Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 29 of 29

Thread: Scott Albany Modification

  1. #21
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    1,790

    Default

    you bet, it is for deep water , I am no small person 250 LBS an river running for over 40 years, this MAY 2014 with a grummen 19 with a 7.5 Merk. then a 15 OMC 2 cycle
    the front half never gets scacthed, it is the section that is just in front of where I stand that gets the most damaged thay is why I put runners on . the back 3/4 of the 19 ft I use , it is real easy to do it , I forget the number of canoes that I have fixed up [ but a few ]
    SID

  2. #22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by North61 View Post
    Calvin Rustrum ,,page 32 North American Canoe Country...... "The first consideration in the selection of a square stern canoe is to make sure that the flat face of the transom does not continue below the waterline. Some aluminum canoes have this serious defect, and the manufacturers should lose no time in correcting it. The flat area of transom below the water creates drag. kicks up a swirl and back-whips water into the canoe with water speed. When paddling the canoe, the flat area below the water creates a noisy suction churn,......"

    One of the conditions Calvin Rustrum describes is when the canoe is being paddled. I think he is absolutely correct describing some disadvantages of a flat transom extending below the water line, provided the canoe is moving slowly enough to be in the displacement mode.

    But, the increased buoyancy at the stern of the flat transom design moves the canoe’s center of buoyancy aft. This is helpful with heavier motors before the canoe reaches planing speed.

    When the canoe is pushed fast enough it will begin to plane. The flat transom design would then have the advantage because its planing surface area is larger enabling the canoe to begin planing at a lower speed. The planing surface is also effectively farther aft with the flat transom design. This is an advantage to counter the canoe’s tendency to have an aft center of gravity with the aft stationing of the operator and large motor.

    Well, that’s my theory anyway. What I’ve done is not really a scientific experiment since I never tested and measured the performance of the original design. I am looking forward to when the water is liquid again to see how it works!

  3. #23
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Whitehorse, Yukon
    Posts
    464

    Default

    Makes sense. I look forward to hearing how it works out!

  4. #24
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    6,031

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rifleman View Post
    One of the conditions Calvin Rustrum describes is when the canoe is being paddled. I think he is absolutely correct describing some disadvantages of a flat transom extending below the water line, provided the canoe is moving slowly enough to be in the displacement mode.

    But, the increased buoyancy at the stern of the flat transom design moves the canoe’s center of buoyancy aft. This is helpful with heavier motors before the canoe reaches planing speed.

    When the canoe is pushed fast enough it will begin to plane. The flat transom design would then have the advantage because its planing surface area is larger enabling the canoe to begin planing at a lower speed. The planing surface is also effectively farther aft with the flat transom design. This is an advantage to counter the canoe’s tendency to have an aft center of gravity with the aft stationing of the operator and large motor.
    rifleman, I think you hit that nail on the head.

  5. #25
    Member mainer_in_ak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Delta Junction
    Posts
    4,108

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by North61 View Post
    Calvin Rustrum ,,page 32 North American Canoe Country...... "The first consideration in the selection of a square stern canoe is to make sure that the flat face of the transom does not continue below the waterline. Some aluminum canoes have this serious defect, and the manufacturers should lose no time in correcting it. The flat area of transom below the water creates drag. kicks up a swirl and back-whips water into the canoe with water speed. When paddling the canoe, the flat area below the water creates a noisy suction churn,......"

    On page 33 he has a drawing diagraming two designs one proper the other Improper. The Proper stern looks a bit like the stern on a Scott.

    Our own Mainer seems to have the opposite opinion. I haven't noticed any issue with my own Hudson Bay with the cut-outs. Even with a lot of shallow water work this year with a 140 pound copperhead, 20pounds of gas and 290 pounds of operator the main scraping damage was to the front 2/3rds of the boat. Myself, I wouldn't bother with the modification though maybe there is an issue with the Albany that doesn't exist in the HB?
    your darn right I have an opposite opinion! but it goes beyond opinion, I have proof. Every time I stopped FM's albany on the Yukon River with a load, to bail, dawn gloves, refuel, ect, I would take an insane amount of water right over the stern when I tried to throttle down against the current. We're talking 10 gallons of water here. Once I got up to speed, the churning mass of a back-wave couldn't catch up.

  6. #26
    New member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    730

    Default

    mainer ....

    That's why the Hudson Bay, unlike the Albany, has a splash tray. When you come off the throttle, the following sea overtakes the transom, etc. The HB's splash tray has a drain hole through the transom, that drains the water out within moments. On the HB ... no big deal. On the Albany, something to deal with.

  7. #27
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Whitehorse, Yukon
    Posts
    464

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rick View Post
    mainer ....

    That's why the Hudson Bay, unlike the Albany, has a splash tray. When you come off the throttle, the following sea overtakes the transom, etc. The HB's splash tray has a drain hole through the transom, that drains the water out within moments. On the HB ... no big deal. On the Albany, something to deal with.
    The only time my HB's splash tray was handy was when I failed to notice the drain plug was leaking and going through some rapids I took on 800 pounds of water that all stayed in the back. When I noticed and made for shore the motor splashed waves over the transom. Scary. Glad I had the splash guard that day!

  8. #28
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Fairbanks, AK
    Posts
    619

    Default

    So now, some years later, how is this mod working? I am considering a much more involved widening, as in starting out 4' forward of the transom, essentially making my HB much more of a planing boat.

  9. #29

    Default

    One mod that would be great is a self draining plug like on a Naiad you go forward water goes out. In big water you are to busy to pull plug and let it self bail then put it back in before you stop.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

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
  •