| MudmotorTalk.com http://www.mudmotortalk.com/mmt_v2/ |
|
| 6061,5052,or 5056 alum. bottom? http://www.mudmotortalk.com/mmt_v2/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=28208 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Fletch [ Thu Apr 05, 2012 12:46 pm ] |
| Post subject: | 6061,5052,or 5056 alum. bottom? |
 Read some where that the 6061 takes impacts better. I know the 5052 and 56 are marine grade but thats about it. I think that most mud boats are made with the 5056. Ill run the river more than mud. Just asking to see what the experts opinions are. Was wondering if the fellas that run the snake river and the ones that run up in Alaska if they run different bottoms. Thanks in advance Fletcher |
|
| Author: | scatters boy 316 [ Thu Apr 05, 2012 1:01 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 6061,5052,or 5056 alum. bottom? |
get .190 guage bottom in 5086. .125 will last but .190 will outlast. keep in mind that the .190 bottomonly adds about 75 pounds but it is also distributed over the entire bottom surface. also bracing helps alot with dents to makes sure to get extra stringers if your runnin rough terrian hope this helps,trey |
|
| Author: | scatters boy 316 [ Thu Apr 05, 2012 1:04 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 6061,5052,or 5056 alum. bottom? |
also 5052 dents easier than 5086, just ask anybody that has an excel boats(im not sain there weak, however they are now makeing there mud hulls wit 5086 as an option) |
|
| Author: | SCmudder7071 [ Thu Apr 05, 2012 1:24 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 6061,5052,or 5056 alum. bottom? |
3/16" equals .1875 but he is referring to 3/16" when he says .190. If your gona be in rocks, stumps, etc get a 3/16 bottom |
|
| Author: | Fletch [ Thu Apr 05, 2012 1:29 pm ] |
| Post subject: | 6061,5052,or 5056 alum. bottom? |
Yeah I'm doing the 3/16 bottom just asking about the difference in grades |
|
| Author: | Podcast [ Thu Apr 05, 2012 1:36 pm ] |
| Post subject: | 6061,5052,or 5056 alum. bottom? |
Like been said here, get what you'll be doin. If ya ain't hittin stumps en rocks ya could go really light. Most a da guys up here are running .080 or .100 at da most. Some run .125 but it pretty rare. I had an excel like mentioned above dat was .100 and dat was a dern heavy boat fer here. Da biggest thing I ever hit wit mine was floating catails. I used ta hit submerged logs wit my outboard but they ain't never touched my boat. |
|
| Author: | Salty Dawg [ Thu Apr 05, 2012 1:51 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 6061,5052,or 5056 alum. bottom? |
I'm running a .125 (5086) hull on the Snake River and have no problems with dents or hooks... |
|
| Author: | Barroll [ Fri Apr 06, 2012 9:19 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 6061,5052,or 5056 alum. bottom? |
I would never run a mud hull with less than .125 5086. I dont know of anyone running the 6061. Im sure there is a reason for that but I dont know why. It may have to do with the lack of flex in the aluminum which may lead to cracks? But im really not sure |
|
| Author: | Fletch [ Fri Apr 06, 2012 11:21 am ] |
| Post subject: | 6061,5052,or 5056 alum. bottom? |
Thanks SD was wondering how the 5056 did in the rocky rivers. Here is about half sand half rocks. |
|
| Author: | Salty Dawg [ Fri Apr 06, 2012 12:33 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 6061,5052,or 5056 alum. bottom? |
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 6 hours |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|