Jump to content

Breamerly

Members
  • Content Count

    366
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Breamerly

  1. Right. I've had other components in the system go, so I've had a taste of what it can do - hence giving it closer scrutiny now, even though it "works." Assuming there is an issue with it, am I stuck with needing a whole new boom? Or are there bolt-on gooseneck assemblies I can use to retrofit what I have? Fwiw, it does not appear designed to rotate (square bar in square hole). I haven't done a die-test, but the rest of the assembly looks tight, including the rivets. Another thought I had was pulling the boom, drilling out the rivets, then pulling the cap and rebuilding
  2. Gooseneck seems... looser than it should. Is this normal? By gooseneck, I mean the ~1" square bar poking out of the forward end of the boom, which links the boom to the gooseneck slider/car on my '69 Santana 27. Instead of being tight/fixed in place, the gooseneck is loose - able to pivot/wiggle 2-4" (measured at the far end). Rather than being screwed into the sidewall, the boom-end fitting (cap?) that carries the gooseneck is riveted in, so I can't access the back end to check/tighten anything. Caveat: it has been loose like this for years, and handled heavy use (beating
  3. A good note but in general I'm not in the habit of relying on reverse while docking. Boat's so small (27) I usually just step off and belay my spring on the nearest handy cleat, with the stern in hand to check any pivot. Might be different if I often had to dock in a crosswind, but marinas around here are so often so well protected...
  4. "He said, barely suppressing his laughter." No seriously, This is being a very thought-provoking thread, and I am very appreciative. This person knows their boats. It is indeed an S27. And I have to say, thanks all for the compliments. My dad kept her in great shape, sailing her well into his eighties, and did a full deck/hull repaint recently enough that she still looks good. My folks and I went around van isle three times in her. I've never quite known whether she's particularly sporty - her PHRF rating is not great, even for her age, but people say Mull built fast boa
  5. haha guilty as charged! I meant to just use it as kind of. a figure of speech or a signpost that I was really trying to think outside the box, but I could have been clearer that a 2S was never seriously in the running for the noise and fuel consumption reasons. This is a great resource, I will definitely check it out, thank you. I do also think that I have been pushing a bit too small of a prop for the application, after doing all this reading. This is the direction I am leaning. interesting insight about the Merc. not having used anything really aside from the ya
  6. This is interesting. I have thought about hiding transitions this way, especially for redoing my cockpit seats and nonskid. The problem on my foredeck, however, is that there are no hard angles. And the non skid that I would have to re-do (unless I blended it?) carries all the way aft to the cockpit. The repair is partly/mostly out of the shot, on the far right side of the photo. But that robbin's-egg blue nonskid carries all the way to the bow.
  7. Haha it drives me up the walllllllllll every time I hear this. Like, Yes! The prep is both crucial and time-consuming. Turns out, just like with every other job, there's one particular part of the process that is both important and tricky! Pouring concrete is easy, it's building the form that's tough. Brain surgery is easy, it's going to med school that's difficult. Landing on the moon is easy, it's flying a spaceship that's hard. Pounding nails is easy, it's drawing up the plans for the house that's the trick. And on and on, until I tear every last strand of hair out of my head because it's a
  8. Looks good. Looks good enough to make me rethink my plans, but I have to ask - how much fairing/repainting is visible here? I see mostly non-skid (which is no dig on the job, at all!) Also, after painting, how much fiddling did you have to do with magician-grade wetsanding (6000 grit etc) and/or polishing/buffing paste to get the blend? Do you have a writeup somewhere of your process?
  9. Who said anything about a two-sroke? My first choice is a new Yamaha T9.9, which is a four-stroke. The only thing that has kept me from clicking 'buy' already is the fact that Yamaha appears to have shifted almost entirely to manufacturing these motors with power tilt, which is a feature that I really don't want, extra complication being the source of misery that it is on a sailboat. Since I use the boat for a lot of mini-cruising (gunkholing), I end up under power a lot. Two summers ago we powered something like 40 hours out to the west side. I try to avoid doing that much usually, b
  10. This is the thing. I could figure out the nonskid I think (I watched my neighbor do it), but figuring out whether my existing topside is gelcoat or paint is not something I know how to do, and again, let alone applying either and having it blend well into the old.
  11. I was being overly negative by calling it a 4ksb. It's a gary mull santana that was my dad's (so more like a 5.5ksb thank you), and she's actually in decent shape, just a bit dinged/scuffed. She's nice enough (and I'm. stupidly proud enough) that while I stop myself from getting perfectionist with anything, I try not to finish repairs/projects with the area looking worse than when I started. That was my reasoning for not wanting to cut open the topsides. I don't know what the old paint was, and I think to make it look good I'd basically be looking at doing fresh nonskid and paint on the
  12. Poked around a bit. The mercury 9.9 pro-kicker is a little different from the mercury 9.9 Command Thrust, but they both have a 2.42:1 lower unit. That's compared to the 2.9:1 lower unit in the Yamaha. Aside from the lower unit they appear quite similar otherwise. Yamaha displaces 212 cc, with a 2.2x1.69 bore/stroke — the Merc is 208 CC with a 2.16 x 1.73 bore/stroke. So the Yamaha has a slightly larger (2%) displacement, but the merc has a 2% longer stroke (long skinny cylinders produce more torque than short squat ones). But those are very small variations, and must to some deg
  13. Is this the one (below)? Looks like it has 2.42:1, but is purpose-built for a larger prop otherwise, they say? https://www.powerequipmentdirect.com/Mercury-Marine-1F10261KK-Engines/p97582.html?gclid=Cj0KCQjw3duCBhCAARIsAJeFyPVT6Hm8Hzt0uQvDEWyIxceCJYKAUSB9nejbpVJHclAILU5QCGWoUaAt6BEALw_wcB
  14. This is why I had been thinking of doing it layer by layer. Single-ply will take simple curves without scoring. It would take 10-12 layers to build to full thickness, but I think if I got myself all laid out and used fast epoxy I could get that laid up in a long day. I am open to this foam stuff though, which sounds way easier. Just would like to find some more info on it.
  15. Interesting! Do you have a link or company name or anything I could use to take a look at that? Also any ideas on where would be a good spot to find some data or at least a good writeup on foam in this application? Also, what about the core-to-core bond at the edge of the repair? With foam do you still need to do a bevel/scarf?
  16. Not possible. The foredeck is two large non-skid sections with a raised painted strip running fire-aft down the center, and rapping around the edges. The soft spot is plum in the middle, underlapping both nonskid areas by 8-10 inches. I could see excavating an inch or two under a non-skid edge, but that seems too far to reach and be assured of a good, complete clean-out. I can't see how coming in from the top wouldn't require essentially redoing nonskid on the whole foredeck, as well as figuring out some way to blend the paint over my repair with the rest of the old topside paint (dubious
  17. Right. I used 'mat' as a general shorthand, but obviously cloth or bixial would be better. I am thinking probably to go with the latter. And yeah, definitely an epoxy-compatible one. Again with the shorthand/assumption. I guess I should have been more clear at the beginning that basic technique was not what I meant to come asking about. What I'm more wondering about is the overall strategy (like the question of whether to come in from the top or the bottom, and foam vs/plywood). With the overhead layup, same thing: I think I have enough basic technique/skill to do it without issue.
  18. I appreciate all of this. One question I have is about coming in from the topside though. I re-did the glass overlap on my the keel flange last summer, and did not actually find the overhead work to be that big of a pain. I didn't do a great job at it, in the sense that the final product was not as fair as I might have liked, but that was mostly down to a lack of yard time/vacation time to spend the extra days or two getting it from decent to good. On top of that, the area in question overlap two separate nonskid areas on the topside, as well as a big flat smooth area. So the w
  19. This.... has not been my experience of the reality of the marine environment.
  20. Hi everyone! It feels like ages since I was on here, commenting on this or that, mocking ads on craigy's, or starting threads on anchoring that seem to annoy nearly everyone. Good times! Anyway I'm back because, yet again, it's springtime, which means my boat needs a fix for which I have only about 2/3 of the necessary knowledge. Basically, soft spot in the bow deck. It started around the fasteners (always the fasteners) for a rode-box that was through-bolted (jesus why) to the underside of the deck, at the front end of the V-birth. The soft spot is pretty big (20-28" in diameter),
  21. Since I was a little kid, I've sailed on boats pushed by Yamaha 9.9 high-thrusts, and as surely as I remember lullabies, I remember my pops whispering in my ear that the 9.9 was the only outboard purpose-made to push a sailboat. Fast-forward a couple decades. I have 6 percent more knowledge about sailboats than I did at age 10, and a credit card, and I need a new motor. And of course, the high-thrusts are back-ordered till kingdom-come because of the 'rona, plus, even worse, it appears to be nigh impossible to find one without an integral power-tilt mechanism (which I am skeptical wo
  22. All I'll say - since given my whole thread on this kind of thing, I'm pretty sure everyone knows my stance - is that a battery powered angle grinder will go through a 3/8" chain link in just over thirty seconds. Don't ask how I know.
  23. It me (In reality I usually get 15-20 gallons of gas, which is a slightly bigger purchase, but still chump change compared to Smokey Belcher and his floating diesel pot, which might suck a couple hundred gallons in one go - that said, it obviously comes with the game of operating a public accommodation - serving cheapskates like me is the price you pay to serve the big spenders)
  24. It's such a tired old saw to waggle a finger at the rest of society this way, all balanced on some hair-splitting: you don't really own that house, you sap! Ownership is defined in most legal cases and also in common use as exclusive right to exclusively control the enjoyment, employment, and disposal of an asset. This is not the same as a legal interest in a property. Even if you're underwater on a zero-down ARM mortgage, you own the house. You get to use it, no one else does, and you can sell it or bulldoze it and build condominiums or a church to the god-emperor Zod or a giant stu
  25. What is reasonable? I guess we'll find out. The one thing I would point to is that contracts and even basic statutes often make things seem more clear-cut than they actually are. After a few decades of case-law are taken into account, responsibility in many types of accidents rarely ends up invested absolutely in one person (the captain), and by the same token neither is blame. (For just one example in a separate Marine situation, take anchoring: it would seem extremely clear cut that if someone comes into the harbor after you, anchors too close, and then swings into you
×
×
  • Create New...