Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Need help making a canoe/boat decision

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    131

    Default Need help making a canoe/boat decision

    I am kicking around the idea of a boat. I have been looking for some time and have narrowed the search and a freighter is quickly rising to the top. I am looking for a boat that will carry 1-3 people gear for a camp and 2 animals ( i know two moose is to much but at least a caribou and moose or moose bear or any other combination. I would also like to feel comfortable on some of the area lakes. I am not a white water guy but understand that the boat needs to be tough enough to handle rocks etc. I just want a boat that will get me up to areas that others do not go and safely float out the fruits of my labor. As far as a camp I usually like to go for 5-7 days and carry a semi heavy load for camp ...food for that time, packs, tent, colman stove etc. Most will say a 17 foot freighter but that seems a little small but a 22 footer seems a little big and getting into the big boat category and not sure how skinny of water it will do. The thing I love about canoes is that if you take the wrong braid it appears the drag across is not as bad as it might be in a flat bottom etc. Just looking for your opinions on the matter thanks

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    1,763

    Talking

    there is some people that will comment on this but not all canoes are the same, but a 19 ft grumman SQ would be small for what you want , it will handle 2 people an camp gear but a whole moose [50' + ] bone out you will be pushing the weight limit of the boat an then some ,,
    you will be happer with some of the new 20 + FT SQ to do what you want with a surface drive , check around for a good HP for the canoe you get
    MY 2 CTS SID

  3. #3

    Default

    You're right about a 17, but for the load you anticipate I'd say you're also overly optimistic about what you can do with a 19. I'd go for the 22 and count on your buds to help pull when you take the wrong braid. BTDT on overloaded boats, and when the freeboard gets skinny, the sphincters tighten too much for me.

  4. #4
    Member mainer_in_ak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Delta Junction
    Posts
    4,078

    Default

    You can do it with a 17. I cut my teeth on beamy 17's. It takes skill though, and alot of work. To get a 54.5" racked moose a fat bodied bull caribou and a somewhat heavy camp back took three trips. I urinate on the ground all around my meat pole because bears don't like the smell of human urine. Sometimes though, it's a risk doing multiple trips, because some bears don't care, or you could get a break down. I won't lie though, I was missing my 18 ft. freighter the whole time. I would've been able to get moose and camp in ONE trip, and burnt 1/3 less fuel. Oh well, meat still filled the freezer. With a 17 ft discovery sport (not made anymore) or an Esquif Cargo, you can haul an entire moose in bone, and two hunters, but that's it. Camp and any other weight will not fit, you'll run out of freeboard. With a whole moose in the boat and two hunters, you will draft about 9 inches in the water, with about 6-7 inches left. Keeping around 1/4-1/2 throttle, you'll gain about 1-2 inches of free board.


  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Fairbanks
    Posts
    466

    Default

    My wife and I hunt and camp out of a 17' Grumman with a 7.5 conventional outboard on it. I think we could bring out one bull moose or maybe two bull caribou, but it would be exciting.

    You might look at a 19' Grumman, that extra two feet is pretty much at the widest part in the middle, with not much difference between the 17' and 19' at the ends. Just a general impression, I haven't actually seen the two side by side.

    Anyroad, a 19' with about a 10hp conventional outboard will get you started. Probably 1000-1500 bucks off Craigslist for both. From there, if you got more dough you can look at nicer canoes, but also you are going to want to read up on surface drives.

    I spent one weekend on a not unusual Alaska river and got the surface drive religion. Loaded for camping my 17' draws about 11" without an animal in it yet. That puts the bottom of the skeg dragging mud or beating up rocks in about 16" of water. Cutting 5" off my total draft by going to a surface drive looks to me from here as more desirable than a nicer boat.

  6. #6
    Member mainer_in_ak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Delta Junction
    Posts
    4,078

    Default

    Your general impressions are false. I shared camp with guys running 19er's If you're comparisons are between the 17 and 19 ft. grummans, your impressions may be ok, but the 17.5 ft. Discoveries and Esquif Cargos are completely different canoes with larger load hauling capabilities.

    The Grumman 19ers look to be about 13 inches tall in the center, if that, and maybe 38" across. Under equal loads, the 19 er drafts until you have no safe free board left because of the shallow height. The Esquif is 16 inches tall in the center, and 43" wide in the center. The discovery 17.5 sports were 15 in. tall at center, and 42-43 accross the center. The stern on the esquif cargo is almost a foot wider too. They end up hauling bigger loads while having more free board than the 19er. I shared camp with guys who have been running 19ers for many decades. The 19er has a keel whereas the Cargo doesn't. Makes a big difference when paddling. The grumman's bow has a full 4-5 in. less height, get on some big lake waves with an entire big bull in the boat and these differences really manifest. They are two completely different boats. Meat must be in-bone so the weight can get excessive with two sets of ribs, the quarters, the anlters, two 100+ lbs bags of meat trimmings/organs, and your hunting partner/gas to get home. If you have any fast chutes of water, or lake waves, you need free board.

    With the size of the 17 ft. grumman, two caribou hunters could not haul two caribou with what appeared to be a 17 ft. grumman, you certainly won't be hauling a moose with it. The moose alone would take at least two trips. They ended up inflating a canoe and pulling meat with that, one caribou was tiny too, the other, wasn't all that big in the body, but big in the antlers.

  7. #7
    Member mainer_in_ak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Delta Junction
    Posts
    4,078

    Default

    With that said, I've run my 12 hp on three different canoes. My taiga creek model, the 18 ft. Scott Albany, and my Esquif Cargo. With the cargo, I couldn't run no more that quarter-half throttle. Too much power, and the stern digs in and counters fuel economy. I would hit half throttle to overcome a shallow section, but that's it, the rest was 1/4 throttle. The hull likes to be run at 10 mph with a load, nothing more, nothing less. With a light load, 13 mph was right at quarter throttle. Any more than that, and the motor would dig the stern all the way to the waters surface. The 6.5 copperhead worked a bit better.

    I used Familyman's Albany for dipnetting and my motor worked horribly with that boat. Due to the excessive rocker, even with two coolers full of salmon in the bow, a dipntetter, and an additional 100 lbs of rocks, the bow would porpoise so excessively in the air, that I would take on water over both the gunwales and the stern, very wet ride. The porpoising is so prevalent, that it leverages the stern to run deeper, that's probably why Familyman nicknamed his boat the rock magnet. It's almost as if those "cut-outs" in the stern would allow water to be pulled to the prop, and dig deep in the water. Again, only quarter-half throttle with my 12 hp copperhead. I ended up burning about 40 percent more fuel using FM's Albany than the prior dip netting year. Wish I would have used a traditional outboard motor with his boat istead.

    With my Taiga creek model, everything changes. You can run the motor full throttle and the stern will not dig in. The canoe has about a 28" wide flat planing surface to counter the tendency of the stern to dig deep. Even with 1500 lbs in the boat, the boat would RISE to the surface. There is less trimming of the motor because of the predictability. My particular surface drive likes to run at the SURFACE.........

    You loose efficiency if you go beyond 1/2 throttle with the other canoes, it digs in and puts too much load on the motor. You gain more efficiency with a narrow planing surface. I've learned this over my last two years running surface drives.

    This is in part why I've drawn up my Muskrat model, so it will run more efficiently at full throttle with a load utilizing the smaller 6.5 and 10 hp copperheads. This will be a 17 ft long canoe. Duck hunters, and moose hunting on skinny creeks, 17 ft is all you want. Trust me, I snapped my muffler off my motor, and cracked the intake box bolted to the carb in sweepers and wood piles. Sometimes, 17 ft. felt too long. I'll begin building the male plug of that model in January. I'm dancing around 46 inches wide, with it narrowing to 40 at the stern. The flat planing surface will be narrow, but just enough to get the stern up with a heavy load. Stay tuned folks, it takes time to let experience transform and evolve canoes into something completely different.

    OK, back to cutting up moose n caribou.

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    6,031

    Default Rock Magnet

    Quote Originally Posted by mainer_in_ak View Post
    that's probably why Familyman nicknamed his boat the rock magnet.
    Hmm, and I thought that my driving was the reason!

    To see the specs on my canoe and the Hudson Bay that is one size larger, look here on Scott's web site:
    http://www.scottcanoe.com/index.php?...d=20&Itemid=97

    Or, go nuts with their ocean-liner style canoe:
    http://www.scottcanoe.com/index.php?...d=21&Itemid=98

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •