zmk1962

Oh dear. Here we go again. All the best @kingfishbig, with your concerns regarding s/s I seriously recommend you x-ray check your s/s outboard mounting bolts for internal corrosion very frequently, for your peace of mind. You can’t have one view on s/s shackles and another on all your other boat/motor s/s fittings. cheers Zoran ps - My last outboard s/s mounting bolts were in place for 21 years and spent far more time in water than my s/s anchor fittings - no corrosion issues. I am comfortable with my set up based on decades of personal experience. I’ll stick with what has worked for me.

Seems @wrxhoon1 and I have exactly the same approach. Gal steel chain, s/s shackles and snap hooks - oversized to compensate. cheers Zoran

Thanks @kingfishbig. Another interesting read by the same author. He seems to be going against the rest of the industry on this topic. Both Stressfree Marine and Lonestar Marine - two of the major anchoring system suppliers in Oz recommended the swivel. BTW I wonder how often that author changes all his gal steel anchor terminal gear compared to the s/steel alternative to keep it serviceable- I think you’d agree it would be much more frequent than the s/s alternative (yes stainless has a service life and would have to be changed eventually as well). Anyway, as I said previously my s/s outboard mounting bolts, propeller, tilt trim shafts etc all spend far more time in saltwater than my anchor does - would that author recommend I change all these to gal steel ! In my original post above I have shared what I have used for the past 4years so that I do not need any tools to change the anchor. There was a concern raised about snap hook holding strength - which I have address. There was a concern about using s/s - largely raised on the basis of one author who has a different view to the rest of the industry. From what I can see, my anchoring requirements as a recreational powerboat user / fisherman are different from that of a cruising sail boater. We all have to evaluate pros and cons and then use what suits our needs best. I have shared what works for me. cheers Zoran

Top report - felt like I was there. cheers Zoran

Hey @Yon, love your views and your efforts! cheers Zoran

Yup. Pretty good summary. cheers Z

Thanks KC, I skim read the article. I didn't see it recommended one material over the other but we all know the whole marine industry recommends s/s over gal steel products for marine use. I think the whole point of that article is to highlight that just by using s/s you cannot set and forget. Anything left in saltwater is susceptible to corrosion, you still must do the periodic visual check and maintenance of the components you use. I would also add that practically speaking my s/s propeller and the s/s mounting bolts holding my outboard spend far far more time in salt water than the anchor shackles - should I be worried about catastrophic failure of these? Not really, I am using them within their design criteria. Here are some of my additional comments. Correct. S/s has a different failure characteristic to mild steel. It is less malleable so under certain stresses it will crack before it visually deforms out of shape. A mild steel gal shackle would bend out of shape first and then snap. But if this is happening 30m underwater would you really be able to see its starting to deform and about to snap? Not really. Whether its gal steel or s/s you would only recognise the end result - the component failed. So for me this concern is handled by choosing a s/s component with sufficient breaking strain rating or SWL. for the job - ie used within its design limits and I'd oversize if I was really concerned. Yes I am familiar with s/s corrosion and have written about it several times in different posts. S/s is an alloy of iron, chromium and various other metals. It is impossible with our manufacturing technology to uniformly disperse the various atoms to create a completely homogenous mixture so you will end up with clumps of iron atoms with a thin layer of protective chromium trioxide on top. If scratched, these areas can pit as the iron is exposed to oxygen and rusts - we are all familiar with that annoying rust stain on our stainless products. The article is somewhat confusing in mentioning that s/s occurs in low oxygen environments - as it does not explain where then does the underlying iron atom get the oxygen to rust. If there is no oxygen for the chromium trioxide to form, where does the oxygen come from to form the iron oxide (rust) pitting underneath? I think the article just oversimplified the whole s/s corrosion phenomena. From my knowledge of metallurgy, s/s corrodes in areas where it cannot form the chromium trioxide protective layer. This usually happens at a boundary / irregularity / edge where something prevents the third oxygen atom binding to the chromium atom leaving the underlying iron exposed. The edge between a plastic knife handle and the blade, the corner in a butt weld, the edges of a grease stain etc. So its not really a low oxygen environment that causes hidden s/s corrosion, its a situation where oxygen is inhibited from that particular area of the s/s surface. From a mechanical perspective, when s/s is scratched and there is oxygen in the environment it reforms the protective layer if the boundary conditions I discussed above allow it. This is unlike a gal steel product. Once the protective zinc layer is gone, there is nothing to prevent the underlying iron from completely rusting. Hence gal products have a far lower service life in a marine environment especially where there is friction movement. Look at a gal D shackle - it starts to rust at the thread and where the chain rubs - this is where the zinc is removed first. BUT the rust damage is far more visible and hence more likely that maintenance action will be taken. Which again I think was the point of that article. Cheers Zoran

Hey Adrian could you check the link - it just opens YouTube for me. cheers Zoran

Donna, I gave you a "thanks" coz I couldn't give a gold star ⭐ ... FYI, Post reading the RMS site I contacted my Toll Tag provider (linkt) and they advised "... Upon checking the effective date of the Large Recreational Toll Rebate will be on November 2020" So I have registered for the news letter and updates with RMS. Cheers Zoran

I understand the concern - I had the same until I checked the load ratings - SWL (suggested working load) is 25% of breaking strain .. http://rwbmarine.com.au/CAT/RWB_Catlog_Sec16.pdf So Snap Hook : 1 x 290kg SWL = 290kg up to 1160kg (but there is chance of the snap coming undone) Snap Hooks : 2 x 290kg SWL = 580kg up to 2320kg (hooks face opposite directions so almost zero chance of coming undone) Quick link : 1 x 1000kg SWL = 1000 up to 4000kg Rope : 8mm 1300kg BS I'm feel that the bollard would probably pull out of the fglass before any of these items went.... Cheers Zoran

Hi Ron ( @campr ), necessity is the mother of invention for sure... inconvenience is another !!! FYI, I have done away with using shackles on anchors altogether and can change anchors even with cold wet fingers. This is my set up. Full write up is in this old post: Cheers Zoran

I was just responding to your statement that it was the "wrong pitch" since 2001. It's not that black and white...right and wrong. There is a lot of ok grey!!!! Hence I mentioned there could have been factors which made that 16p work for the original owner.... the mechanic advised that it was too small - it's implied that advice resulted under the conditions that he tested it - I would additionally ask him if there was sign of cavitation? - if yes, then the prop is definitely too small. If not, then whether its the wrong prop depends on how @Blade intends to use it. Ideally you want to spin the biggest prop and pitch your motor can for hole shot (low RPM Torque) and for max speed (WOT) - under your typical boating conditions and typical boat load and typical boating use ...... As @wrxhoon1 said choosing the right (optimum) prop can be trial and error. Factors to consider: motor max recommended RPM (WOT), motor torque output at different RPM (the turning force applied to the prop at different RPM) - the propeller pitch and diameter: smaller pitch has more bite, bigger diameter has more bite - but spinning a too small pitch too small diameter too fast will cause cavitation (under propped) etc the propeller design and material of construction( ally, s/steel, 3 blade, 4 blade): s/steel has less distortion than ally so will have more bite in the water requiring more torque, thinner blades will have less resistance so spin faster with same torque, etc. the boat hull design (deep V, flat bottom): V's sit deeper in water - need more thrust/prop bite/torque esp for hole shot etc the boat hull balance (weight distribution) the intended use of the boat (typical hull payload, towing - skiers etc, racing) the water typical water conditions (calm water- estuary, lake; broken water-offshore) etc Cheers Zoran

Original owner may have regularly carried more load (more people onboard) or towed skier(s)/tube(s) Or been very stern heavy with his deployment- so needed better hole shot performance at the sacrifice of top end speed. Or this may not be the original prop - just the one the boat was sold with. Cheers Zoran

Sikaflex would be absorbing a lot of your signal. So it’s promising that it worked. cheers Z

Top report to match a top fish 👍👍worth the wait I say. cheers Zoran

It will work but like the 16p the question is how well? As a rule of thumb each increase in pitch raises your top end speed about 6% and because it’s a more aggressive pitch it will reduce the wot rpm (motor working harder). But it lowers your hole shot performance. The 16p would have a lot of push at hole shot rpm (was the boat set up that way coz it carried a lot of load) so moving to 19p you’d lose some of that. Ask your mechanic for his opinion on the 19p it all depends on what problem you are trying to solve. PM me if you want to discuss over phone cheers Zoran

I was about to suggest exact same. Especially if the problem only surfaced after you worked on the impeller. cheers Zoran

Thanks Sam. Conditions were great. Motor is now well run in. First service 20hrs on Tuesday. Reo bar sinkers are a necessity when the sash weights dry up 👍. cheers Z

Hahaha that would be grand but I just implemented the 2m 40lb sinker breakaway trace so I don’t lose the rigs if we snag bottom ... we’d be fighting the mako or bill on 40lb mono 🤣🤣🤣 cheers Z

Search for casting a center pin reel. cheers Zoran

They are a lot of fun and capture absolutely fantastic footage. BUT get ready to update your home IT setup and burn lots of your time - they use up heaps of storage and you’ll find yourself going thru hours of video (unable to delete any coz you might want it one day 😬). Typical day fishing Clips = 22gb storage. Typical skiing trip 150-200gb of footage. That’s hours of video to go through and heaps to backup and store. It becomes a world onto itself. But lots Of fun. cheers Zoran ps - maybe I just have to get more disciplined with what I keep 🤔

Top stuff Yowie. Another great feed. cheers Zoran

Thanks @Yowie, yup Dieter and I were pestered by makos last trip - maybe it’s them again. If so we have just stumbled on a cheap but effective mako lure ! cheers Zoran

Trust me its more ingenious and much less effort to have a FR mate like Dieter who can keep you in supply of sash weights ! The alternative requires a full time operation: Procurement, Manufacturing (cutting, welding), Finishing (painting), Storage and Distribution... Cheers Z

Hmmm barracoota could be a possibility, but why would they be interested in a 30cm black steel rod descending at free spool speed 2-3m below the squid/pillie/lumo jigs? I'm perplexed. Two of these were taken on the way down --- @61 crusher and I had the same experience last time around, but from memory they were on the retrieve, which was slower and with the wave action may impart a jigging like action... Cheers Z