Which of the Bargepusher props did the HSD wear?

[Charles uk]

I thought we had cleared up the 3 or 4 bladed prop & the drive shaft tube length questions Jon.
Mind you a public debate might add some interest.

Here's the 1st reply in favour of the 4 bladed 13" Bargepusher.

3 or 4 blades have not yet got a satisfactory answer. Not to me anyway. A public debate i look forward to. To my untrained eye, if it doesn't look right it probably isn't right, hence the reason why i asked whether or not the 3 bladed prop was actually designed to be used on 102 plus in the first place. And to my eye they just don't look right at all. I've seen quite a few bronze versions of this 3 bladed prop fitted onto inboard powered dinghies before now and always thought that an aluminium version of the same prop could be considered as a "cheap fix" in a time of need. 3 blades instead of the normal 4 might have a slight increase in overall usability when fitted to a plus gearbox, and possibly a few extra revs, but even so they just don't look right to me. Surface area i can understand for pushing big heavy loads as these engines are certainly not about going fast or being stealthy! No sir. They're anything but stealthy . The smog trail and noise would soon give you away

From experience of using my own AHC and THC i can tell you first hand they're not a fast or powerful motor to use. They're often noisy, very noisy in fact compared to the conventional sized 102's, they're also a darn sight heavier than their counterparts.Not to mention SLOW! That's not why i like them. I like them because not many other people like them or prefer to use the more recognisable motors of the same era. Some it's true have probably had a gearbox swap by now anyway, just like this one,which is a shame to me as i like to see the rest of the motor to be true to what the serial number tells you what it should be.

Torque tubes, particularly at the point just underneath the 2 studs/nuts that hold the lower unit on. From what i've seen so far, the vast majority of early 102's including the SD range don't have what i term as a "steering lock". A funny looking square or oblong bit of metal that protrudes downwards away from the flange. With one of these later mounting lugs in place its easy to see the purpose of this protrusion. It acts like a steering lock giving approx. 45 degrees port/starboard of steering capability. Older motors don't have this unless lots of other bits have been replaced along the way. This 102 has a later mounting lug made from ally and black plastic which just adds to the confusion. As this has a later transom mounting anyway, the other parts that go with it are probably of the same or similar age as the "additions". This one though does look a bit "odd" at the top of its shaft. Is it part of the original finish or is there another "addition". (perhaps to cover up a previous "bodge")

Now Chas., as far as tube length goes, did we ever get to the bottom of how long an SDP should be? From memory, Rene's poll a while ago was inconclusive. And what about the gearboxes on those as well? If you're saying there is only 1 tube length for a genuine ww2 motor then that would make them long shaft. Is this correct? Everybody should be able to use a tape measure though, shouldn't they?

I saw that so called "wartime barge pusher" not that long ago and at the time i thought jeez what a hunk of junk! I've seen other better ones for sale if you want to call them "wartime barge pushers" of sorts, although they were mostly made from spare parts and a lot cheaper to buy in the first place. Still, each to their own i suppose.


If Hugo would like to send me a copy of the 46 seagull paperwork concerning the HSD i'd be more than happy to take a look at it.
and yes, i know i haven't sent you the previous register yet! I'm getting there slowly. I've got a lot on my plate at the moment besides seagull stuff.

I've moved this discussion to it's own location so we don't hijack the flywheel number question.

[pat777]

Here is a line drawing of a Model 102 with a date of 3rd of March 1946 from the main SOS site provided to John Williams by Roy Tighe. That is about as much as I can contribute to the debate. As the line drawing is in side profile, I'll have to guess a bow tie two bladed prop!

http://www.saving-old-seagulls.co.uk/i_ ... etters.htm
1946 HSD 102 Plus Short Water Jacket - Clutch Drive


http://www.saving-old-seagulls.co.uk/i_ ... models.htm

[Charles uk]

Check the cylinder Pat, isn't that a long water Jacket? with an SD piston.


But with a full on SD lower unit.

[pat777]

I don't know Charles, Thanks for pointing it out though. I only copy and pasted from the main SOS website, perhaps there is a mistake on there or perhaps although the drawing is from 1946 it is a prototype drawing of a later model.

http://www.saving-old-seagulls.co.uk/i_ ... etters.htm

Shame they skipped all those records when British Seagull closed up, I wonder did the ledgers go for incineration or landfill, if the latter perhaps we could organise sending out a search party for them.

I guess it is wise to not get involved in debates that you know nothing about..... (and just for clarity when I say "you know nothing about", I'm referring to myself!)

[pat777]

[Charles uk]

That list you've posted can't be used like a bible as there are several mistakes on it.

And it had to be typed post 1979 as it includes motors with CDI ignitions & they won't remember 1931!

Keep searching as I've forgotten a lot of this stuff.

I've seen at least one of every model on that list except the EHC

[pat777]

Thanks for the heads up on the inaccuracies of the list Charles. I guess it is never good when you see a lot of "quotation marks/inverted commas" on a list. If the person who constructed the list couldn't be bothered to type out the words, perhaps there was not much attention to detail when it came insuring the accuracy of the details within the list, from the relevant records.

[Charles uk]

Jon do have good examples of both of these props & the early grease nipple, slotted in clutch, barge pusher lower unit so we can easily answer any questions.

[headdownarseup]

The 3 bladed prop i gave to you a couple of years ago Charles so hopefully it's still with you somewhere, a 4 bladed prop no problem.
Gearbox with oil nipples no problem either, bear with me as i've been having LOTS of camera troubles recently. I'll do my best

Jon

[Charles uk]

I thought you had another 3 blade one. I was hoping you had one of everything.

[headdownarseup]

Afraid not!
I thought you still had the 3 bladed version!

Jon

[Charles uk]

I do & the lower unit but don't have a 4 bladed one, I was hoping you had all 3 bits so you could compare, I was going to explain the history of Marston/Seagull props while you were looking at your examples, that "hunk of junk" as you called it, had a very collectable bottom end, one of very few.

What happened to your other 3 bladed prop, cos when you swapped your scruffy 3 for my 4 you told me you were keeping the better one.

[headdownarseup]

To clarify, i swapped the 3 bladed with you and kept both my 4 bladed ones.

The "hunk of junk" advertised a little while ago did indeed have a desireable bottom end (if a little short in the leg for my liking) but with a badly blown cylinder and various bits missing all over. Too much money imo for a pile of rubbish, unless the buyer has the rest of the bits to put something together again that will work. There will be others, we just have to sit patiently for one to show itself.

To get things rolling, here's a few pics of the 2 behemoths when i first got hold of them.

[headdownarseup]

A few more

[Charles uk]

Thanks for that Jon now everyone can see what we're talking about.

Now for my reasons why I believe the3 bladed "Bargepusher was the HSD prop.

But first I will have to educate some of you, by explaining the "prop families".

There are 4 families of props manufactured by Marston then by British Seagull.

1) "Swept back" Marston style family,
manufactured from mid 1931, to early to mid 46 (at a guess), cast from Birmabright (7% Magnesium with good salt water properties) until the last few SD 2 blades that were cast from a lower spec alloy & look greyer, these all were very well finished with a elegant blade profile of a much thinner section with an aerofoil shape, highly polished & they look expensive compared to their younger relatives.

2) "Clover leaf family,
manufactured from 46/47 from cheap casting aluminium, polished for several years until they started painting them, the "bow tie" was the first of this family, none of them had a great blade shape & were crude looking compared with the "swept backs" & must have been cheaper to produce, cheaper alloy & lower finish standard,

3) Hydrofan family,
not an attractive prop but a efficient one & I'm sure all of us can identify one of these, when they first appeared they were recommended as a performance upgrade for earlier models, painted not polished

4) Weed free family,
everything after the Hydrofan, some with internal springs & many external, more prop shaped than the clover leafs, but none could be described as elegant, painted with low standard finish.

Oddities
Marston twin with it's cast bronze 2 & 3 bladed "swept back" family style prop,
Some inboards were fitted with a folding bronze sail drive prop,
5R fitted with a Yamaha prop.