On 5/13/12 7:36 AM, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 12 May 2012 21:48:29 -0400, wrote:



We all have our own definitions of 'hard chop'. To me, 6" - 12" wavelets are pretty calm. One- to
two-footers can be a little 'choppy', but are fine at a slower speed. Don't know why 150-200 horses
is necessary. A good friend had a 24'er with a Honda 90 on the butt end, and we did a whole lot of
pleasant fishing with that thing - in 2'-3' wave conditions. Pulled lots of stripers into that boat.

Around here, hard chop refers less to the size of the peaks of waves and
more to the distances between the peaks. If the peaks are close
together, you get hard chop. If they are farther apart, you typically
don't, wave size being equal.

As for engine horsepower, you have what, an 18-footer with a 150 hp four
stroke engine?

Oh, and you don't actually get out on the Bay more than once a year, do
you?

X ` Man wrote:
On 5/13/12 7:36 AM, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 12 May 2012 21:48:29 -0400, wrote:



We all have our own definitions of 'hard chop'. To me, 6" - 12"
wavelets are pretty calm. One- to
two-footers can be a little 'choppy', but are fine at a slower speed.
Don't know why 150-200 horses
is necessary. A good friend had a 24'er with a Honda 90 on the butt
end, and we did a whole lot of
pleasant fishing with that thing - in 2'-3' wave conditions. Pulled
lots of stripers into that boat.

Around here, hard chop refers less to the size of the peaks of waves
and more to the distances between the peaks. If the peaks are close
together, you get hard chop. If they are farther apart, you typically
don't, wave size being equal.

As for engine horsepower, you have what, an 18-footer with a 150 hp
four stroke engine?

Oh, and you don't actually get out on the Bay more than once a year,
do you?





Spoken like a true non-boater. You have issues, X-Man. Jealousy, envy,
whatever, but it is apparent that you don't boat and have chosen this to
be your dumping ground for your over-the-top political agenda. You seem
to forget that people who have boats are more likely to be educated and
can see through your strange rhetoric. Even your attempts at on-topic
posts are filled with unfounded advice. There are plenty of political
groups in Usenet, I'm sure. Have you been pushed out of them all?

On Mon, 14 May 2012 20:12:42 -0400, Earl wrote:

X ` Man wrote:
On 5/13/12 7:36 AM, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 12 May 2012 21:48:29 -0400, wrote:



We all have our own definitions of 'hard chop'. To me, 6" - 12"
wavelets are pretty calm. One- to
two-footers can be a little 'choppy', but are fine at a slower speed.
Don't know why 150-200 horses
is necessary. A good friend had a 24'er with a Honda 90 on the butt
end, and we did a whole lot of
pleasant fishing with that thing - in 2'-3' wave conditions. Pulled
lots of stripers into that boat.

Around here, hard chop refers less to the size of the peaks of waves
and more to the distances between the peaks. If the peaks are close
together, you get hard chop. If they are farther apart, you typically
don't, wave size being equal.

As for engine horsepower, you have what, an 18-footer with a 150 hp
four stroke engine?

Oh, and you don't actually get out on the Bay more than once a year,
do you?





Spoken like a true non-boater. You have issues, X-Man. Jealousy, envy,
whatever, but it is apparent that you don't boat and have chosen this to
be your dumping ground for your over-the-top political agenda. You seem
to forget that people who have boats are more likely to be educated and
can see through your strange rhetoric. Even your attempts at on-topic
posts are filled with unfounded advice. There are plenty of political
groups in Usenet, I'm sure. Have you been pushed out of them all?

I'm still of the opinion that 6" crests six feet apart are no worse than 6" crests one foot apart.

On Mon, 21 May 2012 21:17:54 -0400, John H.
wrote:

I'm still of the opinion that 6" crests six feet apart are no worse than 6" crests one foot apart.

===

That's because 6 inches is small relative to the size of your boat.
Change the proportions to something like 4 feet 40 feet apart vs 4
feet 400 feet apart.

On Mon, 21 May 2012 23:22:30 -0400, Wayne.B wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 21:17:54 -0400, John H.
wrote:

I'm still of the opinion that 6" crests six feet apart are no worse than 6" crests one foot apart.

===

That's because 6 inches is small relative to the size of your boat.
Change the proportions to something like 4 feet 40 feet apart vs 4
feet 400 feet apart.

True - but the original comment had to do with 6" to 12" wavelets. The Chesapeake, as I'm sure you
know, isn't quite big enough to get 4'ers 400' apart. When we get 4'ers there's a whole lot of wind
coming from somewhere, and I wouldn't have been out there with my 21'er. I've done it - but that's
'cause I got caught in a quick thunderstorm. Then the waves were higher than I could see over when I
was in a trough. Didn't have a GPS then, and was lucky the compass was working.