OK, sometimes I am a slow learner or maybe just too stubborn but after
many years of sailing, I realized a sailboat just was not going to get
me to many interesting places in a timely fashion. Then I read about
the Tolman Skiffs and the amazing voyages some have taken in them and
how seaworthy they are and how fuel efficient they are and thought
"That's the boat I need". Although I had never even been at the helm
of a power boat, I figgered I'd learn. Not knowing anything about
characteristics of powerboats did not stop me and neither did the fact
that the motor I bought on e-bay came without any wiring instructions
or controls didn't either.
All in all, the 20' Tolman is a good boat being rugged, seaworthy,
very fuel efficient (5 mpg at 20 kts with 2 cycle 90 hp, top speed of
30 kts with 6 people aboard) and I am proud of her. However, her fuel
efficiency and planing at 9 kts means she has small deadrise at the
transom, 9 degrees which radically increases toward the bow. In 2'
chop, at anything over 12 kts, she pounds enough to be uncomfy after
about a half hour.
Also being so lightweight, about half the weight of the same size
fiberglass boat, she can get pushed around by seas easily. This means
I am hesitant to take her across the Gulf Stream to the Bahamas or to
Dry Tortugas and other things I'd like to do.
However, the family likes her because we can use her for pulling the
tube behind and scalloping in shallow water etc.
There is a 23' Tolman design with a full cabin and much greater
deadrise that is still fuel efficient. It would use a 125 hp 4 stroke
and get similar MPG. Would a boat this much bigger be as much "fun"?

On 4/16/10 11:48 AM, Frogwatch wrote:
OK, sometimes I am a slow learner or maybe just too stubborn but after
many years of sailing, I realized a sailboat just was not going to get
me to many interesting places in a timely fashion. Then I read about
the Tolman Skiffs and the amazing voyages some have taken in them and
how seaworthy they are and how fuel efficient they are and thought
"That's the boat I need". Although I had never even been at the helm
of a power boat, I figgered I'd learn. Not knowing anything about
characteristics of powerboats did not stop me and neither did the fact
that the motor I bought on e-bay came without any wiring instructions
or controls didn't either.
All in all, the 20' Tolman is a good boat being rugged, seaworthy,
very fuel efficient (5 mpg at 20 kts with 2 cycle 90 hp, top speed of
30 kts with 6 people aboard) and I am proud of her. However, her fuel
efficiency and planing at 9 kts means she has small deadrise at the
transom, 9 degrees which radically increases toward the bow. In 2'
chop, at anything over 12 kts, she pounds enough to be uncomfy after
about a half hour.
Also being so lightweight, about half the weight of the same size
fiberglass boat, she can get pushed around by seas easily. This means
I am hesitant to take her across the Gulf Stream to the Bahamas or to
Dry Tortugas and other things I'd like to do.
However, the family likes her because we can use her for pulling the
tube behind and scalloping in shallow water etc.
There is a 23' Tolman design with a full cabin and much greater
deadrise that is still fuel efficient. It would use a 125 hp 4 stroke
and get similar MPG. Would a boat this much bigger be as much "fun"?


I won't comment on the "fun" quotient, but I will comment on the
"deadrise" quotient.

I used to own a 25' Parker, a heavy boat (7000 pounds, wet) with 16
degrees of deadrise at the transom with, obviously, a much sharper
forefoot at the bow. We frequently have a 2' chop in Chesapeake Bay.
Well, the Parker was up to the challenge at planing speeds in that chop,
but because of the far forward seating positing in the cabin, I kept the
speeds at 20 mph or less in hard chop. Now if I moved to the rear
steering position, the chop was hardly noticeable because at that part
of the boat, the hull did not really leave the water. My new Parker has
21 degrees of deadrise at the transom and in my opinion does a better
job in the chop.

If I were building a new boat in the size you are considering, I'd avoid
a hard-chined boat like the Tolman, and find a hull with round chines.
They slide back into the water much more gently.

Ohhh...a 125 hp outboard would not be enough power for that boat, in my
opinion. My 150 Yamaha is a really good match for my 21' Parker...and
you are talking a bigger boat with less power.



--
http://tinyurl.com/ykxp2ym

On Apr 16, 12:05*pm, hk wrote:
On 4/16/10 11:48 AM, Frogwatch wrote:



OK, sometimes I am a slow learner or maybe just too stubborn but after
many years of sailing, I realized a sailboat just was not going to get
me to many interesting places in a timely fashion. *Then I read about
the Tolman Skiffs and the amazing voyages some have taken in them and
how seaworthy they are and how fuel efficient they are and thought
"That's the boat I need". *Although I had never even been at the helm
of a power boat, I figgered I'd learn. *Not knowing anything about
characteristics of powerboats did not stop me and neither did the fact
that the motor I bought on e-bay came without any wiring instructions
or controls didn't either.
All in all, the 20' Tolman is a good boat being rugged, seaworthy,
very fuel efficient (5 mpg at 20 kts with 2 cycle 90 hp, top speed of
30 kts with 6 people aboard) and I am proud of her. *However, her fuel
efficiency and planing at 9 kts means she has small deadrise at the
transom, 9 degrees which radically increases toward the bow. *In 2'
chop, at anything over 12 kts, she pounds enough to be uncomfy after
about a half hour.
Also being so lightweight, about half the weight of the same size
fiberglass boat, she can get pushed around by seas easily. *This means
I am hesitant to take her across the Gulf Stream to the Bahamas or to
Dry Tortugas and other things I'd like to do.
However, the family likes her because we can use her for pulling the
tube behind and scalloping in shallow water etc.
There is a 23' Tolman design with a full cabin and much greater
deadrise that is still fuel efficient. It would use a 125 hp 4 stroke
and get similar MPG. *Would a boat this much bigger be as much "fun"?

I won't comment on the "fun" quotient, but I will comment on the
"deadrise" quotient.

I used to own a 25' Parker, a heavy boat (7000 pounds, wet) with 16
degrees of deadrise at the transom with, obviously, a much sharper
forefoot at the bow. We frequently have a 2' chop in Chesapeake Bay.
Well, the Parker was up to the challenge at planing speeds in that chop,
but because of the far forward seating positing in the cabin, I kept the
speeds at 20 mph or less in hard chop. Now if I moved to the rear
steering position, the chop was hardly noticeable because at that part
of the boat, the hull did not really leave the water. My new Parker has
21 degrees of deadrise at the transom and in my opinion does a better
job in the chop.

If I were building a new boat in the size you are considering, I'd avoid
a hard-chined boat like the Tolman, and find a hull with round chines.
They slide back into the water much more gently.

Ohhh...a 125 hp outboard would not be enough power for that boat, in my
opinion. My 150 Yamaha is a really good match for my 21' Parker...and
you are talking a bigger boat with less power.

--http://tinyurl.com/ykxp2ym

The 23' Tolman bare hull and cabin is only about 1800 lbs, hence the
125 hp.

On Apr 16, 12:05*pm, hk wrote:

Ohhh...a 125 hp outboard would not be enough power for that boat, in my
opinion. My 150 Yamaha is a really good match for my 21' Parker...and
you are talking a bigger boat with less power.


How do you know that? I didn't see where Frog stated the weight of the
boat. LOA has little bearing on engine performance other than drag.

On Apr 16, 12:13*pm, Frogwatch wrote:
On Apr 16, 12:05*pm, hk wrote:



On 4/16/10 11:48 AM, Frogwatch wrote:

OK, sometimes I am a slow learner or maybe just too stubborn but after
many years of sailing, I realized a sailboat just was not going to get
me to many interesting places in a timely fashion. *Then I read about
the Tolman Skiffs and the amazing voyages some have taken in them and
how seaworthy they are and how fuel efficient they are and thought
"That's the boat I need". *Although I had never even been at the helm
of a power boat, I figgered I'd learn. *Not knowing anything about
characteristics of powerboats did not stop me and neither did the fact
that the motor I bought on e-bay came without any wiring instructions
or controls didn't either.
All in all, the 20' Tolman is a good boat being rugged, seaworthy,
very fuel efficient (5 mpg at 20 kts with 2 cycle 90 hp, top speed of
30 kts with 6 people aboard) and I am proud of her. *However, her fuel
efficiency and planing at 9 kts means she has small deadrise at the
transom, 9 degrees which radically increases toward the bow. *In 2'
chop, at anything over 12 kts, she pounds enough to be uncomfy after
about a half hour.
Also being so lightweight, about half the weight of the same size
fiberglass boat, she can get pushed around by seas easily. *This means
I am hesitant to take her across the Gulf Stream to the Bahamas or to
Dry Tortugas and other things I'd like to do.
However, the family likes her because we can use her for pulling the
tube behind and scalloping in shallow water etc.
There is a 23' Tolman design with a full cabin and much greater
deadrise that is still fuel efficient. It would use a 125 hp 4 stroke
and get similar MPG. *Would a boat this much bigger be as much "fun"?

I won't comment on the "fun" quotient, but I will comment on the
"deadrise" quotient.

I used to own a 25' Parker, a heavy boat (7000 pounds, wet) with 16
degrees of deadrise at the transom with, obviously, a much sharper
forefoot at the bow. We frequently have a 2' chop in Chesapeake Bay.
Well, the Parker was up to the challenge at planing speeds in that chop,
but because of the far forward seating positing in the cabin, I kept the
speeds at 20 mph or less in hard chop. Now if I moved to the rear
steering position, the chop was hardly noticeable because at that part
of the boat, the hull did not really leave the water. My new Parker has
21 degrees of deadrise at the transom and in my opinion does a better
job in the chop.

If I were building a new boat in the size you are considering, I'd avoid
a hard-chined boat like the Tolman, and find a hull with round chines.
They slide back into the water much more gently.

Ohhh...a 125 hp outboard would not be enough power for that boat, in my
opinion. My 150 Yamaha is a really good match for my 21' Parker...and
you are talking a bigger boat with less power.

--http://tinyurl.com/ykxp2ym

The 23' Tolman bare hull and cabin is only about 1800 lbs, hence the
125 hp.

I think I would prefer the hard chines for stability but I have no
experience from which to judge, just what I have read.
On fuel efficiency, here there is a very good free ramp 5 miles
upriver from the gulf and a poor ramp on the gulf which costs $5.
Many people drive their boat and trailer to the poor ramp and launch
there because their boats use so much fuel going up or downriver. The
Tolman is so fuel efficient that it simply is not an issue.
On motors, Tolman specs a 60 hp for the 20'. He says no more than 350
lbs of motor on the transom because it affects performance. I knew I
would be taking at least 4 people most of the time and I wanted a "get
home" kicker too so I asked about a 90 hp and kicker weight, The
suggestion was to put 3 batteries up in the bow to balance her and
make extra people sit forward of the console underway.
On the 23', the 125 hp plus kicker will be beyond the specs for
transom weight.

On 4/16/10 12:28 PM, Frogwatch wrote:
On Apr 16, 12:13 pm, wrote:
On Apr 16, 12:05 pm, wrote:



On 4/16/10 11:48 AM, Frogwatch wrote:

OK, sometimes I am a slow learner or maybe just too stubborn but after
many years of sailing, I realized a sailboat just was not going to get
me to many interesting places in a timely fashion. Then I read about
the Tolman Skiffs and the amazing voyages some have taken in them and
how seaworthy they are and how fuel efficient they are and thought
"That's the boat I need". Although I had never even been at the helm
of a power boat, I figgered I'd learn. Not knowing anything about
characteristics of powerboats did not stop me and neither did the fact
that the motor I bought on e-bay came without any wiring instructions
or controls didn't either.
All in all, the 20' Tolman is a good boat being rugged, seaworthy,
very fuel efficient (5 mpg at 20 kts with 2 cycle 90 hp, top speed of
30 kts with 6 people aboard) and I am proud of her. However, her fuel
efficiency and planing at 9 kts means she has small deadrise at the
transom, 9 degrees which radically increases toward the bow. In 2'
chop, at anything over 12 kts, she pounds enough to be uncomfy after
about a half hour.
Also being so lightweight, about half the weight of the same size
fiberglass boat, she can get pushed around by seas easily. This means
I am hesitant to take her across the Gulf Stream to the Bahamas or to
Dry Tortugas and other things I'd like to do.
However, the family likes her because we can use her for pulling the
tube behind and scalloping in shallow water etc.
There is a 23' Tolman design with a full cabin and much greater
deadrise that is still fuel efficient. It would use a 125 hp 4 stroke
and get similar MPG. Would a boat this much bigger be as much "fun"?

I won't comment on the "fun" quotient, but I will comment on the
"deadrise" quotient.

I used to own a 25' Parker, a heavy boat (7000 pounds, wet) with 16
degrees of deadrise at the transom with, obviously, a much sharper
forefoot at the bow. We frequently have a 2' chop in Chesapeake Bay.
Well, the Parker was up to the challenge at planing speeds in that chop,
but because of the far forward seating positing in the cabin, I kept the
speeds at 20 mph or less in hard chop. Now if I moved to the rear
steering position, the chop was hardly noticeable because at that part
of the boat, the hull did not really leave the water. My new Parker has
21 degrees of deadrise at the transom and in my opinion does a better
job in the chop.

If I were building a new boat in the size you are considering, I'd avoid
a hard-chined boat like the Tolman, and find a hull with round chines.
They slide back into the water much more gently.

Ohhh...a 125 hp outboard would not be enough power for that boat, in my
opinion. My 150 Yamaha is a really good match for my 21' Parker...and
you are talking a bigger boat with less power.

--http://tinyurl.com/ykxp2ym

The 23' Tolman bare hull and cabin is only about 1800 lbs, hence the
125 hp.

I think I would prefer the hard chines for stability but I have no
experience from which to judge, just what I have read.
On fuel efficiency, here there is a very good free ramp 5 miles
upriver from the gulf and a poor ramp on the gulf which costs $5.
Many people drive their boat and trailer to the poor ramp and launch
there because their boats use so much fuel going up or downriver. The
Tolman is so fuel efficient that it simply is not an issue.
On motors, Tolman specs a 60 hp for the 20'. He says no more than 350
lbs of motor on the transom because it affects performance. I knew I
would be taking at least 4 people most of the time and I wanted a "get
home" kicker too so I asked about a 90 hp and kicker weight, The
suggestion was to put 3 batteries up in the bow to balance her and
make extra people sit forward of the console underway.
On the 23', the 125 hp plus kicker will be beyond the specs for
transom weight.

Oh, there is no question a boat with rounded bilges will roll a bit.
If you ever get the chance, take a look at the bottom of a nice old
Lyman or other open boat from that period...nice gently rounded chines,
far less pounding in the chop.

Trade-offs everywhere, eh? Gentler ride, more roll, in the case of the
rounded bilge boat.

The Tolman is "fuel efficient" because it has relatively flat bottom, is
narrow at the bilges, and is lightly built, especially in comparison to
a 'glass boat of the same length.

If you have four sitting ahead of the console, they are going to get the
worst of the pounding, right?








--
http://tinyurl.com/ykxp2ym

On Apr 16, 12:46*pm, hk wrote:
On 4/16/10 12:28 PM, Frogwatch wrote:



On Apr 16, 12:13 pm, *wrote:
On Apr 16, 12:05 pm, *wrote:

On 4/16/10 11:48 AM, Frogwatch wrote:

OK, sometimes I am a slow learner or maybe just too stubborn but after
many years of sailing, I realized a sailboat just was not going to get
me to many interesting places in a timely fashion. *Then I read about
the Tolman Skiffs and the amazing voyages some have taken in them and
how seaworthy they are and how fuel efficient they are and thought
"That's the boat I need". *Although I had never even been at the helm
of a power boat, I figgered I'd learn. *Not knowing anything about
characteristics of powerboats did not stop me and neither did the fact
that the motor I bought on e-bay came without any wiring instructions
or controls didn't either.
All in all, the 20' Tolman is a good boat being rugged, seaworthy,
very fuel efficient (5 mpg at 20 kts with 2 cycle 90 hp, top speed of
30 kts with 6 people aboard) and I am proud of her. *However, her fuel
efficiency and planing at 9 kts means she has small deadrise at the
transom, 9 degrees which radically increases toward the bow. *In 2'
chop, at anything over 12 kts, she pounds enough to be uncomfy after
about a half hour.
Also being so lightweight, about half the weight of the same size
fiberglass boat, she can get pushed around by seas easily. *This means
I am hesitant to take her across the Gulf Stream to the Bahamas or to
Dry Tortugas and other things I'd like to do.
However, the family likes her because we can use her for pulling the
tube behind and scalloping in shallow water etc.
There is a 23' Tolman design with a full cabin and much greater
deadrise that is still fuel efficient. It would use a 125 hp 4 stroke
and get similar MPG. *Would a boat this much bigger be as much "fun"?

I won't comment on the "fun" quotient, but I will comment on the
"deadrise" quotient.

I used to own a 25' Parker, a heavy boat (7000 pounds, wet) with 16
degrees of deadrise at the transom with, obviously, a much sharper
forefoot at the bow. We frequently have a 2' chop in Chesapeake Bay.
Well, the Parker was up to the challenge at planing speeds in that chop,
but because of the far forward seating positing in the cabin, I kept the
speeds at 20 mph or less in hard chop. Now if I moved to the rear
steering position, the chop was hardly noticeable because at that part
of the boat, the hull did not really leave the water. My new Parker has
21 degrees of deadrise at the transom and in my opinion does a better
job in the chop.

If I were building a new boat in the size you are considering, I'd avoid
a hard-chined boat like the Tolman, and find a hull with round chines..
They slide back into the water much more gently.

Ohhh...a 125 hp outboard would not be enough power for that boat, in my
opinion. My 150 Yamaha is a really good match for my 21' Parker...and
you are talking a bigger boat with less power.

--http://tinyurl.com/ykxp2ym

The 23' Tolman bare hull and cabin is only about 1800 lbs, hence the
125 hp.

I think I would prefer the hard chines for stability but I have no
experience from which to judge, just what I have read.
On fuel efficiency, here there is a very good free ramp 5 miles
upriver from the gulf and a poor ramp on the gulf which costs $5.
Many people drive their boat and trailer to the poor ramp and launch
there because their boats use so much fuel going up or downriver. *The
Tolman is so fuel efficient that it simply is not an issue.
On motors, Tolman specs a 60 hp for the 20'. *He says no more than 350
lbs of motor on the transom because it affects performance. *I knew I
would be taking at least 4 people most of the time and I wanted a "get
home" kicker too so I asked *about a 90 hp and kicker weight, *The
suggestion was to put 3 batteries up in the bow to balance her and
make extra people sit forward of the console underway.
On the 23', the 125 hp plus kicker will be beyond the specs for
transom weight.

Oh, there is no question a boat with rounded bilges will roll a bit.
If you ever get the chance, take a look at the bottom of a nice old
Lyman or other open boat from that period...nice gently rounded chines,
far less pounding in the chop.

Trade-offs everywhere, eh? Gentler ride, more roll, in the case of the
rounded bilge boat.

The Tolman is "fuel efficient" because it has relatively flat bottom, is
narrow at the bilges, and is lightly built, especially in comparison to
a 'glass boat of the same length.

If you have four sitting ahead of the console, they are going to get the
worst of the pounding, right?

--http://tinyurl.com/ykxp2ym

HK mistakes "lightly built" and "built light". From what I can tell,
most power boats are built heavy and poorly with little thought to
structural integrity. Read some of David Pasco's stuff to get an idea
of it. OTOH, the Tolman is very well thought out using material that
is stronger than fiberglass construction but lighter. Then it is
designed with the material being bent to make the hull structural
even without the continuous stringers or other interior supports or
the structural
Thwart" across her beam in front of the console. THEN, where nearly
all commercial builders simply use 8 oz/yard glass at joints, Tolman
uses 18 oz BIAXIAL glass covered with 4 oz glass at all stressed
joints. The resulting structure is less than half the weight of an
all fiberglass boat and considerably stronger.

On Apr 16, 4:29*pm, Frogwatch wrote:
On Apr 16, 12:46*pm, hk wrote:



On 4/16/10 12:28 PM, Frogwatch wrote:

On Apr 16, 12:13 pm, *wrote:
On Apr 16, 12:05 pm, *wrote:

On 4/16/10 11:48 AM, Frogwatch wrote:

OK, sometimes I am a slow learner or maybe just too stubborn but after
many years of sailing, I realized a sailboat just was not going to get
me to many interesting places in a timely fashion. *Then I read about
the Tolman Skiffs and the amazing voyages some have taken in them and
how seaworthy they are and how fuel efficient they are and thought
"That's the boat I need". *Although I had never even been at the helm
of a power boat, I figgered I'd learn. *Not knowing anything about
characteristics of powerboats did not stop me and neither did the fact
that the motor I bought on e-bay came without any wiring instructions
or controls didn't either.
All in all, the 20' Tolman is a good boat being rugged, seaworthy,
very fuel efficient (5 mpg at 20 kts with 2 cycle 90 hp, top speed of
30 kts with 6 people aboard) and I am proud of her. *However, her fuel
efficiency and planing at 9 kts means she has small deadrise at the
transom, 9 degrees which radically increases toward the bow. *In 2'
chop, at anything over 12 kts, she pounds enough to be uncomfy after
about a half hour.
Also being so lightweight, about half the weight of the same size
fiberglass boat, she can get pushed around by seas easily. *This means
I am hesitant to take her across the Gulf Stream to the Bahamas or to
Dry Tortugas and other things I'd like to do.
However, the family likes her because we can use her for pulling the
tube behind and scalloping in shallow water etc.
There is a 23' Tolman design with a full cabin and much greater
deadrise that is still fuel efficient. It would use a 125 hp 4 stroke
and get similar MPG. *Would a boat this much bigger be as much "fun"?

I won't comment on the "fun" quotient, but I will comment on the
"deadrise" quotient.

I used to own a 25' Parker, a heavy boat (7000 pounds, wet) with 16
degrees of deadrise at the transom with, obviously, a much sharper
forefoot at the bow. We frequently have a 2' chop in Chesapeake Bay..
Well, the Parker was up to the challenge at planing speeds in that chop,
but because of the far forward seating positing in the cabin, I kept the
speeds at 20 mph or less in hard chop. Now if I moved to the rear
steering position, the chop was hardly noticeable because at that part
of the boat, the hull did not really leave the water. My new Parker has
21 degrees of deadrise at the transom and in my opinion does a better
job in the chop.

If I were building a new boat in the size you are considering, I'd avoid
a hard-chined boat like the Tolman, and find a hull with round chines.
They slide back into the water much more gently.

Ohhh...a 125 hp outboard would not be enough power for that boat, in my
opinion. My 150 Yamaha is a really good match for my 21' Parker...and
you are talking a bigger boat with less power.

--http://tinyurl.com/ykxp2ym

The 23' Tolman bare hull and cabin is only about 1800 lbs, hence the
125 hp.

I think I would prefer the hard chines for stability but I have no
experience from which to judge, just what I have read.
On fuel efficiency, here there is a very good free ramp 5 miles
upriver from the gulf and a poor ramp on the gulf which costs $5.
Many people drive their boat and trailer to the poor ramp and launch
there because their boats use so much fuel going up or downriver. *The
Tolman is so fuel efficient that it simply is not an issue.
On motors, Tolman specs a 60 hp for the 20'. *He says no more than 350
lbs of motor on the transom because it affects performance. *I knew I
would be taking at least 4 people most of the time and I wanted a "get
home" kicker too so I asked *about a 90 hp and kicker weight, *The
suggestion was to put 3 batteries up in the bow to balance her and
make extra people sit forward of the console underway.
On the 23', the 125 hp plus kicker will be beyond the specs for
transom weight.

Oh, there is no question a boat with rounded bilges will roll a bit.
If you ever get the chance, take a look at the bottom of a nice old
Lyman or other open boat from that period...nice gently rounded chines,
far less pounding in the chop.

Trade-offs everywhere, eh? Gentler ride, more roll, in the case of the
rounded bilge boat.

The Tolman is "fuel efficient" because it has relatively flat bottom, is
narrow at the bilges, and is lightly built, especially in comparison to
a 'glass boat of the same length.

If you have four sitting ahead of the console, they are going to get the
worst of the pounding, right?

--http://tinyurl.com/ykxp2ym

HK mistakes "lightly built" and "built light". *From what I can tell,
most power boats are built heavy and poorly with little thought to
structural integrity. *Read some of David Pasco's stuff to get an idea
of it. *OTOH, the Tolman is very well thought out using material that
is stronger than fiberglass construction but lighter. *Then it is
designed *with the material being bent to make the hull structural
even without the continuous stringers or other interior supports or
the structural
Thwart" across her beam in front of the console. *THEN, where nearly
all commercial builders simply use 8 oz/yard glass at joints, Tolman
uses 18 oz BIAXIAL glass covered with 4 oz glass at all stressed
joints. *The resulting structure is less than half the weight of an
all fiberglass boat and considerably stronger.

Two boats on a plane differ in fuel efficiency only due to their
weight (OK, some small drag diffs but minor). Thus a deep V and a
flat hull at the same speed on a plane should get the same mpg if they
weigh the same. Thus, it is not the flat hull of the Tolman but the
low weight that gives it its fuel effciency.

On 4/16/10 4:29 PM, Frogwatch wrote:
On Apr 16, 12:46 pm, wrote:
On 4/16/10 12:28 PM, Frogwatch wrote:



On Apr 16, 12:13 pm, wrote:
On Apr 16, 12:05 pm, wrote:

On 4/16/10 11:48 AM, Frogwatch wrote:

OK, sometimes I am a slow learner or maybe just too stubborn but after
many years of sailing, I realized a sailboat just was not going to get
me to many interesting places in a timely fashion. Then I read about
the Tolman Skiffs and the amazing voyages some have taken in them and
how seaworthy they are and how fuel efficient they are and thought
"That's the boat I need". Although I had never even been at the helm
of a power boat, I figgered I'd learn. Not knowing anything about
characteristics of powerboats did not stop me and neither did the fact
that the motor I bought on e-bay came without any wiring instructions
or controls didn't either.
All in all, the 20' Tolman is a good boat being rugged, seaworthy,
very fuel efficient (5 mpg at 20 kts with 2 cycle 90 hp, top speed of
30 kts with 6 people aboard) and I am proud of her. However, her fuel
efficiency and planing at 9 kts means she has small deadrise at the
transom, 9 degrees which radically increases toward the bow. In 2'
chop, at anything over 12 kts, she pounds enough to be uncomfy after
about a half hour.
Also being so lightweight, about half the weight of the same size
fiberglass boat, she can get pushed around by seas easily. This means
I am hesitant to take her across the Gulf Stream to the Bahamas or to
Dry Tortugas and other things I'd like to do.
However, the family likes her because we can use her for pulling the
tube behind and scalloping in shallow water etc.
There is a 23' Tolman design with a full cabin and much greater
deadrise that is still fuel efficient. It would use a 125 hp 4 stroke
and get similar MPG. Would a boat this much bigger be as much "fun"?

I won't comment on the "fun" quotient, but I will comment on the
"deadrise" quotient.

I used to own a 25' Parker, a heavy boat (7000 pounds, wet) with 16
degrees of deadrise at the transom with, obviously, a much sharper
forefoot at the bow. We frequently have a 2' chop in Chesapeake Bay.
Well, the Parker was up to the challenge at planing speeds in that chop,
but because of the far forward seating positing in the cabin, I kept the
speeds at 20 mph or less in hard chop. Now if I moved to the rear
steering position, the chop was hardly noticeable because at that part
of the boat, the hull did not really leave the water. My new Parker has
21 degrees of deadrise at the transom and in my opinion does a better
job in the chop.

If I were building a new boat in the size you are considering, I'd avoid
a hard-chined boat like the Tolman, and find a hull with round chines.
They slide back into the water much more gently.

Ohhh...a 125 hp outboard would not be enough power for that boat, in my
opinion. My 150 Yamaha is a really good match for my 21' Parker...and
you are talking a bigger boat with less power.

--http://tinyurl.com/ykxp2ym

The 23' Tolman bare hull and cabin is only about 1800 lbs, hence the
125 hp.

I think I would prefer the hard chines for stability but I have no
experience from which to judge, just what I have read.
On fuel efficiency, here there is a very good free ramp 5 miles
upriver from the gulf and a poor ramp on the gulf which costs $5.
Many people drive their boat and trailer to the poor ramp and launch
there because their boats use so much fuel going up or downriver. The
Tolman is so fuel efficient that it simply is not an issue.
On motors, Tolman specs a 60 hp for the 20'. He says no more than 350
lbs of motor on the transom because it affects performance. I knew I
would be taking at least 4 people most of the time and I wanted a "get
home" kicker too so I asked about a 90 hp and kicker weight, The
suggestion was to put 3 batteries up in the bow to balance her and
make extra people sit forward of the console underway.
On the 23', the 125 hp plus kicker will be beyond the specs for
transom weight.

Oh, there is no question a boat with rounded bilges will roll a bit.
If you ever get the chance, take a look at the bottom of a nice old
Lyman or other open boat from that period...nice gently rounded chines,
far less pounding in the chop.

Trade-offs everywhere, eh? Gentler ride, more roll, in the case of the
rounded bilge boat.

The Tolman is "fuel efficient" because it has relatively flat bottom, is
narrow at the bilges, and is lightly built, especially in comparison to
a 'glass boat of the same length.

If you have four sitting ahead of the console, they are going to get the
worst of the pounding, right?

--http://tinyurl.com/ykxp2ym

HK mistakes "lightly built" and "built light". From what I can tell,
most power boats are built heavy and poorly with little thought to
structural integrity. Read some of David Pasco's stuff to get an idea
of it. OTOH, the Tolman is very well thought out using material that
is stronger than fiberglass construction but lighter. Then it is
designed with the material being bent to make the hull structural
even without the continuous stringers or other interior supports or
the structural
Thwart" across her beam in front of the console. THEN, where nearly
all commercial builders simply use 8 oz/yard glass at joints, Tolman
uses 18 oz BIAXIAL glass covered with 4 oz glass at all stressed
joints. The resulting structure is less than half the weight of an
all fiberglass boat and considerably stronger.





My comment about weight was in relation to riding through the chop, not
about the structural integrity of one boat over another. All else being
equal, a heavier boat will ride better. Thus, if you could find a Tolman
with a deep vee hull and the same dimensions and angles of a deep vee
fiberglass boat, the heavier boat will ride the chop better, with less
bounce.

I don't buy your arguments regarding hull strength. If the Tolman specs
call for that heavy a glass, it is because they have to to beef up a
lightly built wood shell, and that the boats are assembled by amateurs.

That larger Tolman you are considering has 12 degrees of deadrise at the
transom. Try pushing that boat at 20 knots through our typical 2' chop
in Bay, and your fillings will fall out.



--
http://tinyurl.com/ykxp2ym

Frogwatch wrote:
OK, sometimes I am a slow learner or maybe just too stubborn but after
many years of sailing, I realized a sailboat just was not going to get
me to many interesting places in a timely fashion. Then I read about
the Tolman Skiffs and the amazing voyages some have taken in them and
how seaworthy they are and how fuel efficient they are and thought
"That's the boat I need". Although I had never even been at the helm
of a power boat, I figgered I'd learn. Not knowing anything about
characteristics of powerboats did not stop me and neither did the fact
that the motor I bought on e-bay came without any wiring instructions
or controls didn't either.
All in all, the 20' Tolman is a good boat being rugged, seaworthy,
very fuel efficient (5 mpg at 20 kts with 2 cycle 90 hp, top speed of
30 kts with 6 people aboard) and I am proud of her. However, her fuel
efficiency and planing at 9 kts means she has small deadrise at the
transom, 9 degrees which radically increases toward the bow. In 2'
chop, at anything over 12 kts, she pounds enough to be uncomfy after
about a half hour.
Also being so lightweight, about half the weight of the same size
fiberglass boat, she can get pushed around by seas easily. This means
I am hesitant to take her across the Gulf Stream to the Bahamas or to
Dry Tortugas and other things I'd like to do.
However, the family likes her because we can use her for pulling the
tube behind and scalloping in shallow water etc.
There is a 23' Tolman design with a full cabin and much greater
deadrise that is still fuel efficient. It would use a 125 hp 4 stroke
and get similar MPG. Would a boat this much bigger be as much "fun"?

Does anyone make a 125 four stroke? You might have to look at a 115 or 150.