Jump to content

4.3 V6 in a B.O.A.T.


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, lorenzo said:

They say the two happiest days of your life are

when you buy a boat 

and when you sell it.  

I've heard that one many times. Had some Lund's that fit that description well! Happiest day of my boating life was back in May of 2001 when I unhooked from that Lund and hooked onto my new  Ranger. 21 years later and still glad I bought it when I did! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remember, whatever you do has to be marine rated.  You cannot safely just plop an automotive injection system into  boat and not risk blowing yourself up.  Just get the carb rebuilt by a reputable builder with MARINE parts and be done with it.  Or just by the appropriate Edelbrock (Carter AFB clone) marine carb and be done with it.  I have had Carter AFB's on twin 440 Chryslers in a 31 Bertram my family bought new in 1966.  They work well and are very simple.  They get rebuilt about once every 20 years.  Once when we converted the boat from 418's to 440's in the 80's and once when I modernized it around 2000.  They are due for another overhaul about now.  This is a boat that stays in the salt water in a boathouse year around in Virginia.  They get no special treatment.  Crank the throttle about 5 times to prime it and set the choke and they start right up! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If starter does not crank engine well it is drawing most of the amps and leaving the ignition system lacking. Worn out bushings will cause that.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Rawleigh99 said:

Remember, whatever you do has to be marine rated.  You cannot safely just plop an automotive injection system into  boat and not risk blowing yourself up.  Just get the carb rebuilt by a reputable builder with MARINE parts and be done with it.  Or just by the appropriate Edelbrock (Carter AFB clone) marine carb and be done with it.  I have had Carter AFB's on twin 440 Chryslers in a 31 Bertram my family bought new in 1966.  They work well and are very simple.  They get rebuilt about once every 20 years.  Once when we converted the boat from 418's to 440's in the 80's and once when I modernized it around 2000.  They are due for another overhaul about now.  This is a boat that stays in the salt water in a boathouse year around in Virginia.  They get no special treatment.  Crank the throttle about 5 times to prime it and set the choke and they start right up! 

I'd like to see the fuel bill for a days outing on the bay in that!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, yellowrosefarm said:

I'd like to see the fuel bill for a days outing on the bay in that!

The reason I sold my Wellcraft with twin 454s. $1000 at the fuel dock was the end.

As was said already: The second happiest day😁

My kids is in the CG and based in Boston, not far away. He's now talking about buying a boat although he just seemed to fall asleep on my boats. I guess that's why he's suited for long patrols on the cutter as he can sleep anywhere, anytime.

I told him get one to trailer and keep it at our place for free and simply launch it at the local marina.

Although an officer he's a boarding officer so the enlisted guys will let him drive the small boats on occasion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, yellowrosefarm said:

I'd like to see the fuel bill for a days outing on the bay in that!

20 gallons per hour at 20 knots!  That is why I just bought an 18-footer with a 115 Mercury 4-stroke on it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Rawleigh99 said:

20 gallons per hour at 20 knots!  That is why I just bought an 18-footer with a 115 Mercury 4-stroke on it!

Yeah, 100$/hour is a might steep for fun in the sun. And I though 100$ a day was too much back when I had my 350 powered Renken!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Measured fuel mileage once on a ship, steam ship, 4, 1200 PSI, 950F boilers, 2 steam turbines 2 screws. It burned more than 100 Gallons per mile just navigating in San Diego Harbor. That ship had a ~425,000 gallon fuel capacity, In 3 days, at good speed we would be sucking fumes and waiting our turn at the floating fuel station.  Lucky me, USA paid for the fuel! and I got to play with the computers, radars, guns, and missiles.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/7/2022 at 9:24 AM, Art From Coleman said:

Could have used the same amount of fuel, and went a lot further, in a light plane.

My 182 burns 12 GPH Does 135 kt TAS so about 150 miles/hour. Two weeks ago the wife and I did a day trip to Nantucket, an impossible task by land/ferry as it would take at minimum 3 hours just to get to ferry dock, probably way worse than that due summer tourist traffic. Round trip fuel burn about 20 gallons at about $7 average due very expensive island fuel but, buying fuel waived parking charge.

True, you can't fish from a landplane but for getting somewhere fast it's hard to beat. A couple of days later we did the same to Provincetown, MA, only 35 minutes by air from Portsmouth, NH,  3.5 hours to drive. Airport shuttles a buck or two/person.

On the other hand we could explore the Gulf of Maine and coast with the boats, live, eat, sleep, cook on it but in reality we just hardly ever could find the time to do it.

Both are expensive for sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, New Englander said:

My 182 burns 12 GPH Does 135 kt TAS so about 150 miles/hour. Two weeks ago the wife and I did a day trip to Nantucket, an impossible task by land/ferry as it would take at minimum 3 hours just to get to ferry dock, probably way worse than that due summer tourist traffic. Round trip fuel burn about 20 gallons at about $7 average due very expensive island fuel but, buying fuel waived parking charge.

True, you can't fish from a landplane but for getting somewhere fast it's hard to beat. A couple of days later we did the same to Provincetown, MA, only 35 minutes by air from Portsmouth, NH,  3.5 hours to drive. Airport shuttles a buck or two/person.

On the other hand we could explore the Gulf of Maine and coast with the boats, live, eat, sleep, cook on it but in reality we just hardly ever could find the time to do it.

Both are expensive for sure.

My gripe about the plane is that for anything under 3 hours the screwing around at the hangar, pre trip, post trip, travel to and from the airport. It isn't worth it. Then you either need, a car rental, courtesy car or someone has to come get you. There are folding bicycles, but a 182 has such a limited capacity that it isn’t like you can take every one and everything. 
not much comparison to a boat really, but either way it is an expensive hobby that requires a real love  of it to be justified. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, New Englander said:

My 182 burns 12 GPH Does 135 kt TAS so about 150 miles/hour. Two weeks ago the wife and I did a day trip to Nantucket, an impossible task by land/ferry as it would take at minimum 3 hours just to get to ferry dock, probably way worse than that due summer tourist traffic. Round trip fuel burn about 20 gallons at about $7 average due very expensive island fuel but, buying fuel waived parking charge.

True, you can't fish from a landplane but for getting somewhere fast it's hard to beat. A couple of days later we did the same to Provincetown, MA, only 35 minutes by air from Portsmouth, NH,  3.5 hours to drive. Airport shuttles a buck or two/person.

On the other hand we could explore the Gulf of Maine and coast with the boats, live, eat, sleep, cook on it but in reality we just hardly ever could find the time to do it.

Both are expensive for sure.

When I was on the ranch up by Sandhiller, the ranch owners flew into Valentine from Holdrege. Fog or wind, don’t remember which the first time, but they couldn’t take off twice. Only an hour to get to the ranch in the plane, but with the weather it made for a 2 day trip. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A later, longer model of the 1966 C33A Debonair I had.  We repowered to an IO-550 shortly before we sold it.  They were nice planes.  Very high quality, and did not have the V tail problems.  The only downside is parts were EXPENSIVE!  Made Agco look cheap!! 

I actually found our old sale ad:

https://www.aircraft.com/aircraft/22435697/n9479s-1966-beechcraft-c33a-debonair

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, vtfireman85 said:

My gripe about the plane is that for anything under 3 hours the screwing around at the hangar, pre trip, post trip, travel to and from the airport. It isn't worth it. Then you either need, a car rental, courtesy car or someone has to come get you. There are folding bicycles, but a 182 has such a limited capacity that it isn’t like you can take every one and everything. 
not much comparison to a boat really, but either way it is an expensive hobby that requires a real love  of it to be justified. 

That's sort of an "it depends". My hangar is about a 1/4 mile from my house as the crow flys but a 6-10 minute drive depending upon the traffic light. For the missions I mentioned - island or across Cape Cod Bay, it's the plane hands down. Another one: Quebec City, about 2 hours by plane, almost 6 hours by car. It's a walk around city, like going to Europe in character, so once you Uber to the hotel you're walking anyway. As for load capacity, I can take two men, two women and enough bags for a weekend with full or nearly full fuel. Plane has long range tanks and will out fly your bladder easily.

Covid shut down some of my plans for the last couple of years but we'll be visiting PEI this year. Hotel on the million plus Marriott points I accumulate. I'll have to rent a car, yes.

So, it "depends" on your mission. The advent of Uber in many places has mitigated the other end ground transportation in many places.

It also depends upon the individual. I happen to hold an A&P license with an Inspection Authorization so maintenance only costs me parts and maybe outside machine work if say, I send a cylinder out for repair. I also have to pay a certified repair station for biennial altimeter and transponder checks. As for the other avionics: I once owned an avionics shop so and can do my own installations thus replaced most of the ancient radios with modern including electronic flight instruments, so thus removed the entire vacuum system and saved the weight of the old stuff. I installed a new interior and all new glass too. Some things do bite such as the prop. The blades were beyond overhaul size and the hub needed to be updated. That was a 6k bite.

It's still expensive but the plane is also appreciating. With the improvements I've made and appreciation the plane I bought for 57k would now sell for 120+.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Lazy WP said:

When I was on the ranch up by Sandhiller, the ranch owners flew into Valentine from Holdrege. Fog or wind, don’t remember which the first time, but they couldn’t take off twice. Only an hour to get to the ranch in the plane, but with the weather it made for a 2 day trip. 

That can be a problem. Instrument conditions are not a problem for me as the plane is qualified and I make my living at it.

The big problem is ice. If the freezing level is lower than the clouds then it can be a problem, so in winter I generally need better weather than other times of the year. Few single engine airplanes are equipped for icing conditions and I don't know of any that are approved for "known icing conditions". There's a system for a 182 but expensive and heavy.

The problem with airframe ice is that it changes the shape of the airfoil. A little rime ice isn't a big deal but clear ice and especially mixed ice can drastically increase drag and increase the stall speed and obscure the windshield. In the jet with heated wings and windshield we hardly give it a thought as we encounter icing conditions regularly. The only ice protection on a 182 is a heated pitot tube.

The above said, with good planning you can accomplish many missions.

Below is a picture of an iced up 182 like mine. He almost made it unscathed but needed to land even faster with more power. The plane stalled and landed very hard: http://www.kathrynsreport.com/2020/01/structural-icing-cessna-182q-skylane.html

Well iced 182.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, New Englander said:

As for load capacity, I can take two men, two women and enough bags for a weekend with full or nearly full fuel. Plane has long range tanks and will out fly your bladder easily.

I assume you are dealing with something more modern, probably turbo with retractable gear. I am basing my experience off of a 45 min drive to the airport and a 1957 182. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, vtfireman85 said:

I assume you are dealing with something more modern, probably turbo with retractable gear. I am basing my experience off of a 45 min drive to the airport and a 1957 182. 

1978 fixed gear, normally aspirated. Gross weight is 300lb more than a '57, 2950 v 2650, airplane cabin is about 2" wider, bigger baggage compartment, cuffed wing leading edge but still 230hp. With just me and my wife it's funny taking off from the 2 mile Pease runway. Without trying it's off the ground before the first thousand foot sign.

Yeah, it depends 😁.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, New Englander said:

That can be a problem. Instrument conditions are not a problem for me as the plane is qualified and I make my living at it.

The big problem is ice. If the freezing level is lower than the clouds then it can be a problem, so in winter I generally need better weather than other times of the year. Few single engine airplanes are equipped for icing conditions and I don't know of any that are approved for "known icing conditions". There's a system for a 182 but expensive and heavy.

The problem with airframe ice is that it changes the shape of the airfoil. A little rime ice isn't a big deal but clear ice and especially mixed ice can drastically increase drag and increase the stall speed and obscure the windshield. In the jet with heated wings and windshield we hardly give it a thought as we encounter icing conditions regularly. The only ice protection on a 182 is a heated pitot tube.

The above said, with good planning you can accomplish many missions.

Below is a picture of an iced up 182 like mine. He almost made it unscathed but needed to land even faster with more power. The plane stalled and landed very hard: http://www.kathrynsreport.com/2020/01/structural-icing-cessna-182q-skylane.html

Well iced 182.jpg

That picture explains why 99% of my flight time was CAVU!!!😀

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where aircraft shine

We have two sons that are pilots

One is a ranch manager for one of our biggest cattle conglomerates. He has both fixed wing and helicopter tickets.

The second is a Cat qualified heavy equipment graduate now out on his own. He was headhunted by the same ranch conglomerate but had to have a private pilot's licence. Which he didn't until he settled in at a training base until he did. The job involves plant and equipment maintenance on a large group of ranches in north west Australia where distances are large, roads are marginal and air travel is an everyday fact of life.

I suspect his flying was to be done on slack time of company planes and that didn't work. So he now owns a Mooney 201 - “Have spanners, will fly”.

By road from here to Kununurra is about 3000 km so about 2 days of solid driving. By commercial flights there are three legs, all expensive, that don't connect so motel costs as well and three days – or two if you do the red eye, from which you have to recover.

On the other hand they took off from here at about 9:30 one morning, two fuel stops and they were in Kununurra that afternoon. And seems fuel costs less than that for driving.

They have taken over the home ranch and we have a house for the Mooney and a 1200 m strip replacing the 800 m temporary. And I have a passing grade in Airstrips 101.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Rawleigh99 said:

A later, longer model of the 1966 C33A Debonair I had.  We repowered to an IO-550 shortly before we sold it.  They were nice planes.  Very high quality, and did not have the V tail problems.  The only downside is parts were EXPENSIVE!  Made Agco look cheap!! 

I actually found our old sale ad:

https://www.aircraft.com/aircraft/22435697/n9479s-1966-beechcraft-c33a-debonair

 

Nice plane, I was over at Airtractor a few years ago and one of the higher-ups had a Bonanza registered to him on their lot. My guess is he commutes to work with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 7/8/2022 at 2:01 PM, vtfireman85 said:

@Hot Plug care to weigh in on fuel economy? 

Well ,um ,ah, let's see fuel aconomy....  I don't own much that has aconomy mode Seth !  Sniff.sniff 

 

           HP

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...