Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

If you were gunna.....

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    I apparently did not make it clear that I moved the bodies around in the seats but I did not use the 3rd seat back because I am considering removing that seat and placing some thwarts for cross bracing in that area and also to make more room for non-people cargo. The front and 2nd seat seems to be the ideal place to put 2 bodies. I put the 6 gallon gas tank which was half full and my usual dry box that goes with me always and weights about 20 pounds in front of the 3rd seat. I sat in the rear seat with all 200 lbs of me on the seat and nothing behind me except the Merc 9.9 hp. Not counting the motor, I had about 550 lbs on board, 300 in the front 2 seats. 50 lbs at the 3rd seat and 200 lbs on the back seat. I did move the 180 lb son between both front seats and it had little difference in the bending in the bottom. About 500 pounds of moose would certainly hold the floor down in the middle and solve the problems but I was fresh out of moose at the time. Regarding motor trim...I had the 9.9 on the bottom notch which would have been the "flat" running trim. If I went up a notch it would have tried to raise the front of the canoe even more.

    Maybe I'm expecting too much from the canoe or I should stick with my 3.3 hp motor that just plods along. I don't think the load I had should have caused a problem. I am going to put in some cross bracing and take out the 3rd seat and see if I can put something like ribs into the middle and see what that does.....more to follow.
    Somewhere along the way I have lost the ability to act politically correct. If you should find it, please feel free to keep it.

    Comment


    • #62
      The smaller motor will do all you want, even with my 19' frighter grumman the man in the front set is out of water when appling max power an the stearn would be under water if i stoped an did not move, but when I stop the bow goes down an stearn goes up, it was like you said the botton gets a small kink in the floor you do need to put some stiffener in the floor some how to stop it , if you want to use the 9.8 Merk,

      Comment


      • #63
        I did a little search for loading of the Cargo and found an entry by Mainer saying make sure you put the weight in the middle of the boat and keep the bow light. That would certainly make sense but what do you do with a moose in the middle and two people to seat in the front of the boat? I'm still thinking the bottom should not bend or deform the way it did with a load of less than half the rated load of the canoe. Maybe that is why Esquif rates the canoe for a 3 hp motor, knowing a larger motor will bend the boat with weight in the front of the boat.

        Any Cargo owners out there with the same problem?
        Somewhere along the way I have lost the ability to act politically correct. If you should find it, please feel free to keep it.

        Comment


        • #64
          have ben think about the problem you have, if you run ribs from side to side the problem will still be there the bottom will cave in as there is no support on the floor the bottom will always in because when under power the bow will lift out of the water an the force of the water will be against the bottom, all the larger canoes have a beam [ of some type ] runing down the center of the canoe
          this is only visable when going fast with a load,
          as I said before the bow will come up an it, the bottom has to be able to take the force of the water on it , the faster you go the more bow out of water, an more force on bottom ,
          so the only choices I see is slow down or put some supports in the canoe that runs from bow to stern
          good luck see you on the stream

          SID

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by Sid View Post
            put some supports in the canoe that runs from bow to stern
            Like a Scott Canoe does. Plus the Scott hull is far harder and heavier material.

            That Cargo will shine, over a Scott, during the times you have to bodily lift it.

            Comment


            • #66
              I have to agree with Sid. My rib idea isn't the best. It would likely transfer the issue to wherever the ribs stopped.

              Also, if my previous post was irritating please accept my apology. That certainly wasn't its intent. 10 months in Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia, basically nasty a third-world city, is driving me nuts. Five weeks and I'm back on POW doing as nature intended humans to do (fooling around in boats, fishing, fiddling in the shop, drinking beer in the evening while listening to salmon flop out in the channel etc. . .)

              Comment


              • #67
                Wynot,

                You were by no means irritating and I really appreciate your input but trying to come up with a simple way to make ribs did stump my simple little mind. Hope you are well paid for your time in Mongolia!!

                One of the reasons I bought the Cargo over the Missourian was the smooth, warm and quiet bottom of Royalex and not aluminum. I have a 17' Grumman if I want play in the tin can which I love but I wanted something more stable and something different. I had no clue that the Cargo would be as soft as it is in the bottom.

                I've studied the keel on the Grumman and there is no practical way to install one on the Cargo... at least that I can think of without glassing a keel or something.

                I could make one that is on the inside and supported by the extra thwarts and some vertical supports from the rails and thwarts to a "frame" on the floor which would probably stop the bottom from deforming under loads imparted by the water at speeds above maybe 15 mph. I am concerned that the Royalex rubbing against the aluminum frame might wear holes in the bottom unless I put some type padding between the frame and the bottom. My other thought....does anyone make Viagra for Royalex? But then I have a Mercury and not a big Johnson!
                Somewhere along the way I have lost the ability to act politically correct. If you should find it, please feel free to keep it.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by Lowrider View Post
                  . My other thought....does anyone make Viagra for Royalex? But then I have a Mercury and not a big Johnson!
                  LOL! Now thats funny.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Went for a ride today with the 3.3 hp on the back, 200 pounds in the 2nd seat and 200 lbs in the rear seat. What a wonderfully well behaved canoe!! No issues at all and I did a lot of the stearing by leaning side to side in the back of the boat. I even stood for a ways holding on to the anchor rope...boat was very stable and did 8.1 MPH at about 3/4 throttle into the wind and 10.7 mph with the wind. Little Merc used a full tank in about 1 hour (did not time) at 3/4 throttle. Without the added power there was no bending or flatening of the bottow as I observed with the 9.9 hp. Great canoe with the little motor!! I'm wondering if maybe a 5 hp is the answer?
                    Somewhere along the way I have lost the ability to act politically correct. If you should find it, please feel free to keep it.

                    Comment

                    Footer Adsense

                    Collapse
                    Working...
                    X