I usually bring a 20-oz.
soda bottle of pre-mix along to provide extended running times.



Ouch! Soda bottle is definitely not a Coast Guard approved fuel container, more like a Molatov Cocktail! Pretty sure that if conservation/marine patrol folks ever spotted this, they wouldn't be real happy.

I also have a 2 HP Yamaha (underwater exhaust, 100 to 1 fuel to oil
ratio, very quiet...I love it but usually just paddle unless I need to
cover a lot of distance) and carry a 1 gallon poly fuel can. Enough
for a weekend and little chance of accidental breakage.


Have fun,
doug m

Ronald Donahue wrote:

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

Thanks

Ron Donahue




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

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

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

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

Bob wrote:

I usually bring a 20-oz.
soda bottle of pre-mix along to provide extended running times.




For even moderate gas-oil consumption, a 2-gal heavy duty poly gas can
from Wally World is only coupla-three bucks & is far better suited to
toting flammables. In fact, they're intended basically for carrying
chainsaw & similar mix. Come w/ pouring spout, too. Much safer & less
likely to garner a warning (or citation) from a passing ranger.

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

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

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

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

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

Brad


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

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

Thanks

Ron Donahue




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

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

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

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

padeen wrote:

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

Of the many canoes & outboards I've owned, this is for me the best
compromise of maneuverability, carrying capacity & reliability.


On the other hand, I think much of your information about square-stern drag
is incorrect, the drag being either negligible or nonexistent,

I'll agree that the loss of symmetry & the presence of a transom would
not have any huge reduction in efficiency. But you might discuss with
the Scott people just why they bother to maintain as narrow a line as
possible below the waterline and keep all of the transom out of the
water - their canoes are famed through Canada & the northeast as true
workhorses for heavy conditions &/or outfitters who need every bit of
"traditional" canoe attributes they can get.

I preferred to run mine from the front seat,
using a pole connected to the end of a Gill's extension handle with a
u-joint consisting of an S link held in place on the Gills handle and a
snap-link locked in place on the pole. This gave both throttle and
direction control from the front seat for about $18.



This would be great on many lakes & wider rivers where one is just "loafing along" regardless of propulsion method. But in white water, bony water, etc. this arrangement would be a handicap rather than an asset.


Pete H

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

"Peter H" wrote in message
...
padeen wrote:

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

Of the many canoes & outboards I've owned, this is for me the best
compromise of maneuverability, carrying capacity & reliability.


On the other hand, I think much of your information about square-stern
drag
is incorrect, the drag being either negligible or nonexistent,

I'll agree that the loss of symmetry & the presence of a transom would
not have any huge reduction in efficiency. But you might discuss with
the Scott people just why they bother to maintain as narrow a line as
possible below the waterline and keep all of the transom out of the
water - their canoes are famed through Canada & the northeast as true
workhorses for heavy conditions &/or outfitters who need every bit of
"traditional" canoe attributes they can get.

I preferred to run mine from the front seat,
using a pole connected to the end of a Gill's extension handle with a
u-joint consisting of an S link held in place on the Gills handle and a
snap-link locked in place on the pole. This gave both throttle and
direction control from the front seat for about $18.



This would be great on many lakes & wider rivers where one is just
"loafing along" regardless of propulsion method. But in white water, bony
water, etc. this arrangement would be a handicap rather than an asset.



Pete's right that this set-up has compromises. Also, he's right about the
drag on the transom in standard square-stern canoes. OTOH, if you ever can
come across a proper Grand Lake Streamer, its a completely symmetric canoe
hull with the end cut off, so the transom is above the waterline. No drag,
and a duffel in the stern will keep the boat trim while you sit in the back
seat. They don't make them, IIRC, but you can find them.

--riverman

a 3hp outboard will move the canoe at hull speed. any larger motor will
just waste gas as the canoe tries to climb over its bow wave. my father
had a 3hp outboard on a 16 ft canoe which he loaded down with lots of food
and equipment when prospecting.

its true that running a motor on a square stern 16 ft canoe is
uncomfortable due to turning around to hold the handle. stern mounted
motors are better on 20 ft and longer canoes.

I've found a sail a very good solution to strong head winds on the small
boats I've built specifically for paddling and sailing. I can stay out
when other paddlers have given up. Although sailing is a lot of fun it
would not be as practical as a motoring for most people. At one time,
before motors were available, sails for canoes were quite popular.

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

Thanks

Ron Donahue




--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
William R Watt National Capital FreeNet Ottawa's free community network
homepage: www.ncf.ca/~ag384/top.htm
warning: non-freenet email must have "notspam" in subject or it's returned