Armstrong Backet on 1994 Outrage 24 - Moderated Discussion Areas

  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Whaler Performance
  Armstrong Backet on 1994 Outrage 24

search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   Armstrong Backet on 1994 Outrage 24

BEACHPANDA posted 07-18-2004 12:10 PM ET (US)
I've recently gotten my boat up and running. Cruising, diving, and swimming are great. But my dad is 82 years old and has a hard time getting in and out of the water. I was thinking of taking the engines off of the transom and adding an Armstrong Bracket (or the like) with a large/long set back to provide a platform for swimmers to get into and off of the boat with greater ease.
What will this added length, of 30+ " do to my performance?
I have twin 2004 4 Stroke 150hp CR engines on my boat. Assuming I'll keep them for 4 more years before repowering to twin 225's, is a 30" set back enough?
Thanks,
BP
BEACHPANDA posted 07-20-2004 03:47 PM ET (US)
^ BUMP
LHG posted 07-20-2004 07:44 PM ET (US)
Beach - I have heard that the 24 Outrage didn't take well to a bracket. Something about drains, etc. I would check with the sales MGR at Lauderdale Marina. That's where I heard that story. With a bracket, always go with the minimum setback needed. I would think with a notched transom you could use a 26", since you'll have plenty of tilt-up room. That's what mine is.
BEACHPANDA posted 07-20-2004 08:18 PM ET (US)
LHG,
Thanks much for the info. I'll give them a call tomorrow. I'll post again, for the forums Knowledge Base, with the information I receive.
BP
BEACHPANDA posted 08-10-2004 10:06 AM ET (US)
Finally had a chance to call BW in Ft. Lauderdale. They were very helpful and patient with me.
The explained that adding an Armstrong Bracket would indeed be a problem with drainage. Not in the manner I thought, though. The problem is that since the transom has some type of notch in it, that the extra weight of the bracket, along with the set back of the weight of the engines, would cause the back end of the boat to be constantly submerged. I would think that this would be the same situation for any notched type of transom that has an extended bracket.
There are some photos of my boat model, on CW at
http://continuouswave.com/whaler/cetacea/cetaceaPage39.html
BW suggested I just add extended Dive Platforms. However, on the same page as above, there is mention of Bob Dougherty's Edgewater 260 with a molded-in engine bracket.
I'm thinking that copying this form, will also serve to the function I'd like to get... thus solving the "drainage" problem of having a "factory notched" transom.
By the way, if the term "factory notched" isn't correct, I wouldn't mind a lesson in vocabulary.
Thanks,
BP

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: Armstrong Backet on 1994 Outrage 24
BEACHPANDA	posted 07-18-2004 12:10 PM ET (US) I've recently gotten my boat up and running. Cruising, diving, and swimming are great. But my dad is 82 years old and has a hard time getting in and out of the water. I was thinking of taking the engines off of the transom and adding an Armstrong Bracket (or the like) with a large/long set back to provide a platform for swimmers to get into and off of the boat with greater ease. What will this added length, of 30+ " do to my performance? I have twin 2004 4 Stroke 150hp CR engines on my boat. Assuming I'll keep them for 4 more years before repowering to twin 225's, is a 30" set back enough? Thanks, BP
BEACHPANDA	posted 07-20-2004 03:47 PM ET (US) ^ BUMP
LHG	posted 07-20-2004 07:44 PM ET (US) Beach - I have heard that the 24 Outrage didn't take well to a bracket. Something about drains, etc. I would check with the sales MGR at Lauderdale Marina. That's where I heard that story. With a bracket, always go with the minimum setback needed. I would think with a notched transom you could use a 26", since you'll have plenty of tilt-up room. That's what mine is.
BEACHPANDA	posted 07-20-2004 08:18 PM ET (US) LHG, Thanks much for the info. I'll give them a call tomorrow. I'll post again, for the forums Knowledge Base, with the information I receive. BP
BEACHPANDA	posted 08-10-2004 10:06 AM ET (US) Finally had a chance to call BW in Ft. Lauderdale. They were very helpful and patient with me. The explained that adding an Armstrong Bracket would indeed be a problem with drainage. Not in the manner I thought, though. The problem is that since the transom has some type of notch in it, that the extra weight of the bracket, along with the set back of the weight of the engines, would cause the back end of the boat to be constantly submerged. I would think that this would be the same situation for any notched type of transom that has an extended bracket. There are some photos of my boat model, on CW at http://continuouswave.com/whaler/cetacea/cetaceaPage39.html BW suggested I just add extended Dive Platforms. However, on the same page as above, there is mention of Bob Dougherty's Edgewater 260 with a molded-in engine bracket. I'm thinking that copying this form, will also serve to the function I'd like to get... thus solving the "drainage" problem of having a "factory notched" transom. By the way, if the term "factory notched" isn't correct, I wouldn't mind a lesson in vocabulary. Thanks, BP