[Rhodes22-list] Converting Electric Winch Motor Lift to a Manual System

[Michael Weisner]

Stan,I always knew Purdue produced more than just poultry. Nice discussion, ME201 as I remember.I have the old (1991) manual version which still.works fine. The straight tracks were made of gray plastic with a narrow slot for the mount to ride in. No fancy aluminum guides or bearing surfaces. The only thing so far is that the top of the track cracked at the top bolt. Everything else is just fine.Mikes/v Wind Lass ('91)Nissequogue, NY
-------- Original message --------From: stan <stan at generalboats.com> Date: 9/6/20  4:05 PM  (GMT-05:00) To: The Rhodes 22 Email List <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org> Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] Converting Electric Winch Motor Lift to a
  Manual System > Boys and Girls, you are clogging up my inbox with this thread, to the > point that you know I go out of my way not to do; step in.  Of course > Chis is correct: /"Are we reinventing the wheel, didn't Stan have a > manual lift with a 6:1 pull? I seem to recall one at the boat show a > while back and it lifted the motor pretty easily." /We did.  And of course Roger is correct.  We used a direct in line pulling design with most all the energy going to moving the motor upward.  Even folk conceived in the roaring twenties could raise and gently lower that contaminating part of their boat.  Actually with 6 sheaves I think it was set up as a 7:1 ratio.  Those smirking a GB design, redesigned by some previous owner, are being innocently disingenuous.Consider the chair.  All 4 of its legs must work as designed or it becomes a rocking chair. Not so with a 3 legged stool. A stretch of an analogy but it points to the fact that any fault you are now encountering is not the result of a 3 X 2 wheel pulley system that worked heretofore, but is the fault of somehow new increased friction being introduced in the moving of the trolley.  So let's count those ways, bearing in mind that sometimes creative prior owners improve on our design - and sometimes, not being tuned into all the variables, they do not:1. The 2 aluminum channel tracks that the trolley rides in are distanced so that there is almost zero side to side play of the trolley.  If there is noticeable trolley side to side play, /*or*/ the tracks are not parallel, something or someone has altered the tracks from how they were set when leaving the plant.   More important:2.    The aluminum tracks must be in the same plane.   To make this possible on the curved transom of the boat, 2 long plastic parts are individually shaped and vertically mounted on the transom for the aluminum track channels to mount to so as to keep each track in the same plane. (These 2 long plastic parts are mounted to the transom by machine screws from inside the lazaret.) To the extent the aluminum tracks are displaced from being in the same plane, friction increases the force needed to raise the motor.  What could displace the tracks from being in the same plane?  Other owners "repairs". (I see in this thread where an owner replaced one of the two aluminum tracks with a home made plastic design, perhaps not tuned into the same plane need.  It did look like they were so far apart the trolley could be removed simply by moving it far enough to one side so the other side would lift out of its track. We do read some reporting of strange noises and machine screw heads pulling through transoms.  Hulls built by others were thin and reinforced with wood strips in the lazaret at the motor lift section of the transom.   A transom that could flex even slightly will take trolley tracks out of the same plane and increase friction that has to be overcome. On older recycled boats this gets caught and corrected, while it is probably missed on privately bought boats.  Hulls built in Edenton are coreless and of solid glass so thick, transoms carry motor lift, rudder loads and boarding ladder, all with no back up support. There is no flexing, even when pulled from the mold.3.    Trolley sliders.  If you have one continuous long slider on each side of the trolley, it is not a factory installation and is a source of considerable friction in non parallel and/or not in the same plane tracks.  Manual lift trolleys had 4 small wheels or sliders, two per side, mounted on pins or axles that allowed them to adjust their angles continuously to accommodate small track variations.  If sliders are multi fastened to the trolley and thus are not accommodative, friction will increase.  When we went to trolleys that could work manually or electrically, we went back to the 3 legged stool idea. There is only one slider on each side of the trolley's upper end.  This reduces friction.  There being no 4 sliders, the third leg of the trolley is a large wheel centered at the bottom of the trolley, that simply rides on the surface of the transom.  This allows for the trolley to start automatically tilting at the right moment to further raise the motor clear of the water.Two final comments.  To answer Peter's good questioning of 'if the manual version was so good why did we go to the electric version?' One, for a commercial reason. To expand our market appeal beyond the Peter principle level. */The ladies love it./*  The other, personal.  I got old and lazy and giving one demonstration sail after another at the Annapolis Sailboat show, where both sailing and motoring is required and the cockpit is full, I became inspired. Then during the demo sail I would ask one of the prospects to tell the motor to come out of the water.  When he or she did and nothing happened, I would say, "No, no.  That motor is from Japan. You have to speak to it in Japaneses".  Luckily, never having a guest who could, I would make some gibberish noise, press the remote in my pocket, take my bows, and maybe a deposit.The other comment is that all of the above is academic since when and if I ever get partnering, I have an idea that may make inboard, retractable electric propulsion competitive with outboards of any kind, and be standard with each Rhodes, making this entire thread of historical interest.stan