Supporting setback bracket? - Moderated Discussion Areas

  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Whaler Repairs/Mods
  Supporting setback bracket?

search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   Supporting setback bracket?

j_h_nimrod posted 01-03-2003 05:12 PM ET (US)
I really like the idea for a setback bracket because of the increased performance and most importantly extending the useable portion of the boat. What I dont like is the fact that you are moving the motor weight farther back on the hull making the boat squat lower in the water increasing the chance of taking water over the back in a following sea at low speeds. Jack-plates have no extra buoyancy and most setback brackets are only 12"-18" wide offering only a few cu/ft of water displacement (1 cu/ft of submerged bracket will support about 63 lbs) or even less on many.
What is the merit to the idea of having a bracket that is essentially a continuation of the hull that is inset say 2"? This way the bracket would add quite a bit of reserve buoyency, add a nice swim step and get the motor farther back. Theoretically it seems that at planing speeds the stepped bracket would be out of contact with the water improving performance by allowing the the motor to be mounted higher and lessening drag.
I would imagine this has been tried before and I would be interested in hearing any comment. How much would the extention need to be angled up to not drag, the initial 2" and then 1" for every 6" of length?
Hopefully this was written well enough that explanation is not necessary, but I am open to any questions of clarification.
More ramblings of an idle mind...jh
j_h_nimrod posted 01-05-2003 02:05 AM ET (US)
Comments, suggestions, anything???
kingfish posted 01-05-2003 08:06 AM ET (US)
j_h_nimrod-
I don't know if you have cruised through jimh's REFERENCE section yet, but if you haven't, I think you'll find a great deal of information in the Brackets article http://continuouswave.com/whaler/reference/engineBrackets.html that pertains directly to your musings.
I think Armstrong makes brackets of the type you describe and I think there are other manufacturers that do also. I think the old whalerdrives stepped up a little although not enough to be clear of the water at plane, and there are photos of a whaler drive as well as a very clear photo of a molded-in bracket with a pronounced step in the bracket article.
kingfish
j_h_nimrod posted 01-06-2003 01:56 AM ET (US)
Thanks for the reply Kingfish. I have read the reference article before, but I re-read it again and this time I did notice the Edgewater 26. That is basically what I had envisioned.
What I would like to know is how something like it preforms. How well does it work? Is it the best of both worlds?
It seems that at slower speeds (not quite plane) that it would create stern lift due to the wake hitting the underside of the extention.
Any discussion on this topic would be appreciated.
jh

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.

Author	Topic: Supporting setback bracket?
j_h_nimrod	posted 01-03-2003 05:12 PM ET (US) I really like the idea for a setback bracket because of the increased performance and most importantly extending the useable portion of the boat. What I dont like is the fact that you are moving the motor weight farther back on the hull making the boat squat lower in the water increasing the chance of taking water over the back in a following sea at low speeds. Jack-plates have no extra buoyancy and most setback brackets are only 12"-18" wide offering only a few cu/ft of water displacement (1 cu/ft of submerged bracket will support about 63 lbs) or even less on many. What is the merit to the idea of having a bracket that is essentially a continuation of the hull that is inset say 2"? This way the bracket would add quite a bit of reserve buoyency, add a nice swim step and get the motor farther back. Theoretically it seems that at planing speeds the stepped bracket would be out of contact with the water improving performance by allowing the the motor to be mounted higher and lessening drag. I would imagine this has been tried before and I would be interested in hearing any comment. How much would the extention need to be angled up to not drag, the initial 2" and then 1" for every 6" of length? Hopefully this was written well enough that explanation is not necessary, but I am open to any questions of clarification. More ramblings of an idle mind...jh
j_h_nimrod	posted 01-05-2003 02:05 AM ET (US) Comments, suggestions, anything???
kingfish	posted 01-05-2003 08:06 AM ET (US) j_h_nimrod- I don't know if you have cruised through jimh's REFERENCE section yet, but if you haven't, I think you'll find a great deal of information in the Brackets article http://continuouswave.com/whaler/reference/engineBrackets.html that pertains directly to your musings. I think Armstrong makes brackets of the type you describe and I think there are other manufacturers that do also. I think the old whalerdrives stepped up a little although not enough to be clear of the water at plane, and there are photos of a whaler drive as well as a very clear photo of a molded-in bracket with a pronounced step in the bracket article. kingfish
j_h_nimrod	posted 01-06-2003 01:56 AM ET (US) Thanks for the reply Kingfish. I have read the reference article before, but I re-read it again and this time I did notice the Edgewater 26. That is basically what I had envisioned. What I would like to know is how something like it preforms. How well does it work? Is it the best of both worlds? It seems that at slower speeds (not quite plane) that it would create stern lift due to the wake hitting the underside of the extention. Any discussion on this topic would be appreciated. jh