range.

                                    It'd really help to have some empirical fuel consumption data from existing AF4
                                    pilots.

                                    To: Michalak@yahoogroups.com
                                    From: daschultz8275@...
                                    Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 16:19:46 +0000
                                    Subject: [Michalak] Re: AF4/G motor bracket and hardtop

                                    I think you are building an AF4G then. You'll need the displacement to haul the
                                    fuel.

                                    Don

                                    --- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, Brian Nimmo <owwin@...> wrote:
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > Lots of good ideas.
                                    >
                                    > The most significant driver of my AF4/G layout will be an outrageous range
                                    >requirement, on the order of 500 miles, to survive sparse refueling options
                                    >along the lower Missouri river...

                                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

                                    ------------------------------------

                                    Yahoo! Groups Links

                                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]











                                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                  • Brian Nimmo
                                    I have no doubt size and technology (16:1 2-stroke, 50:1 2-stroke, 4-stroke, etc.) of an outboard affect its fuel efficiency. But I also suspect that most
                                    Message 17 of 17 , Mar 4, 2011
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      I have no doubt size and technology (16:1 2-stroke, 50:1 2-stroke, 4-stroke, etc.) of an outboard affect its fuel efficiency. But I also suspect that most modern 4-stroke outboards of similar displacement will perform similarly on the same boat. Those numbers in particular would be very useful.












                                      To: Michalak@yahoogroups.com
                                      From: j.stromski@...
                                      Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 11:12:32 -0800
                                      Subject: Re: [Michalak] Re: AF4/G motor bracket and hardtop






                                      Isn't fuel consumption largely dependent upon motor? Yes, the hull figures into
                                      the equation, but my 1964 18hp Johnson's mileage will vary greatly from other
                                      motors. My gas gauge is to inaccurate (inoperable, actually!) to come to
                                      anything more accurate than "fill the 6 gal tank for a typical day out
                                      picnicking".

                                      ________________________________
                                      From: Brian Nimmo <owwin@...>
                                      To: michalak@yahoogroups.com
                                      Sent: Fri, March 4, 2011 11:11:50 AM
                                      Subject: RE: [Michalak] Re: AF4/G motor bracket and hardtop

                                      That's my unresearched presumption. When I finish up the Ozarkian build I'll
                                      spend some time in the AF4 plans to guesstimate how much fuel tankage is
                                      practical, or even moderately impractical, and extrapolate a maximum range.

                                      It'd really help to have some empirical fuel consumption data from existing AF4
                                      pilots.

                                      To: Michalak@yahoogroups.com
                                      From: daschultz8275@...
                                      Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 16:19:46 +0000
                                      Subject: [Michalak] Re: AF4/G motor bracket and hardtop

                                      I think you are building an AF4G then. You'll need the displacement to haul the
                                      fuel.

                                      Don

                                      --- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, Brian Nimmo <owwin@...> wrote:
                                      >
                                      >
                                      > Lots of good ideas.
                                      >
                                      > The most significant driver of my AF4/G layout will be an outrageous range
                                      >requirement, on the order of 500 miles, to survive sparse refueling options
                                      >along the lower Missouri river...

                                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

                                      ------------------------------------

                                      Yahoo! Groups Links

                                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






                                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.