Saving Old Seagulls

I see in this month's Boat Mart magazine, in an answer to a chap enquiring about Seagulls and boat, that the resident writer states:

"From experience I can say that the Suzuki 2.2 equates to the 4HP Seagull in terms of thrust..."

Well we can't have this, can we.

I have issued a challenge to the editor:

*******************************************************

Dear Sir,

I am astonished to read on pages 13 and 14 that Irving Stewart is advising a reader that a 4HP British Seagull will be less powerful than a 2.2 HP Suzuki.

I don't know which model Seagull Mr Stewart is referring to, as British Seagull didn't refer to HP - they preferred to stick to pounds of 'bollard pull', but I'm inclined to think he must be wrong.

I regularly use various Seagulls, and also a 3.3 Mariner, and I'd like to challenge Mr Stewart to a test.

I'll provide the Seagull, and the boat, and he can provide a Suzuki 2.2 and a suitable means of measuring speed and acceleration.

I will undertake not to cheat by using any motor less than 25 years old - thereby demonstrating that his comment about 'long lived' applies to a Seagull. I'm fairly certain he won't be using a 25 year old Suzuki. Any engine I use will not have cissy things like electronic ignition. I will demonstrate carrying any one of them in one hand - I'd like to remind Mr Stewart of the British Seagull advertising for the Forties which utilised a drawing of a little girl carrying one!

I'll bring a Featherweight, a Forty Plus, and a Century as well as a Century Plus. Each will have been serviced, and there will be no 'race tuning' No skimmed cylinder head, no drag racing fuel, no special propellors... I trust he'll bring along a freshly serviced Suzuki 2.2 on the same terms.

We can do a measured run with each, and we'll record the results. He can bring a photographer along too. If I lose, then fair enough, you can publish a photograph of me buying him - and the photographer - a beer. If I lose then they can buy me one.

Fair enough?

Regards

Bravo, Charles!

Hope he (a) prints it and (b) takes you up!

Well said Charles.

“Hear hear!!!â€

Hi Charles, I would not take this challenge too lightly as there may not be as much in it as you think. I have a Suzuki 2.2 and use a 40 plus just to keep it in good order. They both push my little inflatable along a a fair lick, but with a light boat the suzuki may have the edge. I can get onto the plane with the suzuki if I shift my weigh about to find the right spot , but no matter how I try I cannot get the segull to do it. It is slower revving and probably not so good at trhe higher speeds. Whem it comes to heavier boats then there is no contest. Can I suggest that you swap boats for any timed stuff. You should be OK on bollard pull as the Suzuki does not have the same grip on the water.

All the best with the challenge and I look forward to the results.

Regards, Alan

Hi Charles,
I forgot to add that my Suzuki is approx imately 30 years old!!!!!!!
Regards, Alan

Worry not Alan G.

My boat is an R19 - a 19 foot cruiser/racer. No planing!

And of course the 4 Horse Seagull they're referring to - well that has to be a Century of some sort - none of us true believers would claim that a Forty Plus is that powerfulo.

I'm looking forward to this...

I keep having strange (but amusing) images flash before my eyes!!
If this event takes place, can we get images published on the website please!!! Rick.

Yes - if it happens - and even if I lose (as some unbelievers are sure I will) then I'll publish the photos on my web site with links.

As yet I have not had a reply, which is a little disappointing.

Most of my friends mark me down as a complete nutter, and are distancing themselves from the whole thing, apart from Andy in Fordingbridge, who is massively supportive, and the other Charles, who can't believe I intend to use a stock unmodified motorwith my intention to use a stock unmodified motor...

charlesp wrote:I see in this month's Boat Mart magazine, in an answer to a chap enquiring about Seagulls and boat, that the resident writer states:

"From experience I can say that the Suzuki 2.2 equates to the 4HP Seagull in terms of thrust..."

Well we can't have this, can we.

I have issued a challenge to the editor:

*******************************************************

Dear Sir,

I am astonished to read on pages 13 and 14 that Irving Stewart is advising a reader that a 4HP British Seagull will be less powerful than a 2.2 HP Suzuki.

I don't know which model Seagull Mr Stewart is referring to, as British Seagull didn't refer to HP - they preferred to stick to pounds of 'bollard pull', but I'm inclined to think he must be wrong.

I regularly use various Seagulls, and also a 3.3 Mariner, and I'd like to challenge Mr Stewart to a test.

I'll provide the Seagull, and the boat, and he can provide a Suzuki 2.2 and a suitable means of measuring speed and acceleration.

I will undertake not to cheat by using any motor less than 25 years old - thereby demonstrating that his comment about 'long lived' applies to a Seagull. I'm fairly certain he won't be using a 25 year old Suzuki. Any engine I use will not have cissy things like electronic ignition. I will demonstrate carrying any one of them in one hand - I'd like to remind Mr Stewart of the British Seagull advertising for the Forties which utilised a drawing of a little girl carrying one!

I'll bring a Featherweight, a Forty Plus, and a Century as well as a Century Plus. Each will have been serviced, and there will be no 'race tuning' No skimmed cylinder head, no drag racing fuel, no special propellors... I trust he'll bring along a freshly serviced Suzuki 2.2 on the same terms.

We can do a measured run with each, and we'll record the results. He can bring a photographer along too. If I lose, then fair enough, you can publish a photograph of me buying him - and the photographer - a beer. If I lose then they can buy me one.

Fair enough?

Regards

Ah. A true Seagull Appreciation Society member.

Yes these oily, noisy, some people say ugly, rather unkindly I think, I would say "functional design" are poo pooed by some but they are good old sloggers.

The two criticisms I have of them is of the old fan bladed propellor which I have on my Seagull which picks up any flotsam and the forward facing water intake which can be blocked by a single leaf.

Well, we can't change it but I consider myself fortunate to own one in good condition.

She will always get me home if my main engine fails.

Regards.

Alan.

I have a reply from Jane Rickard, the editor of Boast Mart, after a further message to her....


'I’m afraid I haven’t had a response from Irving Stewart yet, but as soon as I receive it I’ll pass it on to you as a matter of urgency.'


Hmm, if we don't get a move on it'll be less of the 'How fast will this motor push my boat' and rather more 'How many inches of ice will this motor break through'!

Of course, this delay means the Seagulls I'm planning to use will be even older!

I have today received a response, which I reproduce in full..

**********************************************************

Irving Stewart Associates,

Boatmart Reader’s Letters 2005



Date Received: 2006-08-07

Letter Ref: 446

Topic: Seagull v Suzuki outboard

Story Ref: 1567

Reader: Charles Palfreeman

Answer Drafted: 2006-09-03

Reply Filed: 2006-09-04



A COPY HAS ALSO BEEN SENT TO THIS READER.



I am delighted that I have caused astonishment in a long term reader – a rare compliment – and equally delighted to be presented with the invitation of a challenge!



Like our reader, Charles Palfreeman, I too have used various examples of the ubiquitous Seagull outboards over the years, and have spent many “happyâ€

Excellent letters from all parties Charles. I think, no matter what the outcome, a good time will be had by all. Great stuff!

Do we know when this challenge is to take place? It would be fun to bring my boat and 1960 Century and watch from the 'side-wakes'!

James

I have a further mail - suggesting tht commitments prevent him from doing anything about this until next Spring.....

Do I sense a slight cop-out here?!