Forum: WHALER
  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: The Whaler GAM or General Area
  Photos of alkar's 1989 22-Outrage Whaler Drive

Post New Topic  Post Reply
search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   Photos of alkar's 1989 22-Outrage Whaler Drive
Barry posted 12-21-2002 11:06 PM ET (US)   Profile for Barry   Send Email to Barry  
Alex from Eugene, Oregon sent me a couple of pictures of his 1989 22-Outrage Whaler Drive.

Alex wrote:
"I hope this works. I'm attaching two photos of my Whaler buttoned up under her new top. As you can see, my trailer cover is more like a stern cover running aft from the bow shelter, but it does the job and allows me to trailer her with the bow shelter up - and that's pretty handy in our climate.

The weather here has been too crappy for me to take the top off to finish the console rail installation or complete the removal and replacement of the thru-hulls. I guess I needed something left to do in the spring...

I'll try to get you better photos when the weather improves and the top comes off. Until then it would be great if you could post these so the guys know I'm not making it all up.:-)"

http://members.aol.com/_ht_a/bburtensha/alkar

alkar posted 12-22-2002 11:23 AM ET (US)     Profile for alkar  Send Email to alkar     
Thanks for your help Barry. It's fun to see some evidence of our hard work on display. Lets zap photos back and forth as our restorations progress.
Dick posted 12-22-2002 11:39 AM ET (US)     Profile for Dick  Send Email to Dick     
alkar

Sweet looking rig. Would love to see some pictures of her uncovered.

Dick

alkar posted 12-22-2002 01:21 PM ET (US)     Profile for alkar  Send Email to alkar     
Thanks Dick. I'me very excited about the progress we've made. The boat is a far cry from the wreck that arrived here last August.

I'm also glad to finally be able to replace the photo of Larry's 25'OR with a picture of my own boat for the desktop photo on my computer at work :-)

Barry posted 12-23-2002 09:57 AM ET (US)     Profile for Barry  Send Email to Barry     
alkar, after looking closely at the pictures I realized how different it looks from the picture in the ad. Looks like you've reattached the bow rail, removed the lower tape stripe, added the name, replaced the t-top with an arch, and replaced the trailer with a new one. Wow! Can't wait to see the inside!
alkar posted 12-23-2002 10:12 AM ET (US)     Profile for alkar  Send Email to alkar     
Barry, we've also replaced all of the following: rub rail, switch panels, lights (navigation and spreader),teak, wiring (all), bilge pumps, windshield, dash panel, batteries (4), compas, and everything electronic, including the radio and stereo system. I also had the stainless props rebuilt and serviced the motors - including replacing both injection systems under warranty. I still have to install the grab rails on the console, replace all the thru-hulls, including the intake for the wash-down, and repair some minor damage to the floor. My wife has been a very good sport so far, but I think I'm starting to test her patience...
Barry posted 12-23-2002 11:38 AM ET (US)     Profile for Barry  Send Email to Barry     
Four batteries? Where did you mount them? I've got two that I think are wired so that each serves one motor. Mine are located in the enclosed area in the stern, one on each side. The oil tanks are mounted on the lip of the old motor well, just inward of the batteries.

Since I needed some additional deep cycle batteries, I replaced both of the existing with Optimas.

alkar posted 12-23-2002 12:29 PM ET (US)     Profile for alkar  Send Email to alkar     
Barry, I mounted them in the same place you did (two on each side with a dedicated switch). It is very tight - but it works well, and the snug fit prevents the batteries from moving around even without being secured. The batteries are also pretty heavy, but the weight doesn't bother the boat a bit. I can't believe how much weight she'll carry without any appreciable difference in attitude or handling.
alkar posted 12-23-2002 08:43 PM ET (US)     Profile for alkar  Send Email to alkar     
Barry, remember that I have some extra room back there, as I have no oil tanks. I guess that's another advantage of the four strokes. Of course, I wouldn't be able to keep up with you and your twin 150s...

It's a shame the previous owner didn't put twin 130s on my boat. They're the same weight as the 115s. Have you determined max speed on your boat yet?

PSW posted 12-24-2002 12:21 AM ET (US)     Profile for PSW  Send Email to PSW     
Alkar nice looking boat. Have you fished that bad boy in Tillamook yet.

PSW

alkar posted 12-24-2002 10:28 AM ET (US)     Profile for alkar  Send Email to alkar     
PSW, I've barely gotten to run her. When I started in to the restoration work I didn't realize how much I needed to do, or how much time and money it would take. Once I was started it was tough to stop to fish, so I missed a good salmon season. My buddies were slaying the fish while I was laying in my driveway, banging my knuckles, and cursing the guy who sold me my boat. If the weather cooperates we'll be crabbing on new year's eve (the crabbing has never been better) - and I plan to be ready to slay the salmon next spring/summer/fall.
Barry posted 01-04-2003 03:17 PM ET (US)     Profile for Barry  Send Email to Barry     
I just noticed that it appears you have added a metal support or brace between the bolts on each side of the Whaler Drive and one on the center Whaler Drive support. I've just got the standard large metal washers on all of my bolts. Why did you make those mods? Also, exactly how did you do it? Did you just remove one bolt at a time? Did you add similar reinforcements on the inside of the transom?
alkar posted 01-04-2003 05:53 PM ET (US)     Profile for alkar  Send Email to alkar     
Barry, the stock washers on the outside appeared almost counter-sunk when I got the boat. They looked as though they had been overtightened at some point. I replaced the small washers with the slightly larger and heavier stainless plates so the weight & stress would be distributed over a larger area of the whaler-drive. Everything looked great on the inside of the transom, so I didn't change anything there.

The heavier plates were pretty easy to add. We originally anticipated having to use a jack system to support the engine weight as we swapped the washers out, but the bunks on my the trailer provide support for whalerdrive, so we didn't need the jacks. I'm pretty sure that all of the smaller bolts on the whalerdrive would provide plenty of support to allow changing one of the large bolts out at a time, but having the additional support from the trailer bunks made us feel more confident about proceeding.

Barry posted 01-04-2003 07:37 PM ET (US)     Profile for Barry  Send Email to Barry     
Interesting about the condition of the washers. That's the only time I've heard of that condition with the Whaler Drive. Of course yours is the only model I've seen with those heavy Hondas. I wonder if the additional weight could have caused it or just contributed.

Regarding your trailer, my bunks extend somewhat from the hull under the Whaler Drive. However the bunks don't touch the WD since the bottom of the WD is a little higher than the bottom of the hull.

alkar posted 01-04-2003 07:57 PM ET (US)     Profile for alkar  Send Email to alkar     
Barry, if your trailer bunks extend as far back as mine do you'll be able to shim the gap between the bunks and the Whaler Drive - if you ever need to support it for repair.

I'm sure the weight of the Hondas did not cause the problem with the washers, as none of the other Whaler Drive attachment points were similarly compressed. The more likely explanation is that the folks who installed the Hondas were afraid of their weight and overtightened the larger bolts as a result.

alkar posted 01-18-2003 02:21 PM ET (US)     Profile for alkar  Send Email to alkar     
Thanks for adding the new pictures Barry.

The shot of your boat at rest puts the extent of my boat's stern-heavy static attitude in perspective. I'm going to do what I can to fix that - but first I'm going to make sure that there's no water in the whaler drive contributing to the problem.

Jim, please feel free to add any of these shots to the web site if you consider them a worthwhile contribution. The recent photos were taken yesterday (1/17/03) when I took my kids out of school to play "hookey". We went on a crabbing mission on the Oregon coast (Winchester Bay). It was cold and bumpy, but we had a wonderful time anyway.

On boat restoration: Although we went to considerable effort to convert the old T-top to a radar arch, I'm now having second thoughts about the way it looks, especially when I compare the appearance of my boat to the more classic lines of Barry's boat.

In spite of my best efforts, my radar arch ended up looking a little "home-made". I'm interested in what you and others think I should do about it. This summer I have to repair the old mounting site for the T-top legs, so I have a fair amount of glass/gelcoat/non-skid work to do anyway. It wouldn't be that much more work to repair the gunwales while I'm at it. Maybe I should pull the arch and find another way to mount the GPS, radio and radar goodies. What do you think?

I'm also interested to hear what you guys think about grab rails on the console. How necessary are they? What options do I have given the console pad configuration? Any thoughts?

John from Madison CT posted 01-18-2003 05:52 PM ET (US)     Profile for John from Madison CT  Send Email to John from Madison CT     
Barry and Others: I believe something is not right with the way your boat is laying so low in the water.

Here are two pics of my 22' Outrage with Whaler Drive with a Single Yamaha 250hp.(~500lbs.) Notice how high it rides in the water at rest, and also, with the second photo, with 3 guys and a 125lb Mako shark in the back of the boat.

Here you go:

http://www.ctfisherman.com/cgi-bin/photopost/index.pl?photo=588


http://www.ctfisherman.com/cgi-bin/photopost/index.pl?photo=351&size=big


Let me know what you think, oh and if someone could linkify these, please do. I forgot how.

What is the total weight of those Hondas??

John from Madison

Barry posted 01-18-2003 06:28 PM ET (US)     Profile for Barry  Send Email to Barry     
Here are the three configurations for easier comparison:

alkar -- engs=1000(~500x2),batt=200(~50x4),fuel=?
http://members.aol.com/bburtensha/alkar/profileaft.jpg

Barry -- engs=772(386x2),batt=80(40x2),oil=?(2 tanks),fuel=?(although it has the large 129gal tank)
http://members.aol.com/bburtensha/outrage/88BW22ORWD_orig_water.jpg

John -- eng=500(?),batt=?,oil=?,fuel=?
http://www.ctfisherman.com/cgi-bin/photopost/index.pl?photo=588
http://www.ctfisherman.com/cgi-bin/photopost/index.pl?photo=351&size=big

John from Madison CT posted 01-18-2003 06:50 PM ET (US)     Profile for John from Madison CT  Send Email to John from Madison CT     
Barry:

At the time of the photo with the 3 guys in the stern, with Fish, I also have 2 batteries in rear of boat, my fuel was at least 50 gallons, and another cooler under leaning post full with ice.

John

Barry posted 01-18-2003 07:01 PM ET (US)     Profile for Barry  Send Email to Barry     
alkar, if I had your boat I would definately move the batteries to the console. I might even consider getting rid of one or two.

While your arch may look "home-made" it definately looks functional. If you have, or are going to add radar, then you obviously need an arch or a t-top. I think console grab rails are a must if you don't have a t-top.

alkar posted 01-18-2003 08:42 PM ET (US)     Profile for alkar  Send Email to alkar     
Barry, I think I need to take the boat to the lake and experiment with weighting. I can mark the whaler drive with a pencil and then move the batteries forward to the console area and mark it again to see how much difference the move makes. Unfortunately, I'm pretty sure I will not be able to move weight around enough to produce John's static trim.

The problem with the heavy Honda motors is that the extra 500lbs is located at the extreme far end of the lever. Since I can't hang a compensating 500lb weight off of the bow rail, I'd have to add about 700lbs where the anchor locker is - and I obviously can't do that. I need to decide how much change in the static trim is necessary to optimize boat performance.

I do want to add radar, so I have to either improve on the arch, or use one of those radar masts that Boston Whaler used to sell to the Coast Guard. I might be better off rebuilding the radar arch and then having the whole thing powder-coated. I just don't know which way to go at this point.

What kind of grab rails? Where? Do you think they are necessary even if I keep a radar arch and passengers can hold on to it when it gets bumpy?

Barry posted 01-18-2003 11:08 PM ET (US)     Profile for Barry  Send Email to Barry     
Is the existing trim a problem and if so how serious? If you are getting on plane quickly, able to maintain plane at reasonably low RPMs, able to trim the bow down enough to smooth out chop, and getting otherwise decent performance maybe it's nothing to worry about. If you are having problems with any or all of those adding Doel-Fins could help. I might be concerned about burying the engines in certain conditions, but you still shouldn't have to worry about taking water over the transom. And there is probably much less chance of stuffing the bow. ;-)

Anyway it will be interesting to hear how much setting the batteries by the console changes the trim.

Using the arch for a handle hold should work fine for those behind the console. My boys like to ride up front and the crook gives them something to hold on to if necessary.

John from Madison CT posted 01-19-2003 08:41 AM ET (US)     Profile for John from Madison CT  Send Email to John from Madison CT     
I had no idea those Honda's weight so much. Wow, those are big.

I too would move as much weight as I could to the console, certainly the batteries.

But, as long as you know the Whaler Drive or Hull itself isn't soaked with water (which I highly doubt), then I guess there is no reason to worry about it.

As long as the boat rides well, then don't sweat it buddy !!

Enjoy a that beatiful ride.

John

alkar posted 01-19-2003 10:52 AM ET (US)     Profile for alkar  Send Email to alkar     
Thanks guys. I appreciate your thoughts. The boat does perform well, and it trims right up as soon as I'm on plane, but I'm just one of those people who can't leave well enough alone. It has to be as "right" as I can make it.

I have never run another 22 WD, so I don't know if my boat's performance is sub-optimum. It's great, but maybe it could be a lot better. Also, the stern-heavy attitude invites a lot of chop-spray into the boat when I'm backing to hold position - and I do that a lot when we're pulling traps - so I'd really like to have another four inches of freeboard back there.

Barry, I hadn't thought about the value of having the "crook" on the console. With the larger back-pad up there I have no place to mount one of those. I may have to head back to the drawing board for a new front pad set up...

lhg posted 01-20-2003 03:28 PM ET (US)     Profile for lhg    
Alkar - Just read this thread which I haven't been following until now. I think your boat looks terrific, but I'm sorry the 25 is no longer on your screensaver!

Seriously, though, if you're interested in changing the radar arch, you might want to get in touch with Kingfish, who has a beautiful arch on his 22. Maybe he can send a photo, as I don't think there are any photos of his in Cetacea yet. If I can be truthful for a moment, I think the one on your boat does not do it justice, and has the tubes too close together across the top, and the bends are too "squarish". It also seems a little high. Generally, arch design dictates that the tube spacing across the top should be about 12". For best styling, the front leg should angle back about 45 degrees, and the rear leg about 30 degrees, with about 18" to 24" the spacing on the gunwale. I learned this after having my own one done, unfortunately, and wish mine layed back a little more. Both mine and Kingfish's are designed to completely clear (not interfere with) the Mills canvas system when it is set.

alkar posted 01-20-2003 05:04 PM ET (US)     Profile for alkar  Send Email to alkar     
Larry, I appreciate your thoughts. And I agree with your appraisal of my arch. It bothered my eye from the moment I installed it. It was just awful hard to give it the toss and start over, but I think that is the only practical alternative. Heck, I need a larger, more stable surface for the radar anyway.

I ended up in this box by trying to save money. The sides of the arch came from the supports for the old T-top. That's why one of the cross members sits at a funny angle; the cross-member used to be the second of four zig-zagging supports on the side of the T.

I'll give Kingfish a shout and see if he has photos and design information.

What do you think of the trim problem?

lhg posted 01-20-2003 06:59 PM ET (US)     Profile for lhg    
It does look like the boat sits just a little low in the stern, but then again, I don't know how much those engines weigh. I regularly see a 22 WD with twin 60 degree OMC 150's, and it does not seem to sit that low.
I think those engines weigh about 400# each.

All Whaler Drives are equipped with batteries in the stern quarters, but perhaps four of them is a bit much. Just don't know, but I hate to see batteries in the Outrage console.
It just wasn't designed for that condition.

Since the 115 & 130 Hondas are the same engine, the additional HP must be in the carbs. Perhaps you can have them upgraded to 130's.

alkar posted 01-20-2003 09:21 PM ET (US)     Profile for alkar  Send Email to alkar     
Larry, I looked into bumping the horses up on the 115s. The mechanic at our Honda dealership told me he'd be fined $10,000 if he were caught doing that. It sounds like baloney to me, but that's the end of my inquiry, as I do not wish to do anything that would risk voiding my warranty on the motors.

I think the ideal solution to the problem is a new set of higher-horsepower, lower weight motors - like the Suzuki 140s... I just can't afford such an extravagant solution.

alkar posted 01-29-2003 05:06 PM ET (US)     Profile for alkar  Send Email to alkar     
Larry, I'd be e-mailing you this, except I don't have access to your e-mail address on my work computer.

I got the manuals and the wonderful pictures of your 25' and "Outre" this morning. They all great! The arch on Outre is exactly what I need. Do you know who built it? Atlantic Towers makes something that looks similar, but I gather that nobody on this site has had any experience with their products, so I don't no where to turn for an appraisal of their quality. What do you think I ought to pay? Any other ideas?

Alex

Salmon Tub posted 01-29-2003 08:15 PM ET (US)     Profile for Salmon Tub  Send Email to Salmon Tub     
Alkar, I think, and as you have stated, the performance should be fine with the static trim being so proud, while underway. The only points I would like to add are the following, as stated in the opening post, you are from Eugene, Or. I would imagine this boat will see use in the open ocean. This should be fine, but keep an eye on how the boat drifts when not under power, I think it may have a tendancy to set up aft into the wind/waves. This should not be a major problem, but you may find yourself taking a few over the transom every now and then. Otherwise, the profile of that boat on the water gives it a nice aggressive look. Good Luck!
alkar posted 01-31-2003 12:50 AM ET (US)     Profile for alkar  Send Email to alkar     
ST, you're right, the boat will be used primarliy in the open ocean, so your thoughts are much appreciated. I'm striving for a boat that appears "like new" in every respect so, if I can make it happen, I'd like to end up with a boat with "stock-like" trim. Once I make sure the boat has no additional water weight in the whaler drive I'm going to work to limit the impact from the weight of the motors. I don't expect it to look like it's carrying a single two-stroke, but I'd like it to be more level than it is.
SWarren posted 01-31-2003 09:47 AM ET (US)     Profile for SWarren  Send Email to SWarren     
That boat looks better than any boat I saw at the Charleston Boat show yesterday. You just cant beat the style of the old whaler lines. I did like two boats yesterday, the new scout 235 sportfish, and the 23 -24 ' palmetto boats.
kingfish posted 01-31-2003 10:31 AM ET (US)     Profile for kingfish  Send Email to kingfish     
That is truly a good looking 22, Alex.

You and I have corresponded about my experiences, thoughts and costs with my arch, and I'll be interested to follow what you decide to do in that regard; in the meantime, you do have a workable solution.

I have to admit that I really drool over the niceties of a full transom every time I see one. On occasion I consider the project of closing mine in and moving my Evinrude 225 back on an Armstrong bracket. And then I think of the other aspect (that Louie Kokinis recently articulated in another thread) of having the ability to dump blue water over my notch transom should I have the need. More thought needed on that whole issue, I guess...

Great looking boat (gotta love those 22's)!

Keep us posted-

John

alkar posted 01-31-2003 09:19 PM ET (US)     Profile for alkar  Send Email to alkar     
Thanks for the compliments guys. As you know, when you're staring at your own boat you always see all the things that need to be fixed or replaced. It's hard to have the perspective to just stand back and appreciate the progress that's been made.

John, I'm pulling the arch off of my boat as soon as the weather warms up. I've stared at the pictures of your boat, Larry's boat, and you arches too much. Now the defects in my arch REALLY bother my eye. I'm grateful, really, because it's going to force me to go all the way and do it right. I'm even thinking about installing an RPS...

I may never be done with this project...

Post New Topic  Post Reply
Hop to:


Contact Us | RETURN to ContinuousWave Top Page

Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Freeware Version 2000
Purchase our Licensed Version- which adds many more features!
© Infopop Corporation (formerly Madrona Park, Inc.), 1998 - 2000.