Seagull remorse - does it exist?

[dylanwinter]

I was a Seagull user for many years - I took great pleasure in the noise, in the astonishing engineering, in their ability to be drowned and then come back for more abuse, in their longevity, simplicity, the wonderful retro graphics.

I am an engineer by training so I understand how amazing and intrigueing they are

..... as museum pieces

do none of you guys feel bad about what Seagull outboards do to the water we sail in?

have you ever run one of these things in a bucket of water?

I am sure you have.

my four stroke Honda leaves the water clean enough to drink.

the Seagull leaves it filthy within seconds - even disposing of the test water is a problem.

come on chaps.... do none of you guys care at all?

My first winter on the Broads I started with a 2hp Seagull on the back of the Seafarer _15 foot trailer sailer.

The boat was parked in a small side dyke. I started the seagull, felt guilty about the amount of crud I left in the dyke, went out for two days and a night, came back and there, still clinging to the vegetation, was the results of my engine start and warm up.

just returning to the dyke with the seagull - hot and running - was enough to leave a film two stroke crud all over the water. I never used the little seagull on the broads again. I bought my first Honda.

A few years ago on a sunny bank holiday when the carrick Roads were teaming with boaters I took my 15 foot trailer sailer right up the creek above Mylor and let the tide strand us.

I sat there on the mud and watched the birds. I had a wonderful day while all the sailors and mortorboatalists roared around in big boats and tenders.

but you would be amazed at how much engine crud came back up that creek with the returning tide. I am sure it concentrated anything and everything into the Ria with the returning tide.

... but it was bloody frightening - I reckon that around 30 per cent of the surface was covered in oil. It could have been ftrom a single sloppy diesel transfer....but each patch seemed slightly different in the way it refelcted the light so I am reasoably convinced that it was not from a single spill.

I drive a car, the slug has a diesel inboard and a Honda four stroke outboard. All contribute to Global warming and the diesel does produce a small amount of sooty carbon when it first fires. But the old 10 to 1 or 25 to one seagulls spit out a film of unburned oil
even when running hot. It is the nature of two stroke engines - they do not purge the cylinders properly



I am an environmental sinner in so many way......

I have a loo that discharges straight into the sea - it has no seat on it so it is the loo of last resort and is never used in port.

but really..... these things are an environmental disgrace and are museum pieces and in my opinion that is where they should be.

http://www.keepturningleft.co.uk/video-logs/ktl-vlog-137-the-unethical-use-of-a-seagull/




Dylan

PS - please don't come back with the argument about how using an old machine is a greener thing to do than to use a newer one. There are lots of wonderful re-cyclable materials in an old seagull and pishing oil straight into our wonderful coastal waters is really not a good thing to do.

 

[armchairsailor]

If nothing else, it's a call to arms to get the carb kit from SOS to convert them to (?)50:1.

Point well made Dylan - nostalgia may be just that, and in some cases progress may not be completely pointless.

But I still want to reusrrect our old one. :-D

 

[Twister_Ken]

I'm with Dylan. Nasty anachronisms. There's noise pollution too (mind you the Honda 2 horse 4 stroke doesn't exactly whisper).

 

[Keen_Ed]

I have a loo that discharges straight into the sea

I'm going to start worrying about this one when fish, marine mammals and birds start using holding tanks.

But yes, Seagulls - esp if they're still using 10:1 - aren't good. (The conversion lets you use 25:1, AIUI).

 

[dylanwinter]

paper

I'm going to start worrying about this one when fish, marine mammals and birds start using holding tanks.

But yes, Seagulls - esp if they're still using 10:1 - aren't good. (The conversion lets you use 25:1, AIUI).

I agree..... to some extent

although keeping it clean will often involve a fair number of tough chemicals and the paper is unsightly - but very biodegradable and sinks really fast. Kitchen towell is almost immortal and floats beautifully.

shame about the Seagull conversion kit only doing 25:1

my experiences on the broads were with a 25:1 Seagull though

and yes the Honda is a noisy thing at full blat - but at tickover it is a good deal quieter than the Seagull at a similar revs

However, if one bloke buys the kit and converts from 10:1 to 25:1 as a result mof this thread or my films then the ire I expect to get coming my way from the traditionalists will have been worth it

Dylan

 

[mjcoon]

I'm going to start worrying about this one when fish, marine mammals and birds start using holding tanks.

Yes, at least that is recyclable carbon and has been going round and round for millions of years. I think that even our toilet paper, if you dare pump it through the heads at all, will get recycled eventually if out in open water.

But I agree all that fossil oil, though it may be biogenic, is part of a much longer cycle and we try to short-circuit it at our peril...

Mike.

 

[Kukri]

You can prise my Seagull Forty Plus from my cold, dead hands, mate!

The point about Seagulls is that they will start right off even after a prolonged period of non-use. I usually sail or row to my mooring and to get ashore from the boat at anchor but for those few occasions when we have a dead header against the tide and its raining the Seagull does the job.

I probably use one five litre can of fuel per season, and yes it's 25:1, so I am putting less crud in the sea than most people.

 

[dylanwinter]

no prising

You can prise my Seagull Forty Plus from my cold, dead hands, mate!

no forcing going on here at all

just a plea to care a little about the place you sail

however....you are free to use a Seagull as you see fit

and that freedom is, in itself, a precious thing

Dylan


here is a film with some nice classic boats in the first bit and some nice birds on the end

please feel frree to stop the film at 1.27 when the bird bits begin

 

[Chrusty 1]

You can prise my Seagull Forty Plus from my cold, dead hands, mate!

The point about Seagulls is that they will start right off even after a prolonged period of non-use. (snip)
I probably use one five litre can of fuel per season, and yes it's 25:1, so I am putting less crud in the sea than most people.

So does my Mercury 6hp 4 stroke, and it puts considerably less crud in the sea than your stinky seagull!

 

[ValleyForge]

come on chaps.... do none of you guys care at all?

No.

Annual fuel consumption less than 1 pint. Lovely putter putter noise reminiscent of grannies treadle sewing machine on steroids, glorious blue haze over the (rather small) wake, one day I'll remember to put a drop of Castrol 'R' to give it that evocative smell too.

Don't object to classic cars / bikes either.

Nice vid though, thanks.

 

[Cobra]

Do you hold hard boy!

No remorse whatsoever Dylan! Sorry mate!

My Forty Plus runs on 25:1, I use maybe 3 litres a season of cheapest unleaded, and yes, there is usually a slight patina on the water astern, BUT the level of pollution that I and other Seagull users create is absolutely buggerall when compared to the pollution caused to our environment in - a) The manufature of wind turbines b) installng wind turbines around the coast c) the high speed craft out there maintaining the various windfarms

SO

With the greatest of respect chap, have a go at the REAL polluters of the environment, the Tree Hugger brigade

(ducks and runs for cover)

 

[onesea]

Dylan,

I agree with the sentiment to some extent, if we where all knocking round with seagulls I would agree.

Personally I rarely see them being used and they are a piece of history.

Personally I still have a 2 stroke outboard, it might be noise and less efficient (which must be more polluting), but I can turn it on its head when its not running that is important to me...

 

[bljones]

Dylan,
Lovely Rube Goldbergian devices that they are, the very fact that they require a 10:1 ratio puts the lie to your rhapsody on the quality of the engineering. Soviet motorcycles don't require 10:1.

As small "free-cord" O/Bs go, I love my Yamaha P45.

As simple,( arguably simpler), as a Seagull, but lighter, with it's own quirks, like the starting instructions printed inside the starter case cover. Note step 5.

 

[electrosys]

You mention 'recycled material' as if that was a good thing ...

Re-cycling of any material is energy intensive, and creates it's own pollution in the various processes it uses. At best, re-cycling is but a band-aid to be used until a better solution is found - but it has become a quasi-religion for those of limited vision, and as long as they continue to worship at the altar of re-cycling, then they will be able to carry-on with a guilt-free polluting lifestyle.

Better by far not to need any re-cycling - and that's what the Seagull mindset is all about. But unfortunately, the small quantities of pollution from a Seagull are visible - and that makes them an easy target for those who only react to what they can see - but do bear in mind that pollution from a Seagull is fully biodegradable.

"But they burn oil" I so often hear people say, and yes they do ... along with the countless millions of diesel engines churning out their oil-based fumes hour after hour, day after day, all over the world. The only difference being that the Seagull's emissions are visible, and offend those who have taken up this absurdly biased environmentally tokenistic hue and cry.

Yes, by all means ban the Seagull, then you can go on crapping all over the world without any guilt. Bought any new electronics recently ? What's the environmental story there then ? Washed any man-made fibres recently ? Only now is it coming to light that thousands of tiny micro-fibres are released from each garment during the washing process, and these are entering the marine food chain at it's lowest level ... and these are NOT bio-degradable - now there's something to really worry about.

Yes - by all means gaze down into the outboard's test tank and get yourself all excited by the scum - better then to not look into your wheelie bin, or those of your neighbours, and most certainly don't ever look at the waste water coming out of your washing machine ... for there you'll find real causes for concern.

Still - criticising Seagulls always makes for good press, and if you're a journalist, that's your real target after all - getting yourself into print.

 

[dylanwinter]

very good

You mention 'recycled material' as if that was a good thing ...

Re-cycling of any material is energy intensive, and creates it's own pollution in the various processes it uses. At best, re-cycling is but a band-aid to be used until a better solution is found - but it has become a quasi-religion for those of limited vision, and as long as they continue to worship at the altar of re-cycling, then they will be able to carry-on with a guilt-free polluting lifestyle.

Better by far not to need any re-cycling - and that's what the Seagull mindset is all about. But unfortunately, the small quantities of pollution from a Seagull are visible - and that makes them an easy target for those who only react to what they can see - but do bear in mind that pollution from a Seagull is fully biodegradable.

"But they burn oil" I so often hear people say, and yes they do ... along with the countless millions of diesel engines churning out their oil-based fumes hour after hour, day after day, all over the world. The only difference being that the Seagull's emissions are visible, and offend those who have taken up this absurdly biased environmentally tokenistic hue and cry.

Yes, by all means ban the Seagull, then you can go on crapping all over the world without any guilt. Bought any new electronics recently ? What's the environmental story there then ? Washed any man-made fibres recently ? Only now is it coming to light that thousands of tiny micro-fibres are released from each garment during the washing process, and these are entering the marine food chain at it's lowest level ... and these are NOT bio-degradable - now there's something to really worry about.

Yes - by all means gaze down into the outboard's test tank and get yourself all excited by the scum - better then to not look into your wheelie bin, or those of your neighbours, and most certainly don't ever look at the waste water coming out of your washing machine ... for there you'll find real causes for concern.

Still - criticising Seagulls always makes for good press, and if you're a journalist, that's your real target after all - getting yourself into print.

I enjoyed that immensely

perfect in every way

Dylan

 

[BarryH]

Change the 2 stroke oil you use. Fully synthetic oil doesn't push out half as much crud as the mineral stuff. Better combustion, less deposits and cleaner burning. Add to that a wonderful smell too.....If your into that sort of thing.

 

[Jenaline IV]

I understand your feeling Dylan but what about the flip side?

All outboards put filth in to the sea in varying amounts but I know that my (1:25 converted) seagull is more messy than modern engines. As a result I use it as little as possible prefering to sail and use seamanship where possible. May someone with a less polluting model restrict his use? I would argue the opposite in most cases as they feel it is cleaner thus can use it more. End result is the seagull may not be the highest net polluter in the water. I may be wrong but that is certainly how I see it from my attitude toward usage.

 

[LONG_KEELER]

I was a Seagull user for many years - I took great pleasure in the noise, in the astonishing engineering, in their ability to be drowned and then come back for more abuse, in their longevity, simplicity, the wonderful retro graphics.

I am an engineer by training so I understand how amazing and intrigueing they are

..... as museum pieces

Dylan

.

“In a chronically leaking boat, energy devoted to changing vessels is more productive than energy devoted to patching leaks.” -Warren Buffett

 

[dylanwinter]

Elucidate

“In a chronically leaking boat, energy devoted to changing vessels is more productive than energy devoted to patching leaks.” -Warren Buffett

could you elucidate about what Mr Buffet meant

did he mean carry on using the Seagulls

or did he want us to replace then with more environmentally benign forms of propulsion

Dylan

 

[Wansworth]

Theres lots of creek cred in a seagull...I pottered thru the Brittany canal with a long shaft and it only gave out on reaching La Coruña.