JimC wrote:



I was simply responding to your claim that the weight of a 50-70HP
outboard is "far less than the weight of a typical diesel." In fact,
its about the same weight. Jeeze, Jim, do you really feel the need to
fight tooth and nail on every issue, including those where you're
completely wrong? Is this a lawyer thing - do you get paid the same
even when your arguments are stupid?

I sort of get paid for knowing what the hell I'm doing, Jeff. And I
seldom loose.

But winning in your business is not the same as being right. In my
experience, lawyers are more often on the side of "wrong" than on the
side of "right." (I think that's because the forces of "wrong" can
afford more of them!)




And let me point out again, its not the weight, its the location. A
250 pound engine hanging off the stern contribute far more to the
pitch moment than an inboard close to the center of the boat.


Well, that's clear enough, and I agree. But once more, the boat is built
to be balanced fore and aft with a motor and a crew in the cockpit. And
it is.

Totally irrelevant. Either you're too stupid to follow the
discussion, or you just showing what type of lawyer you really are.
Obviously the boat was designed to float on its lines with full
ballast and an engine. The issue is whether a different distribution
of mass would lead to a boat that sails better.

Actually, the motor isn't much more astern then the crew sitting
in the cockpit, or the skipper sitting on the back seat over the
transom.

If a 4000 lb racing boat boat sailed with one large (250 lb) crew
hanging off the stern, and another standing on the bow, it would be
substantially slower than its competitors. (Not to mention being more
uncomfortable.)

However, I don't think I agree that a typical diesel, with
generator, fuel pump, filters, prop shaft, etc., would weigh about the
same as a modern outboard. - Any stats on that one?

I thought I just gave one. The weight of a 15 Hp Yanmar, including
everything (alternator, pumps, filter) except the shaft and prop is
249 lbs. Clearly one might add another fuel filter or water filter,
and the muffler weighs a few pounds (mine are plastic) but all of this
is only a few pounds, and then your outboard also has a few extra bits
and pieces not included in its base weight. Also, since the diesel
generates almost twice the power from a pound of fuel, one can claim a
huge weight advantage on that front.



....
Sounds like fun. Might I remind you that a few years ago you were
insisting the Mac could do 18 knots while I was saying that was
unrealistic, you probably wouldn't do much over 12.

This particular day was fairly rough, and I wasn't running the motor
full throttle. - I still think the boat would motor at 18 knots on a
smooth day without the ballast. - But I haven't seen those speeds yet,
because I've been reticent to motor without the ballast.

Yes, buts that's been my point. If you want to keep the boat very
light, and are willing to forgo ballast on a flat clam, you can
achieve the high speeds. But you've just proven my old point that
loaded up with a bit a gear, and dealing with a bit of weather, you
won't want to go that fast.



Very nice. Beautiful little girl, and dog also. I suppose you can anchor
in fairly shallow water also.

I'm in the same area as Joe, between Houston and Galveston (third
largest number of pleasure boats in the US). I don't think our harbors
and anchorages are as nice as yours, although we can get to the gulf in
a few hours.

I've only sailed on the FL side of the Gulf - I enjoyed it a lot, the
Naples area has been on our short list of possible places to move to
in a few years.


Incidentally, does Durgins Park still serve Indian Pudding?

Fresh baked.