Savage 340 Gull tinnie. Anyone used one?

Friar, I've got the current (I think) Allycraft booklet and I don't see the 3.45 in it.
They have a 3.5 that weighs 71 KG, but is only 600mm deep (I am looking for 700mm or more if possible). Their 3.55 weighs 78 KG and is 650 mm deep.

Your winch idea is good, but I'm trying to KISS for the moment.

Hi NormC, just thought I'd put my two cents worth in re the 700mm depth measurement you mention as an ideal for your tinnie. All I wanted to say was don't take the quoted brochure measurements as gospel, they are widely varying to say the least. When I bought my boat (4.1m Allycraft Rhino) I physically went round and measured the keel/gunwale depth on the main contenders and many were not what was quoted in the catalogues. Some manufacturers measure the internal depth from keel to gunwale, and some measure the external measurement (by sitting the boat on flat ground and simply measuring from the gunwale down to the ground (this takes into consideration the thickness of the keel and adds around 50mm but doesn't add to actual hull depth).
Another thing to look for (and actually measure) is the depth of the transom (where the sides meet the transom). You'll find some manufacturers (Quintrex is one) on some of their models, have a nice deep keel to gunwale measurement, but a low freeboard measurement at the transom. To my mind with outboard/ etc. plus operator at the rear of the boat (tiller steer), having as much freeboard in this area is very important.

Anyway, as I said just my two cents. Bottom line - actually take the time to go and measure each vessel that falls into you're length range as you may find that all is not as it seems. (one well known manufacturer I measured took into consideration the bow rail in they're depth measurement!).

Gavin

You are right there Gavin. I recognized this when I took a tape measure to a boat shop a few days ago. A particular boat was listed as .88 deep. Took me a few minutes to find a .88 measurement. It was there; boottom keel to top of gunwale at the deepest point. Usable depth inside floor to top of gunwale at deepest point was around .82.

Another key difference between manufacturers is welding or riveting in seats. On boats below 3.9, some of the big manufacturers still rivet in seats, while others weld them.

All else being equal, I'd have though welding woud be much stronger. Any thoughts on whether riveting is OK?

G'day Norm,

Yeah in my opinion welding is much stronger and is my preference, however I think one of the major issues with rivets in the hull to fasten the seating is corrosion. Over time you can get a small amount of electrolosis around the hull surface that surrounds the rivet. You only need a little bit to form a gap. Albeit the area's affected aren't permanently submersed and therefore won't sink the boat, however once it happens you'll have to drill out and replace with larger rivets or similar etc.

In saying that though, there are still a fair few old dehavilands getting around out there on the water and these used a lot of rivets (not just for the seats either!) - comes down to how well they are looked after with respect to washing down etc.

Personally, for corrosion resistance and strength I think welding is the way to go. You may sacrifice a little with weight but I think negligible.

Another thing to look out for in my opinion is number of ribs in the floor (and to a lesser extent the sides), and also how they are fixed to the hull. The more ribs the more rigid - assuming they're welded to the hull well. They should be welded at both the keel and the chine with good stong welds.

The shape of the hull is important too, you need to get a good compromise between stability and ride comfort. You may have noticed when you look around that some manufactures lean one way or the other. Seajay and Horizon in my opinion go for the stability factor with a relatively low deadrise at the transom (flatter V) but higher sides to compensate. i.e. out of say a 700mm depth measurement the sides account for (say) 550mm of that, but the hull only 150mm. Another manufacturer will lean towards the ride comfort corner, with that 700mm being made up of say 500mm sides and 200mm hull - resulting in a deeper V which rides better but is slightly more tender at rest. Optimally in my opinion you want to find something in between - with a relatively fine forefoot to cut the waves, then a nice shapely bottom that flattens out somewhat towards the rear to retain some stability at rest. I find my Allycraft leans a little towards the ride comfort side with a very deep V when compared to others, it's a little tender at rest but I'm used to it now and appreciate the ride in rougher water. The smaller the boat the more important the stability at rest factor is though.

Cheers

Good advise there, thanks Gavin. I've owned a number of boats before, but none this small.

All boats are a compromise, but none more so than a car topper I am rapidly finding.

Yep absolutely true Norm.

As a reference have a look at this site

www.seamedia.com.au/sea_library/boats.php

scroll down to the articles on the Horizon 3.0 and 3.5m rooftoppers that they have put together. One article is free and the other $5, they take a good in depth look at what makes a good small boat and what to consider, including weight etc. Might give you some good ideas.

Good luck

Uncle, Stacer makes good boats. I recently sold my 5.25 Easy Rider with 125 HP (a bit big to carry on the 'Lux). The only 3.4m in their current range seems to be the Proline, which is only 500mm deep. I'm after something a bit deeper if I can.

I have their 350 Seasprite on my list, which is 760mm deep and weighs 76 KG.

My initial loading plan will be to tip the nose up onto the rear bars on the 4B, then slide it forward (on rollers) to get it on the vehicle.

Thanks Bundy,
The Quintrex Dart 355 is on my list, but weighs 78 KG. Other than the Dart, I reckon most of the other Quintrex range are a bit low at the sides.

I also have two from the Sea Jay range on the list. The Angler 3.55 weighs 76 KG and the Nomad 3.5 weighs 68 KG.

I've had a number of boats before, but this will be my first 'car topper'. I'm after something with reasonable depth, around 3.4 to 3.5M, strong, but not too heavy.

Hi Norm
looking at a similar set up myself but i think i will go to a 3.9m as age is still on my side and will only go on the ct most of the time.
A mate of mine sells boats in Adelaide and he got me looking at Horizon Boats i had them send a catalog and the 3.55m is 1.65m wide, .85m deep, 70kg and a max 15hp but only 3 people but i suppose all boats this size are only rated to this. I think they are sold as Quicksilver boats as a package by Mercury dealers.
If u go to the 3.75m it is 1m deep, 1.8m wide but weight is an issue at 95kg this and the 3.95m are the same other than weight and length.

Mattie

Thanks mattie, hadn't looked at these. The 3.55 you refer to is actually 85 KG. Not surprising as it is a touch wider and deeper than most in this length. Sounds like a good boat, but a touch heavy and possibly a bit wide for me to carry on the 'Lux. My bars will be 1.8 long, but the feet are only about .95 apart.

The 70 KG one is only .65 deep, a bit shallow. Got the info from their web site.

It is all a compromise. Just a matter of finding the best compromise for my needs.

Hi Norm
I wrote the figures in as the web site may not have been updated for while as the catalog i was sent from Horizon boats last week are as i wrote above but it may be worth a phone call to check.

Mattie

Thanks baza. I'm familiar with the folding boats and have been in a portaboat (similar to the Australian one you posted on). For me, a bit of a pain to set up all the time, and I just wouldn't feel safe enough in croc country in one (although my couple of runs in one was in Bullock Creek in Darwin!!).

I've just posted another thread that I lashed out and bought a Stacer tinnie today.