Re: Specialty Boat
>cats,
> I also really like the totally hell-bent-for-leather unlimited
> the kinds of boats frenchmen are always trying to senttogether....
> circumnavigation records in. Maybe if I put two I60 hulls
How about one I60, and your dory? Tacking proa.
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, David Ryan <david@c...> wrote:
the AS 29. I've built real nice looking boats in that class for what
the sails on a AS 29 would cost.
Which one would the
covers of Cruising World, or Sail magazine, you might be surprised.
multihull, sure they are largely crap, but you aren't either a Bolger
or a multihull person, we are pottentialy in the same camp.
I don't think validation is the issue, if people have specific
experience, they will know some things that others don't know. Sure
we all turn a blind eye to the faults of our favorites, but simply
reconfirming prejudices isn't the way to learn more either. So
sharing the benefits of various alternatives should be in all our
interests.
> I'd be the last to argue that cats, even "undercanvased" cats,don't
> go fast. I would ask you how the accommodations on your 26' long,how
> wide? catamaran compared to say, the slightly longer, undoubtedlyWhy not compare it to your dory? A 26' is in no way comparable to
> narrower, and maybe cheaper to build AS29?
the AS 29. I've built real nice looking boats in that class for what
the sails on a AS 29 would cost.
Which one would the
> 'average' yachtsman want to spend a week living on? (Looks notThe average would probably not prefer either, but judging by the
> withstanding.)
covers of Cruising World, or Sail magazine, you might be surprised.
>craft
> My broader point is this: Those of us who choose unconventional
> very easily fall prey to what I call the "evangelization syndrome."are
> It's as if we doubt our own rational for our choice, and have to
> prove its validity by preaching it to everyone else. Bolgeristas
> probably second only to multihullers in the frequency to which theyNonsense. First this is false choice syndrome. Bolger designs some
> fall victim to this "syndrome."
multihull, sure they are largely crap, but you aren't either a Bolger
or a multihull person, we are pottentialy in the same camp.
I don't think validation is the issue, if people have specific
experience, they will know some things that others don't know. Sure
we all turn a blind eye to the faults of our favorites, but simply
reconfirming prejudices isn't the way to learn more either. So
sharing the benefits of various alternatives should be in all our
interests.
>Mike,I don't think you were evangelizing either. I do remember you using
>I don't think you were evangelizing, just presenting ideas.
some sort of superlative ;-)
The coolest cat I ever saw was a rowing cat a guy used to dive off of out here.
It was about 12 feet long, narrow enough and light enough to put on
top of a car, and had a sliding seat. Gear was carried in meshbag on
the tramp, and the hulls were narrow and closed. The thing rowed
fast, and had no trouble in the surfzone because it was incapable of
taking on water. The guy would row out off the beach, raise a flag
and through out an anchor. An hour later he'd be on the beach with
freshly killed blackfish. I asked him about it and he said they were
popular in FLA for diving and fishing.
I also really like the totally hell-bent-for-leather unlimited cats,
the kinds of boats frenchmen are always trying to sent
circumnavigation records in. Maybe if I put two I60 hulls together....
YIBB,
David
--
C.E.P.
415 W.46th Street
New York, New York 10036
http://www.crumblingempire.com
Mobile (646) 325-8325
Office (212) 247-0296
Mike,
I don't think you were evangelizing, just presenting ideas. I agree that
there are alot possibilities for small simple multihulls that are easy to
build. I know what you mean about sitting with legs in the hull instead of
on a tramp, but I also like the cat configuration for more weight carrying
capacity. Also, for a cartopper, each hull of a cat would be lighter than
the main hull of a tri. By doing away with the high powered rig, the hulls
and beams don't need to be so strong and heavy. I like the idea of cartop
18-20' cat that could be rowed or sailed for day use or beach camping. The
hulls would be about 18" wide. If flat bottomed, the bottom could be 1/4"
but the sides could be 1/8" (3mm) or 4mm to keep weight down. For sitting,
a swing out seat (could be a hatchtop) over the water allows you to put your
legs in the well, which could be self-bailing. Or you can sit facing forward
on the hull with your feet in the well. There's no law that says a day cat
has to have completely decked over hulls. One or two little rigs can be
struck and stowed on deck for long rows. One hull could be used alone with
an outrigger as an alternative outrigger canoe, or even as a tri main hull?
I think there are good possibilities that I haven't seen explored much
because of the fascination with all out speed.
Gary Lepak
Port Angeles, WA
I don't think you were evangelizing, just presenting ideas. I agree that
there are alot possibilities for small simple multihulls that are easy to
build. I know what you mean about sitting with legs in the hull instead of
on a tramp, but I also like the cat configuration for more weight carrying
capacity. Also, for a cartopper, each hull of a cat would be lighter than
the main hull of a tri. By doing away with the high powered rig, the hulls
and beams don't need to be so strong and heavy. I like the idea of cartop
18-20' cat that could be rowed or sailed for day use or beach camping. The
hulls would be about 18" wide. If flat bottomed, the bottom could be 1/4"
but the sides could be 1/8" (3mm) or 4mm to keep weight down. For sitting,
a swing out seat (could be a hatchtop) over the water allows you to put your
legs in the well, which could be self-bailing. Or you can sit facing forward
on the hull with your feet in the well. There's no law that says a day cat
has to have completely decked over hulls. One or two little rigs can be
struck and stowed on deck for long rows. One hull could be used alone with
an outrigger as an alternative outrigger canoe, or even as a tri main hull?
I think there are good possibilities that I haven't seen explored much
because of the fascination with all out speed.
Gary Lepak
Port Angeles, WA
----- Original Message -----
From: <teakdeck@...>
To: <david@...>; <bolger@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 10:23 PM
Subject: Re: [bolger] Specialty Boat
> David et all,
>
> I do not wish to be labeled as evangelizing for multihull boats. Only for
> more design work to be done this genre. Smaller boats, under 21 feet, with
> modern and convenient rigs. Again, I'm particularly taken with the
trimaran
> form because I prefer the main hull for sitting over netting.
>
> But I don't want to take away from monohulls.
>
> By the way, somebody wrote me and said they are developing a tri which can
be
> cartopped and the main hull can be used separately as a canoe.
>
> Mike Masten
David et all,
I do not wish to be labeled as evangelizing for multihull boats. Only for
more design work to be done this genre. Smaller boats, under 21 feet, with
modern and convenient rigs. Again, I'm particularly taken with the trimaran
form because I prefer the main hull for sitting over netting.
But I don't want to take away from monohulls.
By the way, somebody wrote me and said they are developing a tri which can be
cartopped and the main hull can be used separately as a canoe.
Mike Masten
In a message dated 1/7/03 8:36:34 AM,david@...writes:
I do not wish to be labeled as evangelizing for multihull boats. Only for
more design work to be done this genre. Smaller boats, under 21 feet, with
modern and convenient rigs. Again, I'm particularly taken with the trimaran
form because I prefer the main hull for sitting over netting.
But I don't want to take away from monohulls.
By the way, somebody wrote me and said they are developing a tri which can be
cartopped and the main hull can be used separately as a canoe.
Mike Masten
In a message dated 1/7/03 8:36:34 AM,david@...writes:
>
>
>My broader point is this: Those of us who choose unconventional craft
>
>very easily fall prey to what I call the "evangelization syndrome."
>
>It's as if we doubt our own rational for our choice, and have to
>
>prove its validity by preaching it to everyone else. Bolgeristas are
>
>probably second only to multihullers in the frequency to which they
>
>fall victim to this "syndrome."
On Wednesday 08 January 2003 01:46, Gary Lepak wrote:
your kids feel about the boats and living on board?
--
Bruce Fountain (fountainb@...)
Senior Software Engineer
Union Switch and Signal Pty Ltd
Perth Western Australia
tel: +618 9256 0083
> Pics atThis is a fantastic site, I enjoyed it immensely. How do
>http://www.multihullboatbuilder.com/workshop/ThreeBoats/ThreeBoats.html
your kids feel about the boats and living on board?
--
Bruce Fountain (fountainb@...)
Senior Software Engineer
Union Switch and Signal Pty Ltd
Perth Western Australia
tel: +618 9256 0083
In liveaboard cruising sizes, I've enjoyed the non-speed related advantages
of multihulls. A Wharram has a lot in common with the Bolger/plywood
philosophy and is only fast off the wind. Most multihullers would call them
low performance. What I like is the deck space, which could carry a few
small boats for entertainment when anchored, and also the shallow draft,
motion, and level ride. After I had a Wharram I designed and built a 34'
low performance junk rigged catamaran that I loved for other than speed
reasons. These boats were cheap to build and maintain since they were not
done up to be yachts. All mainentance for 12 years was done on the beach.
One big disadvantage of the multis is the space they take up in a marina,
but we always anchored out and then the deck space is great to
have--waterfront property wherever you go. Pics at
http://www.multihullboatbuilder.com/workshop/ThreeBoats/ThreeBoats.html
I've also enjoyed plywood outrigger canoes that weren't fast, but were a
lot more stable than a kayak and could be sailed with a little sail. Just
being able to move around in different positions is nice when you are on the
water for hours.
I don't have any personal experience with them, but fancy charter cats also
are said to be low performance, but have the advantage of space for a lot of
people, shallow draft, and level ride.
So to me the penalties are not "outsize" at all. I just can't fit one in my
local marina, but as a trailer boat a multi would work for me. I'm thinking
of building a 24' x8'6" wide trailer cat pocketcruiser out of plywood next
summer, (if my wife lets me ;-)
I guess a multi, with more surface area and more "parts", will always cost
a bit more in time and money to build than a sharpie though. They are just
another compromise.
Gary Lepak
Port Angeles, WA
of multihulls. A Wharram has a lot in common with the Bolger/plywood
philosophy and is only fast off the wind. Most multihullers would call them
low performance. What I like is the deck space, which could carry a few
small boats for entertainment when anchored, and also the shallow draft,
motion, and level ride. After I had a Wharram I designed and built a 34'
low performance junk rigged catamaran that I loved for other than speed
reasons. These boats were cheap to build and maintain since they were not
done up to be yachts. All mainentance for 12 years was done on the beach.
One big disadvantage of the multis is the space they take up in a marina,
but we always anchored out and then the deck space is great to
have--waterfront property wherever you go. Pics at
http://www.multihullboatbuilder.com/workshop/ThreeBoats/ThreeBoats.html
I've also enjoyed plywood outrigger canoes that weren't fast, but were a
lot more stable than a kayak and could be sailed with a little sail. Just
being able to move around in different positions is nice when you are on the
water for hours.
I don't have any personal experience with them, but fancy charter cats also
are said to be low performance, but have the advantage of space for a lot of
people, shallow draft, and level ride.
So to me the penalties are not "outsize" at all. I just can't fit one in my
local marina, but as a trailer boat a multi would work for me. I'm thinking
of building a 24' x8'6" wide trailer cat pocketcruiser out of plywood next
summer, (if my wife lets me ;-)
I guess a multi, with more surface area and more "parts", will always cost
a bit more in time and money to build than a sharpie though. They are just
another compromise.
Gary Lepak
Port Angeles, WA
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Ryan" <david@...>
> Well that's the $64K question, isn't it? Given the same money for the
> initial build and upkeep, can a multihull do everything a monohull
> can do, but with greater stability and sail carrying power? If so,
> then why are any of us wasting our time building monohulls?
>
> Again, it seems to me that a multihull's chief benefit is speed, and
> that once you given up the speed, the rest of the multihull's
> characteristics (what some might call benefits) come with outsized
> penalties. You don't see many "low performance" catamarans on the
> water.
>
> Of course you don't see a lot of sharpies either. I'd offer them as
> "speciality boats" too.
>
> YIBB,
>
> David
I'd be the last to argue that cats, even "undercanvased" cats, don't
go fast. I would ask you how the accommodations on your 26' long, how
wide? catamaran compared to say, the slightly longer, undoubtedly
narrower, and maybe cheaper to build AS29? Which one would the
'average' yachtsman want to spend a week living on? (Looks not
withstanding.)
My broader point is this: Those of us who choose unconventional craft
very easily fall prey to what I call the "evangelization syndrome."
It's as if we doubt our own rational for our choice, and have to
prove its validity by preaching it to everyone else. Bolgeristas are
probably second only to multihullers in the frequency to which they
fall victim to this "syndrome."
You like to sail at speed, and are willing to give things up in
exchange for speed? Bully! Chances are you place a low value on what
you've given up for your speed, so the price doesn't seem high. I
like shippy looks, as far as I'm concerned all the extra strings on a
schooner are just that much more fun. Cleary the benefits of our odd
choices are not evident to all. More over, they may not even exist
for those who choice fin-keeled sloops or jetskis.
The important thing (for me, maybe for you too) is knowing that I
don't have to take what's offered. Just because there isn't a market
for under-canvas, twin Zephyr-hulled, beachfishing catamaran doesn't
mean I don't need one, or can't make one. But no matter how well it
may serve my purposes, I have to recognize that they are my purposes,
and the degree to which any boat serves my purposes tells you more
about me than it tell you about the craft.
YIBB,
David
C.E.P.
415 W.46th Street
New York, New York 10036
http://www.crumblingempire.com
Mobile (646) 325-8325
Office (212) 247-0296
go fast. I would ask you how the accommodations on your 26' long, how
wide? catamaran compared to say, the slightly longer, undoubtedly
narrower, and maybe cheaper to build AS29? Which one would the
'average' yachtsman want to spend a week living on? (Looks not
withstanding.)
My broader point is this: Those of us who choose unconventional craft
very easily fall prey to what I call the "evangelization syndrome."
It's as if we doubt our own rational for our choice, and have to
prove its validity by preaching it to everyone else. Bolgeristas are
probably second only to multihullers in the frequency to which they
fall victim to this "syndrome."
You like to sail at speed, and are willing to give things up in
exchange for speed? Bully! Chances are you place a low value on what
you've given up for your speed, so the price doesn't seem high. I
like shippy looks, as far as I'm concerned all the extra strings on a
schooner are just that much more fun. Cleary the benefits of our odd
choices are not evident to all. More over, they may not even exist
for those who choice fin-keeled sloops or jetskis.
The important thing (for me, maybe for you too) is knowing that I
don't have to take what's offered. Just because there isn't a market
for under-canvas, twin Zephyr-hulled, beachfishing catamaran doesn't
mean I don't need one, or can't make one. But no matter how well it
may serve my purposes, I have to recognize that they are my purposes,
and the degree to which any boat serves my purposes tells you more
about me than it tell you about the craft.
YIBB,
David
>Yep, I didn´t answer David because I realized we were on different wave--
>lengths, but it´s just that. Last month, a 26 foot, open bridge-deck,
>cruising cat I built crossed from Buenos Aires to Montevideo, with winds in
>excess of 32 knots, maintaining an average speed of 10 knots. The rig is
>what would be considered "undercanvassed", actually having a sail area
>comparable to that of a 19 - foot beach catamaran. Want to see a monohull
>the same size performing like that. The whole trip was in total safety ,
>without any thrills.
C.E.P.
415 W.46th Street
New York, New York 10036
http://www.crumblingempire.com
Mobile (646) 325-8325
Office (212) 247-0296
Yep, I didn´t answer David because I realized we were on different wave
lengths, but it´s just that. Last month, a 26 foot, open bridge-deck,
cruising cat I built crossed from Buenos Aires to Montevideo, with winds in
excess of 32 knots, maintaining an average speed of 10 knots. The rig is
what would be considered "undercanvassed", actually having a sail area
comparable to that of a 19 - foot beach catamaran. Want to see a monohull
the same size performing like that. The whole trip was in total safety ,
without any thrills.
Frank - Brazil
David,
It seems to me you are making the point about a multihull: light weight
hull,
stable, able to go fast. But then you get into the idea of oversized,
high-aspect ratio rig etc, which is typical of the thrill ride catamaran or
racing boat, which is not what Bolger boats are primarily about.
I maintain that a multihull can do everything a monohull can do but is more
stable and can carry more sail initially or hold up to more wind with the
same amount of sail. If the interest was in racing or thrills, I might look
elsewhere than to home boat building.
Mike
In a message dated 1/5/03 2:32:30 PM,david@...writes:
- no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
- stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred' posts
- add your comments at the TOP and SIGN your posts and <snip> away
- To order plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box 1209, Gloucester, MA,
01930, Fax: (978) 282-1349
- Unsubscribe:bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
- Open discussion:bolger_coffee_lounge-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject tohttp://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
lengths, but it´s just that. Last month, a 26 foot, open bridge-deck,
cruising cat I built crossed from Buenos Aires to Montevideo, with winds in
excess of 32 knots, maintaining an average speed of 10 knots. The rig is
what would be considered "undercanvassed", actually having a sail area
comparable to that of a 19 - foot beach catamaran. Want to see a monohull
the same size performing like that. The whole trip was in total safety ,
without any thrills.
Frank - Brazil
David,
It seems to me you are making the point about a multihull: light weight
hull,
stable, able to go fast. But then you get into the idea of oversized,
high-aspect ratio rig etc, which is typical of the thrill ride catamaran or
racing boat, which is not what Bolger boats are primarily about.
I maintain that a multihull can do everything a monohull can do but is more
stable and can carry more sail initially or hold up to more wind with the
same amount of sail. If the interest was in racing or thrills, I might look
elsewhere than to home boat building.
Mike
In a message dated 1/5/03 2:32:30 PM,david@...writes:
>Maybe it's just me, but it seems a catamaran's chief benefit is it'sBolger rules!!!
>ability to carry oversized, high-aspect ratio rig on a light-weigh,
>unballasted hulls(s). Why is this an advantage? Because it means you
>can go really fast!
>
>With this advantage come some disadvantages, especially in the
>context of cheap(er) homebuild boats. Perhaps heading the list is the
>cost/technology needed to put up a big, tall rig. Take away the big
>tall rig, and maybe your back to a sail plan that works nearly as
>well on a monohull (with all the monohull's advantages.)
>
>Now I'll admit, I've contemplated some sort of twin Zephyr catamaran
>with a modest rig to use as a beach fishing boat that I could use to
>take a few people out fishing. The twin hull would let people cast
>and fight fish without worrying about tipping the boat over, and the
>modest sail would be easier than rowing. But I have to thing that a
>small sail-plan, low aspect ratio multihull is a speciality boat at
>best.
>
>YIBB,
>
>David
- no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
- stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred' posts
- add your comments at the TOP and SIGN your posts and <snip> away
- To order plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box 1209, Gloucester, MA,
01930, Fax: (978) 282-1349
- Unsubscribe:bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
- Open discussion:bolger_coffee_lounge-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject tohttp://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>I maintain that a multihull can do everything a monohull can do but is moreWell that's the $64K question, isn't it? Given the same money for the
>stable and can carry more sail initially or hold up to more wind with the
>same amount of sail. If the interest was in racing or thrills, I might look
>elsewhere than to home boat building.
initial build and upkeep, can a multihull do everything a monohull
can do, but with greater stability and sail carrying power? If so,
then why are any of us wasting our time building monohulls?
Again, it seems to me that a multihull's chief benefit is speed, and
that once you given up the speed, the rest of the multihull's
characteristics (what some might call benefits) come with outsized
penalties. You don't see many "low performance" catamarans on the
water.
Of course you don't see a lot of sharpies either. I'd offer them as
"speciality boats" too.
YIBB,
David
--
C.E.P.
415 W.46th Street
New York, New York 10036
http://www.crumblingempire.com
Mobile (646) 325-8325
Office (212) 247-0296
David,
It seems to me you are making the point about a multihull: light weight hull,
stable, able to go fast. But then you get into the idea of oversized,
high-aspect ratio rig etc, which is typical of the thrill ride catamaran or
racing boat, which is not what Bolger boats are primarily about.
I maintain that a multihull can do everything a monohull can do but is more
stable and can carry more sail initially or hold up to more wind with the
same amount of sail. If the interest was in racing or thrills, I might look
elsewhere than to home boat building.
Mike
In a message dated 1/5/03 2:32:30 PM,david@...writes:
It seems to me you are making the point about a multihull: light weight hull,
stable, able to go fast. But then you get into the idea of oversized,
high-aspect ratio rig etc, which is typical of the thrill ride catamaran or
racing boat, which is not what Bolger boats are primarily about.
I maintain that a multihull can do everything a monohull can do but is more
stable and can carry more sail initially or hold up to more wind with the
same amount of sail. If the interest was in racing or thrills, I might look
elsewhere than to home boat building.
Mike
In a message dated 1/5/03 2:32:30 PM,david@...writes:
>Maybe it's just me, but it seems a catamaran's chief benefit is it's
>ability to carry oversized, high-aspect ratio rig on a light-weigh,
>unballasted hulls(s). Why is this an advantage? Because it means you
>can go really fast!
>
>With this advantage come some disadvantages, especially in the
>context of cheap(er) homebuild boats. Perhaps heading the list is the
>cost/technology needed to put up a big, tall rig. Take away the big
>tall rig, and maybe your back to a sail plan that works nearly as
>well on a monohull (with all the monohull's advantages.)
>
>Now I'll admit, I've contemplated some sort of twin Zephyr catamaran
>with a modest rig to use as a beach fishing boat that I could use to
>take a few people out fishing. The twin hull would let people cast
>and fight fish without worrying about tipping the boat over, and the
>modest sail would be easier than rowing. But I have to thing that a
>small sail-plan, low aspect ratio multihull is a speciality boat at
>best.
>
>YIBB,
>
>David