TOPIC:

Due to my decision to postpone buying the sweet new boat I planned to get this Spring, thanks 'Rona, I've been acquiring gear to upgrade trolling operations on my Lund Pro V. Included in the upgrade package is new Cannon Mag 10s, which I mount on a set of Cisco tracks so I can remove when not fishing on the big ponds. I currently have them mounted on 6" aluminum risers that I built. With all this fabulous weather we've had, I've not been able to chase silver just yet, but I did test them in my shop. I noticed with them being up that high, there is a significant amount of torque put on the gunnels when the ball starts and stops. It got me thinking I should consider doing away with the risers and going low profile right on top of the tracks. I like the idea of the riser for ease of use, but I want the mounting to feel more solid. Am I overthinking this or are my concerns warranted?

I had the same concern with my Lund so I fabricated some plates with nylon pads to strengthen. It works great!

Yours is a bit different but I’m guessing your run rail is solid. Something similar to what I did would likely work.

More of the torque is coming from the length of the arms than the height of the riser. (Longer radius for the force, higher torque) Depending on your fabrication skills, I'd reinforce underneath the tracks the length of the gunwales or a block down to the sides of the hull to disperse the force.

I'd certainly hate to see something break off and end up in the drink!

There is reinforcement there as the boat (1998 Pro V) has a length of wood that runs four feet from the back. When I mounted the tracks, I also used 1/4" aluminum plates. I thought about making some full length plates out of 6' wide aluminum but I figured with the wood already there and the addition of the Cisco backer plates there should be enough reinforcement. I'll look more into it this week, because, what else am I gonna do? I do like what you've done there.

When Mother Nature permits try 1 high and 1 low . See if you have a preference or if any accelerated/unusual wear developes.

Thanks for the reply. That's a good idea too. I'm just itching to get out, so I'm sitting here rethinking everything.

On my lund the wood underneath the gunnels didn’t run all the way out to the hull and I would get flex right there. I don’t know if it would have failed but it bothered me. I made some L shaped pieces and reinforced everything from the bottom across the gunnel similar to what drjdrew is saying. It helped and took out a lot of the flex. I also added some heavy duty Scotty snubbers above my cannonballs to take out some of the shock on the other end. Just want to be careful and check them frequently and replace as needed so you don’t break one there and donate a cannonball or expensive probe to the lake depending on your set up.
I would post some pictures of how I reinforced everything but my boat is locked in a storage facility and they won’t let it out due to the travel ban in our area.

My Lund is the same way, and similar to your, I think that is where I am getting flex. I think I definitely need to shore that area up. I just had the whole back of the boat opened up as I replaced the transom with Coosa board over the winter and wish I would've added some support in there when I did. I was just focused on that transom and didn't consider it because the area where my rod trees are mounted doesn't really flex much.

I think it’s a 1/4” plywood. I cut strips of 1/4” wood to fill that gap then cut another piece to span the whole gunnel and screwed those together (kind of L shape). Then drilled holes through it to match the tracks. I had to swap out longer screws and nuts on the tracks and used bigger fender washers on the bottom. Then screwed those pieces up into the existing plywood with 3/8” wood screws to make everything more solid. Don’t know if that makes any sense but might give you an idea of something to try. Wish I could post a picture. Might make more sense that way.