On 8/29/10 7:04 PM, *e#c wrote:
On Aug 28, 4:15 am, wrote:
wrote in message

...



On Aug 27, 10:30 am, Chris wrote:
I am going to try and save up about $1000, I'm not loaded so I can't
afford to much, but I have a old 1972 16ft Terry Bass. I like the
layout, but the engine isn't enough. It starts whenever I need it to
but it can only push the boat about 21mph (by myself) and 11mph (with
1 or more people). I think it has the original engine which is a 55HP
Chrysler engine. I mapped my usage and get about 1 mpg, so it sucks
the gas without the power. Should I take the boat in and have someone
work on the engine to get more power, maybe it's not working at all
power, and stay with the dependable engine. Or should I use the $1000
and try to go for a 85HP or so maybe 80's used motor? Boat rated for
85 max. The newer engine should have more power (just even if I
compared 55 from old to new), better gas mileage, but I run the risk
of it not being as dependable? What's your thoughts, should I upgrade
to a new more horsepower engine or update mine (which isn't a 100%
sure if you can get any more speed or gas mileage from the engine)?

Geese...my 155 HP Buick will push my old #2750 pound tub to 40
MPH....with 6 or 7 people in it. The hull must be waterlogged, or
there's something wrong with that motor, or prop, or, or, or......

Is that the "tub" with the lovely Home Depot wood lettering.......real
classy.

I think it looks cool. I dont give one **** WHAT you
think....hahahahahahaha

I can imagine the name of your Boat...." Feminine Spray "


"Aggravated"'s boat has the same name as Spud's boat: MR. SMEGMA

In article ae741d75-219b-4d0e-817c-
,
says...

On Aug 29, 12:25*pm, wrote:
On Sun, 29 Aug 2010 05:37:56 -0700 (PDT), jamesgangnc





wrote:
On Aug 27, 9:50*pm, Chris Reese wrote:
I keep the boat on a trailer with the plug pulled out & cover over it
so I don't think it has soaked up a lot of water. *I can tell just by
moving the boat around in the water that is isn't a light boat but
actually heavier then it looks. *It only sits about 6inches in the
water so it's not like it sits deep & has a lot of drag. *I have heard
that the chrysler outboards were heavier & not as powerful as other
motors around at that time.

That really does not tell you if it has water logged floatation foam
or not. *1972 is old enough that it may not even have foam. *Can you
access all the spaces between the deck and hull? *If so you can look
for foam. *If it does have foam then in 40 years it has absorbed some
water. *No matter how you use and store the boat. *Simply being around
water is all that is needed. *Weighing the boat is really the only way
to tell how much. *The only way to do that is to weight your entire
rig and the leave the boat in the water while weighing it again.

A boat that old is practically worthless, sorry nothing personal, so
you probably should just make sure the engine is running well and it
has the right prop. *For not a whole lot of money you could get a
larger, newer boat and engine built in the 90's. *Imho it would not be
a good idea to spend that kind of money on a 40 year old boat.

How it sits in the water is a good indication of the weight, hence the
water logging problem, A lot of old boats didn't have foam anyway.

There are lots of reasons why old motors don't perform like new ones,
not the least of which is the lie they painted on the cover. They used
to use "bench HP" now they are rated at the prop. That can easily make
a 30% difference in actual power.

I agree I would not spend a lot of money on an old boat but if he is
OK with it, why not put in a few bucks to squeeze some extra life out
of it if money is tight.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

What could he do beyond making sure it was running right and had the
correct prop?

Bigger engine, craigslist.com... He is running an engine that is waaaaay
off from the HP rating of the hull if I remember correctly. Like I said,
he could spend 4,5,600 bucks or more on a rebuild and reprop and hope he
gets 30 more horse power out of it, or he could just go out and get an
85 horse and be done with it...

--
Rowdy Mouse Racing - We race for cheese!

Chris Reese wrote:
I am going to try and save up about $1000, I'm not loaded so I can't
afford to much, but I have a old 1972 16ft Terry Bass. I like the
layout, but the engine isn't enough. It starts whenever I need it to
but it can only push the boat about 21mph (by myself) and 11mph (with
1 or more people). I think it has the original engine which is a 55HP
Chrysler engine. I mapped my usage and get about 1 mpg, so it sucks
the gas without the power. Should I take the boat in and have someone
work on the engine to get more power, maybe it's not working at all
power, and stay with the dependable engine. Or should I use the $1000
and try to go for a 85HP or so maybe 80's used motor? Boat rated for
85 max. The newer engine should have more power (just even if I
compared 55 from old to new), better gas mileage, but I run the risk
of it not being as dependable? What's your thoughts, should I upgrade
to a new more horsepower engine or update mine (which isn't a 100%
sure if you can get any more speed or gas mileage from the engine)?

Best advice you got so far was to weigh the boat to see if the foam is
waterlogged.
What's the sense of a different motor pushing a waterlogged boat?
They used open cell foam in those old boats.
This says your boat should weigh 835 lbs.
http://www.iboats.com/Terry__Pro_Bas...bp/61b125380r1
Empty the boat before weighing, then subtract the published motor weight.
If you don't know of a local scale, try looking here.
http://www.catscale.com
It doesn't matter if the boat was garaged.
When water goes in that foam it don't come out.
Sounds like you should just sell that boat and get one that will go as
fast as you want to go.
If you got $500 for it, you could save just $800 and see if this guy
would take $1300.
http://charlotte.craigslist.org/boa/1872342108.html
Save some more for this.
http://nashville.craigslist.org/boa/1924917798.html
45mph! Be careful you don't hit a stump.
If your boat is waterlogged you just don't want be throwing any money at it.
Boats are too cheap now to be doing that.
If the boat isn't hundreds of pounds overweight, and is otherwise sound,
then your re-power idea has merit.

Jim - Sometimes you need to look real hard at your plans.

"Jim" wrote in message
...
Chris Reese wrote:
I am going to try and save up about $1000, I'm not loaded so I can't
afford to much, but I have a old 1972 16ft Terry Bass. I like the
layout, but the engine isn't enough. It starts whenever I need it to
but it can only push the boat about 21mph (by myself) and 11mph (with
1 or more people). I think it has the original engine which is a 55HP
Chrysler engine. I mapped my usage and get about 1 mpg, so it sucks
the gas without the power. Should I take the boat in and have someone
work on the engine to get more power, maybe it's not working at all
power, and stay with the dependable engine. Or should I use the $1000
and try to go for a 85HP or so maybe 80's used motor? Boat rated for
85 max. The newer engine should have more power (just even if I
compared 55 from old to new), better gas mileage, but I run the risk
of it not being as dependable? What's your thoughts, should I upgrade
to a new more horsepower engine or update mine (which isn't a 100%
sure if you can get any more speed or gas mileage from the engine)?

Best advice you got so far was to weigh the boat to see if the foam is
waterlogged.
What's the sense of a different motor pushing a waterlogged boat?
They used open cell foam in those old boats.
This says your boat should weigh 835 lbs.
http://www.iboats.com/Terry__Pro_Bas...bp/61b125380r1
Empty the boat before weighing, then subtract the published motor weight.
If you don't know of a local scale, try looking here.
http://www.catscale.com
It doesn't matter if the boat was garaged.
When water goes in that foam it don't come out.
Sounds like you should just sell that boat and get one that will go as
fast as you want to go.
If you got $500 for it, you could save just $800 and see if this guy
would take $1300.
http://charlotte.craigslist.org/boa/1872342108.html
Save some more for this.
http://nashville.craigslist.org/boa/1924917798.html
45mph! Be careful you don't hit a stump.
If your boat is waterlogged you just don't want be throwing any money at
it.
Boats are too cheap now to be doing that.
If the boat isn't hundreds of pounds overweight, and is otherwise sound,
then your re-power idea has merit.

Jim - Sometimes you need to look real hard at your plans.


Another advantage of weighing your boat.
The original trailer may not be sturdy enough to carry the additional weight
of a waterlogged boat.
The original 1986 trailer that came with my 1986 sailboat was rated at 1200
lbs...turned out the boat weighed 1700 + pounds.
The idiot I had build a new trailer for me went with this 1200 mfg estimate
and put on trailer springs rated for 1800 lb.
The boat & trailer (no motor or gas aboard) came in at over 2300 lbs. The
trailer broke down within 500 miles on my first road trip.
(the biggest thing the idiot did wrong was not spacing the spring hangers
properly for the length of springs)
You have to be careful trailering on the highways.

On 8/30/10 12:00 PM, W1TEF wrote:
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010 07:21:18 -0500, wrote:

Best advice you got so far was to weigh the boat to see if the foam is
waterlogged.

I don't know if you remember Jim, but I found out that my Ranger bay
boat is about 870 lbs over published weight putting the whole rig
right on the edge of trailer capacity - 4,980 lbs for a 5,000 lb
trailer.

The foam isn't waterlogged. I called Ranger about it and they didn't
have an explanation either.

I got to thinking about it. A gallon of water weighs 8 lbs. To have
870 lbs of extra water weight, the boat would have to hold 109 gals of
water.

That's a lot of cubic feet of water to have in foam on a 20 foot boat.


It's probably the lead Ranger poured into one side of the bilge to make
the boat float level. About one cubic foot of lead isn't far off from
that weight you are carrying around.

In article ,
says...

On Mon, 30 Aug 2010 07:21:18 -0500, Jim wrote:

Best advice you got so far was to weigh the boat to see if the foam is
waterlogged.

I don't know if you remember Jim, but I found out that my Ranger bay
boat is about 870 lbs over published weight putting the whole rig
right on the edge of trailer capacity - 4,980 lbs for a 5,000 lb
trailer.

The foam isn't waterlogged. I called Ranger about it and they didn't
have an explanation either.

I got to thinking about it. A gallon of water weighs 8 lbs. To have
870 lbs of extra water weight, the boat would have to hold 109 gals of
water.

That's a lot of cubic feet of water to have in foam on a 20 foot boat.

There is always the possibility the boat manufacturers play loose and
fast with the weight, the way auto manufacturers play with gas
mileage... Yes, even your beloved Ranger, what are they supposed to
tell you, "we lied". In the words of the immortal spaceman, "~snerk~"!

--
Rowdy Mouse Racing - We race for cheese!

On Aug 30, 12:00*pm, W1TEF wrote:
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010 07:21:18 -0500, Jim wrote:
Best advice you got so far was to weigh the boat to see if the foam is
waterlogged.

I don't know if you remember Jim, but I found out that my Ranger bay
boat is about 870 lbs over published weight putting the whole rig
right on the edge of trailer capacity - 4,980 lbs for a 5,000 lb
trailer.

The foam isn't waterlogged. I called Ranger about it and they didn't
have an explanation either. *

I got to thinking about it. *A gallon of water weighs 8 lbs. *To have
870 lbs of extra water weight, the boat would have to hold 109 gals of
water.

That's a lot of cubic feet of water to have in foam on a 20 foot boat.

How do you know the foam isn't waterlogged? Is all the space between
your floor and the hull accessible? Case it's not on most boats.

In article , says...

On 8/30/10 12:00 PM, W1TEF wrote:
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010 07:21:18 -0500, wrote:

Best advice you got so far was to weigh the boat to see if the foam is
waterlogged.

I don't know if you remember Jim, but I found out that my Ranger bay
boat is about 870 lbs over published weight putting the whole rig
right on the edge of trailer capacity - 4,980 lbs for a 5,000 lb
trailer.

The foam isn't waterlogged. I called Ranger about it and they didn't
have an explanation either.

I got to thinking about it. A gallon of water weighs 8 lbs. To have
870 lbs of extra water weight, the boat would have to hold 109 gals of
water.

That's a lot of cubic feet of water to have in foam on a 20 foot boat.


It's probably the lead Ranger poured into one side of the bilge to make
the boat float level. About one cubic foot of lead isn't far off from
that weight you are carrying around.

Spoofer alert! I'm not stupid so I wouldn't post crap like that.

On Aug 30, 12:15*pm, jamesgangnc wrote:
On Aug 30, 12:00*pm, W1TEF wrote:



On Mon, 30 Aug 2010 07:21:18 -0500, Jim wrote:
Best advice you got so far was to weigh the boat to see if the foam is
waterlogged.

I don't know if you remember Jim, but I found out that my Ranger bay
boat is about 870 lbs over published weight putting the whole rig
right on the edge of trailer capacity - 4,980 lbs for a 5,000 lb
trailer.

The foam isn't waterlogged. I called Ranger about it and they didn't
have an explanation either. *

I got to thinking about it. *A gallon of water weighs 8 lbs. *To have
870 lbs of extra water weight, the boat would have to hold 109 gals of
water.

That's a lot of cubic feet of water to have in foam on a 20 foot boat.

How do you know the foam isn't waterlogged? *Is all the space between
your floor and the hull accessible? *Case it's not on most boats.

You're right on the money. The Foam Cores are almost always NOT
accessible. When I re-did the sub frames,and floors in my boat, it WAS
accessible. No water in there, luckily.

On Aug 30, 1:28*pm, "*e#c" wrote:
On Aug 30, 12:15*pm, jamesgangnc wrote:





On Aug 30, 12:00*pm, W1TEF wrote:

On Mon, 30 Aug 2010 07:21:18 -0500, Jim wrote:
Best advice you got so far was to weigh the boat to see if the foam is
waterlogged.

I don't know if you remember Jim, but I found out that my Ranger bay
boat is about 870 lbs over published weight putting the whole rig
right on the edge of trailer capacity - 4,980 lbs for a 5,000 lb
trailer.

The foam isn't waterlogged. I called Ranger about it and they didn't
have an explanation either. *

I got to thinking about it. *A gallon of water weighs 8 lbs. *To have
870 lbs of extra water weight, the boat would have to hold 109 gals of
water.

That's a lot of cubic feet of water to have in foam on a 20 foot boat..

How do you know the foam isn't waterlogged? *Is all the space between
your floor and the hull accessible? *Case it's not on most boats.

You're right on the money. The Foam Cores are almost always NOT
accessible. When I re-did the sub frames,and floors in my boat, it WAS
accessible. No water in there, luckily.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Yep, when I redid my floor I removed the foam. The foam was only
accessible with the floor removed.