Pontoon boat and deck boat magazine
home
+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3
FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 23

Thread: Logic, on TAP Fins

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    780

    Default

    Larry
    You fully misunderstood this , a person of your great knowledge I would Never Be disrespectful too.
    Especially when it comes to the T.A.P. Fins.
    Your worldly experience in the performance field along with all of your enhancements should never be question.

    PS There are lots of up dated photos on Conrad Marine face book page TAP Fin.
    there the moderator won't change things....

    Love ya Larry.


    Malcolm
    Malcolm ( Goofy )
    TAP Fins
    8525 Sylvan
    200 H O E Tec




    " Keep a fire in your heart and a smile on your face, for you never know when your leaving this place"

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    6,213

    Default

    Do I detect a hint of sarcasm in your post Malcolm? Hard to tell if you're being sincere or just bumping up your game a little. But I do like the free advertising to visit your site on Facebook. Nice touch! You have to understand that when you come on here and belittle someone who has alot of engineering experience and also is very proficient with outboard engine rebuilding and boating experience in general, I cannot let those comments stay. Otherwise other members (especially new ones) would not trust his advice and the help he provides. His advice is sound and should be taken that way by all. This applies to many different facets of boating, not just one product.
    Rick

    St. Louis/Lake of the Ozarks

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    780

    Default

    Great day Rick,
    No belittling here, that was done some time ago on me and the product I developed.

    Did not know that engineering was so wide of a field? Like going to a dentist or a gynecologist, both have holes?
    Propulsion engineering is different form Manufacturing engineering.?
    Never said or thought Larry s advice was out of place until he became a expert on propulsion.
    great point as the New people that do come for that valued information , Life is a game to share not tear so speak from experience.
    Malcolm
    Malcolm ( Goofy )
    TAP Fins
    8525 Sylvan
    200 H O E Tec




    " Keep a fire in your heart and a smile on your face, for you never know when your leaving this place"

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Location
    Central Texas
    Posts
    88

    Default

    I’m new to the Forum...so forgive me if I stir things up that have settled-out and down... this is all new to me as the new guy.
    However, I am not unfamiliar with moderator duties/actions and the controversies which can arise as opinions clash and words on the internet lack voice-inflection and beget misunderstandings... I am a founding administrator and moderator at an aviation forum for almost 20 years and have BTDT.
    These TAP fins demonstrate an imaginative way to alter the physics of pontoons. But, in my mind I have to wonder a couple things (lacking any scientific proof, only opinions...). If the fins reside above the waterline, it seems the only time they contribute lift is at higher speeds that present them to wake. That wake colliding with the fins also creates drag...similar to the drag created by a boat not under-skinned ... although admittedly not as abruptly. It seems to me that the fins greatest contribution is a re-direction of the spray back onto the lake and the boat is already on-plane so that TAP-fin drag would counter any addt’l lift.
    In addition to that the fins add complexity and damage opportunities to the trailer and the pontoons themselves from collisions with bunks, docks, objects, etc.. Also, the additional welds and heat applied to the pontoons add stress to those areas, increasing the odds of stress/cracking/leaks (of pressurized hulls) if done at the after-market level... relying so much upon the individual welder’s skills.
    Since strakes are under the waterline, their contribution (to offset their drag) is that they reduce the drag of the pontoons themselves. In fact, that seems to be their major contribution... a change of characteristics of the pontoons from a purely displacement-hull to a semi-planing hull. This allows the boat to take better advantage of higher HP engines without skyrocketing fuel consumptions beyond the power-curve graph.
    The TAP fins are not for me due to their minimal contribution to lift vis a vis their potential for damage to the boat.
    Last edited by FogHorn; 09-11-2019 at 06:00 PM. Reason: Syntax

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Location
    Central Texas
    Posts
    88

    Default

    Actually, water and air are similar...they are both FLUIDS. Physics is physics.
    (I’ve seen the pictures and they’re not convincing, as they appear to only illustrate the deflection of spray back downward.) Without a first-hand/in-person trial and lacking measureable proof it’s a subjective matter.
    After FINALLY seeing a link (instead of promises that further information is coming later on the page that never seems to occur) ...and visiting the conradmarine site I was able to see the promotional video.
    Here’s my thoughts:
    It’s a promotional video that has self-defeating features. Just when a good view of the modification/installation is being presented in video-format... an INSERTED still-picture is superimposed preventing observation of the feature being described by the narrator.
    Reading the article in PBD magazine provided in the link... it describes yet-another subjective view of a promotiional. (Example: a family completely inexperienced with pontooning is given a ride in two boats that are initially described as identical except for one being TAP fin equipped and the other lifting-strake equipped. However, further reading describes how the TAP fin boat is equipped both inside and outside the pontoons...yet later the article states that it’d be even better if the inside of the pontoons also had the fins. Huh?)
    Then the inexperienced family is given the chance to drive the boat and the article appears to gloss-over the mans own comments that he “feels” like one boat handles better than the other. Again,. There’s that “feeling” rather than any factual or objective measurements.
    I realize that a boats “ride” is a felt perspective. I’m not trying to bad-mouth the product. I’m trying to find some realistic and objective facts rather than promises of more pictures (the views of which aren’t blocked by another still-picture overlaid it).
    I do see that the TAP-fin equipped boat has a non-underskinned structure. It’s pretty evident to me that the TAP fins must prevent a lot of spray from striking that non-under-skinned deck structure and that HAS to be a good thing!
    Whether or not as an owner I’d be better off under-skinning in a do-it-myself project... or having TAP fins installed ...is still unknown as to which would provide more benefit vs cost. I know that the derogatory name-calling drives me away and the mis-spellings and poor writing skills aren’t convincing tactics. I’d suggest a complete start-over and get rid of the attack-tactics.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Raystown Country, PA
    Posts
    2,228

    Default

    I have been saying or years that Id like to see a simple before and after TAP fin test, like you do with props. This is Bob's boat before tap fins, top speed, rpms's, turn radius, blow out, maybe decible level at helm, maybe fuel consumption. This is Bob's boat after, same measurements, same lake, same water conditions, a simple, fair, unbiased 3rd party test, that would answer some of these 15 year old questions once and for all.

    One of the most convincing videos I ever saw was a Tracker ad for their NUVI (I think) fins on the '08, '09 models, where a 20 foot boat with a 60 BF is overtaken and passed by an identical model boat with the same engine and the NUVI tubes. The proof is in the pudding.
    2006 Forester 19 Fish (new deck and carpet, Pontoonstuff interior, 2019)
    1996 Mercury 50 ELPT4S
    1983 Sea Nymph FM171 Striper (complete rebuild from hull up, 2014)
    1985 Johnson 70 J70ELCO

    Raystown Country, PA

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Raystown Country, PA
    Posts
    2,228

    Default

    In defense of TAP fins, the drag they add to the tube would be more fairly compared to that of an underskinned deck, or an underwater lifting strake, since they are a smooth uninterupted surface. Adding them would not create any more tube integrity, or trailering issues than adding any other aftermarket lifting strake type device. That is a risk that any pontoon owner would have to weigh before he did any modification to the tubes. I would never modify a tube that was under warranty, and with the lifetime warranty offered on a lot of pontoon hulls, it is something that has to be considered.

    The underwater strake would have to increase the drag of the stock tube by increasing the surface area of the tube as a whole. I'm guessing it makes up for this by helping the tube then get up on top of the water, like a standard water ski compared to a wider kid's set.
    2006 Forester 19 Fish (new deck and carpet, Pontoonstuff interior, 2019)
    1996 Mercury 50 ELPT4S
    1983 Sea Nymph FM171 Striper (complete rebuild from hull up, 2014)
    1985 Johnson 70 J70ELCO

    Raystown Country, PA

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Raystown Country, PA
    Posts
    2,228

    Default

    http://www.conradmarine.com/wp-conte...Tap-Fins-1.pdf

    In my opinion this test does a fair job of comparing a boat with fins to a boat with strakes. It is not exactly the perfect test, but it is as close as they could get and I believe they attemped to do it without bias.

    It also makes a pretty good case for the fins possibly being the better product. The tap fin boat performed as good as or better than the strake boat, with half as many attachments to the boat. I would guess that that would cost less, and that would make the fins a better deal.

    I would love to see this test done with a totally stock boat and one with TAP fins, that would tell the tale.
    2006 Forester 19 Fish (new deck and carpet, Pontoonstuff interior, 2019)
    1996 Mercury 50 ELPT4S
    1983 Sea Nymph FM171 Striper (complete rebuild from hull up, 2014)
    1985 Johnson 70 J70ELCO

    Raystown Country, PA

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Location
    Central Texas
    Posts
    88

    Default

    If TAP fins are indeed less expensive and more effective than strakes, it’ll be interesting to see if they (or something similar) become the favored method with new boats from more OEMs as opposed to strakes.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Location
    Central Texas
    Posts
    88

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FogHorn View Post
    If TAP fins are indeed less expensive and more effective than strakes, it’ll be interesting to see if they (or something similar) become the favored method with new boats from more OEMs as opposed to strakes.
    Well...whaddyaknow... I dropped by my marine dealer yesterday to pick up some small parts and saw a new South Bay on the showroom floor. It’s a 3+ model (3 full-size pontoons w/center-storage) and the outer ‘toons have ...not what I’d call TAP-fins...or fins at all...but they have what I’d describe as “miniature strakes” almost exactly where the TAP-fins appear to be mounted. These are only about 1.5” wide strakes instead of the full-sized 3” ones SB mounts inside the ‘toons and on the center ‘toon. These do not appear to be lifting strakes but instead appear to be “deflecting” items to reshape/control wake.

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts