Outboard on CD 25D?

[John Stone]

... Our electric motor has more power that our MD7A did but it does have a limited range of about 18 miles ... If we wanted to motor further, say down the ICW we can maintain about 3 knots with a 2000 watt generator for as long as we have gas ... Nothing is perfect, but it is a aux and not its main propulsion ...

I have made the ICW trip some 10 or 11 times from NJ to "down island," in different sailboats but mostly on a CD 28, over the last four decades. I have yet to meet a fellow ICW traveler on a sailboat who considers a set of sails the boat's "main propulsion." And yes, I've listened to "we're goin' outside" many times, but only from those who haven't tried it.

While I agree that many people seem very quick to go to the engine, I have met lots of folks making the outside passage. But, you are probably not going to meet those that see themselves as sailors first running down the ICW unless they are inside due to wx or some other issue. Perhaps they just want to see what the inside passage looks like. I have sailed around Hatteras but I am intrigued by the Big Dismal Swamp Canal. Supposed to be lots of interesting wildlife. Motoring that far would probably drive me nuts though.

I also think more people would tend to sail more often if the engine had not become such a central part of the boat's design at the cost of sailing performance and sailing and passage making comfort. There are an awful lot of boats out there that look like they are not set up well for simple, safe, comfortable, and convenient sailing.

In the end choose your boat well. Set it up wisely. And, do what you want without fear of being labeled.

[ghockaday]

I have paddled by canoe up to the lake and it is pretty and quiet. It is the boat traffic in the ICW that keeps me out of it. I have heard that the Dismal Swamp side is so bad now your mast is up in the trees as well as snags under you, and have I said that commercial boat traffic is those confines makes me nervous. I think I have gotten this off topic from the original poster maybe they won't mind. Dennis

[kerrydeare]

... Maybe you have just defined the difference between cruisers and sailors?

I don't think I know the difference. Care to elaborate? For myself (and not to suggest any high fallutin' goals or such), leaving the dock and coming back a few hours later just never got it for me. It did initially, but after a while the destination mattered a lot more than the ride.

[Steve Laume]

As I always say, it all depends on how you use your boat.

I cruise for a month or more at a time these days. I sail my boat and hard. What I really hate is sitting somewhere going no where with the sails flogging. Sometimes there is no wind and still a good bit of swell. You can bet I will be motoring in that situation and have the main sheeted in tight or even pulled a slight bit to windward to keep it from flopping around. There have also been times where I have beat into the wind all day and then been grateful for an engine that will push me against strong wind and choppy seas so that I can get the sails down and make it into a sheltered harbor. My engine also gives me hot water for showers. It has a powerful alternator and smart regulator so I can charge batteries fairly quickly. It is a back up if the rig were to fail in some way. It brings me up to trolling speed in areas where I expect to catch fish. The inboard runs on a minuscule amount of fuel that is not nearly as volatile as gasoline. It is much more simple and reliable. It doesn't detract from the esthetics of my beautiful boat. It keeps the weight where the designer intended it to be. Maintains the resale value of my boat. Will run for thousands of hours. Doesn't require questionable modification of a well thought out design.

I am sure I could go on but would you need more reasons than these?

Rebuild or replace the diesel but look for another boat before you start hacking up a CD-25D to try to make it outboard powered.

Just my opinion but it is far from humble, Steve.

[wikakaru]

I have yet to meet a fellow ICW traveler on a sailboat who considers a set of sails the boat's "main propulsion."

For what it's worth, on our first cruise in 1992 we met a couple on a 26-foot engineless steel sailboat called Joy who sailed the ICW without an engine. We talked them into doing the Dismal Swamp Canal (a place wholly unsuited to an engineless sailboat) by offering to tow them through it. Otherwise, they sailed the ICW without an engine and, to my knowledge, without any other tows. If we hadn't towed them through the Dismal Swamp Canal they would have been perfectly happy to sail the Albemarle & Chesapeake Canal instead.

They were some of the most resilient and determined people we have ever met. They built their sailboat themselves in the Soviet Union (before the breakup) using only industrial supplies (for example, their mast was constructed from aluminum irrigation pipe) and sailed it from Russia to the US. I lost touch with them half way through their second circumnavigation.

Here's a blurb from the November 1992 Cruising World Magazine: https://books.google.com/books?id=xiWI0 ... ko&f=false

Our two boats side-by-side in Elizabeth City:

1992-07-23_1089-018a.jpg

Towing Joy on the upper Pasquotank River:

1992-07-24_1089-022.jpg

On our second cruise in 2001 we met Tom and Nancy Zydler, who not only cruised the ICW without an engine, but actually wrote general-purpose cruising guides of the ICW based on research done on the their engineless sailboat Mollymawk. Here is an article from the June 2001 Cruising World Magazine they wrote about the Golden Isles of Georgia: https://books.google.com/books?id=szXN5 ... wk&f=false.

I realize that sailing without an engine--and especially sailing the ICW without an engine--isn't for everyone, but there are certainly people who do it and enjoy the immense satisfaction it brings.

My apologies to the original poster for pulling this thread so far off the original topic.

Smooth sailing,

--Jim

[Dane9]

When we repowered we considered the outboard well idea but went electric. We could not cut that big key hole in the transum. One other issue of being in the well according to the people that have done it is extra care has to be taken with the outboard to prevent corrosion as it can get covered in salt water. You could not just forget it was there.

Our electric motor has more power that our MD7A did but it does have a limited range of about 18 miles. We sail 12 months out of the year and don't have to winterize. We sail in the Chesapeake Bay and generally don't sail if the wind is not blowing. We rarely use more than about 5% of our battery capacity. If we wanted to motor further, say down the ICW we can maintain about 3 knots with a 2000 watt generator for as long as we have gas. Then of course we have gas onboard again. Nothing is perfect, but it is a aux and not its main propulsion. Dennis

Thanks for the replies everyone, and no apologies necessary for going off topic. The thread was very interesting to read.

The 25D I was considering sold to someone else before I could take a look at it.

Ghockaday, I find the idea of electric propulsion interesting. Was the cost to repower with an electric engine similar to what it would have been with a diesel? How quiet and smooth is the electric? I saw an electric power boat a couple of years back that was almost completely silent from a distance of 20 feet or so.

[kerrydeare]

... in 1992 we met a couple on a 26-foot engineless steel sailboat called Joy who sailed the ICW without an engine. We talked them into doing the Dismal Swamp Canal (a place wholly unsuited to an engineless sailboat) by offering to tow them through it. Otherwise, they sailed the ICW without an engine and, to my knowledge, without any other tows. If we hadn't towed them through the Dismal Swamp Canal they would have been perfectly happy to sail the Albemarle & Chesapeake Canal instead ...

In other words, if they hadn't had a tow from your power-driven boat, they would not have been able to continue south. Did they ever explain the outboard motor mount on the transom of their "engineless" boat?

The other route (Route One) to Ablemarle involves a lock and several stretches barely as wide as the boat is long, including several timed bridges whose tenders are as likely to delay their bridge as provide a free lunch with showers. Also if done at normal sailboat speeds it's impossible to carry a fair tide at all points of the route.

It is difficult if not impossible to imagine this stretch as amenable to a boat without propulsion, regardless of the charm of an adventurous and exotic foreign crew, and people who try this are the very same people who, at some point and without exception, rely on other people with engines. As you know from your own experience, and as I can attest having provided such assistance more than once, this is always the case. It's "cute" the first few times and even leads to fun cocktails in the afternoon on occasion, but it's also entirely against most sailors' idea of self-sufficiency or even courtesy.

I don't however believe you are suggesting that this sort of thing makes practical sense for a typical reader of this board or for that matter most people who have a modicum of common sense and aren't completely destitute. I am prepared to repeat the claim that sailing a modern cruising boat without propulsion is at best a stunt, and at times even illegal. Daysailing on the Chesapeake, particularly from a mooring, is however not only possible but very likely a lot of fun. Just be sure to make it back to the mooring that afternoon early enough to avoid the daily thunderstorm.

... in 2001 we met Tom and Nancy Zydler, who not only cruised the ICW without an engine, but actually wrote general-purpose cruising guides of the ICW based on research done on the their engineless sailboat Mollymawk. Here is an article from the June 2001 Cruising World Magazine they wrote about the Golden Isles of Georgia: https://books.google.com/books?id=szXN5 ... wk&f=false ...

I'll read it once more to be sure, but I didn't see any mention in this article about an englneless sailboat named Mollymawk. I am prepared to admit to poor eyesight, so please advise. BTW having been plagiarized by this magazine in the past, I will freely admit I'm still smarting.

[ghockaday]

I realize that sailing without an engine--and especially sailing the ICW without an engine--isn't for everyone, but there are certainly people who do it and enjoy the immense satisfaction it brings.

My apologies to the original poster for pulling this thread so far off the original topic.

Smooth sailing,

--Jim[/quote]

Jim, that was a wonderful story. I bet they talk about you to this day. Did you ever hear from them again. Dennis

[kerrydeare]

... My apologies to the original poster for pulling this thread so far off the original topic ...

Thread drift, misinterpretation, and misunderstanding at a distance are all part of the bargain we encounter without face-to-face social and conversational discourse. Unless I missed something, that's simply called "The Internet."

[wikakaru]

In other words, if they hadn't had a tow from your power-driven boat, they would not have been able to continue south.

*North*. I can assure you that we really did have to talk them into letting us tow them through the Dismal Swamp Canal. They did not want to do it. I also am quite certain that, as resourceful as these people were, had we not towed them through the Dismal Swamp Canal they would have either sailed through the Albemarle & Chesapeake Canal, or, if for some reason they were unable to make it through the A&C Canal (because of, say, some bureaucratic prig of a bridgetender rather than a lack of ability), they would have back-tracked to Hatteras Inlet and sailed outside to the Chesapeake.

..people who try this are the very same people who, at some point and without exception, rely on other people with engines.

I have met people like that, too. These weren't those kind of people.

Did they ever explain the outboard motor mount on the transom of their "engineless" boat?

They did. They had acquired an outboard motor and outboard bracket at some point in their trip after leaving Russia, I'm not sure when or where, but it had long since ceased working and they didn't have the money to buy parts to repair it, so they just left the bracket there. Sort of like the original poster of this thread's desire to bolt an outboard bracket on his transom instead of fixing the diesel.

The other route (Route One) to Ablemarle involves a lock and several stretches barely as wide as the boat is long, including several timed bridges whose tenders are as likely to delay their bridge as provide a free lunch with showers. Also if done at normal sailboat speeds it's impossible to carry a fair tide at all points of the route.

In my experience, it's pretty well impossible to carry a fair tide at all points on any route on the ICW. If the wind isn't strong enough to overcome the current, you anchor. If the ditch is very narrow and the wind isn't fair for sailing, you wait until it is.

I don't however believe you are suggesting that this sort of thing makes practical sense for a typical reader of this board or for that matter most people who have a modicum of common sense and aren't completely destitute. I am prepared to repeat the claim that sailing a modern cruising boat without propulsion is at best a stunt, and at times even illegal. Daysailing on the Chesapeake, particularly from a mooring, is however not only possible but very likely a lot of fun. Just be sure to make it back to the mooring that afternoon early enough to avoid the daily thunderstorm.

I think it's true that people who have jobs and have to be back to work on Monday morning simply don't have the time required to wait for conditions to be fair to sail everywhere. For those of us who are retired and have the leisure of our time, it's another matter. If you are talking about "practical sense", you should give up sailing altogether. Sailing in any form, with our without an engine, doesn't make any sense. Up here in Maine one of the largest industries is lobster fishing, and I have to tell you that to virtually every lobsterman I have talked to, no one "with a modicum of common sense" as you put it would sail. To them, any boat with a sail is just stupid. Get a powerboat and join the real world.

As to sailing without an engine being a "stunt", then I suppose you also think that tossing a 9.5 inch round ball through an 18 inch circle from 50 feet away is a "stunt" or putting a 1.68 inch ball into a 4-1/4 inch hole 367 yards away using a stick is a "stunt" or putting a 8.66 inch ball through a 24x8 foot rectangle without using your hands is a "stunt". Personally I think that sailing without an engine is a sport, just like basketball, golf, or soccer is. In sport we do things that are essentially pointless for no reason other than the challenge of it. To me a "stunt" is crossing Niagara Falls on a tight rope, though I suppose the tight rope walker might consider what he does a sport. I think you will find that a great many sailors consider sailing without an engine a sport rather than a stunt.

So it's all how you look at it. Feel free to consider sailing without an engine a "stunt" if you like. I consider it a sport. Those lobstermen think we're all a bunch of idiots anyway.

I'll read it once more to be sure, but I didn't see any mention in this article about an englneless sailboat named Mollymawk.

No, I don't think that article mentions anything about being engineless. Try here: https://www.oceannavigator.com/new-crui ... -veterans/

Smooth sailing,

--Jim

[ghockaday]

... My apologies to the original poster for pulling this thread so far off the original topic ...

Unless I missed something, that's called "The Internet."

okey do-key, what ever you say.

[MHBsailor]

I think a more relevant comparison is to look at CD22 (stern-mounted OB) vs. the CD 22D (inboard diesel). The biggest difference is the prop on the diesel variant is lower than any outboard prop is going to be. This is real handy when the boat is pitching up and down in good-sized swells. Second, I can only imagine how difficult it would be to reach back over the stern lazarette locker and through the stern pulpit every time I needed to kick the outboard up and down while pitching and rolling in a sea. I had a 6HP 4-stroke (65 lbs) on my previous TY Senior which was plenty of power, but I would think that a 9.9 HP 4-stroke (110 lbs) would be a minimum size for a CD 25D which displaces 2000 lbs more - the closest comparison would be to look at what size OB CD 26 skippers are using since they are similar (5300 lb displacement). That's a significant amount of weight hanging off the stern plus aesthetically I'm not sure an OB on a 25D would work for me. Yes the diesel can be a PITA to work on, but I think one has to think long and hard about what kind of sailing they want to do and what is the safest engine option for that purpose when the weather chips are down. Not having to worry about the prop coming out of the water - priceless

[wikakaru]

I think a more relevant comparison is to look at CD22 (stern-mounted OB) vs. the CD 22D (inboard diesel). The biggest difference is the prop on the diesel variant is lower than any outboard prop is going to be. This is real handy when the boat is pitching up and down in good-sized swells. Second, I can only imagine how difficult it would be to reach back over the stern lazarette locker and through the stern pulpit every time I needed to kick the outboard up and down while pitching and rolling in a sea. I had a 6HP 4-stroke (65 lbs) on my previous TY Senior which was plenty of power, but I would think that a 9.9 HP 4-stroke (110 lbs) would be a minimum size for a CD 25D which displaces 2000 lbs more - the closest comparison would be to look at what size OB CD 26 skippers are using since they are similar (5300 lb displacement). That's a significant amount of weight hanging off the stern plus aesthetically I'm not sure an OB on a 25D would work for me. Yes the diesel can be a PITA to work on, but I think one has to think long and hard about what kind of sailing they want to do and what is the safest engine option for that purpose when the weather chips are down. Not having to worry about the prop coming out of the water - priceless

I guess it's academic at this point, since the OP said the boat in question had sold, but for posterity there are a couple other points to factor in with the inboard/outboard decision that haven't been mentioned yet.

The first of these is that an inboard provides prop wash over the rudder for low-speed maneuvering but an outboard doesn't. The counterpoint is that (assuming you can reach the outboard while maneuvering) you can pivot a transom-hung outboard, turning it into a directional thruster. If reaching the outboard from the helm is impractical, I have seen people put extensions on their outboard's gearshift so they can actuate it from the cockpit and PVC pipes that extend the throttle for the same reason. You could also rig up a tiller rope with a couple of turning blocks to get it within easy reach to steer the outboard from the cockpit. Crabbers in the Chesapeake Bay do something like this with the rudders on their deadrise boats so they can steer from anywhere in the long cockpit.

The second thing is power generation. The alternator on a diesel can produce a lot of electricity; an outboard...not so much.

So it depends on what kind of cruising you intend to do and the particulars of the boat. For long-distance cruising where your priorities are engine power to get you out of trouble when it gets dicey and electrical power to live on, and boats where it is difficult to access a transom-hung outboard, it would probably be worth figuring out how to revive that dead diesel; for sailing close to home where you have to maneuver in and out of a tight marina slip every day, and you don't care about generating electricity, an outboard could be a better choice (as long as you can reach it).

Smooth sailing,

--Jim

[wikakaru]

Jim, that was a wonderful story. I bet they talk about you to this day. Did you ever hear from them again. Dennis

We did exchange letters for a while (hard to do when both of us were cruising), but we eventually lost touch. I heard that they sold their steel boat and bought a cheaper Bristol 24, fixed it up, and used the money that was left over to continue their cruise. I think they did a full circumnavigation in the Bristol 24. They had a son born in the U.S. while they were here the first time, and if I recall correctly, their second child was born in Australia--4 people circumnavigating on a Bristol 24! The last I heard was that when they made it back to the U.S. after 1-1/2 times around the world they ran into trouble with U.S. immigration because their Soviet passports, issued before the breakup of the Soviet Union, had expired and for some reason the Russian government wouldn't issue them Russian passports. Some of this is second- and third-hand that I heard from other people who met them or knew of them, so it's hard to say what's accurate.

I can tell you that my wife and I still think and talk about them, and it's been almost 30 years since we first met them. They were remarkable people. It would be nice to think that they do the same about us.

Smooth sailing,

--Jim

[wikakaru]

I have sailed around Hatteras but I am intrigued by the Big Dismal Swamp Canal. Supposed to be lots of interesting wildlife. Motoring that far would probably drive me nuts though.

John,

If you ever get the chance, definitely "Do the Dismal". The Dismal Swamp Canal in North Carolina/Virginia and the Waccamaw River in South Carolina were our two favorite parts of the ICW. Both have heavily wooded banks where the trees grow right down to the water. Traveling through them by boat is like walking through a quiet path in the forest, except...you are on your boat! Pick a time so that you are not traveling in someone else's wake and the Dismal Swamp is like a mirror to infinity, a perfect Zen reflecting pool. Truly an experience not to miss. Here's a photo from our 1999 trip:

1999-06-13_75184-010.jpg

If you do it on Far Reach be extremely careful though--with that offset prop shaft your prop won't be protected from deadhead logs that are just beneath the surface. Both of the boats we used for our Dismal Swamp transits had their props in apertures, so the few logs we hit tended to just roll along the bottom of the keel and didn't cause any damage to the prop.

Smooth sailing,

--Jim