Don Silsbe

@WindyBeard That bolt-on metal bracket was what I did on my previous boat. I should have notched the transom. It worked fine, except that the motor wouldn’t latch in the tilted position. I needed to get creative. This time, I’ll do it right. I’m building a partially completed kit started by someone else. I’ll do it right this time. Here is the link to Alan’s photo essay of his transom modification: https://photos.app.goo.gl/dnbRVtpFxNTxV5o16

@WindyBeard. Look at the above photo of Skeena,, the one from the stern looking forward. See the fin on the Suzuki long shaft? When you swing the motor around for reverse, the fin needs to clear the transom. This requires you to notch the transom regardless. Other long shaft 2.5’s might do better.

I understand, Reacher. In the photo above of Windependent, you’ll see that the masthead light on the main is pointing aft. The masthead float is forward. I remove that for travel, of course. Here are some photos of Windependent with the masts down and ready for the road. You are correct in that there is a lot of overhang, especially aft. This is mitigated by the boomkin and the rudder being in the up position. Jay is handy with a sewing machine, and made covers for the mast and rudder.

@messingdd97 Thanks, David, but I think I’ll stick with what I have. I’m going to equip the boat to handle my short shaft as well as an electric trolling motor. Most of my sailing will be on reservoirs.

@Reacher I assume you haven’t seen a lot of mark 3’s Down Under. Let me show you a few as relates to the subject of a tabernacle. First, the mizzen remains pinned, and swings FORWARD (!). Because of power lines at the launch site I used, I needed to launch Jay’s 20.3 (that he built and I bought) as-trailered. I had to raise the masts as she floated at the dock. If you zoom in, you’ll see that the aft edge of the tabernacle is even with the aft edge of the thwart. On this boat, the mizzen is secured down low, about 3” above the cockpit sole. On Steve Warfle’s Skeena, the thwart is more aft. Also, the mizzen stops at thwart level. I’d probably favor Jay’s solution, but I have no good reason for it. Also notice that both tabernacles have a crutch for the top end of the other mast. I am confident that I could currently handle some sort of mizzen funnel, but I’m less confident that it would become more and more cumbersome “into my dotage” as Andy puts it. I want to sail right up until I am admitted to the Assisted Living unit. LOL

New Subject—Cockpit Coaming I’ve been reviewing photos and videos of other mark 1’s, and am leaning to a flush cockpit coaming, at least aft of the main’s cleats. I like the clean look and feel on my bottom. This decision is partly functional and partly aesthetic. Focusing on the functional aspect, what am I missing? Here is what it looks like on Alan’s Southbound. I’m also considering using some thin Sapele for this, and steam bending the curve. How well does Sapele respond to steam bending?

The alternative would be to shift the cc/b 1/4” more off the centerline. There’d be two advantages to this. 1) It keeps the mast completely on the centerline of the boat and firmly on the keel batten/keelson. 2) The bailer can be snuggled up to the keelson and tabernacle at the appropriate location. Your thoughts?

I happen to have a small drawing with me while on vacation. According to this, there’s a half inch gap between the mizzen mast and the c/b trunk. The tabernacle is constructed of 3/4” material. My temptation is to shift the mizzen 1/4” to port to make it fit. Would this be OK, or is this “touching Superman’s cape”? I could shift the c/b 1/4” to starboard instead. Would that be better or worse? To B&B— Did I just violate a copyright law by posting this? If so, I’ll remove it, NP.

I’m on a long vacation right now. When I get home after Labor Day I’ll put two triangles together* and work out just how feasible a conventional tabernacle would be on a 17 mk1. I brought it up here to create a mini brainstorming session. Reacher’s idea may have created a spark in AndyB’s head. (Or not. It doesn’t matter.) Hopefully other ideas will surface. For the record, there is no such thing as a stupid idea. The most obscure idea often triggers the very best one. * Automotive engineers (even retired ones) schooled in descriptive geometry do not use T-squares. They use two triangles instead. And for the record, my transom drawing above was a sloppy actual sized sketch.

@Andy B— OH! Now that’s worth considering. That’s roughly how the Illur single mast is stepped on Roger Barnes’ boat. It is held in place with line lashed between two belaying pins. I imagine the same thing could be accomplished with a chock bolted into the “toaster slot”.

@Andy B— I saw that. “Toaster slot” is a clever nickname. I think it’d be too big a tear-up for a Core Sound, though. The main isn’t the problem so much as the mizzen. A tabernacle on the main mast solves most of the problem. A winch for the main would make stepping even easier. The 20.3 I had (albeit briefly) spoiled me. That would be ideal, if I could get it to fit. Reacher’s swivel or my removable funnel significantly reduce the effort.

NEW SUBJECT— A TABERNACLE ON THE MIZZEN Before this unfinished kit showed up, I was going to build an Amanda to serve as my Old Man’s Boat. The hardest thing for this old man to do on the 17.1 I had was stepping the masts. The double tabernacles on the 20.3 were a godsend. I’d love to have both on this boat, but I see a problem with the mizzen. The c/b trunk is in the way. It would also put an ugly slot in the thwart. One solution would be to devise a mast-stepping aid similar to what I made for my first 17.1, but use it for only the mizzen. I could always wait on this, and make it as I sail into my 80’s a couple of years from now. But it would be better to do this in the initial construction. What are your thoughts?

Good to hear, Mike. I tried something similar on my Bay River Skiff years ago. It didn’t work, and I abandoned the idea. Maybe I should revisit it.

When I was employed as an engineer, I learned to not only trust the drawings, but to consult others to learn from their experiences. So, I first posted this on the forum. Then, I went through all the build narratives I could find. Then, I made my drawing. I started 10” from the centerline of the boat, then tried 14.5”, and finally 20”. (Trial numbers 1, 2, & 3 respectively.) Each iteration made the notch in the transom smaller (vertically). I then transferred Alan’s Southbound centerline to the drawing. The conclusion is that the 14.5”. Is slightly outboard of Alan’s 13”. I think Graham’s Carlita is closer to the 20” trial, but I think he did that to avoid the boomkin. What do y’all think? Should I go with 14, or go more outboard? Here’s Alan’s modification to Southbound.

@Paul356— My experience with this motor on the subject is this. It is not the ratchet letting go or hydro lock. I almost always store mine upright. It is just that sometimes it wants to crank backwards for a short pop, just enough to wrench the handle out of your hand. It only happened a few times, but it has happened. Other than it wanting to break your wrist, it is an excellent little power plant.