Phil Nowack
Well-known member
OK... SO of the people have made the Scaup, how many actually inset the motor,vs the traditional layout of hanging off the transom???? Pros and cons?
Scaup
- Thread starter Phil Nowack
- Start date
Phil Nowack
Well-known member
OK... with all the responses I will break the news... I am planning to NOT inset the motor
Mistake. Fowl a prop and you will appreciate being able to untangle without leaning off the back of the boat. You will also lose some hide-ability, hole shot performance (level), aft buoyancy, and uniqueness of the design. But all I did was build one so what do I know 
CAnderson
Well-known member
Man, now you did it. I wanted to respond, but I haven't built a Scaup before. If I were to build one, my preference would be to build it with the recessed motor well.
It is your boat, so build it how you want, I am just excited to see a couple of builds going on. Keep us posted and informed along the way.
Oh, and post some more of those beautiful Chessie pics too. Hoping to get a couple of my own this season. The Setter has been cooperating and providing lots of great pics, but now it is time to focus on some Chessie pics with ducsk in mouth.
Chad
It is your boat, so build it how you want, I am just excited to see a couple of builds going on. Keep us posted and informed along the way.
Oh, and post some more of those beautiful Chessie pics too. Hoping to get a couple of my own this season. The Setter has been cooperating and providing lots of great pics, but now it is time to focus on some Chessie pics with ducsk in mouth.
Chad
Phil Nowack
Well-known member
FINALLY!!!...
SO... Eric, do you think it will draft deeper with the the motor hanging off the end? My real goal is a TDB17 out of aluminum. I wasn't really thrilled with the inset motor on my BBII. The other factor that I don't like with the inset, is loss of fuel tank storage.
SO... Eric, do you think it will draft deeper with the the motor hanging off the end? My real goal is a TDB17 out of aluminum. I wasn't really thrilled with the inset motor on my BBII. The other factor that I don't like with the inset, is loss of fuel tank storage.
Brandon Yuchasz
Well-known member
Phil,
Sam and I had a discussion about well vs no well unfortunately I can't remember the conversations as it applied to a BBIII. does that help?
Since your planning to wale tail the boat how would you incorporate that with the recessed motor? With the garvey I chose a straight transom with a splash well.
Sam and I had a discussion about well vs no well unfortunately I can't remember the conversations as it applied to a BBIII. does that help?
Since your planning to wale tail the boat how would you incorporate that with the recessed motor? With the garvey I chose a straight transom with a splash well.
It will somewhat. Maybe not enough to matter. What size/weight motor are you going to run? What didn't you like before. That may not change. Fuels tanks work fine up front.
Phil Nowack
Well-known member
Brandon, in my planning... I didn't even consider how it would or wouldn't incorperate a the whaleback.
Eric, I as I tend to put all my decoys up front... the Fuel tank is not very convienent up there... to be honest I don't exactly remember my issue, but I didn't like how it forced me further into the cockpit. I also really like the splash well... I was thinking of a 40hp... but.. perhaps a 50....
Eric, I as I tend to put all my decoys up front... the Fuel tank is not very convienent up there... to be honest I don't exactly remember my issue, but I didn't like how it forced me further into the cockpit. I also really like the splash well... I was thinking of a 40hp... but.. perhaps a 50....
Brandon Yuchasz
Well-known member
Phil,
I run a 40hp two stroke on my 16 foot garvey. Its enough motor most of the time but with enough guys and decoys I find myself wishing for the 50. Obviously a different hull though.
I run a 40hp two stroke on my 16 foot garvey. Its enough motor most of the time but with enough guys and decoys I find myself wishing for the 50. Obviously a different hull though.
Sean C.
Active member
Phil,
I built my Scaup approximately 8 years ago now, and built it with a full transom. In that time I have done a lot of hunting and crabbing with the boat, and in my opinion the full transom is the way to go. I do agree that you lose some of the "appeal" and "uniqueness" of what the original Devlin designs that probably drew most of us to them in the first place, but I believe the advantages of a full transom outweigh the advantages of the inset transom.
What I like most about the transom change is that I can sit on the Starboard aft deck comfortably and run the motor; I dont have to sit further forward in the cockpit eating up what is already valuable real estate.
The second most important item to me, which has been debated and discussed on here many times before, is that the full transom keeps water from splashing into the boat through the motor well (well, for the most part). I spent all of my time either on the Puget Sound or in the San Juan's hunting and crabbing with my boat. I also find myself "backing down" quite regularly either to hold a position in the wind, reversing to pick up decoys, or reversing just for the sake of reversing. I'm here to tell you that in these scenarios, in these waters, you will take on significant amounts of unwanted water.
The third reason was for additional storage space. I originally stowed the 6 gallon fuel tank where the motor well would have been, but have since relocated the fuel tank to the bow on a platform I built for better weight distribution when running the boat solo. I intend to make some nice dry storage, with a rack and door, for the motor well, which was an idea I stold from Tod Osier on his Snowgoose.
Cons - The only con in my opinion, other than the cool Devlin duckboat look of having an inset motor, is that unless you move some weight forward and add wedges, the LCG is too far aft. I found that even with the wedges (which I made too small) that until I moved the fuel tank forward the boat would still porpoise slightly at WOT. I'm close to 300 lbs, and that along with the battery, the fuel tank and running the boat solo and light, is too much weight to be sitting on the aft deck. However, with the simple adjustment of relocating a 6 gallon fuel tank to the bow, all my problems were fixed.
Feel free to ask any questions you might have - I absolutely love my Scaup and everything it does for me. I would say however if I were to do it again I would probably opt to build the Snow Goose due to the higher freeboard which would truly suit my needs better.
I built my Scaup approximately 8 years ago now, and built it with a full transom. In that time I have done a lot of hunting and crabbing with the boat, and in my opinion the full transom is the way to go. I do agree that you lose some of the "appeal" and "uniqueness" of what the original Devlin designs that probably drew most of us to them in the first place, but I believe the advantages of a full transom outweigh the advantages of the inset transom.
What I like most about the transom change is that I can sit on the Starboard aft deck comfortably and run the motor; I dont have to sit further forward in the cockpit eating up what is already valuable real estate.
The second most important item to me, which has been debated and discussed on here many times before, is that the full transom keeps water from splashing into the boat through the motor well (well, for the most part). I spent all of my time either on the Puget Sound or in the San Juan's hunting and crabbing with my boat. I also find myself "backing down" quite regularly either to hold a position in the wind, reversing to pick up decoys, or reversing just for the sake of reversing. I'm here to tell you that in these scenarios, in these waters, you will take on significant amounts of unwanted water.
The third reason was for additional storage space. I originally stowed the 6 gallon fuel tank where the motor well would have been, but have since relocated the fuel tank to the bow on a platform I built for better weight distribution when running the boat solo. I intend to make some nice dry storage, with a rack and door, for the motor well, which was an idea I stold from Tod Osier on his Snowgoose.
Cons - The only con in my opinion, other than the cool Devlin duckboat look of having an inset motor, is that unless you move some weight forward and add wedges, the LCG is too far aft. I found that even with the wedges (which I made too small) that until I moved the fuel tank forward the boat would still porpoise slightly at WOT. I'm close to 300 lbs, and that along with the battery, the fuel tank and running the boat solo and light, is too much weight to be sitting on the aft deck. However, with the simple adjustment of relocating a 6 gallon fuel tank to the bow, all my problems were fixed.
Feel free to ask any questions you might have - I absolutely love my Scaup and everything it does for me. I would say however if I were to do it again I would probably opt to build the Snow Goose due to the higher freeboard which would truly suit my needs better.
Sean C.
Active member
I also forgot to note that the effects on the static trim of the boat are pretty minimal in my opinion. The LCG does move further aft, but I dont think it has too much of an impact on trim.
I agree with Eric that hole shot almost certainly negatively effected, but with a 40hp motor (which you should definately have) you have plenty of power to get up on step.
I originally used a 3 cylinder 30hp Yamaha because I had it, which did a suffecient job of powering the boat even when heavy, but when I stepped up to a 40hp the difference was night and day.
Good Luck
I agree with Eric that hole shot almost certainly negatively effected, but with a 40hp motor (which you should definately have) you have plenty of power to get up on step.
I originally used a 3 cylinder 30hp Yamaha because I had it, which did a suffecient job of powering the boat even when heavy, but when I stepped up to a 40hp the difference was night and day.
Good Luck
Phil Nowack
Well-known member
Thank you Sean,
I am ... about 210... but, the bow will still probably need ballast. I have marked up drawings and am working on pricing. I really like the splash well... as well...
I am ... about 210... but, the bow will still probably need ballast. I have marked up drawings and am working on pricing. I really like the splash well... as well...
Steve Horswell
Member
Phil:
I haven't built a Scaup but built a Devlin Black Brant 1 over 25 years ago. I continue to use this boat and brought it to the Lacrosse get together two year ago. I had the same debate with myself at the time I built it (there wasn't an internet, let alone a duckboat.net to bounce ideas around). I elected to build my boat with a full transom and added a motor mount bracket to the top of the deck to raise the motor to enable the boat to run in shallower water. The full transom also enables me to keep 3 dozen decoys under the back deck. The full transom is probably not as pleasing on the eye as the motor well and the more rearward position of the motor causes the bow to ride a bit higher when underway. The Black Brant 1 is a displacement hull with a lot of rocker whereas the Scaup is a planing hull with much less rocker. I would expect this design difference to cause the bow to ride much lower on your to-be-full transom Scaup versus my full transom Black Brant 1. However you decide to built it, you know it won't be the perfect duck boat and you'll have to build another anyway. Consider this one to be practice for the next one. I have a building full of boats due to this phenomenon.
I haven't built a Scaup but built a Devlin Black Brant 1 over 25 years ago. I continue to use this boat and brought it to the Lacrosse get together two year ago. I had the same debate with myself at the time I built it (there wasn't an internet, let alone a duckboat.net to bounce ideas around). I elected to build my boat with a full transom and added a motor mount bracket to the top of the deck to raise the motor to enable the boat to run in shallower water. The full transom also enables me to keep 3 dozen decoys under the back deck. The full transom is probably not as pleasing on the eye as the motor well and the more rearward position of the motor causes the bow to ride a bit higher when underway. The Black Brant 1 is a displacement hull with a lot of rocker whereas the Scaup is a planing hull with much less rocker. I would expect this design difference to cause the bow to ride much lower on your to-be-full transom Scaup versus my full transom Black Brant 1. However you decide to built it, you know it won't be the perfect duck boat and you'll have to build another anyway. Consider this one to be practice for the next one. I have a building full of boats due to this phenomenon.
Huntindave McCann
Well-known member
Always good to have materials on hand, in the garage, just in case the urge strikes to build another one, right? :>) :>) Good thing I live far enough away or we would be working on it now Steve.
Steve Sanford
Well-known member
Phil,
Can't wait to see what you come up with. Another member here Cody Williams did something similar last year I believe which really caught my eye. If you search his name you'll come across his vision of a sneak boat. I don't know if he started with a Devlin design or if this is his own design. Obviously his isn't a TBD but he doesn't have the motor well which I like. I like the use of the space under the deck rather that lose it to a motor well. Now what I'm really interested in is how you'll approach the upper deck to get the look and height of the TDB17.
Can't wait to see what you come up with. Another member here Cody Williams did something similar last year I believe which really caught my eye. If you search his name you'll come across his vision of a sneak boat. I don't know if he started with a Devlin design or if this is his own design. Obviously his isn't a TBD but he doesn't have the motor well which I like. I like the use of the space under the deck rather that lose it to a motor well. Now what I'm really interested in is how you'll approach the upper deck to get the look and height of the TDB17.
Chuck J
Well-known member
Last edited:
Phil
I'd say you got some really good feedback with from a diverse group of users. You know I'm biased towards the motor well and on a sneakbox type boat as they seem to make the most sense to me. I've heard the water splashing concern before but haven't experienced it too much myself. Could be because I put a splash guards in the well on both sides, or might be I just don't encounter the water conditions that lead to water splashing over the transom. But having said that the splash well is also a nice option and on a garvey style boat the way I probably would go. I'm sure you'll come up with something that best suits your needs. Seeing all the variations and ideas from builders over the years has made us all a lot smarter.
Eric
I'd say you got some really good feedback with from a diverse group of users. You know I'm biased towards the motor well and on a sneakbox type boat as they seem to make the most sense to me. I've heard the water splashing concern before but haven't experienced it too much myself. Could be because I put a splash guards in the well on both sides, or might be I just don't encounter the water conditions that lead to water splashing over the transom. But having said that the splash well is also a nice option and on a garvey style boat the way I probably would go. I'm sure you'll come up with something that best suits your needs. Seeing all the variations and ideas from builders over the years has made us all a lot smarter.
Eric
Cody Williams
Well-known member
Hey guys, glad you like my boats, I'm honored to have them referenced! For what it's worth, I've had great luck with my BB3 with the full transom and rear rocker removed, my purpose for doing it was to mount a mud motor. I talked with Sam about changing the design before I did it and he encouraged me to give it a try. I haven't ridden in the original design so I can't compare them directly but the additional surface area in the rear lets you float a bit more weight, which is handy with a heavy mud motor, and it seems to jump up on plane pretty quickly. I haven't had any issues with porpising, but I'm probably not hitting the speeds with my mud motor that you guys with outboards are. I wouldn't call myself an expert but I think that the porposing at speed is caused by the rear rocker in the hull, and taking that out seems to solve the issue. You might lose some seaworthiness in open water and heavy swells but I don't have those conditions much in Utah so it isn't an issue for me, however if you hunt the big water it might be something to consider. The Scaup is a very similar hull to the BB3 so I think that the changes I made would have similar effects on the bigger hull.
My smaller sneak boat is my own design, the hull goes from a semi V in the front to totally flat from about halfway back. Again this boat was designed around mud motors so it has no rear rocker but when I ran a surface drive on it it absolutely flew, it goes a bit slower with the longtail that I have on it now but I've never had any issues with porposing on that hull either. I'm interested to see what you end up coming up with!
My smaller sneak boat is my own design, the hull goes from a semi V in the front to totally flat from about halfway back. Again this boat was designed around mud motors so it has no rear rocker but when I ran a surface drive on it it absolutely flew, it goes a bit slower with the longtail that I have on it now but I've never had any issues with porposing on that hull either. I'm interested to see what you end up coming up with!