Pros and Cons of Outboard Engines on South Pacific Cruise

[44'cruisingcat]

Originally Posted by CruiserAD

hi

In the South Pacific you might encounter very strong currents in the passes entering the lagoons. Normally they are too narrow to sail through. Preferably your engines should be powerful enough to handle this. I personally like the idea of outboards but I'm not sure if they can produce enough power for such situations?

cheers Jan


Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

Current makes no difference regarding the type of motor. If you can motor at 6 knots then a 2 knot counter current will reduce that to 4 knots over the ground, with either diesels or outboards.

[Factor]

One thing you need to remember is that an outboard prop is (virtually) always clean un-barnacled fixed and ready to provide full thrust.

[44'cruisingcat]

Some pro's:

Cheaper. Lighter. Less drag. Combined means the boat sails better, less motoring.

No cooling water aboard, so dry bilges. Boat doesn't stink of diesel. Servicing can be done off the boat. Anything wrapped around a propeller is easily removed without getting wet.

Most can easily be pull started in the event of a flat battery or starter failure.

Cons: They don't have big alternators, so you need adequate solar/wind generation etc. (Although IMO this is a pro, since you don't put hours on your engines charging batteries.)

No hot water, ditto.

Petrol is much more volatile so the fuel system needs more consideration. Fuel tanks should be in self draining lockers above the waterline, fuel hose runs should be of minimal length.

In really choppy head seas, prop ventilation can be an issue. Engine placement is important here. Too far aft is near useless.

They're generally a bit noisier, and about 20% more thirsty. But you use them less....

Ultimately, they won't last as long. However, they'll almost certainly repay the cost of replacement by their cheaper cost of ownership.

That's about all I can think of just now...

Oh yeah, props are out of the water most of the time, so no need for fancy, expensive, ineffective antifouls, and anodes last virtually for ever.

[BigBeakie]

Had an interesting chat with Pantaenius Insurance about insuring a cat and the assessor was very negative on outboards. Seems cats with outboards have higher risk, based on claims made, of not being able to claw their way off a lee shore in big wind due to the exponential wind resistance, coupled with prop ventilation in just those sort of conditions.

So it sounds prudent to work out your own boats windage & see if there is enough thrust to move you against say, a 50 knot blow in very choppy seas.

[Factor]

Originally Posted by BigBeakie

Had an interesting chat with Pantaenius Insurance about insuring a cat and the assessor was very negative on outboards. Seems cats with outboards have higher risk, based on claims made, of not being able to claw their way off a lee shore in big wind due to the exponential wind resistance, coupled with prop ventilation in just those sort of conditions.

So it sounds prudent to work out your own boats windage & see if there is enough thrust to move you against say, a 50 knot blow in very choppy seas.

Not my experience with insurance. But more importantly, how on earth does the ocean know whether is a 20hp diesel or a 20 hp outboard spinning the prop? Prop ventilation is a matter of design. This discussion is a bit like many, a bad engine installation is a bad engine installation, outboard or not.

[44'cruisingcat]

Originally Posted by BigBeakie

Had an interesting chat with Pantaenius Insurance about insuring a cat and the assessor was very negative on outboards. Seems cats with outboards have higher risk, based on claims made, of not being able to claw their way off a lee shore in big wind due to the exponential wind resistance, coupled with prop ventilation in just those sort of conditions.

So it sounds prudent to work out your own boats windage & see if there is enough thrust to move you against say, a 50 knot blow in very choppy seas.

Interesting.... friends of ours have their outboard powered cat (actually it's sail powered, but also has outboard motors, a distinction many don't seem to understand) insured by Pantaenius. The type of motors wasn't mentioned as being of any concern.

Frankly, I doubt if many such claims have been made, in reality.

WHen you say "very choppy seas" do you mean very choppy seas for 50 knots? I'd suggest that there would be quite a few diesel powered boats, mono and multi, that would struggle to make much headway against 50 knots and normally developed seas, let alone "very choppy" ones.

With our outboards we've motored into 35 gusting 40 knots, and quite lumpy, but not "very choppy" seas. (An unforecast south westerly at cape bowling green) No problem at all.

[44'cruisingcat]

Another outboard "pro". Combined with daggerboards and kick-up rudders, they can allow you extreme shallow draught. We can (and quite often do) pootle around in water less than 1/2 metre deep. Some of the very best, most comfortable and secure anchorages can be found in those places.

[44'cruisingcat]

Originally Posted by BigBeakie

Had an interesting chat with Pantaenius Insurance about insuring a cat and the assessor was very negative on outboards. Seems cats with outboards have higher risk, based on claims made, of not being able to claw their way off a lee shore in big wind due to the exponential wind resistance, coupled with prop ventilation in just those sort of conditions.

So it sounds prudent to work out your own boats windage & see if there is enough thrust to move you against say, a 50 knot blow in very choppy seas.

Now I think about it, Pantaenius offered US insurance in 2012 when we were investigating offshore insurance. Our outboard motors weren't any problem to them then.

[BigBeakie]

Re Pantaenius, it could well be they have no issues, ie they have no company policy on it, as such. It was just a conversation I had with one guy who was pretty knowledgable on multi's, but it was only one guy. I was asking what factors to consider that might affect the insureability of any specific boat. He had several suggestions that made perfect sense to me, and outboards was just one topic. I might pop into their stand at the Sydney boatshow and ask for clarification, just out of interest.

The scenario I was thinking of was getting off a lee shore anchorage if you get caught in a big blow ie 50 knots or so.

BTW, Factor are you at the Sydney show? Would be good to say hi.

[Factor]

Originally Posted by BigBeakie

Re Pantaenius, it could well be they have no issues, ie they have no company policy on it, as such. It was just a conversation I had with one guy who was pretty knowledgable on multi's, but it was only one guy. I was asking what factors to consider that might affect the insureability of any specific boat. He had several suggestions that made perfect sense to me, and outboards was just one topic. I might pop into their stand at the Sydney boatshow and ask for clarification, just out of interest.

The scenario I was thinking of was getting off a lee shore anchorage if you get caught in a big blow ie 50 knots or so.

BTW, Factor are you at the Sydney show? Would be good to say hi.

Yep I am there. Seawind/Outremer Stand. Call in, but bring a coat it was very cold today/this evening. I have already asked the pantaneius people to quote a 1160 diesel and outboard so we get a clear answer

[thinwater]

[QUOTE=BigBeakie;1596877]The scenario I was thinking of was getting off a lee shore anchorage if you get caught in a big blow ie 50 knots or so.QUOTE]

Do we believe that motoring into a sustained 50 kt, from shallow water with breaking waves is possible for any 30-38 boat (the range that could use outboards)? I don't.

What we should be measuring is the difference.
* What is the speed on flat water? What is the speed into 20 knots? This gives us a measure of power to drag. So long as the first number is a little above hull speed and the second is about hull speed, we are good. If you are dropping under ~ 6.5 knots into 20 kts, power is a little light by some standard. Depends on how you value power.
* Are the props located such that they cannot come out of the water nor be sheared through the water so sharply that they lose grip? Transom or near-transom outboards are a failure. Deep mounts are always required. I've been out in some terrible conditions with my center mounted engines (they are about 60% aft of the PDQ 32); they don't come out of the water lose grip. I have been on boats with saildrives (inboard diesels) mounted so far aft that although they did not ventilate, they would shear through the water so quickly as to lose grip (quick transom rise); in my opinion saildrives should not be in the aft 25% of the hull.

Certainly there is an upper limit beyond which the 9.9 hp high thrust engines don't cut it. Obviously.

As a coastal sailor, I like outboards. I can see the knot meter rise when I lift them and I'm sure the weight helps. As a long distance cruiser, I could go either way, depending on my mood. To me the greatest down side for outboards is the noise.

---

And a plus I did not see; no engine room = storage space. Not for heavy stuff, but on the PDQ the outboard versions have HUGE lockers where the engines would be. Good for bulky items.

[Factor]

Originally Posted by BigBeakie

Had an interesting chat with Pantaenius Insurance about insuring a cat and the assessor was very negative on outboards. Seems cats with outboards have higher risk, based on claims made, of not being able to claw their way off a lee shore in big wind due to the exponential wind resistance, coupled with prop ventilation in just those sort of conditions.

So it sounds prudent to work out your own boats windage & see if there is enough thrust to move you against say, a 50 knot blow in very choppy seas.

So - got a quote from Pantaenius for insurance , south pacific, south east asia, Australia, New zealand, based on an 1160 Lite (outboards) and 1160 Deluxe (Inboards). No difference at all in risk restriction or price when insured for the same value. No difference at all. I have the pantaenius reps number if you want it.

So Insurance is not an issue.

[BigBeakie]

Hi Factor,

That's good news. Maybe Adam was being "conservative"

Sorry I did not get back to the show to pop in and say hi. Was there with Nathan S. and the time flew by.

[44'cruisingcat]

Originally Posted by BigBeakie

Hi Factor,

That's good news. Maybe Adam was being "conservative"

Sorry I did not get back to the show to pop in and say hi. Was there with Nathan S. and the time flew by.

Conservative? But from what you said, this guy said they were a greater risk based on actual claims made.

But reality shows Pantaenius do NOT consider them a greater risk at all.

I wouldn't call that "conservative", I'd call it dishonest.