Simmon Sea Skiff

Ask questions before buying our plans or request a new design. Anybody can post here
User avatar
georgesboyer
Frequent Poster
Frequent Poster
Posts: 104
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2003 1:00 am
Location: USA

SSS

Post by georgesboyer »

Jacques, i hope you will design something a bit more (maybe in addition to the "sea skiff") like the OD in a 20 foot length witha a moderate v at the bow, preserving the relatively shoal draft. The shear line of the OD, combined with the wider beam available and a v bottom would be terrific for chop and bay/inshore running. Also, the 20' length is a bit more practical for a trailered boat. Ideally, it could be powered by a 50-60 hp two stroke, light and fast enough. JMO 8)

jacquesmm
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 28215
Joined: Wed Aug 14, 2002 1:00 am
Location: Florida USA
Contact:

Re: SSS

Post by jacquesmm »

georgesboyer wrote:Jacques, i hope you will design something a bit more (maybe in addition to the "sea skiff") like the OD in a 20 foot length witha a moderate v at the bow, preserving the relatively shoal draft.
That's the plan as we discussed it the other thread:
http://forums.bateau2.com/viewtopic.php?t=13331
but the hull shape may be close to the Simmons Sea Skiff.
I started working on it one hour ago.
Jacques Mertens - Designer
http://boatbuildercentral.com

jacquesmm
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 28215
Joined: Wed Aug 14, 2002 1:00 am
Location: Florida USA
Contact:

Post by jacquesmm »

I don't want people to get all upset about this discussion. We should keep an open mind: the Simmons Sea Skiff is a good boat but there are other good boats. We like or dislike some features and we should be able to discuss their pros and cons without bad feelings.
The features that distinguish the SSSkiff from our boats, besides the material are:
- motorwell cut
- lapstrakes
- rocker.
Each of them has its advantages and drawbacks.
You could add to that narrow bottom or unusual flare in the sides.

Seaworthiness is not on that list of differences. We have regular reports of JimW fishing 60 NM offshore in his C19 and at least one report of a OD16 crossing to the Bahamas.
Jacques Mertens - Designer
http://boatbuildercentral.com

glcost
Frequent Poster
Frequent Poster
Posts: 139
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 5:37 pm
Location: Tacoma, Washington USA

Post by glcost »

I started typing this before Jacques' last post, but I still want to point out what I feel are the advantages of a motorwell.

First, I have to agree with Pipefitter's statement that a motorwell and associated stern are very functional. I have a boat with a motorwell and have experienced the difference. What I like about it is; all the bouyancy in the stern aft of the heavy engine makes for a smoother ride in rough conditions. The boat has more of a rocking horse action in big swells and waves instead of the bow flying up and slam back down. Also with the engine "inboard", the stern can be designed to accept a flowing sea better than a wide flat transom.

The disadvantages are... the motorwell does take up lots of space in the cockpit that most boater want open. This will be a big drawback for most people. I have found that a older 2 stroke engine in a motorwell is noisy and smelly, more so than in a standard boat.

Like any boat, there are always trade offs!

George
George C

retrosub
Frequent Poster
Frequent Poster
Posts: 141
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2006 3:14 pm
Location: Redwood City, CA

Post by retrosub »

This is in response to SalmonMan's picture of the 22' Sea Skiff.

If you look at that picture, what strikes me about the 22' version is how little room there is inside for a 22' boat. I would guess that an OD18 has more interior room than the pictured 22' SS. This is not only because of the motor well, but the frames intruding into floor space. There is also the bow deck, which has storage under, but can't really be used as a casting deck or seat (as often seen on OD boats).

I think a new design of a SSS will have fewer frames and thus more usable space inside. This is pertinent for the 18 vs 20 vs 22 discussion, because a 20' JM-designed version may have more room than a 22' original SSS. While I would like to see designs for all lengths, I still think the 20' version makes the most sense. It was the most popular size of the original skiff, it's only 4" narrower than the 22', while significantly larger than the 18' version. Also, the new FS17/FS19(or whatever it will be called) sounds like it'll fill a similar nich as a 18' SSS.

DUH! I just saw that JM said he would design all three lengths! OK, I'll leave this post to prod the 20' being designed first....

User avatar
tech_support
Very Active Poster
Very Active Poster
Posts: 12318
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm
Location: Vero Beach, FL
Contact:

Post by tech_support »

Stefan's C21..... his caption reads "big boat, little worker" :wink:

Image

jacquesmm
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 28215
Joined: Wed Aug 14, 2002 1:00 am
Location: Florida USA
Contact:

Post by jacquesmm »

I will design the SSS20 first. I agree that it is the most attractive one.
I just finished laying out the lines taken from the Dave Carnell. It is not an easy task because this is a typical wooden boat drawing, no real table of offset. However, it helps me see all the features: that hook is a serious one.
Justified if only small engines are available and you want to force the thing to get on plane.
I wanted to draw that at the same time that I am drafting the FS19 (temporary name). I want to compare the two.
Jacques Mertens - Designer
http://boatbuildercentral.com

anonymous

Post by anonymous »

If you alleviate the hook,you will end up doing one or 2 of 5 things to correct it. One is hydraulic trim tabs. Hopefully the flush mounted type under the hull on either side of the outboard so that they don't have to stick out further than the lower unit. 5deg or more trim angle to the motor mount transom. Wedges glued on the bottom after the fact when you find the boat wanting to porpoise when carrying a light load and some possibly from any disturbance in the water that may unsettle the bow at speed.One of those anti-cavitation fins added to the outboard.Substantially widening the distance between chines from just aft of amids to stern.

I have no ties or preferences to traditional wooden boats.As a matter of fact,I am more disgruntled at the prices and suitability of proper hardwoods.I am pro-modern/composite construction. I added as much of this as possible to my own build. I have just happened to disprove,through usage,in many conditions, old wives tales and theoretically stated ill manners of the hull and the design, that were either derived from hulls built incorrectly or folks that were expecting a much larger boat or characteristics of such.

The restrictions of the hull,in the case of the 18 and the 20,come from saving material and the use of even #'s based on universally available dimensional material. That's the trade off.But I would truly like to see someone try to design more of a boat with the same amount of materials without sacrificing any of the positive attributes achieved by the Simmons. It can't be done without adding, at the very least,one more sheet of plywood and extra splicing/taping etc.

The plans are simple. If you can read a tape measure and strike a fair curve with a batten, You're more than halfway there.

I don't disagree for your reasoning to design a hull around your building method but to dispell the myths and 2nd hand information about the attributes of the original Simmons skiffs. The ill behavior of the motorwell is false as is most of the others. If your design ends up including these stated ill traits by default of trying to correct so called "errors",it wont be fair to blame the design after the fact.

anonymous

Post by anonymous »

I should add in the midst of all of this opinion/discussion,I do like your methods of composite construction. I have checked out many of your adaptations and designs. It seems like a good thing to do for DIY'rs. Some nice boats have come out of these pages. More power to ya.

jacquesmm
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 28215
Joined: Wed Aug 14, 2002 1:00 am
Location: Florida USA
Contact:

Post by jacquesmm »

I don't say that the motorwell produces a ill behavior, I just don't like it.
For the hook, it's a trick that was very common years ago. You can clearly see it on many Atkins designs.
It helps boats to get on plane with less HP but seriously limit top speed.
Yes, it reduces porpoising but not all boats porpoise and if they do, there are trim tabs. That hook is like big fixed trim tab.
It's clever but has its drawbacks.

By coincidence, I am currently designing an unusual boat, semi-displacement flat bottom and the plans will show that type of hook but the boat is designed for max. 18 mph.
Jacques Mertens - Designer
http://boatbuildercentral.com

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests