Wooden Boat People
By McKenzieDriftBoat.com
Need help identifying my wooden drift boat
Can anyone help me identify the origins of my wooden drift boat? I bought it about 5 years ago in Southern Oregon off Boat Trader. It was in pretty sad shape cosmetically but very solid. Over the years I have done quite a bit of restoration work to the boat. There is a data plate as pictured but there was no paint left on the plate. I have always assumed that the '900' is a weight capacity, the '4' is either number of passengers or outboard horsepower, the '15' is the length of the boat, and '61971' I always thought might be a date code.
I have already sent these pictures to Steve Steele who was kind enough to examine them. In his opinion this is not a Steele boat. The craftsmanship appears to be very nice. The way the ribs and the gunwale angles are cut tells me this may have been a factory built boat of some kind. The plywood is clear on both sides and the distance from the scarf joint to the bow (stern?) is over 9'.
There are a number of details that I have added to the boat that should not be considered in trying to identify it. I put in the stern seat, the rear knee brace, the slats across the bow compartment, the anchor system, and the aluminum chine strips, but otherwise it is as I found it.
The boat measures 15' 4" on center. There is a removable transom cap as pictured. If anyone has a clue as to who built this boat I would be happy to get that information.
Views: 4863
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by JAY STRUGNELL on
-
Hello, I'm afraid I can't help much; I think You are correct about the numbers on the tag. It also looks like another tag used to be there. It has some Steele like feachers,but You contacted the man with the records. The last number on the tag is more than likely a hull identification number assigned by someone. Hope someone else on here can be of more help. By the way I fished up there,Balls ferry last weekend,was a little slow but cought a few nice rainbows.
-
Permalink Reply by Kevin Kay on
-
Hi Jay, thanks for the input. Fishing has been a bit slow on the Lower Sac for me also of late.
-
Permalink Reply by Herb Jacobsen on
-
I would venture to guess that the rowing seat is not original.. Reason for that is the front seat is built for stacking and there are no stacking bunks on the rowers seat. Another tell tale is the limber holes in the ribs, are they round or square. You have so much stuff in there it is really hard to see all the features.
Keith added numbers stamped into the wood in the stern between the gunnels, as well as the required coast guard tag. There were also gussets under the rowers seat on the frames to reinforce for the stacking of boats.
I would venture to guess that someone took the original boat and changed a bunch of stuff around. It might have been a kit that was changed around a bit. It is hard to tell from the photos. Nice boat though...
-
-
Hi Herb, thanks for the input. Please enlighten me on the 'stacking bunks' as I am not familiar with this. If the limber holes are the ones in the horizontal ribs on the floor, they are semi-circular, not square.
-
Permalink Reply by David Jensen on
-
My pal, Beaver Boy Steve Steele, is the definitive word on this, but nothing else. I agree this was not built by Keith Steele. I've got two of them. My guess is someone "borrowed" from Keith's designs. Condolences are in order for Beaver Boy: Ducks killed them for the 4th straight year.
-
-
Kevin,
In the photos section on page 76, under April pics 195 and 193, you can see a good example of Steve Steeles work. Rick Newman took the photos. in 193 you can see the rowers seat and the stacking bunks that are on it. They keep the loaded boat centered when stacked.
After looking more at the pictures of your boat, I would almost guess that some of the pieces came off a Steele boat, or were copied. There are other examples of Keith Steele boats in the picture section. Years ago STS magazine had adds from various wooden boat builders in Oregon. Some were copies of Keith Steele boats. I forget the fellows name who lived in the Leaburg, OR area, where Keith lived, who also built boats.
Again, you have a nice boat there, hope you enjoy it. There is a picture of one of my Steele boats in the photo section of my page.
-
-
Herb,
The Leaburg boat builder you are recalling is Tony Noe, who now lives around, or in, Anchorage. Unfortunately, he got a set of Keith's plans through the back door, and built some boats from the plans with some modifications. The other local builder was Greg Tatman, who also built a nice boat. Randy now owns Tatman, and is producing a great boat.
-
Permalink Reply by Roger Fletcher on
-
The four clues regarding the boat’s builder that I find intriguing are (1) the very clear panels, (2) the protective battens that run longitudinally along the underside (a dangerous feature long ago abandoned), (3) the removable transom plate and (4) the location of your purchase (southern Oregon). When Woodie Hindman sold his boat business to Marty Rathje in 1954 he and Ruthie moved to Crescent City. There he began building boats for the northern California and Rogue River guide interests. Several of his boats then were river dories comparable to the Glen Wooldridge power skiffs, but he built some McKenzies too, in spite of a non-compete clause he had signed with Rathje (pic). He thus would probably not use his traditional “Built by Woodie Hindman” identifier. So these factors offer an intriguing compass heading. However, two major pieces point against Woodie. As with Keith Steele, Woodie (to my knowledge) did not put the identifier on the stem post or the down river end of the boat. In McKenzie country, the prow is the stern and the transom is the bow, hence the plates were traditionally posted on or near the transom. The second piece that diverts the compass heading away from Woodie is the date on the stem plate, if that is in fact the date of the build. Woodie died in 1967. I am puzzled, though, that as late as 1971 a responsible builder would install protective battens on the underside. If the boat was built by someone in the “know”, then those battens suggest a boat built a couple of decades earlier. If the boat was built in 1971 then (to me) it suggests a boat built by a pretty decent home boat builder. The only other southern Oregon option I can think of is Willard Lucas (Lucas Lodge, Agnes). He built a mighty fine McKenzie too, but again, those battens just don’t fit a commercial builder in 1971. Regardless the builder, your boat is a mighty fine piece of work, and kudos to you for making it the treasure it appears to be.
-
Permalink Reply by mitchell on
-
I'm wondering if another sign Kevins boat is not a Hindman, no 10th rib under the bow? Did Woodie's boats always have the 10th?
-
-
Yes, it was Woodie's custom to apply a 10th mini frame that resided under the fly line deck but a note in his diary in his later years (post 1954) questioned the value of that frame. However, the photo taken not too long before he died in my last post shows that 10th frame.
-
-
Hi Roger, I was hoping you would chime in at some point. Of course your excellent book was where I first looked for clues. I am assuming the battens would be dangerous as they could catch a rock and flip the boat? Perhaps I am leading everyone astray with my assumptions about the serial number. I think this plate started life as a generic Coast Guard ID plate with paint on it which has long ago worn off. If indeed the 61971 is a serial number assigned by the Coast Guard then it very well may have nothing to do with the date of manufacture at all. I don't know when the current long ID numbers were standardized. Perhaps this plate was even added long after the boat was built. Someone remarked about the extra holes in my picture of the plate. When I got the boat the edges of the plate were very chewed up so I cut the plate down smaller to clean it up. That's why there are extra holes in a larger pattern, not because there used to be a different plate. Everything about this boat points to it being quite old in my opinion.
-
Permalink Reply by Randy Dersham on
-
Kevin, here's a little info about your HIN (Hull Identification Numbers)
Prior to November of 1972 the US Coast Guard did not require a standard HIN like we see today. The number was decided and recorded by the manufacturer without standard from one builder to the next. Because it has a Coast Guard plate with numbers and because those numbers do not follow the current standard that means two things. It is unlikely that it is a home built boat, and the boat was finished before the November 1972 HIN US Coast Guard standards that require a MIC (Manufacturers Identification Code) to be part of the HIN and specific placement of numbers to identify model and year.
I think it is a very fair guess, and a likely place to start the investigation, to assume that the number on the plate stand for the 616th boat built by the builder and that it was finished in 1971. It is very common that the last two numbers of any HIN are the year.
I'll do a little more digging. There are obvious non-builder modifications to the boat that have been part of it's story over the years. I might send you a note asking for some specific photographs.
© 2024 Created by Randy Dersham.
Powered by
