Hobie Forums
http://www.hobie.com/au/en/forums/

Looking For Close-Up Pix of AI Properly Seated in Cradles
http://www.hobie.com/au/en/forums/viewtopic.php?f=71&t=56947		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  PeteCress [ Tue Feb 23, 2016 10:35 am ]
Post subject:  Looking For Close-Up Pix of AI Properly Seated in Cradles
I have been going on-and-on in https://www.hobiecat.com/forums/viewtop ... e86c170b55 and it seems like I am getting lost in detail.

I am coming around to thinking:

  • - The proper position of the hull in the rear cradle is with the center (handhold) of the ama centered in the ama cradle and, therefore, with the scupper-dolly holes directly over the center of the cradle.
    Makes sense in that that seems to be the strongest part of the hull. viz: https://picasaweb.google.com/1081497986 ... 2667851474
    .
  • - The mal-fit of the forward cradle is as-designed: the cradle's sides are parallel, but the hull at the specified 65" fore of the aft cradle tapers considerably.
    But this is no big deal because the vast majority of the weight is on the rear cradle. viz: https://picasaweb.google.com/1081497986 ... 1327559218

Am I on the right track here?

Call me OCD, I find the instructions accompanying the cradles to be inadequate.... and really, *really*, REALLY don't want to take the boat off the trailer and find a huge dent where it's been sitting on the cradle.
Author:  Hogman [ Tue Feb 23, 2016 12:44 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Looking For Close-Up Pix of AI Properly Seated in Cradle
viewtopic.php?f=71&t=54448
Author:  PeteCress [ Tue Feb 23, 2016 3:03 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Looking For Close-Up Pix of AI Properly Seated in Cradle
Hogman wrote:
http://www.hobiecat.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=71&t=54448

Looks like my spacing/placements are right on the money but something's amiss with the fit of my front cradle.
His: http://i1335.photobucket.com/albums/w66 ... 4wgzgy.jpg
Mine: https://picasaweb.google.com/1081497986 ... 4768982370

Now that I'm looking more closely, it seems like mine needs to be tilted a little.

Thanks!
Author:  KayakingBob [ Tue Feb 23, 2016 5:43 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Looking For Close-Up Pix of AI Properly Seated in Cradle
PeteCress wrote:
Now that I'm looking more closely, it seems like mine needs to be tilted a little.

or maybe reversed (cradle turned 180) so the high side is forward ?
Author:  PeteCress [ Tue Feb 23, 2016 7:11 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Looking For Close-Up Pix of AI Properly Seated in Cradle
KayakingBob wrote:
or maybe reversed (cradle turned 180) so the high side is forward ?
Oops!.... Never dawned on me that the front cradle had a high/low side....
Author:  Hogman [ Tue Feb 23, 2016 10:37 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Looking For Close-Up Pix of AI Properly Seated in Cradle
KayakingBob wrote:
PeteCress wrote:
Now that I'm looking more closely, it seems like mine needs to be tilted a little.

or maybe reversed (cradle turned 180) so the high side is forward ?


That would have been my assessment. Needs to be reversed
Author:  PeteCress [ Wed Feb 24, 2016 6:55 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Looking For Close-Up Pix of AI Properly Seated in Cradle
KayakingBob wrote:
or maybe reversed (cradle turned 180) so the high side is forward ?
Hogman wrote:
That would have been my assessment. Needs to be reversed
Bingo!....

Now it fits like a glove - and, once I stare at it long enough, it is obvious that it is asymmetrical fore-aft.

I guess Hobie's instructions were not written with the spatial-relationship-challenged in mind..... -)
Author:  PeteCress [ Thu Mar 03, 2016 8:57 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Looking For Close-Up Pix of AI Properly Seated in Cradle
PeteCress wrote:
Now it fits like a glove ...
Well, I think I just fell out of the frying pan and into the fire.

Once I realized that the retailer had sent me an old (pre-September 2015) version of the cradles, I called them to ask what the story was and they immediately volunteered to send the latest-and-greatest.

In the immortal words of Alfred E. Neuman: "Whyyyyyyyy Not?"

But now I am back to either having done something stupid in the install (again....) or being forced to question Hobie's instructions.

To Wit:
  • "The forward cradle position best fits the hull at approximately the aft end of the drive well."
    First: WTF is "approximately"? .... The author was unable to gain access to a tape measure?..... Is it the center of the cradle that should be there? ... The leading edge? ..... The trailing edge? ..... That's right up there with the three blatant spelling errors in the old-version instructions.
    .
    Second: There is no way that fore cradle fits the hull at anywhere near the recommended point. You can go fore-aft two feet and it will never, ever fit. ... The side portions of the hull are never supported. ... Here is the least-bad fit: https://picasaweb.google.com/1081497986 ... 0877675698, but following the 60" C-C rule, that puts the aft cradle way behind the preseumably-strong area around the scupper holes and shifts the majority of the weight to the fore cradle - creating a situation where I can easily lift the stern with one finger: https://picasaweb.google.com/1081497986 ... 8074579058.
    .
    Third: The cradle fit at the rear seems poor - not supporting the sides of the hull: https://picasaweb.google.com/1081497986 ... 0226442386
    .
  • OTOH: If I stick with the 60" rule and position the rear cradle so that the scupper holes are centered over it, more than half of the hull's weight bears on this apparently-quite-strong area of the hull and the ama balance points (Hobie logo/handle) are perfectly centered on the aft cradle.
    The front cradle fit still is not great - but no worse that the fit per the instructions: both leave daylight under the sides of the hull.
    .
    The rear cradle, however, fits like a glove: https://picasaweb.google.com/1081497986 ... 5252709634

So, in summary, there seems to either be something wrong with the new instructions (60" between cradles, front cradle aft of the drive well) or something wrong with Yours Truly.

The aft cradle really does fit perfectly when centered on the scupper holes - and there is only about 4.5" of movement possible in either direction before the fit becomes poor - allowing daylight between the cradle and the sides of the hull.

I am thinking that maybe the fore cradle is not intended to fully fit the hull - period.... But that still leaves the gross mis-distribution of hull weight and poor rear cradle fit when following "Fore cradle aft of drive well..." and "Aft cradle 60 inches aft of fore cradle".

In fact, when going by the instructions, neither fore not aft cradle fully supports the hull. ... Both leave daylight under the sides of the hull. ... At least with the "Cradle under scupper holes" approach, the rear cradle fully supports the hull.

Maybe I should just send back the new cradles and stick with the old.

Comments from Greater Minds Than Mine?
Author:  tonystott [ Thu Mar 03, 2016 11:04 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Looking For Close-Up Pix of AI Properly Seated in Cradle
PeteCress wrote:
KayakingBob wrote:
or maybe reversed (cradle turned 180) so the high side is forward ?
Hogman wrote:
That would have been my assessment. Needs to be reversed
Bingo!....

Now it fits like a glove - and, once I stare at it long enough, it is obvious that it is asymmetrical fore-aft.

I guess Hobie's instructions were not written with the spatial-relationship-challenged in mind..... -)

So let me get this straight... you finally got the cradles to fit perfectly, so you then decided to get another set of cradles from your Hobie dealer...

WHY?\

I just don't understand why you put yourself through all your subsequent efforts trying to accommodate the new cradles, when you had already solved your problem.
Author:  PeteCress [ Thu Mar 03, 2016 12:03 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Looking For Close-Up Pix of AI Properly Seated in Cradle
tonystott wrote:
So let me get this straight... you finally got the cradles to fit perfectly, so you then decided to get another set of cradles from your Hobie dealer...

WHY?
Three Reasons:

  • The dealer suggested it - and I figured "Why not?"?
    .
  • I figure Hobie redesigned those cradles for a reason and I might as well have what works best since I'm paying all that money....
    .
  • I've been out of work for almost a year now - with little prospect of ever getting back to it (too old) and I *need* stuff like this.

Quote:
I just don't understand why you put yourself through all your subsequent efforts trying to accommodate the new cradles, when you had already solved your problem.
Good question..... But I go back the idea that Release 1.0 of almost *anything* is suspect and if somebody offers me Release 2.0 or Release 1.5 it would seem like a good move to take it.

I figured it would be a bolt-over replacement..... Even so the instructions for Release 1.0 were sloppyly written, I figured things would be better with Release 2.0 or whatever the new cradles should be called.

But the new instructions with "Approximately...." as a critical location ?

But it may be that Release 2.0 really *is* better and I'm just being dense..... I do not discount that.

But I also enjoy fooling around with things until I make them work and understand why they did not work in the first place. .... Computer application developers call it "Iterative Development"..... and it's not for everybody... but I seem to like it.... either that or I'm a stone masochist....

Right now, I am going with the assumption that the right place for the rear cradle is centered on the scupper holes... mainly because that is the *only* place where it really conforms to the main hull's bottom...... So, with the position of the rear cradle determined, I am moving the front cradle fore-aft trying to find the least-bad fit.....

I am prepared to hear that it is not supposed to fit and just supporting the center part of the hull is it's intended function..... In fact, mMiller seemed to imply in another thread that the "Redesign" was not really a redesign and was, rather, just Hobie's way of simplifying stocking/shipping by shipping two copies of the rear cradle instead of a separate front cradle.

If that turns out to be the case, then I have to evaluate the tradeoff between sticking with the old set - where the front cradle fits like a glove, but does not support the bows of the amas; ... and the new set where the bows of the amas get supported but the front cradle only supports the center portion of the hull.
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/