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.

In article ebb8b8ad-adad-4863-bce2-82ef77533479
@e14g2000yqe.googlegroups.com, says...

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.

Well, like we said, it's hard to tell. Either way, I can't see a rebuild
making an engine twice as powerful which seems about what you need so I
would still invest in the larger powerplant instead of hoping the
rebuild of the engine (slightly bigger than half the rated hp) will
solve the problem...

--
Rowdy Mouse Racing - We race for cheese!

On Aug 27, 10:11*pm, I am Tosk
wrote:
In article ebb8b8ad-adad-4863-bce2-82ef77533479
@e14g2000yqe.googlegroups.com, says...



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.

Well, like we said, it's hard to tell. Either way, I can't see a rebuild
making an engine twice as powerful which seems about what you need so I
would still invest in the larger powerplant instead of hoping the
rebuild of the engine (slightly bigger than half the rated hp) will
solve the problem...

--
Rowdy Mouse Racing - We race for cheese!

* This coming from a man who claims to know things about 2 stroke,
Motocross Bike engines, and has been pushed down stairwells by the
local Cops.*
He is short, uneducated, jobless, lives off his Wifes back, and also
lives his life off of his Daughters back while camping in small tents
with underaged girls.

On Aug 28, 12:35*am, "*e#c" wrote:
On Aug 27, 10:11*pm, I am Tosk
wrote:





In article ebb8b8ad-adad-4863-bce2-82ef77533479
@e14g2000yqe.googlegroups.com, says...

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.

Well, like we said, it's hard to tell. Either way, I can't see a rebuild
making an engine twice as powerful which seems about what you need so I
would still invest in the larger powerplant instead of hoping the
rebuild of the engine (slightly bigger than half the rated hp) will
solve the problem...

--
Rowdy Mouse Racing - We race for cheese!

* This coming from a man who claims to know things about 2 stroke,
Motocross Bike engines, and has been pushed down stairwells by the
local Cops.*
He is short, uneducated, jobless, lives off his Wifes back, and also
lives his life off of his Daughters back while camping in small tents
with underaged girls.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Do I live off my dog's back too, how about the cats. Oh wait,
yesterday it was my dad's fortune snerk. ??? Are you still
unemployed and crying on facebook because they don't give unemployment
to those who have been fired?? Huh, yellowteeth?

On Aug 28, 1:08*am, "JustWaitAFrekinMinute!"
wrote:
On Aug 28, 12:35*am, "*e#c" wrote:



On Aug 27, 10:11*pm, I am Tosk
wrote:

In article ebb8b8ad-adad-4863-bce2-82ef77533479
@e14g2000yqe.googlegroups.com, says...

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.

Well, like we said, it's hard to tell. Either way, I can't see a rebuild
making an engine twice as powerful which seems about what you need so I
would still invest in the larger powerplant instead of hoping the
rebuild of the engine (slightly bigger than half the rated hp) will
solve the problem...

--
Rowdy Mouse Racing - We race for cheese!

* This coming from a man who claims to know things about 2 stroke,
Motocross Bike engines, and has been pushed down stairwells by the
local Cops.*
He is short, uneducated, jobless, lives off his Wifes back, and also
lives his life off of his Daughters back while camping in small tents
with underaged girls.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Do I live off my dog's back too, how about the cats. Oh wait,
yesterday it was my dad's fortune snerk. ??? Are you still
unemployed and crying on facebook because they don't give unemployment
to those who have been fired?? Huh, yellowteeth?

No, you "mount " your Dogs back, FAGGOT.

Are you still unemployed and crying on facebook because they don't
give unemployment
to those who have been fired??

Thats never happened, but nice try......

Besides, you're the one who " cried " about being jobless, getting
pushed down stairs by the Cops ( your Cousin...LMAO )..and boasted
about camping in a small tent with your Daughter......

Shall I go on? Does Terry watch? Do you fondle the horses...I bet you
do.
At least I still have a FB account...you dont....because you're a
COWARD FAGGOT COCKSUCKER.

"JustWaitAFrekinMinute!" wrote in message
...
On Aug 28, 12:35 am, "*e#c" wrote:
On Aug 27, 10:11 pm, I am Tosk
wrote:





In article ebb8b8ad-adad-4863-bce2-82ef77533479
@e14g2000yqe.googlegroups.com, says...

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.

Well, like we said, it's hard to tell. Either way, I can't see a rebuild
making an engine twice as powerful which seems about what you need so I
would still invest in the larger powerplant instead of hoping the
rebuild of the engine (slightly bigger than half the rated hp) will
solve the problem...

--
Rowdy Mouse Racing - We race for cheese!

* This coming from a man who claims to know things about 2 stroke,
Motocross Bike engines, and has been pushed down stairwells by the
local Cops.*
He is short, uneducated, jobless, lives off his Wifes back, and also
lives his life off of his Daughters back while camping in small tents
with underaged girls.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Do I live off my dog's back too, how about the cats. Oh wait,
yesterday it was my dad's fortune snerk. ??? Are you still
unemployed and crying on facebook because they don't give unemployment
to those who have been fired?? Huh, yellowteeth?


I heard he made a video on unemployment.I sure would like to view it.

On Aug 28, 8:39*am, "Harry ?" wrote:
"JustWaitAFrekinMinute!" wrote in message

...
On Aug 28, 12:35 am, "*e#c" wrote:



On Aug 27, 10:11 pm, I am Tosk
wrote:

In article ebb8b8ad-adad-4863-bce2-82ef77533479
@e14g2000yqe.googlegroups.com, says...

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.

Well, like we said, it's hard to tell. Either way, I can't see a rebuild
making an engine twice as powerful which seems about what you need so I
would still invest in the larger powerplant instead of hoping the
rebuild of the engine (slightly bigger than half the rated hp) will
solve the problem...

--
Rowdy Mouse Racing - We race for cheese!

* This coming from a man who claims to know things about 2 stroke,
Motocross Bike engines, and has been pushed down stairwells by the
local Cops.*
He is short, uneducated, jobless, lives off his Wifes back, and also
lives his life off of his Daughters back while camping in small tents
with underaged girls.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Do I live off my dog's back too, how about the cats. Oh wait,
yesterday it was my dad's fortune snerk. ??? Are you still
unemployed and crying on facebook because they don't give unemployment
to those who have been fired?? Huh, yellowteeth?

I heard he made a video on unemployment.I sure would like to view it.

Yes, I did. The video in question were my ideas of how to better run
the system, not have it open for a "slush-fund " for the Govt. to use
at will. It had nothing to do with the lies Snotty Inger****
suggested. He was reaching....being so short.
Too bad you never will see it. Its only available for Humans to
view...not sub-species douchebags, like you, spoofer.

Later, cumbucket.

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.

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?

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!