posted 04-10-2002 10:16 PM ET (US)            

My question is: what kind of steering does a stock rage have? Teleflex? I am not familiar with jet drive engines, but having teleflex steering seems like it would make life a lot easier.

posted 04-13-2002 09:51 AM ET (US)         

A friend of mine has extensive experience with marine architecture. He is quite familiar with Boston Whalers as well. I related your story to him, as well as the proposed solution of converting the boat to an outboard.

His response? "I wouln't even consider that." He proceeded to go through a list of reasons why. His biggest objection related to alteration of the boat's center(s) of gravity. He also, as tuna1 commented earlier, called the transom design and reinforcement of the rage into question.

Please do not misinterpret my posts, I am not trying to persuade you to repower or modify. However, I am of the mindset that, if professional advice can be renedered, it should be shared.

posted 04-13-2002 10:50 AM ET (US)            

Considering the situation, I would say "Why not experiement?"

The transom can be reinforced with plywood. Some stringers could transfer the loads to the hull. You could even use two pieces of plywood, one on each side, bonded to the hull and covered with cloth and resin. It might end up looking a lot like this:
Hyperlink

The best place for the weight is aft, anyways. If the greatest place to mount engines was three feet in front of the transom then we'd all be cutting motor wells into the cockpits of our 22-Outrages, right?

Do a decent job of engineering the transom and filling the hole in the hull from the jet drive.

Keep the engine weight on the light side. Don't try to hang a 350# 4-stroke back there. Make the bracket as light as possible. Don't buy a commercial bracket rated for 300-HP, but make your own with proportionate strength for your 50-70 HP engine.

posted 04-13-2002 10:03 PM ET (US)         

"Why not experiment?" The manufacturer is supposed to do that before the finished product is presented to the general public. The reason is a simple one...$$$$$$$$$.

posted 04-14-2002 05:42 AM ET (US)         

I think that the variation in suggestions (modify versus maintain stock) stems from preference. Some people are tinkerers and experimenters by nature. I am not. However, I recognize that, without them, we would not enjoy some of our current innovations.

However, I neither have expertise in this type of project nor do I want it. The thing I'd like to avoid is watching Bob Kemmler risk investing (probably thousands of) dollars in a venture with a questionable (at best)outcome.

The thing about this whole venture that concerns me is the issue of the transom's ability to be converted to a bracket. Although a poor analogy, the suggestion of converting a jet to ouboard seems akin to converting an inboard to an outboard. The boat is designed, built, and equipped for one type of powerplant. Radical departures can prove disastrous, at least financially.

If the proposal is being pursued solely on the basis of being an experiment (and being funded by "disposable" income), the story is a different one.

Whatever Bob decides to do, I wish him luck in his venture.

posted 04-16-2002 01:22 AM ET (US)            

zpeed7

posted 04-16-2002 10:07 AM ET (US)            

Also, does anyone know what kind of forces an outboard puts on a transom?

I see 3 forces: weight down, torque (round), and a forward/upward thrus. I would think of these forces will cause different stresses on different parts of the transom.

I hope the forces are small enought, with a kicker, not to cause a problem, but with an engine large enough to get up on plain ...?

posted 04-16-2002 07:11 PM ET (US)         

But seriously, nobody here is right or wrong. He asked for advice, so people who have attempted to give it should not be criticized for their good intentions. Some of these intentions are obviously focused on preventing possible personal injury. I thought this site is about helping people. Conversely, it's his boat, and like the "Chain Saw Whaler", he's free to do what he wants with it, and with his safety. Chop it up if he wants to.

Also, like CSW, this is a chance for some interesting information, on how the Rage was built, and whether a conversion like this will be successful. Looks like the bets have been placed!

But there are risks for other Rage owners with this experiment. If it works, these owners will know their boats have a second life after the OMC jet drives can no longer be serviced or supported. If it doesn't, values will suffer similar to the old OMC Sea Drives, as the values of the Rages sink to practically zero with un-repairable or very high priced rebuilding costs. Continued parts availability of these OMC engines/drives will become an issue. Although at considerable expense, Sea Drive Whalers can be re-powered successfully, saving the value of the boats. Let's see what happens with the Rages.

posted 04-16-2002 11:56 PM ET (US)         

If you plan on keeping the boat and were satisfied with the jet performance, have you considered replacing the drive train and motor with a Mercury Sportjet? I have no idea what that would cost, or if any good ones are available used or surplus.

I saw the article in my local newspaper (if you could call it that) about the remote control CPD Whaler. It is Sportjet powered. Maybe that is another option for you.

Best of luck!

posted 04-17-2002 12:22 AM ET (US)            

A few years ago (1997) we were seriously thinking about getting a 25-foot trailerable mini lobster-yacht, made up in Nova Scotia. We flew up there to visit the builder. He offered the hull in the following options:

--straight shaft inboard
--vee-drive inboard
--stern drive
--cut transom outboard
--full transom/bracket mounted outboard

The hull had been originally developed with a straight inboard engine in mind. Having made just about every imaginable configuration over the years (the boats are all built to order and semi-custom) he told me that the set up he liked the best was:

--full transom with stern bracket and twin outboards (usually 70-HP HONDA 4-strokes)

Of course, this was about the most expensive option, too, so that might have had something to do with it. :-)

posted 04-17-2002 02:51 AM ET (US)         

Your point is well taken, but there is an essential difference in this case. The hull of Bob's boat is already built, and it was designed and built specifically for jet power. It is true that, in the design and planning stages, some manufacturers offer extensive modifications with regards to powerplants and drivetrains.

This is evident in the Rage 15 and Dauntless 15, the former jet powered and the latter outboard powered. Their transom construction, fuel tank placement, and interior layouts are specifically designed for each type of power.

posted 04-17-2002 12:45 PM ET (US)            

By installing a bracket the value of the hull will be preserved into the future as any new outboard can be installed on it. Maintaining the jet will just cost lot of dollars and make it prematurely obsolete (if it isn't already).

posted 04-18-2002 05:05 PM ET (US)            

Bob in the wood location diagram from Whaler, how much and where is the wood in the RAGE.

Also, does the wood in the dauntless tie to anything? Is it the full width of the transom?

Just trying to get an idea of what it looks like inside.

posted 04-18-2002 09:05 PM ET (US)            

I almost did the same thing you are going to do and I am sure you will be fine. Of course you will have to check/improve the transom.

Stainless marine makes a bevy of various floatation brackets that should meet your needs. They have a few that are only 10-12in setbacks. You may want to check them out. www.stainlesmarine.com if you have not already. I have rebuilt a few transoms from the inside, and the outside. Feel free to check out my site(in my profile) for some pics of the transom rebuilds. (They are under 20fters)

posted 04-29-2002 12:58 PM ET (US)         

Kindly share with us how one modifies "any transom...to carry any HP."

Of special interest would be the specific sources on which you base your calculations for center of gravity modification. To where is the fuel tank relocated? The battery? The oil tank (if applicable)? How is the boat's drainage system affected?

Furthermore, what reference(s) are used from the materials science literature which allow you to determine laminate compositions, their ratios, and the placement thereof? How do you account for stress, strain, flexibility (or stiffness), and weight in Bob's proposed undertaking of converting a jet powered boat to an bracket-mounted outboard?

These are complicated questions, but it is necessary to answer them satisfactorily prior to embarking on a venture of this nature (or strongly encouraging others to do the same.)

posted 04-29-2002 05:08 PM ET (US)            

When my motor or drive go I will be the next one with a Bracket Rage. I had thought about doing this when the powerhead blew and the extended warranty would not cover the ran lean condition they blamed it on.

Paul

The battery is in the console, the gas tank(23 gal.) is in the floor under the console and the oil resivor is under the seat on the side. The drainage the scuppers are on the sides and their is already a pump in the engine compartment.

And I have to believe it would still be safer than a 7 year old bayliner of similiar size.

posted 04-29-2002 11:44 PM ET (US)            

As I have mentioned, I used to work for an electronic instrumentation company. One of our products was a novel hardness tester that used a technique of hardness measurement unlike any other hardness testing device.

I was helping with the preparation of a long paper explaining the scientific principles that allowed the device to measure hardness. The inventor and some of the project engineers revealed that the instrument was not at all invented in that way. It was quite accidental that they noticed the ability of this device to measure hardness. They just more or less happened upon that feature of it. After they satisfied themselves that the darn thing did indeed measure hardness--and actually did it much more accurately than most all of the competing devices--then they set about studying it to discover some scientific basis that they could show as the theory behind its unusual capabilty. We published a big paper explaining its operation (after getting the patent) so we could satisfy the demand in the marketplace to understand how the thing really worked.

posted 04-30-2002 05:10 AM ET (US)         

Let's hope that Bob doesn't test the righting moment of the boat--if that's what I think it is. Does one use a bubble podometer to measure that?

[That was a joke!]

Good luck Bob!

posted 05-06-2002 04:31 PM ET (US)            

I do no understand how the Seacast pourable transom will give you any structural reinforement.??? I know it will prevent rot but you can achieve the same with ply saturated with epoxy as long as you protect all holes with epoxy. Ply will be much less $

Why not just laminate a new transom using marine ply saturated w/ Epoxy and tie the new transom into the hull with woven roven and with some stringers running fore and aft?

I may be missing something though, how much access do you have to the inside of the transom??

$1500.oo for glass and gelcoat repair of the jet drive hole is a bit steep. IMO

Can you do any glass work?? repairing that hole would be a good first project and one that would save you some $$

posted 05-06-2002 08:54 PM ET (US)            

TAKE SOME PICTURES! We all want to see this in the various steps of conversion.

Thanks,

posted 05-06-2002 09:28 PM ET (US)            

Seacast claims that their product is twice as strong as the same thickness of marine grade plywood. Write to them and ask for a sample. I held a 1/2 inch piece of it in my hand and I am astounded as to how strong it is. It is intended for structural reinforcement. They actually state that you can use it to replace the transoms in boats.

posted 05-07-2002 01:31 PM ET (US)            

I was thinking you would work from the inside and remove the inner section of the transom and then the core, leaving the outer skin. Then work your way backwards building up with ply & Epoxy.

If it is easy enough to remove the core leaving the two skins, inner and outer, it sounds like you are golden.

I too was intimidated by Gel-Coat untill I started working with a glass shop in Groton CT named LBI fiberglass. They have been very helpful in my rebuild and gave me pointers on gel-coating. To the point I am undertaking a project of re gelcoating an entire 20 ft boat. If you feel as though you may be up to it, regelcoating your transom hole my be worth saving the $1500. Or not its up to you.

posted 05-08-2002 01:01 AM ET (US)            

<A HREF="http://images.traderonline.com/img/6/plcnad/767496/2162531_1.jpg" TARGET=_blank>RAGE 14</A>

posted 05-29-2002 09:45 AM ET (US)            

Lake Breeze Rage

Bob

Tell me how much shipping is and I will put a check in the mail.

Best regards,
Mike

posted 08-12-2002 04:08 PM ET (US)            

For more info on the Stuffer Prop solution contact: