An XL Tripper with a side mount; now there's a nice rig, I'm sure. I can
see a 6 HP gas OB making this a very versatile package.

On the other hand, I think much of your information about square-stern drag
is incorrect, the drag being either negligible or nonexistent, except
perhaps for "canoes" with a broad transom, or very poor lines. My
experience is primarily from a 19' Grumman SS, whose stern had, when
correctly loaded and run, virtually no drag (despite its rather crude
lines), stability was not a problem, and even driving from the rear with a
very light load, it needs only a spare 5gal gas can on the forward deck to
keep it running flat.

As to contortionists training, I preferred to run mine from the front seat,
using a pole connected to the end of a Gill's extension handle with a
u-joint consisting of an S link held in place on the Gills handle and a
snap-link locked in place on the pole. This gave both throttle and
direction control from the front seat for about $18. With a 3' board stuck
between the seat and the thwart behind, one could cruise in great comfort.
Add a cuddy over the front bay with either small poles and visqueen or a
tarp and it can be quite cozy as well. This, of course, is no longer what
I'd call a "canoe", but a poor man's riverboat.

Brad


"Peter H" wrote in message
...
Ronald Donahue wrote:

My wife and I have been paddling canoes for the past 30 years and kayaks
for the last 3 but sometimes the places we want to go are just too far or
we
get tired of fighting the wind so I'm thinking or getting a square stern
canoe or maybe one of those brackets that you can put a small outboard
motor
on. Anybody have experience with this type of set up or a better idea,
any
suggestions?

Thanks

Ron Donahue




As others have suggested, the overall size/carrying capacity of your
'final' canoe need to be the first consideration. I've had canoes from
12' - 20'. Have a 20' Old Town XL Tripper and woldn't dream of going
back. There's a sturdy aircraft-aluminum + oak side mount. If I'm using
the outboard, I have a 45# counterweight that straddles the opposite
gunwale; I move it forward or aft as need be for trim depending on
placement of load, passengers, etc. I've never had a problem with this
canoe with motor or sans motor in any water so long as I reconignize the
limits of the given moment & act accordingly. Even though some waters in
northern Maine have a 10 h.p. limit, it's widely known that some river
guides will use 15 h.p. motors on their XLs with a 10 h.p. cover. Far
too much motor for me, but I don't even need the 10; I get great power,
economy & service from an ancient Evinrude 6. I've had up to 3 h.p. on a
16' Lincoln with satisfactory results. So far as square stern is
concerned, I wouldn't do it myself (your mileage may vary) since the
square end instantly obviates one basic attribute of the canoe - it's
hopefully symmetrical below the waterline for whatever load or water you
find yourself in. In fact, in most square-enders the propeller's
backwash against the transom will eat up a good portion of your
outboard's power. Note here that the 20' - 22' square-end Scott &
similar canoes that are designed specifically for heavy loads & heavy
water all have a bit of "clipper ship" (basically this means there is a
keel-like protrusion which maintains much of the underwater symmetry)
effect below the transom to avoid the backwash experienced on smaller
square-end canoes. In addition, if a square-ender is only 18' - 20' the
nature of the beast will give some balance & loading problems
interfering with comfortable and decent control over the motor while
maintaining good trim, even in easy water. All else being equal, they're
clumsy because of the motor placement & the needed boardinghouse reach
required of the operator. I've found that the side-mount properly
counterbalanced (a fairly easy task - even shifting your duffel about
will often suffice) gives superior balance & control.

Bottom line to all my blathering: the canoe is basically symetrical from
end to end. There's a very good reason for that. Maintain that symmetry
for best results in any canoe.

Yours in the north Maine woods,
Pete Hilton (Reg. Me. Guide) aka The Ent

--
If the assumptions are wrong, the
conclusions aren't likely to be very good.
R. E. Machol