Forum: WHALER
  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Post-Classic Whalers
  Jack Plate on a Sport 130

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

Author Topic:   Jack Plate on a Sport 130
Bill Davis posted 12-06-2003 08:34 AM ET (US)   Profile for Bill Davis   Send Email to Bill Davis  
I like to go shallow, and fast in the shallow. I have been thinking about a jack plate. I don't know hardly a thing about them, 'cept they raise the motor up. I would want on I could use easily, as in hydraulic lifted.

I have a sport 130 with a 30hp 2-cycle merc.

whaddyathink?

GeneNJ posted 12-07-2003 10:01 PM ET (US)     Profile for GeneNJ  Send Email to GeneNJ     
The hydralic plates are expensive +$600, but if the price doesn't put you off try a google search, there are many different ones available.
Bill Davis posted 12-08-2003 06:55 AM ET (US)     Profile for Bill Davis  Send Email to Bill Davis     
That is pricey, but would it make a big difference is planing in shallow water? I have zero experience with this, but it sounds logical that it would help a lot.
arnereil posted 12-08-2003 07:08 AM ET (US)     Profile for arnereil  Send Email to arnereil     
I find my '02 sport 13 already tail heavy. putting more weight on the back (jack plate), plus moving the motor weight even further back would only make it worse.

Maybe once it was planeing it would be better, but at low speeds trying to get on plane the prop would be even lower in the water....

The 13' is a nice boat that i find has a dicey design. There is overhang built into the front that only marginally balances off the weight of the motor, gas, battery, driver near/at the back end. When climbing to plane, the view to the front disappears... only at plane does it seem near balance, and putting the weight of the motor further out seems like it would be causing more problems, not less..... imho......

GeneNJ posted 12-08-2003 08:04 PM ET (US)     Profile for GeneNJ  Send Email to GeneNJ     
From what I've read, they are suited to bass boats where hole shot and shallow running at high speed are important. I agree with arneriel, it seems like overkill for the 130. Do you have trim/tilt on the motor?
Bill Davis posted 12-08-2003 09:09 PM ET (US)     Profile for Bill Davis  Send Email to Bill Davis     
I do have trim/tilt.... And I'll tell you, after reading the above comments I am convinced I am barking up the wrong tree here with a jack plate. The weight distribution would kill it.

I am thankful for this and other forums and the people who populate them. It is nice to be able to run an idea past folks who are thoughtful on the topic and who are willing to share.

Now I'll just have to think of some other ways to "trick out" this boat.... :)
thanks

Blackeagle posted 12-08-2003 09:17 PM ET (US)     Profile for Blackeagle  Send Email to Blackeagle     
As far as jack plates not being sutable for a 13, tell that to Clark Roberts!

http://continuouswave.com/whaler/cetacea/cetaceaPage28.html

Bill Davis posted 12-09-2003 06:59 AM ET (US)     Profile for Bill Davis  Send Email to Bill Davis     
Now I'm REALLY confused!
lakeman posted 12-09-2003 07:02 AM ET (US)     Profile for lakeman  Send Email to lakeman     
Someone on here was investigating putting one on a 16 or 18 Dauntless and said he would post the things he found out. YOu might want to call Bobs Machine Shop in Florida they are an old company considered honest and knowlegeable people. They Manufacture Jack Plate and other marine add ons.
arnereil posted 12-09-2003 07:21 AM ET (US)     Profile for arnereil  Send Email to arnereil     
I took a look at the link.... no way in 'you-know-where' that set up would ever get on plane in 10 inches of water.... Yes, it 'might' possibly run in 18 inches on plane, but it has to get there, and i'm guessing it would need close to 30" to get on plane... you give that set up near full throttle, that back end is going to sink right down and the bow is going to lift up....

Even on plane the middle of the boat is going to need at least 5 inches, plus the depth of the motor.... the whole thing sounds 'fishy' to me.

poker13 posted 12-09-2003 09:43 AM ET (US)     Profile for poker13    
You cannot compare Clark Roberts' 13 with the newer sport 13/130 we're talking about here. The old 13 Clark has weighs almost half what the new 13 weighs and the engine it's got hanging off the transom is a little 25hp 2-stroke Yamaha, which I suspect is lighter. Two different boats and motors--no comparison.
Backlash posted 12-10-2003 04:28 PM ET (US)     Profile for Backlash  Send Email to Backlash     
arnereil,
You are obviously not an expert on skinny water running. Reread the article...Clark says "will run on plane in 10" of water", NOT get on plane. Also, as poker13 mentions, your 13 and the classic 13 are two completely different animals.

arnereil posted 12-10-2003 10:43 PM ET (US)     Profile for arnereil  Send Email to arnereil     
You are correct, i am no expert. But the topic is a sport 13. Also, there is a reality to deal with. If you have a 10" prop, you have to run the prop in the 'pillow' of water formed behind the boat. Given that the clearance, even with the pillow, would require the top of the prop to be even with the top of the pillow, and perhaps 1 inch of clearance on the prop bottom, the stated fact that is 'can' run in 10" of water is useless in real world conditions.

I have seen similar runs made on the Delaware through boulder patches with jet drive/outboard boats, where the only way they could make it was to get up on plane in deep water and hit the shallow portion on plane, at 75% throttle.. they had 20" of water, give or take an inch or two.

In any event, i still think a jack plate on a sport 13 is a questionable project, at best.... but, since it is not my money, i'd like to see it done and get a report... just watch out for water over the transom.....

Bigshot posted 12-12-2003 02:57 PM ET (US)     Profile for Bigshot  Send Email to Bigshot     
I own a jackplate and have owned 4 13's but not a 130. I would NOT get a hydraulic one being they are expensive and heavy. I would go with a 6" manual plate that would raise the engine up about 3-4" from the bottom of the hull. This means 3-4" shallower draft. With this you would not need a low water pickup and a surface piercing prop. How a jackplate works is it moves the engine aft where the water starts to rise from the hull bottom. The water is less turbulent here and considered "cleaner", therefore the engine can run higher up. When you look at the anti-cavitation plate i still looks identical as a non lifted motor when running(level with water). The water is higher back there, hence why it looks the same.

Now as far as being able to run in 10" of water....hell yes in a 13 classic. I only needed about 12-14" with mine stock and trust me I did a LOT of dredging. I needed about 2' to plane. My Montauk will run in about 15" on plane....no BS. I also had a 12' aluminum boat with a 7.5hp and she would run on plane in about 8-10". I could cruise past people walking in water half way up their shins. I have a friend with a tunnel flats boat with a hydraulic plate and he can run in 4" of water....that is as high as a cigarette pack. I was pushing my Carolina skiff across a flat and a guy in a flats boat passed me, the water was about 2" above my ANKLE.

Manual jackplates are about $150-250 depending on what you want. The $150 2 piece is PLENTY for a 30hp.

GeneNJ posted 12-12-2003 10:00 PM ET (US)     Profile for GeneNJ  Send Email to GeneNJ     
BigShot

If alone, how do you manage to raise the plate after you get on plane? The manual jack doesn't seem that easy to work when running.

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.