Cutaway transom or not?
 

YES, I'll start a real flame war here but I am serious about the
question.
HK says a cutaway transom allows the boat to drain if it is swamped,
seems sensible.
The designer of my Tolman says to have a high drywell in front of the
motor on a cutaway to make sure she does NOT fill with water.
A compromise seems to be to have the dry well but also have serious
cockpit drains, not the tiny ones you see on most boats, I mean at
least 6" diameter AND have the cockpit drains with flapper valves made
of thick rubber sheet attached to the transom with SS screws. This
would require the boat be decked with floatation underneath.
I am curious because I am considering in the long term what boat to
build next and am considering a modified 23' Tolman Jumbo with more
deadrise.

Cutaway transom or not?
 

On Jun 23, 3:34*pm, Frogwatch wrote:
YES, I'll start a real flame war here but I am serious about the
question.
HK says a cutaway transom allows the boat to drain if it is swamped,
seems sensible.
The designer of my Tolman (Renn Tolman) says to have a high drywell in front of the
motor on a cutaway to make sure she does NOT fill with water.
A compromise seems to be to have the dry well but also have serious
cockpit drains, not the tiny ones you see on most boats, I mean at
least 6" diameter AND have the cockpit drains with flapper valves made
of thick rubber sheet attached to the transom with SS screws. *This
would require the boat be decked with floatation underneath.
I am curious because I am considering in the long term what boat to
build next and am considering a modified 23' Tolman Jumbo with more
deadrise.

In either case, the cabin entrance should have a high step to get over
to prevent water from going below. This seems sorta a pain but
necessary. Many sailboats are built with such a step (bridgedeck) to
prevent water from going below if the cockpit floods. In addition, in
nasty weather, I keep the bottom hatchboard in place. Maybe such a
hatchboard would help on offshore boats with cabins? What is done on
such boats to prevent water from going into the cabin?.

Cutaway transom or not?
 

Frogwatch wrote:
YES, I'll start a real flame war here but I am serious about the
question.
HK says a cutaway transom allows the boat to drain if it is swamped,
seems sensible.
The designer of my Tolman says to have a high drywell in front of the
motor on a cutaway to make sure she does NOT fill with water.
A compromise seems to be to have the dry well but also have serious
cockpit drains, not the tiny ones you see on most boats, I mean at
least 6" diameter AND have the cockpit drains with flapper valves made
of thick rubber sheet attached to the transom with SS screws. This
would require the boat be decked with floatation underneath.
I am curious because I am considering in the long term what boat to
build next and am considering a modified 23' Tolman Jumbo with more
deadrise.


The problem with a "high drywell," as you call it, is that if you take a
big wave over the bow or over the sides, the water will have to be
higher than that "high drywell" to get over it. The scupper drains at
the bottom aren't going to do for serious green water. I think the
larger, semi-horizontal scupper drains are more effective.

In all the years I have been messing around in small boats, I have never
taken any serious amount of water over the stern, and that includes
boats I have had with 15" and 20" transom heights. When waves come to
the stern, the boat usually rises enough to keep water out.

From 2002 to 2003, I had a SeaPro "bay boat" with stern seats and a
transom water dam. I never took any significant water over the stern,
but I did take a decent sized wave over the bow. It took a while to
drain the water out the scuppers.

Before that, I had another SeaPro, but it had only two stern seats, no
transom water dam. One fine day we were anchored close to the beach just
north of Mayport when the wind shifted, and some big waves began
breaking just in front of and and the bow of the boat. We took two
substantial waves right over the bow, and I thought I was going to lose
the boat. But I was able to cut the anchor line in a flash, start up the
engine, and get the water to the stern, where it poured right over the
transom.

There are a few assholes here who will argue otherwise, but their
problem is with me, not with the boat design. A couple of them have
absolutely no big water experience.

Cutaway transom or not?
 

On Jun 23, 4:18*pm, HK wrote:
Frogwatch wrote:
YES, I'll start a real flame war here but I am serious about the
question.
HK says a cutaway transom allows the boat to drain if it is swamped,
seems sensible.
The designer of my Tolman says to have a high drywell in front of the
motor on a cutaway to make sure she does NOT fill with water.
A compromise seems to be to have the dry well but also have serious
cockpit drains, not the tiny ones you see on most boats, I mean at
least 6" diameter AND have the cockpit drains with flapper valves made
of thick rubber sheet attached to the transom with SS screws. *This
would require the boat be decked with floatation underneath.
I am curious because I am considering in the long term what boat to
build next and am considering a modified 23' Tolman Jumbo with more
deadrise.

The problem with a "high drywell," as you call it, is that if you take a
big wave over the bow or over the sides, the water will have to be
higher than that "high drywell" to get over it. The scupper drains at
the bottom aren't going to do for serious green water. I think the
larger, semi-horizontal scupper drains are more effective.

In all the years I have been messing around in small boats, I have never
taken any serious amount of water over the stern, and that includes
boats I have had with 15" and 20" transom heights. When waves come to
the stern, the boat usually rises enough to keep water out.

*From 2002 to 2003, I had a SeaPro "bay boat" with stern seats and a
transom water dam. I never took any significant water over the stern,
but I did take a decent sized wave over the bow. It took a while to
drain the water out the scuppers.

Before that, I had another SeaPro, but it had only two stern seats, no
transom water dam. One fine day we were anchored close to the beach just
north of Mayport when the wind shifted, and some big waves began
breaking just in front of and and the bow of the boat. We took two
substantial waves right over the bow, and I thought I was going to lose
the boat. But I was able to cut the anchor line in a flash, start up the
engine, and get the water to the stern, where it poured right over the
transom.

There are a few assholes here who will argue otherwise, but their
problem is with me, not with the boat design. A couple of them have
absolutely no big water experience.

Before I build the Tolman Jumbo, I will probably modify my 20' with
large drains and a removable deck with foam underneath. I worry about
foam absorbing water so I want it to be removable. One advantage of
the Tolman is the very high bow making it unlikely to take water over
it but you never know.
How does the Parker keep water from going into the cabin?

Cutaway transom or not?
 

Frogwatch wrote:
On Jun 23, 4:18 pm, HK wrote:
Frogwatch wrote:
YES, I'll start a real flame war here but I am serious about the
question.
HK says a cutaway transom allows the boat to drain if it is swamped,
seems sensible.
The designer of my Tolman says to have a high drywell in front of the
motor on a cutaway to make sure she does NOT fill with water.
A compromise seems to be to have the dry well but also have serious
cockpit drains, not the tiny ones you see on most boats, I mean at
least 6" diameter AND have the cockpit drains with flapper valves made
of thick rubber sheet attached to the transom with SS screws. This
would require the boat be decked with floatation underneath.
I am curious because I am considering in the long term what boat to
build next and am considering a modified 23' Tolman Jumbo with more
deadrise.
The problem with a "high drywell," as you call it, is that if you take a
big wave over the bow or over the sides, the water will have to be
higher than that "high drywell" to get over it. The scupper drains at
the bottom aren't going to do for serious green water. I think the
larger, semi-horizontal scupper drains are more effective.

In all the years I have been messing around in small boats, I have never
taken any serious amount of water over the stern, and that includes
boats I have had with 15" and 20" transom heights. When waves come to
the stern, the boat usually rises enough to keep water out.

From 2002 to 2003, I had a SeaPro "bay boat" with stern seats and a
transom water dam. I never took any significant water over the stern,
but I did take a decent sized wave over the bow. It took a while to
drain the water out the scuppers.

Before that, I had another SeaPro, but it had only two stern seats, no
transom water dam. One fine day we were anchored close to the beach just
north of Mayport when the wind shifted, and some big waves began
breaking just in front of and and the bow of the boat. We took two
substantial waves right over the bow, and I thought I was going to lose
the boat. But I was able to cut the anchor line in a flash, start up the
engine, and get the water to the stern, where it poured right over the
transom.

There are a few assholes here who will argue otherwise, but their
problem is with me, not with the boat design. A couple of them have
absolutely no big water experience.

Before I build the Tolman Jumbo, I will probably modify my 20' with
large drains and a removable deck with foam underneath. I worry about
foam absorbing water so I want it to be removable. One advantage of
the Tolman is the very high bow making it unlikely to take water over
it but you never know.
How does the Parker keep water from going into the cabin?


The cabin parker I owned had a step down cabin...the sides and stern
were so high, it would have taken a tsunami to get any water inside the
cabin. Plus the cabin had drains and pumps in the floor, so when I
cleaned the boat out, I hosed out the surface decks after using a bucket
of soapy water on them.

The 21' parker cabin boat uses the same hull as my CC. It doesn't get
much water in it. SW Tom's "mighty" bay boat is maybe, and I mean maybe,
2/3's the height at the bow and along the sides as my smaller Parker. I
would say it would fit inside my parker, but I'm not sure of its width,
since that model Ranger was not a marketing success and is no longer made.

Cutaway transom or not?
 

On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 16:47:46 -0400, Gene Kearns
wrote:

How does the Parker keep water from in doors. Once any significant amount of water down floods the cabin, the boat is usually a goner. You just can't get it out fast enough and the loss of stability/risk of capsize is severe.

Taking water over the bow is usually caused by encountering a high,
steep wave where the bow can not rise quickly enough. Water over the
transom can be caused by a breaking wave from astern. It happens on
offshore sailboats all the time. It can put a *lot* of water in the
cockpit in no time at all. The other big issue with water over the
transom is "accidental" anchoring from the stern, frequently caused by
snagging a crab trap or similar. The guys from St Pete Beach whogoing
into the cabin?

Don't know about Parker but as you mentioned the answer is some sort
of significant bridge deck combined with decent cab capsized last
winter were trying to pull an anchor out from the stern, another big
no-no.

Cutaway transom or not?
 

On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 19:57:30 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 16:47:46 -0400, Gene Kearns
wrote:

How does the Parker keep water from in doors.

OK, let's try to unscramble this mess:

Don't know about Parker but as you mentioned the answer is some sort
of significant bridge deck combined with decent cabin doors. Once a
signicant amount of water downfloods the cabin, the boat is usually a
goner. You just can't get it out fast enough and the resulting loss
of stability/capsize risk is severe.

Taking water over the bow is usually caused by encountering a high,
steep wave where the bow can not rise quickly enough. Water over the
transom can be caused by a breaking wave from astern. It happens on
offshore sailboats all the time. It can put a *lot* of water in the
cockpit in no time at all. The other big issue with water over the
transom is "accidental" anchoring from the stern, frequently caused by
snagging a crab trap or similar. The guys from St Pete Beach who
capsized last winter were trying to pull an anchor out by the stern,
another big no no.

Cutaway transom or not?
 

On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 19:57:30 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 16:47:46 -0400, Gene Kearns
wrote:

How does the Parker keep water from in doors. Once any significant amount of water down floods the cabin, the boat is usually a goner. You just can't get it out fast enough and the loss of stability/risk of capsize is severe.

Taking water over the bow is usually caused by encountering a high,
steep wave where the bow can not rise quickly enough. Water over the
transom can be caused by a breaking wave from astern. It happens on
offshore sailboats all the time. It can put a *lot* of water in the
cockpit in no time at all. The other big issue with water over the
transom is "accidental" anchoring from the stern, frequently caused by
snagging a crab trap or similar. The guys from St Pete Beach whogoing
into the cabin?

Don't know about Parker but as you mentioned the answer is some sort
of significant bridge deck combined with decent cab capsized last
winter were trying to pull an anchor out from the stern, another big
no-no.

I keep waiting for an explanation as to why Parker developed and sells
the 'transom cutout dam' to keep the water from coming in through the
stern. Wouldn't the damn dam also keep the water from going OUT the
stern?
--

John H

Cutaway transom or not?
 

On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 20:30:49 -0400, John H
wrote:

I keep waiting for an explanation as to why Parker developed and sells
the 'transom cutout dam' to keep the water from coming in through the
stern. Wouldn't the damn dam also keep the water from going OUT the
stern?

But if it doesn't come in, it doesn't need to go out...

I suppose there might be a few timidly souls out there, or their
wives, that might be somewhat unnerved by the sight of a wave coming
in through the transom cut out. There's a reason why stern brackets
have become popular on offshore outboards.

Cutaway transom or not?
 

On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 20:56:16 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 20:30:49 -0400, John H
wrote:

I keep waiting for an explanation as to why Parker developed and sells
the 'transom cutout dam' to keep the water from coming in through the
stern. Wouldn't the damn dam also keep the water from going OUT the
stern?

But if it doesn't come in, it doesn't need to go out...

I suppose there might be a few timidly souls out there, or their
wives, that might be somewhat unnerved by the sight of a wave coming
in through the transom cut out. There's a reason why stern brackets
have become popular on offshore outboards.

I agree. But, why does Parker make the dams if the cutout is such a
great idea?
--

John H

Cutaway transom or not?
 

On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 12:34:27 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
wrote:

YES, I'll start a real flame war here but I am serious about the
question.
HK says a cutaway transom allows the boat to drain if it is swamped,
seems sensible.
The designer of my Tolman says to have a high drywell in front of the
motor on a cutaway to make sure she does NOT fill with water.
A compromise seems to be to have the dry well but also have serious
cockpit drains, not the tiny ones you see on most boats, I mean at
least 6" diameter AND have the cockpit drains with flapper valves made
of thick rubber sheet attached to the transom with SS screws. This
would require the boat be decked with floatation underneath.
I am curious because I am considering in the long term what boat to
build next and am considering a modified 23' Tolman Jumbo with more
deadrise.

Despite loving to poke Mr. Science and Boating in the eye once in a
while, transom cutouts do make some sense depending on the boat
design. And it's not for water flow out the stern either whicih is
probably the dumbest thing I've heard - 2/3rds of the transom is still
in place which creates a water dam forcing water out the remaining 1/3
- which happens to be partially plugged by a engine?

It's more for matching available engines to the boat - 30" shaft
engines aren't a common beast and 25" shaft engines are pretty much
the norm - unless you have a boat like mine which is designed as a
short shaft boat, but has a long shaft engine on a jack plate. It's
about the engineering of applying the power to the hull and making it
go rather than emptying the boat of water in case you are stupid
enough to be out running in weather you shouldn't be running around
in.

Racing sailboats have open sterns, but they are a whole different ball
game - their sterns are entirely open, not partially open.

Use of a splash board or dry well is to keep water out of the boat
when backing down or having water come up over the stern in certain
weather conditions. Most boat companies offer an option for a splash
board - around these parts it's unusual to see an open boat without a
splash board in boats with open transoms.

Brackets are the usual solution for those who want to have full
transoms and outboard power. Brackets have the added feature of
actually lengthening the boat by a foot or so - the old axiom that for
any given horse power, extra length on the boat will create more hull
speed - plus not having the engine cluttering up the stern. The down
side to brackets is that you can, and I've done this on a Fish Hawk
and a Sea Pro, bury the engine halfway up the cowl on a hard back down
and abrupt change of running status from quick to slow. That's always
been the one feature of brackets that I've been a little leery of.

If I were planning on building a boat, I'd probably go with a full
transom and use a bracket rather than poking holes in the transom for
an engine. It also depends on how you plan on powering the boat -
outboard or inboard? It may be a mute question.

Cutaway transom or not?
 

Wizard of Woodstock wrote:
On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 12:34:27 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
wrote:

YES, I'll start a real flame war here but I am serious about the
question.
HK says a cutaway transom allows the boat to drain if it is swamped,
seems sensible.
The designer of my Tolman says to have a high drywell in front of the
motor on a cutaway to make sure she does NOT fill with water.
A compromise seems to be to have the dry well but also have serious
cockpit drains, not the tiny ones you see on most boats, I mean at
least 6" diameter AND have the cockpit drains with flapper valves made
of thick rubber sheet attached to the transom with SS screws. This
would require the boat be decked with floatation underneath.
I am curious because I am considering in the long term what boat to
build next and am considering a modified 23' Tolman Jumbo with more
deadrise.

Despite loving to poke Mr. Science and Boating in the eye once in a
while, transom cutouts do make some sense depending on the boat
design. And it's not for water flow out the stern either whicih is
probably the dumbest thing I've heard - 2/3rds of the transom is still
in place which creates a water dam forcing water out the remaining 1/3
- which happens to be partially plugged by a engine?

It's more for matching available engines to the boat - 30" shaft
engines aren't a common beast and 25" shaft engines are pretty much
the norm - unless you have a boat like mine which is designed as a
short shaft boat, but has a long shaft engine on a jack plate. It's
about the engineering of applying the power to the hull and making it
go rather than emptying the boat of water in case you are stupid
enough to be out running in weather you shouldn't be running around
in.

Racing sailboats have open sterns, but they are a whole different ball
game - their sterns are entirely open, not partially open.

Use of a splash board or dry well is to keep water out of the boat
when backing down or having water come up over the stern in certain
weather conditions. Most boat companies offer an option for a splash
board - around these parts it's unusual to see an open boat without a
splash board in boats with open transoms.

Brackets are the usual solution for those who want to have full
transoms and outboard power. Brackets have the added feature of
actually lengthening the boat by a foot or so - the old axiom that for
any given horse power, extra length on the boat will create more hull
speed - plus not having the engine cluttering up the stern. The down
side to brackets is that you can, and I've done this on a Fish Hawk
and a Sea Pro, bury the engine halfway up the cowl on a hard back down
and abrupt change of running status from quick to slow. That's always
been the one feature of brackets that I've been a little leery of.

If I were planning on building a boat, I'd probably go with a full
transom and use a bracket rather than poking holes in the transom for
an engine. It also depends on how you plan on powering the boat -
outboard or inboard? It may be a mute question.


Or...even a moot question, Mr. Grammar.

20", 25" and 30" shafts are "commonly" available for outboard motors.
And if I was interested, Parker would have cut the transom on my
21-footer to 30" instead of 25".

Brackets are fairly *un*common on smaller outboard boats. Part of the
reason is a balance issue.

Cutaway transom or not?
 

On Jun 23, 3:34*pm, Frogwatch wrote:
YES, I'll start a real flame war here but I am serious about the
question.
HK says a cutaway transom allows the boat to drain if it is swamped,
seems sensible.
The designer of my Tolman says to have a high drywell in front of the
motor on a cutaway to make sure she does NOT fill with water.
A compromise seems to be to have the dry well but also have serious
cockpit drains, not the tiny ones you see on most boats, I mean at
least 6" diameter AND have the cockpit drains with flapper valves made
of thick rubber sheet attached to the transom with SS screws. *This
would require the boat be decked with floatation underneath.
I am curious because I am considering in the long term what boat to
build next and am considering a modified 23' Tolman Jumbo with more
deadrise.

Ask Harry this: IF a cut out transom is such a great safety feature,
why in hell does Parker themselves sell a dam to protect against
following seas?

Cutaway transom or not?
 

On Wed, 24 Jun 2009 07:48:56 -0400, Wizard of Woodstock
wrote:

On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 12:34:27 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
wrote:

YES, I'll start a real flame war here but I am serious about the
question.
HK says a cutaway transom allows the boat to drain if it is swamped,
seems sensible.
The designer of my Tolman says to have a high drywell in front of the
motor on a cutaway to make sure she does NOT fill with water.
A compromise seems to be to have the dry well but also have serious
cockpit drains, not the tiny ones you see on most boats, I mean at
least 6" diameter AND have the cockpit drains with flapper valves made
of thick rubber sheet attached to the transom with SS screws. This
would require the boat be decked with floatation underneath.
I am curious because I am considering in the long term what boat to
build next and am considering a modified 23' Tolman Jumbo with more
deadrise.

Despite loving to poke Mr. Science and Boating in the eye once in a
while, transom cutouts do make some sense depending on the boat
design. And it's not for water flow out the stern either whicih is
probably the dumbest thing I've heard - 2/3rds of the transom is still
in place which creates a water dam forcing water out the remaining 1/3
- which happens to be partially plugged by a engine?

It's more for matching available engines to the boat - 30" shaft
engines aren't a common beast and 25" shaft engines are pretty much
the norm - unless you have a boat like mine which is designed as a
short shaft boat, but has a long shaft engine on a jack plate. It's
about the engineering of applying the power to the hull and making it
go rather than emptying the boat of water in case you are stupid
enough to be out running in weather you shouldn't be running around
in.

Racing sailboats have open sterns, but they are a whole different ball
game - their sterns are entirely open, not partially open.

Use of a splash board or dry well is to keep water out of the boat
when backing down or having water come up over the stern in certain
weather conditions. Most boat companies offer an option for a splash
board - around these parts it's unusual to see an open boat without a
splash board in boats with open transoms.

Brackets are the usual solution for those who want to have full
transoms and outboard power. Brackets have the added feature of
actually lengthening the boat by a foot or so - the old axiom that for
any given horse power, extra length on the boat will create more hull
speed - plus not having the engine cluttering up the stern. The down
side to brackets is that you can, and I've done this on a Fish Hawk
and a Sea Pro, bury the engine halfway up the cowl on a hard back down
and abrupt change of running status from quick to slow. That's always
been the one feature of brackets that I've been a little leery of.

If I were planning on building a boat, I'd probably go with a full
transom and use a bracket rather than poking holes in the transom for
an engine. It also depends on how you plan on powering the boat -
outboard or inboard? It may be a mute question.

I'm still wondering why Parker makes the 'dam' to go in front of the
transom cutout, if the cutout is such a great design feature. One
would think a Parker owner would answer that question.

If the design were for safety reasons, then it would seem Parker would
do the same on its entire outboard powered lineup. But the 18' and the
23' *don't* have the cutout transom. This would lead me to believe
that the transom design was to accomodate the engine configuration, as
you pointed out above.

Perhaps the purpose of the 'dam' is to keep large fish from jumping
into the boat through the cutout?
--

John H

Cutaway transom or not?
 

On Wed, 24 Jun 2009 05:23:27 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 20:56:16 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 20:30:49 -0400, John H
wrote:

I keep waiting for an explanation as to why Parker developed and sells
the 'transom cutout dam' to keep the water from coming in through the
stern. Wouldn't the damn dam also keep the water from going OUT the
stern?

But if it doesn't come in, it doesn't need to go out...

I suppose there might be a few timidly souls out there, or their
wives, that might be somewhat unnerved by the sight of a wave coming
in through the transom cut out. There's a reason why stern brackets
have become popular on offshore outboards.

I agree. But, why does Parker make the dams if the cutout is such a
great idea?

You'll have to check with our resident Parker expert. :-)

Cutaway transom or not?
 

Vic Smith wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2009 08:13:22 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
wrote:


So, we do NOT have an answer. Consider that if I build a boat I have
complete control over how to do it EXCEPT, I will not use a bracket.
I would consider deep transom cutouts on either side or large
scuppers.
Consider, my boat has filled about 9' of rainwater sitting in my yard
when I left the drain plug in. With the small 750 gph pump, it took
over 10 minutes to pump it out. If I had the largest capacity pump I
can get, 3500 gph, it would take nearly 1.5 minutes, a long time, so
some type of scupper seems necessary for the eventuality of getting
her nearly swamped.

Here's a link I posted about a year ago.
Watch the vid (it's not long) and listen to this guy.
I think he knows a lot about it.
I like the one-way transom "doors" solution.
There's a shot of them near the end of the vid.
http://www.boattest.com/VLibrary/vPlay.aspx?ID=1216

--Vic


But...how could a guy who builds top of the line boats have more
knowledge about the subject than the Asshole Fans of Harry who post here?

Cutaway transom or not?
 

On Jun 24, 1:36*pm, Vic Smith wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2009 08:13:22 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch

wrote:

So, we do NOT have an answer. *Consider that if I build a boat I have
complete control over how to do it EXCEPT, I will not use a bracket.
I would consider deep transom cutouts on either side or large
scuppers.
Consider, my boat has filled about 9' of rainwater sitting in my yard
when I left the drain plug in. *With the small 750 gph pump, it took
over 10 minutes to pump it out. *If I had the largest capacity pump I
can get, 3500 gph, it would take nearly 1.5 minutes, a long time, so
some type of scupper seems necessary for the eventuality of getting
her nearly swamped.

Here's a link I posted about a year ago.
Watch the vid (it's not long) and listen to this guy.
I think he knows a lot about it.
I like the one-way transom "doors" solution.
There's a shot of them near the end of the vid.http://www.boattest.com/VLibrary/vPlay.aspx?ID=1216

--Vic

Again, Harry has stated that Parker offers the dam as an option. If
the cut out transom is so safe, why in hell does Parker offer it at
all? I'd think it would be litigious to offer an option that makes the
boat less safe.

Cutaway transom or not?
 

On Wed, 24 Jun 2009 10:58:11 -0700 (PDT), Loogypicker
wrote:

On Jun 24, 1:36Â*pm, Vic Smith wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2009 08:13:22 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch

wrote:

So, we do NOT have an answer. Â*Consider that if I build a boat I have
complete control over how to do it EXCEPT, I will not use a bracket.
I would consider deep transom cutouts on either side or large
scuppers.
Consider, my boat has filled about 9' of rainwater sitting in my yard
when I left the drain plug in. Â*With the small 750 gph pump, it took
over 10 minutes to pump it out. Â*If I had the largest capacity pump I
can get, 3500 gph, it would take nearly 1.5 minutes, a long time, so
some type of scupper seems necessary for the eventuality of getting
her nearly swamped.

Here's a link I posted about a year ago.
Watch the vid (it's not long) and listen to this guy.
I think he knows a lot about it.
I like the one-way transom "doors" solution.
There's a shot of them near the end of the vid.http://www.boattest.com/VLibrary/vPlay.aspx?ID=1216

--Vic

Again, Harry has stated that Parker offers the dam as an option. If
the cut out transom is so safe, why in hell does Parker offer it at
all? I'd think it would be litigious to offer an option that makes the
boat less safe.

Assuming you're not just doing your obsessive Harry slagging, I can
think of some reasons a person wants the dam:

1. Boater always on calm water, but wants short shaft OB.
Doesn't like the looks of the empty space at the cutout.
2. Boater on all waters, doesn't care about swamping, because
dry feet is his priority.

Probably missed some.
Why do you care? Are you a boater?

--Vic

Cutaway transom or not?
 

On Wed, 24 Jun 2009 08:16:38 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
wrote:

I suspect that open/low transom with a cabin without bridgedeck is a
really bad idea because once you got significant water in the cabin,
you're a goner.

Absolutely right.

Some sort of sturdy cabin closure is also a good idea, perhaps like
the drop boards in a sailboat companionway, with sliding bolts to hold
them in place. You might be able to survive a capsize with something
like that.

Cutaway transom or not?
 

On Jun 24, 2:37*pm, Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2009 08:16:38 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch

wrote:
I suspect that open/low transom with a cabin without bridgedeck is a
really bad idea because once you got significant water in the cabin,
you're a goner.

Absolutely right. *

Some sort of sturdy cabin closure is also a good idea, perhaps like
the drop boards in a sailboat companionway, with sliding bolts to hold
them in place. * You might be able to survive a capsize with something
like that.

David Pascoe:

http://www.yachtsurvey.com/sinking.htm

Does not like either scuppers or low/no transoms. He prefers
duplicate battery systems and large multiple bilge pumps.

Cutaway transom or not?
 

On Jun 24, 3:45*pm, Frogwatch wrote:
On Jun 24, 2:37*pm, Wayne.B wrote:

On Wed, 24 Jun 2009 08:16:38 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch

wrote:
I suspect that open/low transom with a cabin without bridgedeck is a
really bad idea because once you got significant water in the cabin,
you're a goner.

Absolutely right. *

Some sort of sturdy cabin closure is also a good idea, perhaps like
the drop boards in a sailboat companionway, with sliding bolts to hold
them in place. * You might be able to survive a capsize with something
like that.

David Pascoe:

http://www.yachtsurvey.com/sinking.htm

Does not like either scuppers or low/no transoms. *He prefers
duplicate battery systems and large multiple bilge pumps.

On a new boat I build, I will probably go with:

Very high splashwell, no scuppers, a removable deck with foam
underneath, largest bilge pumps I can get with oversize hose exiting
as high on transom as possible thru smooth hose and 3 batteries. I
will incorporate a 8" bridge deck I will have to step over to get into
the cabin with removable hatchboards similar to hatchboards on a
sailboat.

On the existing Tolman, I will get the largest bilgepump (This will
give me two pumps) I can exiting thru transom up high. I already have
two batteries. I will install addtl floatation of foam blocks under
the leaning post and between stringers forward of leaning post.
Splashwell is already high but I may increase it by another 1.5".

Cutaway transom or not?
 

On Wed, 24 Jun 2009 12:45:30 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
wrote:

On Jun 24, 2:37*pm, Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2009 08:16:38 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch

wrote:
I suspect that open/low transom with a cabin without bridgedeck is a
really bad idea because once you got significant water in the cabin,
you're a goner.

Absolutely right. *

Some sort of sturdy cabin closure is also a good idea, perhaps like
the drop boards in a sailboat companionway, with sliding bolts to hold
them in place. * You might be able to survive a capsize with something
like that.

David Pascoe:

http://www.yachtsurvey.com/sinking.htm

Does not like either scuppers or low/no transoms. He prefers
duplicate battery systems and large multiple bilge pumps.

Pascoe is always an interesting read. Some of his advice is
controversial because it defies conventional wisdom. He has looked
at a lot of boats however, and investigated a lot of sinkings. His
comments about bilge pumps, hoses and fittings seem spot on to me, as
well as his advice to keep the water out of the boat in the first
place. If a boat takes a wave over a low transom for some reason it
can capsize within seconds because it will lose stability.

Cutaway transom or not?
 

On Wed, 24 Jun 2009 18:00:52 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Wed, 24 Jun 2009 12:45:30 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
wrote:

On Jun 24, 2:37*pm, Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2009 08:16:38 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch

wrote:
I suspect that open/low transom with a cabin without bridgedeck is a
really bad idea because once you got significant water in the cabin,
you're a goner.

Absolutely right. *

Some sort of sturdy cabin closure is also a good idea, perhaps like
the drop boards in a sailboat companionway, with sliding bolts to hold
them in place. * You might be able to survive a capsize with something
like that.

David Pascoe:

http://www.yachtsurvey.com/sinking.htm

Does not like either scuppers or low/no transoms. He prefers
duplicate battery systems and large multiple bilge pumps.

Pascoe is always an interesting read. Some of his advice is
controversial because it defies conventional wisdom. He has looked
at a lot of boats however, and investigated a lot of sinkings. His
comments about bilge pumps, hoses and fittings seem spot on to me, as
well as his advice to keep the water out of the boat in the first
place. If a boat takes a wave over a low transom for some reason it
can capsize within seconds because it will lose stability.

You will have noticed that our resident 'expert' hasn't addressed the
purpose behind the dam developed by Parker. Unless it's to keep out
large, dangerous fish, I don't understand the concept.

Cutaway transom or not?
 

On Wed, 24 Jun 2009 18:00:52 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Wed, 24 Jun 2009 12:45:30 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
wrote:

On Jun 24, 2:37*pm, Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 24 Jun 2009 08:16:38 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch

wrote:
I suspect that open/low transom with a cabin without bridgedeck is a
really bad idea because once you got significant water in the cabin,
you're a goner.

Absolutely right. *

Some sort of sturdy cabin closure is also a good idea, perhaps like
the drop boards in a sailboat companionway, with sliding bolts to hold
them in place. * You might be able to survive a capsize with something
like that.

David Pascoe:

http://www.yachtsurvey.com/sinking.htm

Does not like either scuppers or low/no transoms. He prefers
duplicate battery systems and large multiple bilge pumps.

Pascoe is always an interesting read. Some of his advice is
controversial because it defies conventional wisdom. He has looked
at a lot of boats however, and investigated a lot of sinkings. His
comments about bilge pumps, hoses and fittings seem spot on to me, as
well as his advice to keep the water out of the boat in the first
place. If a boat takes a wave over a low transom for some reason it
can capsize within seconds because it will lose stability.

Like most talented guys, he tends to fixate on certain things that
defy common sense.

However, when it comes to bilges, fittings, hoses and the mechanical
issues, he's pretty spot on.