Review of Westerly Centaur form 1969 says 9.5 hp outboard is an option

[dylanwinter]

Re: Review of Westerly Centaur from 1969 says 9.5 hp outboard is an option

The o/b version was the cheapest, and I've seen one back in the days when a Centaur was a biggish boat for most sailors. People who had big boats like Centaurs or very big boats like Nic 32s used to have all these luxuries like electric lights and an echosounder. Some even had a VHF radio and an electronic log.

I've also sailed on a Centaur with the 32 hp engine, and at full throttle it produces a substantial wash, though doesn't actually go much faster than with the smaller inboards.

can you remember what sort of bracket it had on it - and if it was on the centre line of the boat?

 

[PD-Morild]

Re: Review of Westerly Centaur from 1969 says 9.5 hp outboard is an option

32 hp....
Maybe that's where McGregor got the idea...

 

[Niander]

Re: Review of Westerly Centaur from 1969 says 9.5 hp outboard is an option

Dylan you are obsessed with outboards over inboards even though the former is substantially inferior to the later.

 

[dylanwinter]

Re: Review of Westerly Centaur from 1969 says 9.5 hp outboard is an option

Dylan you are obsessed with outboards over inboards even though the former is substantially inferior to the later.

obsessed with sailing that is for sure

as for your assertion about the superiority of inboards

depends what for and what budget

an inboard in my inflatable would not be as good as an outboard

ditto in Katie L

if an outboard can do the same job as an inboard at a lower price.....

I would have said that made the outboard better value

that aside

I am greatly enjoying being able to speak to other people aboard while inder power

D

 

[William_H]

The Westerly Windrush, in many ways the precursor of the Centaur, was generally offered with an inboard, but also with an outboard in an early type of well.

This is the same kind of well that the Westerly 25s have, with a carriage for the outboard in a locker from which the outboard can be lowered onto the transom.

The Windrush is quite a big boat for an outboard, the same hull as the 25, but a bigger superstructure. It would be interesting to know whether the outboard was a success.

Anyway, here's one for sale on Apollo Duck if you want to see the well:

http://westerly.apolloduck.co.uk/feature.phtml?id=454347

That link to the photos of the Windrush seem to show a type of outboard well that I think would work well. I have seen one on a local boat called a Marauder 24ft. It is a compromise or half way between an o/b in a well and an o/b on a transom bracket. The o/b sits in a well or cut out that is open to the stern and so the prop sits about 30cms forward of the transom. When raised the o/b prop extends aft of the transom.
So you do not get loss of cockpit floor area and you get a motor easy to swing up out of the water for sailing or mooring but you do get a drive that is less susceptible to pitching cavitation and easier to reach for starting and working on the motor. It is of course more susceptible to pitching cavitation than a o/b in a well further forward or an inboard. I imagine the well would have much less drag or effect on water flow because it is open to the stern. ie no worse than dragging the transom.
What you do lose is the ability to have a transom mounted rudder so you need a rudder firther forward or twin transom mounted rudders.
Anyway I will stick to my o/b on a bracket adjustable in height so no reall problems of drive when pitching but then again hardly ever used. I like to sail. good luck olewill

 

[oldharry]

Back in the 1960s we were used to engines like the old 4hp Stuart Turner with a massive 8hp in the twin version, and even further souped up to 10hp! (If you could start it!). The Vire 6 was fitted to hundreds of boats, it was uprated to 7hp, then a highly desireable 12hp. If the boat needed more power, then a marinised 4 cyl road engine - usually petrol would be employed. The old Anglia 105e (like in the Heartbeat Panda car) was a popular choice, as diesels were heavy, slow and smelly. So a 10hp outboard on a Centaur would have been regarded as quite powerful. Remember the old Brit 10? - a massive thumper of a petrol engine weighing over 1/4ton! Wouldnt fit in a Centaur.....

In the early 70s, manufacturers started producing dedicated marine diesels like the Bukhs and Volvos, opening up the market for viable marine diesels for bigger crusing boats, and Centaur was regarded as a 'big' boat in those days!

 

[Poignard]

Eric and Susan Hiscock had, if I remember correctly, only a 4hp Stuart-Turner in their 30ft Wanderer, yet managed to get around the world in her.

I have a 10hp BUKH in my 28' Twister which is perfectly adequate. Yet when I was thinking of fitting a new Beta engine the manufacturer advised fitting a 20hp. Seemed a pointless waste of money to me.

 

[jwilson]

Re: Review of Westerly Centaur from 1969 says 9.5 hp outboard is an option

can you remember what sort of bracket it had on it - and if it was on the centre line of the boat?

Can't remember - it was in about 1970..... The biggest boats in our local muddy river were a Centaur and a 25 ft Folkboat that had a mooring in a lovely jelly-mud corner next to a Hillyard 2.5 tonner. All the rest were small bilge-keelers or C/Bs.

 

[Tranona]

Eric and Susan Hiscock had, if I remember correctly, only a 4hp Stuart-Turner in their 30ft Wanderer, yet managed to get around the world in her.

I have a 10hp BUKH in my 28' Twister which is perfectly adequate. Yet when I was thinking of fitting a new Beta engine the manufacturer advised fitting a 20hp. Seemed a pointless waste of money to me.

That is just like saying our grandfathers were happy with their Austin 7s. What the Hiscocks did 70 or more years ago is irrelevant to most modern sailors - and they were the first to install a big diesel when they became available. Almost certainly if they were still alive they would embrace all the modern goodies - just as they had the latest gear in their times.

You boat has a Bukh because that was the very best available when it was built, but if it were built now it would have a 20hp engine and be a better, or should I say more usable, boat in today's environment.

All very well if you want to live in the past but most people don't.

 

[ghostlymoron]

Yes, many people think that if you fit an engine twice the power, you'll go twice as fast. Actually, the speed of a boat is limited by the length. (Non planing)

Eric and Susan Hiscock had, if I remember correctly, only a 4hp Stuart-Turner in their 30ft Wanderer, yet managed to get around the world in her.

I have a 10hp BUKH in my 28' Twister which is perfectly adequate. Yet when I was thinking of fitting a new Beta engine the manufacturer advised fitting a 20hp. Seemed a pointless waste of money to me.

 

[oldharry]

Its not quite as simple as that, I think. Firstly medium sized twin cylinder diesels were simply not available, and we had to make do with what we had,. As you say, the Hiscock's soon enough revised their views on engines once viable units became available. Secondly, life was more relaxed, and there wasnt the hurry to make deadlines. It was still possible to ring your boss and say you would be a day late getting back, without threat of job loss (well more so then than nowadays!)

Thirdly we lived in harbours and on moorings. Marinas were virtually non existent, so the engine really was an auxiliary to sail, rather than as nowadays an alternative. So we only fitted small engines, because that was all we thought we needed.

 

[mickyp168]

It all depends on if you are going to sail or motor. I see too many boats motoring when they could be sailing which I think is often down to laziness. If you just need an engine for getting in and out of port then all you need is an outboard. Also when the engine goes wrong ,which it will, an outboard is so much less trouble.

 

[Arcady]

Gosh - that looks like an adventurous way to chock the boat up for winter! Mind you, I'd love to have such access to the bottom of my keel

 

[dylanwinter]

I think we tend to over-engine our boats

Centaur 1 had 18hp and would be going at hull speed at about a third revs

not sure what the rest of the power is for

Centaur two has 25 hp - hull speed at about a quarter revs

the 6hp shoves her along at 4.5 knots through flat water at half revs - and that is a fairly small prop running at high revs.

My plan for a back up engine for Centaur 2 is to use the little Honda 2.3

the only time I can see myself needing a back up is in case of prop fouling and to prevent the humiliation of being towed into harbour.

The 2.3 will shove the centaur along and give me the ability to manoever in light winds

if the winds are strong then I will sail to sheltered water and then fire up the little one.

Clearly Old Laurent Giles thought 9.5 hp was enough for a four tonne boat.

However, the inboard allows me to hear my wife telling me what I should be doing - whereas when I have the Tohatsu going then I wear headphones and can no longer hear her.

Oh - hang on..... maybe the noise from the outboard is a good thing

D

 

[ghostlymoron]

I don't think I'd risk going under a boat on those props.

Gosh - that looks like an adventurous way to chock the boat up for winter! Mind you, I'd love to have such access to the bottom of my keel

 

[Niander]

Yes looks dangerously unsupported.
As far as power goes surely is it not better to have a reserve of power if you need it rather than find yourself dangerously underpowered for instance one cannot sail directly into the wind...what if that's where the shelter is?
But if I had to have an outboard it would have to be in a well as otherwise the prop can come out of the water in a swell[screaming prop, over revving engine and no drive].

 

[dylanwinter]

I don't think I'd risk going under a boat on those props.

climb aboard, give it a good shake around

the majority of the weight is on the wooden blocks - carefully placed at the point of balance.

no worries as long as it is not blowing a hoolie

never heard of a centaur blowing over

from dangerous Dyl

 

[Poignard]

That is just like saying our grandfathers were happy with their Austin 7s. What the Hiscocks did 70 or more years ago is irrelevant to most modern sailors - and they were the first to install a big diesel when they became available. Almost certainly if they were still alive they would embrace all the modern goodies - just as they had the latest gear in their times.

You boat has a Bukh because that was the very best available when it was built, but if it were built now it would have a 20hp engine and be a better, or should I say more usable, boat in today's environment.

All very well if you want to live in the past but most people don't.

You persist in misunderstanding, or deliberately misinterpreting, what other people write. It's annoying and childish.

One of my grandfathers owned a string Jaguars; he never owned an Austin 7 because he was wealthy, and would probably have disliked it if he had been compelled to make do with one

My pointing out what the Hiscocks achieved was intended to do just that, ie show what can be achieved with what many would nowadays regard as inadequate. I would not want a 30-foot cruising yacht with a 4hp engine.

I do not need a 20hp engine in my boat because 10hp is perfectly adequate for my requirements. It is capable of pushing her along at up to 5-1/2 knots. Why spend money on something I don't need?

I don't understand what you are getting at when you say "today's environment". My sailing environment today is the same as it has always been, ie sailing when I can, motoring when I must. Does that differ much from what most yachtsmen want? I'd be surprised if it did.

 

[ghostlymoron]

I used the Honda 2.3 on Cobblers a couple of times (in flat water) it drove it along fine but was not good for close manoeuvring because a) it has no clutch and b) the throttle is below the transome. The latter means that you have to release the tiller and look over the transome which is tricky at critical moments. Alright as a backup though.

I think we tend to over-engine our boats

Centaur 1 had 18hp and would be going at hull speed at about a third revs

not sure what the rest of the power is for

Centaur two has 25 hp - hull speed at about a quarter revs

the 6hp shoves her along at 4.5 knots through flat water at half revs - and that is a fairly small prop running at high revs.

My plan for a back up engine for Centaur 2 is to use the little Honda 2.3

the only time I can see myself needing a back up is in case of prop fouling and to prevent the humiliation of being towed into harbour.

The 2.3 will shove the centaur along and give me the ability to manoever in light winds

if the winds are strong then I will sail to sheltered water and then fire up the little one.

Clearly Old Laurent Giles thought 9.5 hp was enough for a four tonne boat.

However, the inboard allows me to hear my wife telling me what I should be doing - whereas when I have the Tohatsu going then I wear headphones and can no longer hear her.

Oh - hang on..... maybe the noise from the outboard is a good thing

D

 

[dylanwinter]

I used the Honda 2.3 on Cobblers a couple of times (in flat water) it drove it along fine but was not good for close manoeuvring because a) it has no clutch and b) the throttle is below the transome. The latter means that you have to release the tiller and look over the transome which is tricky at critical moments. Alright as a backup though.

all I need is a plan B - so as a back up

needless to say I will film the fun involved