Unethical use of a Seagull outboard

[rotrax]

As an admirer of Sturmey Archer gears, Singer Sewing machines, Bale knotters, Concord and beam engines I am always amazed and impressed at the simplicity, reliability and power of Seagull outboards.

They are brilliant bits of engineering - astonishing - amazing - wonderful.



I have had an old two stroke in my garage for years - I pulled it out, put some fresh fuel in and fired it up.

It did leave a lot of gunge in the test tank though.

http://www.keepturningleft.co.uk/2011-video-logs/ktl-vlog-128-starting-the-seagull/

I had put it in the garage because I used it on the broads for one trip - but I was so worried about the amount of oil and petrol it threw around a sensitive environment that I went out and bought a Honda 2.3 hp four stroke. Great little engine by the way. Sold that with the seafarer trailer sailor I was using at the time.

As a temproary engine for my current MD1 related excitements Al (of Al and Stewie fame) loaned me a four hp seagull as a standby in case the beast gear box finally gave up.

I started it up and it ran okay on the back of the slug - I even sort of liked the noise of it

but Nora!

Seagulls are dirty things.....

I really felt so bad about the thing that I now beleive that they should not be used anywhere outside of a test tank.

I do hope people will not take this too much to heart or abuse me for what is a personal decision

http://www.keepturningleft.co.uk/2011-video-logs/ktl-vlog-137-the-unethical-use-of-a-seagull/


Dylan

Hi Dylan, I had a 40 plus for some years and used it to push a big dinghy on the canals and Thames. I got hold of what was at the time leading edge motorcycle racing synthetic two stroke oil-Shell if IIRC. With this mixed at 50:1 no smoke to worry about. Also smelt like a scrambles race meeting from behind! I also adjusted the carb. needle to make it a little leaner when on the canal as the speeds were so low.When tickling the carb just get the fuel level up to the outlet hole and no more-hold a rag on the carb to catch any drips if you can. I have a couple of Yamaha outboards. Recomended oil/fuel ratio 100:1 on normal marine two stroke oil. Modern synthetic oil at 50:1-give it a try!

 

[VicS]

Hi Dylan, I had a 40 plus for some years and used it to push a big dinghy on the canals and Thames. I got hold of what was at the time leading edge motorcycle racing synthetic two stroke oil-Shell if IIRC. With this mixed at 50:1 no smoke to worry about. Also smelt like a scrambles race meeting from behind! I also adjusted the carb. needle to make it a little leaner when on the canal as the speeds were so low.When tickling the carb just get the fuel level up to the outlet hole and no more-hold a rag on the carb to catch any drips if you can. I have a couple of Yamaha outboards. Recomended oil/fuel ratio 100:1 on normal marine two stroke oil. Modern synthetic oil at 50:1-give it a try!

It is not recommended that Seagulls are run on a 50:1 mix. Apart from a few QB series engines produced in the 1990's they have plain bearings, not needle rollers, which are not suitable for such a mix. It is believed that very few of the 50:1 engines actually survived the ordeal!
Engines produced from 1968 to 1978 can be converted to run on 25:1 instead of the original 10:1 mix. Prior to 1968 they had slightly different bearings an it is not recommended that they run on 25:1. From 1978 onwards they were supplied ready to run on 25:1.

I don't think Dylan has told us the serial number of either his small one or the 4 hp one he has been loaned but I would judge from the steel tank and enclosed recoil starter that the small one is from the early 1980's. If so it should be run on 25:1.

Ceratinly the older ones running on 10:1 were oily smokey things but once converted to 25:1 are nowhere near so oily and produce relatively little smoke.

 

[dylanwinter]

you are really good vic

It is not recommended that Seagulls are run on a 50:1 mix. Apart from a few QB series engines produced in the 1990's they have plain bearings, not needle rollers, which are not suitable for such a mix. It is believed that very few of the 50:1 engines actually survived the ordeal!
Engines produced from 1968 to 1978 can be converted to run on 25:1 instead of the original 10:1 mix. Prior to 1968 they had slightly different bearings an it is not recommended that they run on 25:1. From 1978 onwards they were supplied ready to run on 25:1.

I don't think Dylan has told us the serial number of either his small one or the 4 hp one he has been loaned but I would judge from the steel tank and enclosed recoil starter that the small one is from the early 1980's. If so it should be run on 25:1.

Ceratinly the older ones running on 10:1 were oily smokey things but once converted to 25:1 are nowhere near so oily and produce relatively little smoke.

Spot on - the little one is 1980s - 25 to 1

the four hp from Al is much older and is designed to run at 10 : 1 - which adds quite a bit to the cost of runnig the thing. I am sure that we could convert it ti 25:1.

Al sdays the Evinrude is running beautifully so I now have a fully functioning suite of engines

the Beast for as long as it keeps going - for the day it breaks down and for entering complicated marinas I will use the little Honda four stroke - a cracking little engine. Then I shall keep the Evinrude in reserve at home so that if the beast does throw a wobbly I have a viable big outboard to carry on cruising.

So, all round..... in pretty good shape.

Dylan

PS - KTL 74 is up....

is free and its about sailing through woodland - just the sort of place I would be concerned about running pne of my drippy seagulls

http://www.keepturningleft.co.uk/2010-season/ktl-74-the-ant-and-sailing-through-woodland/

 

[prv]

I now have a fully functioning suite of engines

So the Slug is starting to look a bit like this these days?

Pete

 

[Boathook]

All I can think is poor seagull. It will certainally outlast any modern machine and with the suggestions given on this thread use a lot less oil.

 

[Twister_Ken]

I watched Dylan's film about the dreadful Seagull. Bizarrely, as soon as the damned thing started barking, I could smell burnt 2-stroke oil. There have been 60 or more years of progress since the Seagull was conceived. Seems daft to ignore that progress - a bit like using cotton sails instead of Dacron, or wearing an army surplus gas cape instead of modern waterproofs.

 

[dylanwinter]

progress

I watched Dylan's film about the dreadful Seagull. Bizarrely, as soon as the damned thing started barking, I could smell burnt 2-stroke oil. There have been 60 or more years of progress since the Seagull was conceived. Seems daft to ignore that progress - a bit like using cotton sails instead of Dacron, or wearing an army surplus gas cape instead of modern waterproofs.

progress is a wonderful thing...21,000 posts and many of them make perfect sense

although..... you have to admit there is a sneaking admiration for the seagull and its ability to keep going when lesser designs are scrap

but being pickled in oil at 25:1 or 10:1 has got to help longevity

but they stil put out a film of unburned oil and fuel

its also in the nature of the two stroke cycle

the cylinder never really purges perfectly between sparks

Dylan

 

[electrosys]

There have been 60 or more years of progress since the Seagull was conceived.

Progress ? :

Like rubber impellors which have to be regularly replaced (and they're not cheap), or they fail ...

Like small diameter props which satisfy the sales team's requirements for a general-purpose outboard, but are not well suited for pushing displacement hulls along with ...

Like electronics which will almost certainly die if the motor should ever find itself underwater ...

There is a reason why the Indians have opted for the manufacture of Royal Enfield motorbikes, and Morris Oxford cars, rather than something which is computer-controlled or has a V-tec engine or whatever - because they are adequate, proven designs which will continue to work in harsh environments with the minimum of maintenance. The same argument applies to the classic Land Rover, another proven design from the age of the Marston Seagull.

I'd be the first to admit that the fuel economy of the Seagull is one negative aspect, but that expense can be offset many times by the exceptionally low maintenance costs, and the virtually zero amortization: one Seagull, properly maintained, will see out the life of several 'modern' outboards.

But - as with most things in life - it's a question of 'horses for courses': if you're a heavy user of an outboard, several hundred hours annually (say), then the fuel consideration becomes a dominant issue - but if you only go out a few times each year, then a Seagull may prove a better bet. Returning to the issue of rubber impellors for example: these deteriorate whether the engine is used or not, so an engine sitting quietly in a corner awaiting use is in fact wearing out, although not actually being used.

A mate of mine religiously takes his Yamaha engines (x2) to a commercial servicing bloke each year, although he uses them less than a handful of times a year - impellor change, plugs change, tweak the carb, grease wherever necessary ... you know the kind of thing. Last time his bill was over £250. The whole of my Seagull collection of 8 engines (at the last count) has just about cost me the same.

Ok, it's not a completely fair comparison, as his engines are much bigger (25 and 15HP) than mine (4/5 HP), but I'd have to burn an awful lot of fuel to make a dent in £250 !

For some reason I keep thinking about bicycles ... now there's a design which hasn't essentially changed in nearly 200 years. Maybe something which is 'good enough' and 'can do the job' is all that's necessary ?

 

[dylanwinter]

You speak excellent sense

Progress ? :

Like rubber impellors which have to be regularly replaced (and they're not cheap), or they fail ...

Like small diameter props which satisfy the sales team's requirements for a general-purpose outboard, but are not well suited for pushing displacement hulls along with ...

Like electronics which will almost certainly die if the motor should ever find itself underwater ...

There is a reason why the Indians have opted for the manufacture of Royal Enfield motorbikes, and Morris Oxford cars, rather than something which is computer-controlled or has a V-tec engine or whatever - because they are adequate, proven designs which will continue to work in harsh environments with the minimum of maintenance. The same argument applies to the classic Land Rover, another proven design from the age of the Marston Seagull.

I'd be the first to admit that the fuel economy of the Seagull is one negative aspect, but that expense can be offset many times by the exceptionally low maintenance costs, and the virtually zero amortization: one Seagull, properly maintained, will see out the life of several 'modern' outboards.

But - as with most things in life - it's a question of 'horses for courses': if you're a heavy user of an outboard, several hundred hours annually (say), then the fuel consideration becomes a dominant issue - but if you only go out a few times each year, then a Seagull may prove a better bet. Returning to the issue of rubber impellors for example: these deteriorate whether the engine is used or not, so an engine sitting quietly in a corner awaiting use is in fact wearing out, although not actually being used.

A mate of mine religiously takes his Yamaha engines (x2) to a commercial servicing bloke each year, although he uses them less than a handful of times a year - impellor change, plugs change, tweak the carb, grease wherever necessary ... you know the kind of thing. Last time his bill was over £250. The whole of my Seagull collection of 8 engines (at the last count) has just about cost me the same.

Ok, it's not a completely fair comparison, as his engines are much bigger (25 and 15HP) than mine (4/5 HP), but I'd have to burn an awful lot of fuel to make a dent in £250 !

For some reason I keep thinking about bicycles ... now there's a design which hasn't essentially changed in nearly 200 years. Maybe something which is 'good enough' and 'can do the job' is all that's necessary ?

brilliant explanation of the advantages of seagulls and appropriate technology. You are correct on all counts - everything you say is true and you speak like a reasonable man

until you mention that you have eight seagulls....



then after a brief moment of self examination I realise that I now have in my garage a two hp seagull, a 4hp seagull, a 6hp evinrude stroke, a Honda 2hp (utterly broken because it fell in the water and the con rod punched through the cylinder wall) and a 2.3hp Honda that works beautifully.


Dunno is you have ever been to india and seen the places where they repair the motorcycle taxis - some of them are just a pile of old bits in the corner of two walls, a bloke with a KTL Toolkit (TM)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/kindadopey/5749909503/

 

[Twister_Ken]

For some reason I keep thinking about bicycles ... now there's a design which hasn't essentially changed in nearly 200 years.

Maybe it's time you tried a modern bike!


Maybe something which is 'good enough' and 'can do the job' is all that's necessary ?

Do you drive a 60 year old car, still?

.

 

[electrosys]

Maybe something which is 'good enough' and 'can do the job' is all that's necessary ?

Do you drive a 60 year old car, still?

I think the hey-day for cars (when they became 'good enough', but not too sophisticated (meant in a negative sense)) was somewhere around the 1990's.
Having driven a computer-controlled all-singing all-dancing vehicle which was impossible to maintain without a specialist computer rig, I now drive a 25-year-old Peugeot: the MoT testers comment each visit that the bodywork looks like it's just come off the line. It has an OHV engine (none of your hydraulic valve-lifters to jam); and manual wind-up windows. Funny, I was thinking only yesterday whilst driving along that there's precious little to go wrong with it. One recipe for relaxed, even fun motoring.

In your earlier post you mentioned Dacron as being a 'modern material' - but like Seagulls it was invented back in the 1930's and 40's.
http://tuppencehapennyvintage.blogspot.com/2011/02/history-of-synthetics-polyester.html
The only reason it wasn't heavily promoted then, was that Nylon was the material in vogue. I well remember wearing shirts made from the damned stuff - talk about 'not fit for purpose' !.

But I agree with you - the days of duck canvas and manilla cordage are gone - they had too many downsides. The days of modern materials (Nylon, Dacron, Polyester) are here. These being pre-WWII products .... just like the Seagull design.

 

[electrosys]

... you speak like a reasonable man

until you mention that you have eight seagulls....



then after a brief moment of self examination I realise that I now have in my garage a two hp seagull, a 4hp seagull, a 6hp evinrude stroke, a Honda 2hp (utterly broken because it fell in the water and the con rod punched through the cylinder wall) and a 2.3hp Honda that works beautifully.

Just been in the shed ... I exaggerated ... it's now 7 Seagulls (2 x 102's, 3 x Silver Century Plus's, 1 x Featherweight, and a Seagull model 57 (as in 'Heinz 57') which I experiment with. The 8th was a Century 100 which I'd forgotten was terminally cannibalised.

Then - there's a Mariner 5 4-stroke (not used for the last 4 years), and a Mariner 2 (runs fine, used it last autumn, but not enough power for The Wash). There's also a Chrysler 8 which came with the latest boat (with a piddly little prop, so no use to me), and a Perkins 15 in bits.
Note to self: must have a clear-out ...

 

[Searush]

Originally Posted by Twister_Ken
Maybe something which is 'good enough' and 'can do the job' is all that's necessary ?

Do you drive a 60 year old car, still?

And why not? My vehicles are all between 30 & 15 years old with the one exception of the 6 yo motorhome I just aquired. I'd love a 1950's car or motorbike in the collection, but I am running out of places to park them all.

New stuff, boats, cars, houses, furniture, even clothes are not necessarily better than older ones. I much prefer living in a 150 yo cottage to the modern equivalent which would be a house on an estate.

 

[Cymrogwyllt]

New stuff, boats, cars, houses, furniture, even clothes are not necessarily better than older ones. I much prefer living in a 150 yo cottage to the modern equivalent which would be a house on an estate.

a very big +1 there

 

[Applescruffs]

Living in the Past!

A bigger +2....but old isn't always better.....how many pulls on that Seagull did 'yer man' have to do before it fired.....SO....when is the last time you drove a 40 year old car?....the brakes are pants.....the clutch is either on-or-off, the steering pulls your arms off, noisy, draughty cantankerous....yher!!! and I love e'm!! currently between classics at the moment...wont list 'em all but for sheer cussedness has to be the Triumph Stag....for Simples...Citroen 2CV....

 

[Searush]

Well, my 30 y-o car has pre-tensioned seat belts, power steering, all round hydraulic power assisted discs, ABS cruise control (must get that working again!) central locking, fuel injection. Oh and a 3.8ltr V8 - mind you it cost over 50 grand new which would have bought a pair of provincial semis in 1980.