| MudmotorTalk.com http://www.mudmotortalk.com/mmt_v2/ |
|
| 1854 vs. 2054 http://www.mudmotortalk.com/mmt_v2/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1253 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Full Throttle [ Tue Mar 24, 2009 7:57 pm ] |
| Post subject: | 1854 vs. 2054 |
What's the weight difference between these two sizes in .125, approximately? I was originally thinking 1854 for my next hull, but if the extra 2 feet won't rob too much performance, I may go that route. I don't run timber. Mostly hard, sandy bottom with a big load. What yall think? |
|
| Author: | coastal [ Tue Mar 24, 2009 10:12 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 1854 vs. 2054 |
I am 2 fuked up 2 think rite now...Will reply when sober. |
|
| Author: | bayouboy [ Wed Mar 25, 2009 12:40 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 1854 vs. 2054 |
|
|
|
| Author: | balloon-knot [ Wed Mar 25, 2009 5:51 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 1854 vs. 2054 |
Hell.... I am only mildy Fuked up right now.....so here is goes!!  1860 - 630lbs 2060 - 650lbs Stright from the Phowler brocher. I would assume the others would be similar in diference. |
|
| Author: | Crews [ Wed Mar 25, 2009 6:48 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 1854 vs. 2054 |
weight difference is a funny thing to me... I think a marginal difference in weight actually means alot when you're talking about pushing off a sand bar. it may not make that much difference when you're floating, but when that sucker is stuck on a sand bar with one inch of water, there's a big difference. for example... Hizzoner had a 17x54 excel with all the extra boxes, etc. the whole inside of the boat was also coated in bedliner. we got that thing stuck on a sandbar with appr. 1" of water, and couldn't push it off to save our lives. Got stuck in the exact same conditions with a stock 17x54 Prodrive boat, and 2 guys pushed it off with ease. Never have been able to figure that out. As far as floating performance, I'm no boat FE, but my motto is it never hurts to have that extra couple feet... |
|
| Author: | Sand Man [ Wed Mar 25, 2009 8:07 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 1854 vs. 2054 |
Not sure which grade AL you are using, but I took 5086 AL from PD's website. The weight of 5086 AL is .096 lb/in^3. Let's say you have 21" sides on both boats. The sides would be 21"X24"(for the extra 2')X.125"(I'm guessing you would use this thickness as it's standard on most MM hulls). That = 63in^3 X's 2 for both sides of the hull which equals 126in^3. Now for the bottom. 54"(bottom width)X24"(for the extra 2' longer hull)X.125"(thickness) equals 162in^3. So the extra 2' of hull is approx 288 cubic inches of extra metal. 288in^3 X's .096 lb/in^3 equals 27.648 pounds. That should give you an idea. I'd say go the extra 2', but I'd put poly on the bottom like drake1 does since you run sandy bottom. Disclaimer: I pulled the density of 5086 AL from Wikipedia. I was too lazy to look in the Mark's handbook, so it might be wrong. 
|
|
| Author: | BROOKS [ Wed Mar 25, 2009 8:14 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 1854 vs. 2054 |
and that there is the reasons SandyMans makes the big bucks !!!
|
|
| Author: | Sand Man [ Wed Mar 25, 2009 8:33 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 1854 vs. 2054 |
Brookes! Why you always makin' fun of me and mines?  
|
|
| Author: | BROOKS [ Wed Mar 25, 2009 8:48 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 1854 vs. 2054 |
| Author: | Sand Man [ Wed Mar 25, 2009 8:58 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 1854 vs. 2054 |
Just messing with you Brookes. I didn't take it as an insult. No idea on the total weight as all the measurements of materials used would just be an approximation.
|
|
| Author: | Full Throttle [ Wed Mar 25, 2009 9:26 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 1854 vs. 2054 |
| Author: | Sand Man [ Wed Mar 25, 2009 9:59 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 1854 vs. 2054 |
| Author: | Full Throttle [ Wed Mar 25, 2009 10:45 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 1854 vs. 2054 |
| Author: | muddoctor [ Wed Mar 25, 2009 2:18 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 1854 vs. 2054 |
We figured it out with alot less brain power. Just put a 16' on a trailer and ran over to the grain elevator two blocks away and ran over the scale, then put an 17 on the same trailer, then 18, then 20 and rounded up to make it nice and even. Can't compete with old Sanders on this one.  PW |
|
| Author: | Brinkleydog [ Wed Mar 25, 2009 4:32 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 1854 vs. 2054 |
If you want to put your motor on a 20x54 let me know we can trap it on anytime...........you dotn have to buy mine, but if you want to check the load performace out let me know. You might want a 60" wide after you see the 54" |
|
| Author: | Full Throttle [ Wed Mar 25, 2009 5:16 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 1854 vs. 2054 |
| Author: | Brinkleydog [ Wed Mar 25, 2009 9:01 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 1854 vs. 2054 |
Don't worry about the weight of the hull but think of it like crews said. How much resistance will a 60 wide be when in contact with the bottom. I can pull my rig buy myself off a sand flat with 2 in.....ask costal and gigga they was in the same place.....but if I set it on dry ground I need another person to push off. My next rig well be a 60 but will also have poly on the bottom. Good luck and let me know if you want to run my hull. Anybody know how to calculate amount of force needed to move a 1000 lb load on dry ground with a 20X60.....SandMan what u got for us. |
|
| Author: | Wilson [ Thu Mar 26, 2009 12:44 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 1854 vs. 2054 |
| Author: | River [ Thu Mar 26, 2009 6:17 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 1854 vs. 2054 |
| Author: | muddiejeep [ Thu Mar 26, 2009 7:02 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 1854 vs. 2054 |
You would need to know the coeffiecent of friction for the type of dry land and for the boat. Sand, grass, and mud have differrent coefficents of friction. |
|
| Author: | muddoctor [ Thu Mar 26, 2009 7:45 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 1854 vs. 2054 |
| Author: | basinhunter [ Thu Mar 26, 2009 7:54 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 1854 vs. 2054 |
| Author: | Sand Man [ Thu Mar 26, 2009 8:08 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 1854 vs. 2054 |
| Author: | Sand Man [ Thu Mar 26, 2009 8:10 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 1854 vs. 2054 |
On edit, I see you asked for 1000lb load. You are talking total weight or that amount of weight in a 2060 with a motor on back???? Okay, so 1000 pounds in a 2060 with a PD motor. 1000 + 650 for boat + 240 for motor = 1890. Let’s round that up to 2000 to keep it simple 2000 pounds = 907.18 kg f = u*N = u*m*g = 0.31*907.18*9.8 = 2756.03 N 1 N = .2248 lb force, so 2756.03 N = 619.55 lb force |
|
| Author: | basinhunter [ Thu Mar 26, 2009 8:14 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 1854 vs. 2054 |
WTF he just said? lol |
|
| Author: | River [ Thu Mar 26, 2009 8:27 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 1854 vs. 2054 |
| Author: | Brinkleydog [ Thu Mar 26, 2009 9:30 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 1854 vs. 2054 |
| Author: | Brinkleydog [ Thu Mar 26, 2009 9:36 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 1854 vs. 2054 |
| Author: | basinhunter [ Thu Mar 26, 2009 9:52 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 1854 vs. 2054 |
| Author: | Sand Man [ Thu Mar 26, 2009 10:02 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 1854 vs. 2054 |
| Author: | Brinkleydog [ Thu Mar 26, 2009 10:08 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 1854 vs. 2054 |
I just added it up for ya......me my wife and kids weigh in at 495 plus food box and gass......... Recon i need to go ahead and get the party barge out and crank it up..........kids not getting any smaller.........they in that exponential growth stage........ I see Sandman i giving us weights but remember everyboat is braced different and has different floors so i would say a hull could weigh 10-70 lbs different from just the bracign and floor posabilities. Later |
|
| Author: | Brinkleydog [ Thu Mar 26, 2009 10:10 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 1854 vs. 2054 |
LOL.....the 1000lb was for hull plus gass and BS......only person who never gets out is my dad.."you got us in theis you get us out" old fuker..... |
|
| Author: | muddoctor [ Thu Mar 26, 2009 11:37 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 1854 vs. 2054 |
It is much simpler with then all that. How much force to move a 1000 lb hull and motor off dry ground? With four people in the boat to help, 25% of the effort and not to bad if they can all help. With three people inthe boat to help, 33% of the effort and not to bad if they are not all lightweights. With two people only, 50% of the effort after you take everything out of the boat and get is moving. At least one of you will probably blow a nut. Alone, 100% of the effort to go 1", you will blow a nut, strain your back, bruse at least one arm and be in a great deal of pain (if you are without beer) will take about an hour. With Russ in the boat with you. Forget it, you will blow both nuts, strain your back, bruse both arms and be in a extreme pain and royally pissed......... As you watch Sanders sitting on the back corner drinking all your beer pretending to help:mrgreen:
|
|
| Author: | River [ Thu Mar 26, 2009 12:10 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 1854 vs. 2054 |
| Author: | Brinkleydog [ Thu Mar 26, 2009 1:33 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 1854 vs. 2054 |
Well if i got get me some i guess i can say i got a friend then
|
|
| Author: | 50fps [ Fri Mar 27, 2009 1:49 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 1854 vs. 2054 |
http://www.principalmetals.com/utilitie ... ulator.htm |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 6 hours |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|