Boat Builder Central - Builder Forums

This will be my "planning to build a boat at some point" thread. It will also serve as a sort of notebook for myself for things I should remember but likely won't. There will be ramblings about designs I like, things that bother me with the designs I like and various other more or less coherent thoughts regarding boats and building. There will be designs from both Bateau and other designers, if this is a big no-no at this point, I'll make a blog instead, but there is so much knowledge on this forum that I'd like to tap into the collective knowledgebase to be as prepared for the build as I can be.

First things first.

I have measured my mooring berth today, and I was happy to find it was a lot wider than anticipated. I thought it would be around 290-300cm wide (9.5-9.8ft), but it was actually 340cm (11.15ft) wide. That is the narrowest point between the bumpers, but it should be possible to squeeze in a 9.5-10ft wide boat with some care.

Second thing is which boat I want. Problem is, there are too many to choose from. Also, I'm not entirely sure what I want in and from a boat, except that it floats and the engine works every time I want to take it out. So, I tried to make a list of requirements, a SOR of sorts.

Program:
- Recreational fishing trips with friends and family, mostly protected waters
- Exploration of local area, picnics on beaches and islands
- Day trips (no overnighting)

Here are my wishes in no particular order or preference; list is subject to change:
- Must be able to carry 8 passengers (4 adults and 4 kids) safely and comfortably
- Fuel efficient / low power requirements
- Would prefer a cat hull
- Must have a head
- Miniature galley would be nice, if for nothing else than being able to make a cup of coffee while at sea.
- Small fridge for drinks and food
- Center console with windscreen and some way of wrapping walls around for shelter from the weather, alternatively a (lockable) pilothouse with seating
- Lots of lockable, watertight storage for life vests, drafts, fishing gear, etc that is cumbersome to carry to and from the boat every time
- Benches in cockpit that fold together into transom/gunwales for better use of cockpit while fishing
- Beachable for picnics
- Hullside access door, ideally with access gangway and/or swim ladder
- Max length 26ft, max beam at waterline 10ft
- Would like to see 30 knots top speed with just me on board. Family speed would be about half of that. Would also be nice to still be on plane at that speed because fuel costs are ludicrous over here. Ludicrous to the point where owning a petrol fueled boat is a sure way to financial disaster. We're looking at around US$8/gallon at the moment. Will look into diesel outboards when the time comes. OXE, I'm looking at you. Get your products on the market.

I don't need fish boxes, washdown hoses, livewells or any such things.

The designs I have been looking at, are the following:

Bateau.com Classic 21 (C21)




Classic, open offshore fishing boat. 21' by 8'6". Dual console/bowrider is tempting. Stitch & glue (S&G) ply composite.

Bateau.com Carolina Sportfish 25 (CS25)





25' by 8'6" Carolina style offshore V-hull fishing boat. Interior customizable. I love the lines. S&G ply composite.

Bateau.com Cat 22 (CT22)





22' by 8'3" power cat based on NoosaCat/SharkCat lines. Interior somewhat customizable. S&G ply composite.

Bateau.com Lobster Boat 26 (LB26)





26' by 8'6". Inboard, classic looking powerboat. Love the looks and lines. S&G ply or foam composite.

Richard Woods Jazz 30 Fishing Catamaran (Jazz 30)





Fishing power cat, 30'x14'. Fuel efficient with relatively small outboards. Not super fast. S&G ply or foam composite.

Richard Woods Skoota 24 (SK24)





24'x12' power cat. Folds for storage and towing. S&G ply or foam composite.

Glen-L Party Boat





20'6" or 22' open deck boat. 8'3" beam. Max 200HP outboard. Interior customizable. Ply on frame.

Glen-L Wildcat E-X-T Sport



20', 22' or 24' by 8'6" power cat. Interior customizable. 90-230 total HP. Ply on frame.

Glen-L Bear-Cat Sport



24'6", 25'6" or 27'10" by 10' power cat. Interior customizable. 150-400 total HP. Ply on frame.

BlueJacket Boats’ Bluejacket 24/25.5/27/27.1





24/25/25.5/27' classic looking power cruiser. Very fuel efficient and gets good speed even with relatively small outboard. S&G ply composite.

I will discuss the pros and cons of each in separate posts.

Regardless of which boat I end up with, I'll have to make minor or major modifications to the interior of it to accommodate for typical west coast Norway weather - cold, wet or cold and wet. Even if the weather's nice when heading out, it changes quickly and it can rain cats & dogs and be quite windy on the way back, so some sort of shelter from the elements is required. It doesn't necessarily have to be a permanent structure, fold-up windows/walls will work.

Maybe JM can comment.... In a previous post you mentioned a dislike for I/O boats. The LB26 might be outboard capable with a bracket. I mention that as I've been thinking it would be one of the better options for the program you mention. I know you've a preference for the cats, but the LB seems like the more enjoyable with the access to the big blue you've mentioned.

Jaysen wrote: ↑Wed Nov 07, 2018 8:21 am Maybe JM can comment.... In a previous post you mentioned a dislike for I/O boats. The LB26 might be outboard capable with a bracket. I mention that as I've been thinking it would be one of the better options for the program you mention. I know you've a preference for the cats, but the LB seems like the more enjoyable with the access to the big blue you've mentioned.

Honestly, I have no experience with inboards, but from what I gather, they can be more finicky and are more difficult to service because they are inside a small engine box. Should I venture that way, I would get a reasonably new, if not brand new, engine to go with the boat to postpone eventual problems for as long as possible.

Even if the LB26 was outboardable, I wouldn't want to do it, as it ruins the looks and lines of the boat.

5 gallon bucket makes for the perfect head and why a fridge if no overnighting? Cooler works all day and you would not have to have a large power source. You also seem to narrow down cabin or open boat. How do you see a head working in an open boat? Have you looked at the "Nina 22" ? I think it is a 22' boat that should be considered. Low power requirements, good in rough seas if need be and can carry a number of people. (read the review on it)
https://bateau.com/studyplans/LB22_study.php?prod=LB22

OrangeQuest wrote: ↑Wed Nov 07, 2018 9:44 am 5 gallon bucket makes for the perfect head and why a fridge if no overnighting? Cooler works all day and you would not have to have a large power source. You also seem to narrow down cabin or open boat. How do you see a head working in an open boat? Have you looked at the "Nina 22" ? I think it is a 22' boat that should be considered. Low power requirements, good in rough seas if need be and can carry a number of people. (read the review on it)
https://bateau.com/studyplans/LB22_study.php?prod=LB22

The bucket method works for me, but not the girls

If open boat/center console, the head would be stashed inside the console like peter-curacao did in his CS25. A dual console with a canopy/soft top is on the table as well, and if I end up with a cat, the hull depth should be plenty to allow a head with almost standing room.

Fridge isn't really needed, no. I was just thinking cold beer, but they can easily go in a separate cooler.

I've looked at the Nina, but the design didn't really do much for me. I'm also after a boat with a potential higher top speed. Realistic speeds with family onboard is usually quite a ways off the top speed, at least in the boats we've had so far.

Jaysen wrote: ↑Wed Nov 07, 2018 8:21 am Maybe JM can comment....

I"ll wait for the dust to settle.
If it was possible to design a boat that satisfies all those preferences, I would draw it right away and sell thousands of plans.

See this:
http://bateau2.com/faq.php

Surprised, based on some of your wants, that you haven't looked at the Pilot 21.

https://bateau.com/studyplans/P21_study.php?prod=P21

Or the CX25

https://bateau.com/studyplans/CX25_study.php?prod=CX25

Both can accommodate the number of passengers you list, have a head, are protected, and have a berth where kids could lay down.
Not sure on the P21, but the study guide on the CX shows a small galley and a head. From the study guide on the CX:
"The head is isolated from the cabin by a real door, not a curtain. The galley can accommodate a fridge, sink and stove. Headroom is close to 6' under the companion way hatch and there is comfortable sitting headroom over the vee berth. There is ample room for tanks: fresh water and waste."

jacquesmm wrote: ↑Wed Nov 07, 2018 11:26 am

Jaysen wrote: ↑Wed Nov 07, 2018 8:21 am Maybe JM can comment....

I"ll wait for the dust to settle.
If it was possible to design a boat that satisfies all those preferences, I would draw it right away and sell thousands of plans.

See this:
http://bateau2.com/faq.php

I realize I'm asking for a lot, but I am willing to compromise on many things as long as it still looks a bit like I envisioned. And that is the point of this thread - whittle down my over the top wants and expectations to something realistic.

How about setting a budget? Some of the large boats cost 5 times more to build than the small ones.
Then, pick a building method and material.
Some of those plans are 60 years old and designed fro old fashioned ply on frame.

jacquesmm wrote: ↑Wed Nov 07, 2018 12:41 pm How about setting a budget? Some of the large boats cost 5 times more to build than the small ones.
Then, pick a building method and material.
Some of those plans are 60 years old and designed fro old fashioned ply on frame.

Thank you so much for showing an interest, it means a lot.

I don't really know if that's feasible to set a budget, seeing as things cost a lot more over here in Norway than anywhere else, with the possible exception of Switzerland. Besides, I won't be buying everything at once but rather spread the purchases over time to afford it it all. In any case, once I've decided and am committed, I'll pay what it costs to see it through. Even it that gets me committed... :p

A 23' production boat which ticks most of the boxes for me with a 250HP Suzuki 4-stroke costs NOK1.1 million/USD132,000. The boxes it doesn't tick are light weight and fuel efficient - it weighs 4500kg and reaches 32 knots at WOT with said motor. They refuse to give me consumption numbers, which usually is a bad sign. The outboard alone with remote control, tacho and tilt meters, no trottle/gear cables, costs NOK260,000/USD32,000.

So.. I don't know. Is USD100,000 finished, on the water a realistic budget for a self built boat?

The outboard(s) will obviously be the single largest expense, but I'm not adverse to buying used provided the service history is good and the outboards are in good working order. I would prefer to get new ones, but buying new is... well, very expensive. I see twin outboards pop up for sale every now and then which look like good deals. No idea how it compares to the US, but here are some examples:

In August I found a pair of 2004 Yamaha 250s for sale for NOK83,000/USD9,950 for the pair, all cables and instruments included, as well as a binnacle remote control. Serviced at the dealership every year, 450-ish hours on them and were sold by the dealership for the customer with complete service booklet and 6 month warranty. I think they were 4-strokes, but can't really remember. The listing disappeared rather quickly...

In October a pair of 2017 Yamaha F350 4-strokes with all instruments popped up for NOK250,000/USD30,000 for the pair - 70 hours on both motors, recently serviced. List price of one is NOK370,000/USD44,500. These sold the same day the ad was posted.

I realize many of the designs I've looked at are old, and I'm guessing you're referring to the Hankinson designs. I don't know when he designed his power cats, but I found a build thread for the Wildcat E-X-T dated back in 1999, so I'm guessing it's at least 30 years old by now. I don't have any experience with building ply on frame, so I can't say anything about the build method (which is why I started my Build methods thread).

I really like the clean, straight lines on his cats and the walkaround cockpit. If I could get that in S&G plywood composite like you have designed your CT22, I would be a happy camper. I would love to build a CT22, but the immovable beam under the front bench bothers me - I would like a much smaller front deck (about half the size of how it's rendered), a rear-facing bench taking up the space left, and the designed bench I'd like removed completely. And I want the bow pointing forwards from the stems of the amas, not inwards. But that's easy enough to do while building.

I did a layer-on-layer drawing of the Glen-L Party Boat and the CT22 as they are the same length and width; this is the result:
It uses the CT22 hull, the Party Boat's interior with some modifications. In front of the consoles there would be a split windscreen and a sliding door to close the pathway. I'd also have some kind of bars with a rigid or soft top to get out of the rain. There isn't a head drawn, that will be a bit of a headache to place with a layout like that, but shouldn't be impossible. I haven't shown the side view, but I would like a broken sheer line because I prefer that look, maybe something like the CS25 or the Bluejacket 24. I love the flair on the CS25's bow and would love to incorporate that as well, but I'm not sure if that would flow correctly. I'd also like slightly straighter stems and sterns like on the WildCat E-X-T Sport, but that too, I guess, can be done when building.

The hull (center section/bridge deck) was widened by 3". Now that I have an accurate measurement of my mooring berth's width, I wonder if the beam could be widened to 9' to give a bit of extra room.

There is storage in all seats and benches. Under the bow seats there will be a double floor where more stuff can be stored. Fuel tanks and bilge pumps also live down there. The head could possibly be fitted under one of the rearmost bow seats with a curtain or something for an illusion of privacy.

At least that's my fantasy... but, since the forward connecting beam can't be moved, this probably won't happen. And that was the sole reason I started actually looking at the Hankinson cats. That said, should you consider a re-do of the CT22 and that re-do happens to fall in line with what I just wrote, I would no longer have any reason not to buy the plans and build the boat...

How about the GP21 deck boat:
https://bateau.com/studyplans/GP21_D_st ... rod=GP21_D
?
The dimensions are close. It has the max. beam for European towing, large capacity, easier to build and more economical than a cat. The plans are designed with the expectation that the builder will customize her.

jacquesmm wrote: ↑Wed Nov 07, 2018 3:57 pm How about the GP21 deck boat:
https://bateau.com/studyplans/GP21_D_st ... rod=GP21_D
?
The dimensions are close. It has the max. beam for European towing, large capacity, easier to build and more economical than a cat. The plans are designed with the expectation that the builder will customize her.

That is a good alternative, actually, but I think it looks a bit low, that is, has low freeboard. The C21 would perhaps be better with higher freeboard and could have its interior arranged similarly to the GP21_D?

A couple of things to think about. First the girls want a enclosed head no matter what. If you want them to go with you this is a must.
I too have to deal with a little cool and wet weather You might be able to deal with being out in the elements but if you want others to go with you and be happy you will need a way to get out of the weather and stay warm. Heat is a big deal and you need to plan for it.
You have lots of boats to pick from and I wish you luck on finding what you want. I would look at all of them and if they do not check the head and heat boxes I would discard them. Just my opinion for what it is worth.

Fuzz wrote: ↑Wed Nov 07, 2018 4:22 pm A couple of things to think about. First the girls want a enclosed head no matter what. If you want them to go with you this is a must.
I too have to deal with a little cool and wet weather You might be able to deal with being out in the elements but if you want others to go with you and be happy you will need a way to get out of the weather and stay warm. Heat is a big deal and you need to plan for it.

Exactly. The dragon has given me permission to build a boat, but only if it has a head. We supposed to upgrade from one boat to the next, not move laterally. She's tired of running ashore when nature calls. No head, no building a boat. Simple as that.

Fuzz wrote: ↑Wed Nov 07, 2018 4:22 pm You have lots of boats to pick from and I wish you luck on finding what you want. I would look at all of them and if they do not check the head and heat boxes I would discard them. Just my opinion for what it is worth.

Many of the designs I have looked at I have found not aesthetically pleasing or somehow "wrong" in other ways. I really, really would like an enclosed, lockable pilot house or large cabin, but I also want outside seating. I could perhaps make padded benches that fold into the gunwales, maximizing fishing space when needed and maximizing seating when needed.

That said, there are many designs that would allow a head, if even just a portable composting version, with some creativity. Privacy will be an issue in a smaller boat, and I feel 22' is borderline to accommodate this.

It might seem like I'm dismissing all monohulls and am dead set on a cat, which is partially true. I feel a cat hull will give better stability and more deck space and interior room in general, and the deeper hulls could also allow for more storage and also more headroom for a head. A cat with a full beam pilot house or tall-ish dual console would also provide the dry, warm seating required, while still having a bigger front deck/seating area for the (precious few) really warm days. If doing a dual console, the rear half or so of the boat would have rollup walls/windows to give shelter from the elements, as mentioned in a previous post.

I'm trying to cover all bases here, but the size restraints given wrt mooring limits the size of the boat quite drastically. I've been told that the max length of a boat allowed is 8 meters, but I do know that my brother had his 28ft/8.5m daycruiser moored at the same marina, and nobody lifted an eyebrow. So, while a longer boat than 22ft is possible, if I go for a cat hull, I'm not sure how well it would behave with a max beam of 9.5ft (any wider and I'm bound to run into problems trying to dock).

The Jazz 30 is big enough to do pretty much everything I want and seems to have almost unlimited customization options. If that could be shortened by 4' to 26ft and the beam reduced from 14' to 9.5', have a full front deck and still behave well, it would be a great boat for all I want it to do. I may have to email RIchard and ask for his opinion on that...

(This is where fallguy1000 usually chimes in and tells me to build the Skoota 24 and drop the aft cabin...)

The Glen L and the bateau cats will be soakers. No place to hide from sea spray, wind, or cold. They are not near shore designs, but fair weather lake boats.

You cannot shrink the Jazz 30 to 10 or 11' beam and have good results. The hulls are too long and wave interference a serious problem.

The C21 as drawn also offers no protection from the elements or place for a head, although it is probably big enough to modify. The CS also would need modification. While the bow flare would reduce sprays; the openness will not be nice in cooler weather. Many of the guys here are Florida builders and wouldn't leave the harbor on your warm days. My rule on Superior is I won't leave the harbor below 32F, but fishing season is open. Who wants ice on decks?

No temporary bimini is wise for your story.

The only boats the fit your sor as drawn are the

LB26 -ding is fuel economy and wasted space of cuddy for sleeping and the engine alone is going to cost like 25k there. It is a lovely boat, but not an easy build.

Skoota 24 (if you can reduce her beam a bit and ditch the gaudy kids aft cabin, that is a privacy cabin you know, I just don't know if the cabin can be removed or if structural benches are required instead, then the main cabin can be made bigger for a warmer salon). The thing to reconcile is where to put the motors to avoid turbulent water if you narrownthe beam. Email Richard. Modern motors might mount on the tilting hulls. A couple of decent engines and that displacement craft can get 30mph.

Bluejacket - they claim good fuel economy are they not a planing hull? Among the options; they look good, but they look like they'd roll a LOT.

The other boats I think would work are the Novi and the Downeasters.

You need to reconcile speed and fuel economy; you don't get both. Any planing hull is going to use more fuel.

Hope I don't offend anyone with my remarks.

I also think you need to pin down the beam more in your sor. Why have any 8'6" boats in the list if you can slip 10'6"? That is just silly, imo. I have to rent two slips for my boat at 16'6".

There is also the Bear Cat Cuddy at Glen-L, which offers a hideous cuddy with sleeping accommodations for two. The cuddy can most likely both be redesigned into something aesthetically pleasing as well as enlarged - the boat is a massive 27'10" x 10', so there should be plenty of room left over.

Downside is that it's big, heavy, ply on frame and requires MOAR POWAR at the stern, but it would tick all the boxes otherwise. Then again, a pair of 100HP 4-strokes isn't hard to come by and would likely be sufficient power for what I'll use it for. There's also the option of building it shorter at 25'6" x 10'. WIth the same power, it should either go faster or more efficiently, depending on my mood and the conditions that day.

Picture:

Good comments, thank you.

fallguy1000 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 07, 2018 7:02 pm The Glen L and the bateau cats will be soakers. No place to hide from sea spray, wind, or cold. They are not near shore designs, but fair weather lake boats.

The Bateau CT22 is designed as an offshore fishing boat - though that doesn't in any way equate to a dry ride.

fallguy1000 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 07, 2018 7:02 pm You cannot shrink the Jazz 30 to 10 or 11' beam and have good results. The hulls are too long and wave interference a serious problem.

But what if the hulls were shortened to 25-26ft? Kinda redundant question, really; it would probably not make any difference, and the whole boat would need to be redesigned - which leads to the Skoota 24, which I don't like...

fallguy1000 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 07, 2018 7:02 pm The C21 as drawn also offers no protection from the elements or place for a head, although it is probably big enough to modify. The CS also would need modification. While the bow flare would reduce sprays; the openness will not be nice in cooler weather. Many of the guys here are Florida builders and wouldn't leave the harbor on your warm days. My rule on Superior is I won't leave the harbor below 32F, but fishing season is open. Who wants ice on decks?

No temporary bimini is wise for your story.

The CX25 with full transom, engine bracket and a better looking cabin could work. That leaves enough room at the rear with the possibility of fold-up benches and the necessary amenities inside. It requires quite a bit of power and dinosaur juice to move, however.

fallguy1000 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 07, 2018 7:02 pm The only boats the fit your sor as drawn are the

LB26 -ding is fuel economy and wasted space of cuddy for sleeping and the engine alone is going to cost like 25k there. It is a lovely boat, but not an easy build.

Yeah, I'll keep dreaming about this one, but will likely never build her.

fallguy1000 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 07, 2018 7:02 pm Skoota 24 (if you can reduce her beam a bit and ditch the gaudy kids aft cabin, that is a privacy cabin you know, I just don't know if the cabin can be removed or if structural benches are required instead, then the main cabin can be made bigger for a warmer salon). The thing to reconcile is where to put the motors to avoid turbulent water if you narrownthe beam. Email Richard. Modern motors might mount on the tilting hulls. A couple of decent engines and that displacement craft can get 30mph.

From various posts in forums here and there, the aft cabin can be removed if the remaining structure is strengthened somewhat. The folding mechanism will still steal deck space, which is part of the reason I don't like it. I also saw your questions about the Jazz and Skootas over at Richard's forum; it would be interesting to read his reply to the questions in your final post in that thread. He came back at the end and said he'd replied via email.

fallguy1000 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 07, 2018 7:02 pm Bluejacket - they claim good fuel economy are they not a planing hull? Among the options; they look good, but they look like they'd roll a LOT.

It's a planing hull with wide reverse chines at the stern, which gives it more lift and keeps it mostly level throughout the speed range. From his tale of the storm he got caught in, I'm convinced it's a solid and safe boat, but the fact he had to slow down to a crawl kinda makes me want to drop it from the list. They do look good, though.

fallguy1000 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 07, 2018 7:02 pm The other boats I think would work are the Novi and the Downeasters.

Both seem to fall into the same box as the Bluejacket, honestly.. about the same length and width, similar hull styles...

fallguy1000 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 07, 2018 7:02 pm You need to reconcile speed and fuel economy; you don't get both. Any planing hull is going to use more fuel.

I know... Why couldn't Richard design the Jazz 30 as a 26x10' boat instead of 30x14'? That would have solved all my problems. :p

fallguy1000 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 07, 2018 7:02 pm I also think you need to pin down the beam more in your sor. Why have any 8'6" boats in the list if you can slip 10'6"? That is just silly, imo. I have to rent two slips for my boat at 16'6".

As I noted in the previous post, there's also the Glen-L Bear Cat Cuddy.

fallguy1000 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 07, 2018 7:02 pm Hope I don't offend anyone with my remarks.

None taken! This kind of discussion is great - it gives me a bit of reality check and options I may not have considered pop up. Much obliged.

Big thanks to all who participate! Maybe we can even come up with the Ultimate Boat That Does Everything Fast And With Much Fuel Efficiency(tm)?

Christer wrote: ↑Wed Nov 07, 2018 7:37 pm There is also the Bear Cat Cuddy at Glen-L, which offers a hideous cuddy with sleeping accommodations for two. The cuddy can most likely both be redesigned into something aesthetically pleasing as well as enlarged - the boat is a massive 27'10" x 10', so there should be plenty of room left over.
Downside is that it's big, heavy, ply on frame and requires MOAR POWAR at the stern, but it would tick all the boxes otherwise. Then again, a pair of 100HP 4-strokes isn't hard to come by and would likely be sufficient power for what I'll use it for. There's also the option of building it shorter at 25'6" x 10'. WIth the same power, it should either go faster or more efficiently, depending on my mood and the conditions that day.
Picture:
Bearcat Cuddy.png

I tell myself NOT to get involved in this discussion - yet I keep getting drawn to it.

You seem to prefer the cats, but have you ever driven a power cat? They are quite different to handle, and like most boats they are great in some areas and poor in others.

For what its worth, I think the Bearcat Cuddy would be a "dog" with 100 hp per side! A similar size Kevlacat that I know is running twice that.

BarraMan wrote: ↑Thu Nov 08, 2018 3:28 am

Christer wrote: ↑Wed Nov 07, 2018 7:37 pm There is also the Bear Cat Cuddy at Glen-L, which offers a hideous cuddy with sleeping accommodations for two. The cuddy can most likely both be redesigned into something aesthetically pleasing as well as enlarged - the boat is a massive 27'10" x 10', so there should be plenty of room left over.
Downside is that it's big, heavy, ply on frame and requires MOAR POWAR at the stern, but it would tick all the boxes otherwise. Then again, a pair of 100HP 4-strokes isn't hard to come by and would likely be sufficient power for what I'll use it for. There's also the option of building it shorter at 25'6" x 10'. WIth the same power, it should either go faster or more efficiently, depending on my mood and the conditions that day.
Picture:
Bearcat Cuddy.png

I tell myself NOT to get involved in this discussion - yet I keep getting drawn to it.

You seem to prefer the cats, but have you ever driven a power cat? They are quite different to handle, and like most boats they are great in some areas and poor in others.

For what its worth, I think the Bearcat Cuddy would be a "dog" with 100 hp per side! A similar size Kevlacat that I know is running twice that.

I have never driven a cat, no. I just like them because they're different and not something everyone else has. There is much praise about their seakeeping properties - softer ride, less slamming/jerky movement, better tracking, better maneuverability, more interior space, etc.

The obvious downsides are that you're practically building three boats at once - two hulls and the center section, they require two of everything which costs more, the width can be restrictive wrt areas one can get into, transportation on land and of course, mooring.

The Glen-L blurb on the BCC regarding power is as follows:

Recommended total HP (Twin outboards, 25" shaft required) 180-450
These longer, wider power cats allow greater displacement, tankage, storage, and load-carrying ability than our WILDCAT design. Besides the extra room, the wider beam only improves upon the superior qualities of power cats, especially stability. Based on v-bottom planing hulls, these boats can also absorb higher horsepower motors. Twin outboards at the higher ratings can provide speed into the 50 MPH range. Even at the minimum power ratings, planing speeds will range in the mid-to-upper 20's depending on all-up weight.

That's my reasoning for the twin 100's. They are also easily found in good used condition. 115's and 150's are also readily available, but at that power point fuel cost may start becoming an issue. Note that the numbers are for the 28' version. If I build the 25.5' version, it should be a bit lighter and should perform a bit better with twin 100's. Maybe.

I'm not familiar with the KevlaCat, but I assume it's a fibreglass production boat with Kevlar reinforcements? My take is that production boats are about twice as heavy as they need to be; re: my example of the locally made 23' production boat weighing 4.5 metric tons dry.

I think the BearCat will be way too much boat, honestly. The WildCat EXT Cuddy in 24' is likely a better choice, with the beam increased by 1'.

Or, if I could talk Jacques into redesigning the CT22 for me like the PartyCat I pictured earlier, that'd be sweet.

Christer wrote: ↑Thu Nov 08, 2018 9:59 am
Or, if I could talk Jacques into redesigning the CT22 for me like the PartyCat I pictured earlier, that'd be sweet.

No need to redesign anything. Your sketch is very close to my design. As long as you keep the main frames, you can do what you want with the seating.
There are two obstacles: the head and the main beam.
I don't think the Glen-L head is realistic, nobody can fit in there. Build a cardboard mock-up, you"ll see.
The Glen-L boat has a much lower bridge deck. That boat will slam in any kind of weather but it keeps the transversal girder below the deck and allows for that bow rider style seating.
You can do that with the CT22 if you accept the slamming. I wouldn't.


The main limiting factor is the head.
On the GP21, I propose a folding head, same as on some pontoon boats. It works, I had one on one of my boats.
Cat hulls are very narrow for a good head. A large console in a vee hull works better but despite what you see advertised, you have to go up to 23' to have enough room. It can be done in a C21 but it's tight.

At first you showed the DE23 in your choices. That would solve all problems and it is a very nice boat.
There are smaller ones like the P21.

Shrinking the beam on cats is unwise.

There are a number of reasons.

Bow wake interference.

Creating turbulent water for engines.

And no matter what, never sacrifice bdeck clearance.

fallguy1000 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 08, 2018 1:55 pm Shrinking the beam on cats is unwise.

Correct, don't.

jacquesmm wrote: ↑Thu Nov 08, 2018 10:41 am

Christer wrote: ↑Thu Nov 08, 2018 9:59 am
Or, if I could talk Jacques into redesigning the CT22 for me like the PartyCat I pictured earlier, that'd be sweet.

No need to redesign anything. Your sketch is very close to my design. As long as you keep the main frames, you can do what you want with the seating.
There are two obstacles: the head and the main beam.

Can the main beam be moved forward a bit to allow the seating arrangement I showed? What if the overall beam of the boat was extended to say, 9ft? Or the whole thing scaled 10% for that matter.

jacquesmm wrote: ↑Thu Nov 08, 2018 10:41 am I don't think the Glen-L head is realistic, nobody can fit in there. Build a cardboard mock-up, you"ll see.

I actually found a picture of a Bearcat built as a tour boat, and it had a porta-potty dead center on the deck. Not very pretty - or private. Then again, privacy on a small boat is pretty much impossible.

jacquesmm wrote: ↑Thu Nov 08, 2018 10:41 am The Glen-L boat has a much lower bridge deck. That boat will slam in any kind of weather but it keeps the transversal girder below the deck and allows for that bow rider style seating.
You can do that with the CT22 if you accept the slamming. I wouldn't.

One of the reasons for wanting a catamaran is a softer ride with less slamming, so no, I wouldn't accept that either.

jacquesmm wrote: ↑Thu Nov 08, 2018 10:41 am The main limiting factor is the head.
On the GP21, I propose a folding head, same as on some pontoon boats. It works, I had one on one of my boats.
Cat hulls are very narrow for a good head. A large console in a vee hull works better but despite what you see advertised, you have to go up to 23' to have enough room. It can be done in a C21 but it's tight.

I found a good candidate in a maritime catalog from a local shop yesterday. It's a 12V composting toilet with a height of around 40cm. That should be possible to pop under a seat behind some form of cover around for the illusion of privacy. Most times it'll only be myself and my family on the boat, and for those other times the rest will just have to look in another direction and whistle.

jacquesmm wrote: ↑Thu Nov 08, 2018 10:41 am At first you showed the DE23 in your choices. That would solve all problems and it is a very nice boat.
There are smaller ones like the P21.

I've looked closely at those boats and I feel they tip over into weekenders with sleeping accommodation and all that. I honestly can't see us ever sleeping on the boat - the dragon isn't much of a boat person, so her coming along at all is quite impressive. She also gets cold easily and thus wants to go home to a hot shower. Thus the big selling point of the boat is kind of moot, at least for what we would be using it for.

Then again, currently NOT having the option of doing a sleepover at a nice little island prevents us from even trying the experience, so who knows? If I built such a boat, maybe we would start using it more and differently from what we've done so far.

They are very nice boats, though.

Maybe you should stop looking at boats with cabins as campers and start looking at them as boats with a she shed. A comfortable place to use the restroom with real privacy and the ability to wash up afterwards like in a real rest room. Wouldn't take much to add a small sink, pressure activated pump and a 5 gallon fresh water tank with a grey water holding tank. Instead of rushing off the water due to getting cold the she shed could hold extra warm clothing, blankets and have a day bed that can be extra seating when you guys have guests. It could also store a small portable stove to make grill cheese sandwiches with tomato soup or some other quick snack or hot beverages. they make a few that clamp to the railing. Guys fishing off the stern while the women are talking in the she shed! It is also an instant shelter if the weather changes quickly. Sounds like you guys want to go out and enjoy boating, why not make it comfortable?

My second wife was English, she loved going out on the boat but ever so often I had to stop everything and heat her up some water for her tea. We would pack a duffel bag with tea, stove, sugar and biscuits (cookies) along with the boating gear that we didn't leave on the boat.

OrangeQuest wrote: ↑Thu Nov 08, 2018 5:41 pm Maybe you should stop looking at boats with cabins as campers and start looking at them as boats with a she shed. A comfortable place to use the restroom with real privacy and the ability to wash up afterwards like in a real rest room. Wouldn't take much to add a small sink, pressure activated pump and a 5 gallon fresh water tank with a grey water holding tank. Instead of rushing off the water due to getting cold the she shed could hold extra warm clothing, blankets and have a day bed that can be extra seating when you guys have guests. It could also store a small portable stove to make grill cheese sandwiches with tomato soup or some other quick snack or hot beverages. they make a few that clamp to the railing. Guys fishing off the stern while the women are talking in the she shed! It is also an instant shelter if the weather changes quickly. Sounds like you guys want to go out and enjoy boating, why not make it comfortable?

My second wife was English, she loved going out on the boat but ever so often I had to stop everything and heat her up some water for her tea. We would pack a duffel bag with tea, stove, sugar and biscuits (cookies) along with the boating gear that we didn't leave on the boat.

Good idea OQ.
You don't have to have the berth if you don't want it. You can make the cabin whatever you wish it to be (as long as the weight is comparable).
Without the berth you have all kinds of room for comforts she would enjoy. Heck, even a small marine heater to warm the cabin up. Larger head and a cooktop like OQ mentions.

Yes, no berths, just a very large head (bathroom). Wives love that: shower, powder room, lots of shelves for their fancy little bottles of perfumed stuff.

Wow!

Spent some time the past 2 days on the Glen forum looking at builds. They have some beautiful boats and I understand some of the reasons why they need to do what they do but...WOW, looking at the framing system, compound cuts, relying on metal fasteners, bolts and what not they look more involved as building a hurricane house to code! I'm sorry but even for simple boats that's way more involved than the simple jigs we see here (IMO only). Don't get me wrong, if built correctly and sealed up, I'm sure they'll last generations but JM's designs will do the same thing with a much simpler build and way (I mean WAY) lighter build (and just as strong).

piperdown wrote: ↑Thu Nov 08, 2018 8:43 pm Wow!

Spent some time the past 2 days on the Glen forum looking at builds. They have some beautiful boats and I understand some of the reasons why they need to do what they do but...WOW, looking at the framing system, compound cuts, relying on metal fasteners, bolts and what not they look more involved as building a hurricane house to code! I'm sorry but even for simple boats that's way more involved than the simple jigs we see here (IMO only). Don't get me wrong, if built correctly and sealed up, I'm sure they'll last generations but JM's designs will do the same thing with a much simpler build and way (I mean WAY) lighter build (and just as strong).

Right.

I said as much on the methods thread.

fallguy1000 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 08, 2018 9:28 pm

piperdown wrote: ↑Thu Nov 08, 2018 8:43 pm Wow!

Spent some time the past 2 days on the Glen forum looking at builds. They have some beautiful boats and I understand some of the reasons why they need to do what they do but...WOW, looking at the framing system, compound cuts, relying on metal fasteners, bolts and what not they look more involved as building a hurricane house to code! I'm sorry but even for simple boats that's way more involved than the simple jigs we see here (IMO only). Don't get me wrong, if built correctly and sealed up, I'm sure they'll last generations but JM's designs will do the same thing with a much simpler build and way (I mean WAY) lighter build (and just as strong).

Right.

I said as much on the methods thread.

Yes you did. But until I saw what was involved...who whee!

Right, so I've been trying to research Ken Hankinson's Wild/Bear Cats, and things don't bode well for building any of them. There are a number of issues with both plans, building and the finished products.

As a member of the WoodenBoat forums so eloquently put it in this thread, http://forum.woodenboat.com/showthread. ... dcat-Cuddy

the plans are pathetic
asthetically ugly
with that useless tug boat style gunwhale (changed)
designed for old style plystringer construction not stitch and glue
needed considerable changes
taking away useless bits and reinforcing oterareas like transom transom knees ect

when you get all the frames up and stuck together and try to skin the hull with plyyou find that you cannot bend the ply fairly around the frames and end up with a great disaster requiring the crudest nastiest dirtiest boatbuilding tofair the 2 inch dips between frames

He goes further:

the hulls on the wildcat i think are too narrow and need to be somewhat wider -the tunnel needs to be higheras it rubs the water at anyspeed - lotsof wetted surface

mounting the engines is difficult requiring alot of thought

There is also a BearCat built by Andy Smith Boatworks in the Philippines, which at least was on the water some years back.

This picture shows the waterline; the white is obviously below the waterline. Notice how short/low the sponsons are.



Here it is on the water:



And finally one showing the stern:



There is next to no clearance between the tunnel ceiling and the water, which I suspect will cause wave slamming at any speed and at any sea conditions with the possible exception of glassy water.

There was a question on the Glen-L forums about whether the height of the sponsons could be increased to reduce the wave slamming, and the answer was "We do not recommend increasing the height of the sponsons." In other words, the boat will not be pleasant to drive.

So that leaves only one real alternative, the bateau.com CT22, which I want to tweak in ways it can't. What to do, what to do...

There's a new contender, Schionning Marine's Prowler VT650:



Fantastic looking boat, and suits my program perfectly. I guess the CT22 could be built to look similar to the VT650...

Christer wrote: ↑Wed Nov 14, 2018 7:46 pm There's a new contender, Schionning Marine's Prowler VT650:



Fantastic looking boat, and suits my program perfectly. I guess the CT22 could be built to look similar to the VT650...

There is a lot to like about a kit boat.

Fast build.

The only thing I don't like is there ain't much beam and that means you have a 9' limit on the sea. But you don't likely want to be out in anything bigger than 4' in a small boat anyhow.

Costs will be higher. But the design has some provimg done.

Still open, though.

Ask the designer to critique the boat and see what he says.

fallguy1000 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 14, 2018 9:15 pm

Christer wrote: ↑Wed Nov 14, 2018 7:46 pm There's a new contender, Schionning Marine's Prowler VT650:



Fantastic looking boat, and suits my program perfectly. I guess the CT22 could be built to look similar to the VT650...

There is a lot to like about a kit boat.

Fast build.

The only thing I don't like is there ain't much beam and that means you have a 9' limit on the sea. But you don't likely want to be out in anything bigger than 4' in a small boat anyhow.

Costs will be higher. But the design has some provimg done.

Still open, though.

Ask the designer to critique the boat and see what he says.

The boat is designed to be built from foam cored fibreglass composite panels, like the Bateau designs. He specifies Divinycell H80 foam and S-glass for the scantlings, which makes for a very light and strong boat, although an expensive build. Also, the plans are more than AUD3000 alone, so while I like the looks of it, I have to get something that can be built from locally sourced marine plywood.

I would also like 3 ft more length and 1.5ft wider boat for a 7.6x3m or 25x9.75ft beam, to get a little more room inside. We likely won't be out in anything more than 1-2' chops voluntarily, but it would be good to know that the boat can handle 6-8' seas and get us back to shore without falling apart.

It's a partially open boat The targa arch makes it easy to attach a button-up roof over the cabin and aft cockpit, and depending on how the soft roof is made, it could be possible to heat it somewhat. I think that arrangement works well enough, and also allows for a head to be installed. An enclosed pilothouse works even better, but I've come to the realization that it requires a much bigger boat, at least 28ft and over, in order to be actually useful and not feel cramped. A dual console with a button-on top and a front door to keep the weather out I think would work well enough.

Christer wrote: ↑Thu Nov 15, 2018 5:14 am

fallguy1000 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 14, 2018 9:15 pm

Christer wrote: ↑Wed Nov 14, 2018 7:46 pm There's a new contender, Schionning Marine's Prowler VT650:



Fantastic looking boat, and suits my program perfectly. I guess the CT22 could be built to look similar to the VT650...

There is a lot to like about a kit boat.

Fast build.

The only thing I don't like is there ain't much beam and that means you have a 9' limit on the sea. But you don't likely want to be out in anything bigger than 4' in a small boat anyhow.

Costs will be higher. But the design has some provimg done.

Still open, though.

Ask the designer to critique the boat and see what he says.

The boat is designed to be built from foam cored fibreglass composite panels, like the Bateau designs. He specifies Divinycell H80 foam and S-glass for the scantlings, which makes for a very light and strong boat, although an expensive build. Also, the plans are more than AUD3000 alone, so while I like the looks of it, I have to get something that can be built from locally sourced marine plywood.

I would also like 3 ft more length and 1.5ft wider boat for a 7.6x3m or 25x9.75ft beam, to get a little more room inside. We likely won't be out in anything more than 1-2' chops voluntarily, but it would be good to know that the boat can handle 6-8' seas and get us back to shore without falling apart.

It's a partially open boat The targa arch makes it easy to attach a button-up roof over the cabin and aft cockpit, and depending on how the soft roof is made, it could be possible to heat it somewhat. I think that arrangement works well enough, and also allows for a head to be installed. An enclosed pilothouse works even better, but I've come to the realization that it requires a much bigger boat, at least 28ft and over, in order to be actually useful and not feel cramped. A dual console with a button-on top and a front door to keep the weather out I think would work well enough.

There's also, according to the website, a cuddy cabin version.
Why not just ask them if it can be scaled by 10%?
The website, at least on the information page, calls for "Built from balsa-core Duflex panels". While I've heard of lots of boats built from balsa I'd be very hesitant to use it. One tiny flaw or nick in the glass and the balsa would be pulling in water like crazy.
I don't have experience with balsa cored boats, only what I've read. However, I've used balsa for other hobby projects and it absorbs water, paint and other liquids more than soft pine.

piperdown wrote: ↑Thu Nov 15, 2018 7:25 am

Christer wrote: ↑Thu Nov 15, 2018 5:14 am The boat is designed to be built from foam cored fibreglass composite panels, like the Bateau designs. He specifies Divinycell H80 foam and S-glass for the scantlings, which makes for a very light and strong boat, although an expensive build. Also, the plans are more than AUD3000 alone, so while I like the looks of it, I have to get something that can be built from locally sourced marine plywood.

I would also like 3 ft more length and 1.5ft wider boat for a 7.6x3m or 25x9.75ft beam, to get a little more room inside. We likely won't be out in anything more than 1-2' chops voluntarily, but it would be good to know that the boat can handle 6-8' seas and get us back to shore without falling apart.

It's a partially open boat The targa arch makes it easy to attach a button-up roof over the cabin and aft cockpit, and depending on how the soft roof is made, it could be possible to heat it somewhat. I think that arrangement works well enough, and also allows for a head to be installed. An enclosed pilothouse works even better, but I've come to the realization that it requires a much bigger boat, at least 28ft and over, in order to be actually useful and not feel cramped. A dual console with a button-on top and a front door to keep the weather out I think would work well enough.

There's also, according to the website, a cuddy cabin version.
Why not just ask them if it can be scaled by 10%?
The website, at least on the information page, calls for "Built from balsa-core Duflex panels". While I've heard of lots of boats built from balsa I'd be very hesitant to use it. One tiny flaw or nick in the glass and the balsa would be pulling in water like crazy.
I don't have experience with balsa cored boats, only what I've read. However, I've used balsa for other hobby projects and it absorbs water, paint and other liquids more than soft pine.

I looked at the cuddy cabin version, but no matter how hard I try, I just can't like it.

I thought I remembered it called for balsa cored Duflex panels, but the PDF study plans list Divinycell foam and fibreglass. Also, it was late and so I got confused and thought it was another design I looked at...

I've heard the same about balsa - nice and lightweight, but wicks water like a sponge and isn't really suitable for use in boats. I think that Divinycell is a better choice.

More questions came by email but I want to reply on the forum. Discussions on the forum will help hundreds of readers.

Christers asked about elimination or reducing the size of a cross beam in order to add bow rider style seating forward of the console as in the Hankinson design.
It is not possible.
One of the big differences between the Hankinson and the CT22 is the height of the deck between the hulls (bridge deck). His deck is very low. This provides volume to have a cockpit forward with seating and an enclosed head. That low clearance produces bad slamming under the deck. It can be acceptable for a protected waters boat used with the same program than a pontoon boat. It is unsafe offshore. You can see that very low clearance in the pictures posted above in this thread.
The CT22 has much more bridge deck clearance but it does not leave enough volume to have such a cockpit.
Look at the perspective drawings:

See the box just in front of the console. That is the cross beam we are discussing, the one with a lid.
In the front, the height inside that box is about 6" above the bridge deck!!!
There is no way to bring that down or eliminate it.
Look at the hatches in the foredeck. Those compartments are 17" deep stern side and 10" bow side. That does not leave enough room for seats.

The choice is simple: have a low bridge deck (Hankinson) and lots of comfort but pay a price in blue water ability or have a seaworthy high bridge deck but no extra room for seating.
Anyway, I would never want to sit there in a formed sea, you"ll fly over board.

Seaworthiness or comfort.
That are your choices. It is not an unusual choice, compromises are a major factor in boat design.
The Hankinson and my CT22 are each good designs but for a different program.

The VT650 is another compromise. From what I see, the freeboard is higher, the windage is more than what I like. The bridge deck is lower but not as low as theWild Cat.
That compromise produces enough volume for the bow rider seating but there will be some slamming. Less than with the Wild Cat, more than the CT22.

jacquesmm wrote: ↑Thu Nov 15, 2018 1:54 pm More questions came by email but I want to reply on the forum. Discussions on the forum will help hundreds of readers.

Christers asked about elimination or reducing the size of a cross beam in order to add bow rider style seating forward of the console as in the Hankinson design.
It is not possible.
One of the big differences between the Hankinson and the CT22 is the height of the deck between the hulls (bridge deck). His deck is very low. This provides volume to have a cockpit forward with seating and an enclosed head. That low clearance produces bad slamming under the deck. It can be acceptable for a protected waters boat used with the same program than a pontoon boat. It is unsafe offshore. You can see that very low clearance in the pictures posted above in this thread.
The CT22 has much more bridge deck clearance but it does not leave enough volume to have such a cockpit.
Look at the perspective drawings:

See the box just in front of the console. That is the cross beam we are discussing, the one with a lid.
In the front, the height inside that box is about 6" above the bridge deck!!!
There is no way to bring that down or eliminate it.
Look at the hatches in the foredeck. Those compartments are 17" deep stern side and 10" bow side. That does not leave enough room for seats.

The choice is simple: have a low bridge deck (Hankinson) and lots of comfort but pay a price in blue water ability or have a seaworthy high bridge deck but no extra room for seating.
Anyway, I would never want to sit there in a formed sea, you"ll fly over board.

Seaworthiness or comfort.
That are your choices. It is not an unusual choice, compromises are a major factor in boat design.
The Hankinson and my CT22 are each good designs but for a different program.

The VT650 is another compromise. From what I see, the freeboard is higher, the windage is more than what I like. The bridge deck is lower but not as low as theWild Cat.
That compromise produces enough volume for the bow rider seating but there will be some slamming. Less than with the Wild Cat, more than the CT22.

Great reply.

Here is a boat that is interesting. Not sure I get the bottom design.

http://www.spirainternational.com/study/ValdezStudy.pdf

That guy's stuff always looks really heavily framed to me, although some of his designs have pretty nice lines.

cracked_ribs wrote: ↑Thu Nov 15, 2018 9:41 pm That guy's stuff always looks really heavily framed to me, although some of his designs have pretty nice lines.

I only point it out because he ought to build to fit his slip.

Bigger than a trailerable.

fallguy1000 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 15, 2018 8:18 pm Here is a boat that is interesting. Not sure I get the bottom design.

http://www.spirainternational.com/study/ValdezStudy.pdf

fallguy1000 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 15, 2018 10:20 pm

cracked_ribs wrote: ↑Thu Nov 15, 2018 9:41 pm That guy's stuff always looks really heavily framed to me, although some of his designs have pretty nice lines.

I only point it out because he ought to build to fit his slip.

Bigger than a trailerable.

I've looked at those designs in the past. They do have some nice lines but they are along the same build methods as Glen-L, heavy frames and lots of mechanical fasteners.

Please don't build a Spira. Many of his boats are made with 2x4's, panels don't bend, difficult to build.

jacquesmm wrote: ↑Fri Nov 16, 2018 7:47 am Please don't build a Spira. Many of his boats are made with 2x4's, panels don't bend, difficult to build.

I was hoping you'd critique that hull shape more than the framing.

Again, only presented to get Christer to realize....he's gonna need a bigger boat....

... and to avoid the trailerable trap.

jacquesmm wrote: ↑Fri Nov 16, 2018 7:47 am Please don't build a Spira. Many of his boats are made with 2x4's, panels don't bend, difficult to build.

The plans Fallguy posted said over 300 feet of 2X4s and I counted 38 sheets of plywood of different thicknesses. To many different size screws to count. But I read on one of the forums that for one of his smaller boat the "fastener" kit was somewhere around $2500. That is a lot of screws! But I bet the boats show up good on radar!

jacquesmm wrote: ↑Thu Nov 08, 2018 10:41 am .

At first you showed the DE23 in your choices. That would solve all problems and it is a very nice boat.
There are smaller ones like the P21.

Bump




Plus it’s not ugly.

Thanks, I think the P21 is a great boat for that program.

fallguy1000 wrote: ↑Fri Nov 16, 2018 8:14 am

jacquesmm wrote: ↑Fri Nov 16, 2018 7:47 am Please don't build a Spira. Many of his boats are made with 2x4's, panels don't bend, difficult to build.

I was hoping you'd critique that hull shape more than the framing.

Again, only presented to get Christer to realize....he's gonna need a bigger boat....

... and to avoid the trailerable trap.

I know I need a bigger boat. Legally trailerable is out the window, now my width constraint is my mooring slip. So, about 10ft wide and 28ft long. 30ft long is a stretch, but might be doable.

I think Jacques posted "Friends don't let friends build a Spira design" in a thread somewhere...

Eastward is doing a cat about that size, I think they were coming in between 100 and 130 rigged.

Building a boat to fit that space is a six figure hobby. It's not for everyone. A boat that maximizes your slip that you can't afford to launch is less fun than a boat you can use.

fallguy1000 wrote: ↑Fri Nov 16, 2018 8:14 am
I was hoping you'd critique that hull shape more than the framing.

Most of his hull shapes come from the Sucher books or from the old Texas Dory plans, nothing special.
This one is a flat bottom, beach able dory style (Pacific Dory). They are beachable but they slam.
That hull shape has rocker, it will not plane easily and if it does, it will porpoise and have a bad trim.
The waterplane at the stern is too narrow for planing speeds. That shape is OK for a moderate speed boat, slow semi-displacement.

piperdown wrote: ↑Thu Nov 15, 2018 7:25 am There's also, according to the website, a cuddy cabin version.
Why not just ask them if it can be scaled by 10%?

I sent them an email asking the following:

1. Can the boat be built from plywood/fibreglass composite, using Okume BS1088 marine plywood?
2. Can the design be scaled to get a bit larger boat? I’d really like a 25-28’ length boat with a beam of 9.5-10’. My mooring berth is just over 11’ wide (340cm), so a 10’ wide boat will fit with a bit of care when docking. Trailering isn’t a concern, it’s not going to be trailered for long distances and there are oversize permits readily available.
3. Can the targa arch be moved back slightly and have a hardtop roof like the cuddy version?
4. Are the hulls deep enough to accommodate a stand-up head if put under the port console?
5. What is the tunnel height/bridgedeck clearance when at rest? I’ve been told that 400mm is minimum for a 22’ cat, otherwise wave slamming will be a problem. If less then 400mm, can the tunnel height be increased by increasing the height of the sponsons?

Haven't heard anything back yet, but time zone differences etc. We'll see. In any case I'm not in a hurry to start building anything big as my housing situation is a bit unstable at the moment.

jacquesmm wrote: ↑Thu Nov 15, 2018 1:54 pm More questions came by email but I want to reply on the forum. Discussions on the forum will help hundreds of readers.

Christers asked about elimination or reducing the size of a cross beam in order to add bow rider style seating forward of the console as in the Hankinson design.
It is not possible.
One of the big differences between the Hankinson and the CT22 is the height of the deck between the hulls (bridge deck). His deck is very low. This provides volume to have a cockpit forward with seating and an enclosed head. That low clearance produces bad slamming under the deck. It can be acceptable for a protected waters boat used with the same program than a pontoon boat. It is unsafe offshore. You can see that very low clearance in the pictures posted above in this thread.
The CT22 has much more bridge deck clearance but it does not leave enough volume to have such a cockpit.
Look at the perspective drawings:

See the box just in front of the console. That is the cross beam we are discussing, the one with a lid.
In the front, the height inside that box is about 6" above the bridge deck!!!
There is no way to bring that down or eliminate it.
Look at the hatches in the foredeck. Those compartments are 17" deep stern side and 10" bow side. That does not leave enough room for seats.

The choice is simple: have a low bridge deck (Hankinson) and lots of comfort but pay a price in blue water ability or have a seaworthy high bridge deck but no extra room for seating.
Anyway, I would never want to sit there in a formed sea, you"ll fly over board.

Seaworthiness or comfort.
That are your choices. It is not an unusual choice, compromises are a major factor in boat design.
The Hankinson and my CT22 are each good designs but for a different program.

The VT650 is another compromise. From what I see, the freeboard is higher, the windage is more than what I like. The bridge deck is lower but not as low as theWild Cat.
That compromise produces enough volume for the bow rider seating but there will be some slamming. Less than with the Wild Cat, more than the CT22.

Thanks for your reply, Jacques. Even if it's not what I wanted to hear, I appreciate it.

However, I don't want to eliminate the connecting cross beams, I understand they have to be there. Please don't take this the wrong way, but why were they/the box put there and not forther forward? By having it where it is, about half the usable space in the boat is taken up by the front deck and the box.

I quite obviously have no NA experience nor experience in designing a boat, which is why every time I ask something I feel retarded. I'm trying to understand why things are done they way they are, but this one continues to puzzle me.

I assume the low height of the forward lockers is because of the sloping of the tunnel ceiling, and that is also why the connecting frame box is placed where it is. Couldn't the front part of the slope be steeper and thus deeper, allowing more internal depth in the cockpit, and possibly also allowing the connecting frame box to moved forward?

With my stated program, I think either of the cats mentioned in the thread could work. I really want to build a CT22, but the way it's laid out, it just doesn't work for me.

I also realize that a standard monohull would be faster and a lot cheaper to build and given the right design, would satisfy all my requirements except being a catamaran. I'm going to have to give this some more serious thinking.

fallguy1000 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 15, 2018 8:18 pm Here is a boat that is interesting. Not sure I get the bottom design.

http://www.spirainternational.com/study/ValdezStudy.pdf

Don't like how it looks and the framing scares me.

jacquesmm wrote: ↑Fri Nov 16, 2018 7:47 am Please don't build a Spira. Many of his boats are made with 2x4's, panels don't bend, difficult to build.

I'm not planning to, he's got exactly 0 boats that I like. Plus, as I wrote in the previous post, the framing scares me. It looks like someone started building a house, then changed the shape of it and tossed it in the water.

jacquesmm wrote: ↑Fri Nov 16, 2018 4:12 pm

fallguy1000 wrote: ↑Fri Nov 16, 2018 8:14 am
I was hoping you'd critique that hull shape more than the framing.

Most of his hull shapes come from the Sucher books or from the old Texas Dory plans, nothing special.
This one is a flat bottom, beach able dory style (Pacific Dory). They are beachable but they slam.
That hull shape has rocker, it will not plane easily and if it does, it will porpoise and have a bad trim.
The waterplane at the stern is too narrow for planing speeds. That shape is OK for a moderate speed boat, slow semi-displacement.

The shape of the bottom is very Skoota like. And you nailed it I'd say. Semi-d comes to mind.

OrangeQuest wrote: ↑Fri Nov 16, 2018 8:17 am

jacquesmm wrote: ↑Fri Nov 16, 2018 7:47 am Please don't build a Spira. Many of his boats are made with 2x4's, panels don't bend, difficult to build.

The plans Fallguy posted said over 300 feet of 2X4s and I counted 38 sheets of plywood of different thicknesses. To many different size screws to count. But I read on one of the forums that for one of his smaller boat the "fastener" kit was somewhere around $2500. That is a lot of screws! But I bet the boats show up good on radar!

The BearCat has a "Fastener kit" for the cuddy version - it alone is more than $1700. There's a lot of epoxy and fibreglass to be had for $1700.

cracked_ribs wrote: ↑Fri Nov 16, 2018 3:41 pm Eastward is doing a cat about that size, I think they were coming in between 100 and 130 rigged.

Building a boat to fit that space is a six figure hobby. It's not for everyone. A boat that maximizes your slip that you can't afford to launch is less fun than a boat you can use.

That is a very good point, and one that's becoming more and more clear the more I look at various designs. The size boat I want is exactly opposing the idea of an economically driven hull, unless I go for a Skoota 24 or the Jazz 30. Those designs are economical to run, but the beam is a problem.

Even after bothering so many people, it seems likely that I'll never get to build anything.

Christer, this has to be the most exasperating thread I have seen. You have talked about building boats from 21’ to 30+’ on the one hand, while on the other hand you talk about “economy” and saving on engine costs.

I don’t know your personal circumstances, but there are HUGE differences between the build, fit-out and operating costs of a 20’ vs a 30’ planing boat!

Given that you are looking at 25 - 30’ outboard powered boats, and the cost of petrol/fuel in Europe, I assume you have deep pockets!

BarraMan wrote: ↑Fri Nov 16, 2018 5:10 pm Christer, this has to be the most exasperating thread I have seen. You have talked about building boats from 21’ to 30+’ on the one hand, while on the other hand you talk about “economy” and saving on engine costs.

I don’t know your personal circumstances, but there are HUGE differences between the build, fit-out and operating costs of a 20’ vs a 30’ planing boat!

Given that you are looking at 25 - 30’ outboard powered boats, and the cost of petrol/fuel in Europe, I assume you have deep pockets!

Pinning down the SOR better is important.

Reconciling speed vs fuel economy is one.

Max length and beam another.

Christer wrote: ↑Fri Nov 16, 2018 5:05 pm
Even after bothering so many people, it seems likely that I'll never get to build anything.

Well, why not start with that boat for your daughter, and scratch the itch without having to make all these decisions?

I had planned a large build myself, but then the company I do most of my work for changed their minds about where they needed me, and instead of going back to a space I could build in, I had to stay in the middle of a city where a house with a yard is two million dollars and a garage is another million, so I'm in an apartment.

I couldn't start the build I had planned, so I built a new dinghy because I could fit it in my apartment.

I have a book that is nearing completion, but it's hard to get paid real money to write a whole book. But I wanted to keep writing, so I wrote articles in my field of expertise and I have tens or hundreds of thousands of words in print because I worked small when I couldn't work big and it added up.

If you want to build, you build. You don't start with your magnum opus. You just start.

BarraMan wrote: ↑Fri Nov 16, 2018 5:10 pm Christer, this has to be the most exasperating thread I have seen. You have talked about building boats from 21’ to 30+’ on the one hand, while on the other hand you talk about “economy” and saving on engine costs.

I don’t know your personal circumstances, but there are HUGE differences between the build, fit-out and operating costs of a 20’ vs a 30’ planing boat!

Given that you are looking at 25 - 30’ outboard powered boats, and the cost of petrol/fuel in Europe, I assume you have deep pockets!

Well, I'm having a hard time deciding, haven't I?

Also, being so focused on the cats doesn't help matters, either...

With "economy", I don't necessarily mean that the engine should run only on petrol fumes, but obviously I don't want to spend $200 every time I go out, either. There are also interesting things happening with diesel outboards these days, and by the time I decide on a plan and get it built, the diesel outboards are hopefully available on the market. I don't know if it's a Norwegian thing or not, but we have "red diesel" available, which is tax and duty free. I think it's mainly for agricultural use, but I know several people using the red diesel in their boats with no issue. It's plain old diesel with red colouring added. No idea about the legality of it, though.

In any case, one of my main problems with picking a design, is that I love boating. I've been driving boats since I was 7 years old and have practically grown up in boats. The dragon (my fiancee) is not really a boat person, although she's grown to not dislike it so much over the years. We also have friends who like to go fishing, but have little to no experience being in a boat or out on the water at all, and they really don't like the rocking back and forth and get quite nervous. Hence, I want to, need to, have a boat that's stable, has high freeboard, doesn't jump around at speed and doesn't rock too much at rest. Thus, my slight fixation on the catamarans.

Given that most of the people we take out are landlubbers, they expect some comfort, like padded seats, not getting soaked.. things like that. Thus, the boat must meet these criteria. Ladies refuse to substitute buckets for toilets, so one must be on board. Granted, we're usually never too far from shore or a WC, so it's not a big problem as such, it just makes everything so much easier when 4 people don't have to pull in their lines because someone needs to pee.

With regards to speed - I love going fast just because I can, but with lots of people on the boat, we're not going fast, because we're out having a relaxing day on the water and/or beach somewhere. 15-ish knots on plane would be a good speed for that, but I'd like the possibility to go a lot faster if need be. So I want good range (large-ish tanks) and decent economy (see above).

There must also be a way to cover the boat somewhat to get out of the weather when it inevitably turns bad. I've compromised with myself and gone from a fully enclosed pilothouse to a dual console with a soft top, button-up or otherwise. I don't necessesarily need it heated as we don't use the boat when it's terribly cold, but if there's room for a small heater it's all the better.

Deep pockets? Not so much, but I'm thinking that price and cost doesn't really matter that much if I get what I want. I'll try and do it as cheaply as possible, but I'll pay to get what I want. In line with that thinking, I'll pay what it costs to keep it running, within reason.

That's another reason I'm looking at designs like the VT650 - it gives me everything I want and from the motorization outlines of 2x50HP to 2x90HP, it's reasonably cheap to run. My Suzuki DF50 uses very little fuel, so a VT650 with 2x75HP 'zuki 4-bangers should deliver both enough speed and decent fuel economy. Pretty much the only thing bothering me with the VT650 is that it needs a few more feet of length and a foot or so of width, and the targa arch needs to come aft a little but still not block fishability from the rear deck. That said, I don't think I would have any problems living with it as designed.

Oh yeah, another thing - the plans for it are AU$3250.

I also feel bad for discussing other designer's designs on here, I feel like such a spoilt brat and that I'm just critizing Jacques' designs. I don't mean to be a jerk and there are many very nice designs in the Bateau portfolio that likely would be perfect for my program, but either they can't be changed like I want them to (CT22), or they require too much power to move (CS/CX25), or there just is something that's not quite right. That goes for all the other designer's plans I've looked at as well!

In any case, I'm sorry if I come across as stubborn and condescending. I don't mean to. Sorry.

cracked_ribs wrote: ↑Fri Nov 16, 2018 6:24 pm

Christer wrote: ↑Fri Nov 16, 2018 5:05 pm
Even after bothering so many people, it seems likely that I'll never get to build anything.

Well, why not start with that boat for your daughter, and scratch the itch without having to make all these decisions?

I had planned a large build myself, but then the company I do most of my work for changed their minds about where they needed me, and instead of going back to a space I could build in, I had to stay in the middle of a city where a house with a yard is two million dollars and a garage is another million, so I'm in an apartment.

I couldn't start the build I had planned, so I built a new dinghy because I could fit it in my apartment.

I have a book that is nearing completion, but it's hard to get paid real money to write a whole book. But I wanted to keep writing, so I wrote articles in my field of expertise and I have tens or hundreds of thousands of words in print because I worked small when I couldn't work big and it added up.

If you want to build, you build. You don't start with your magnum opus. You just start.

Yeah, I'll try and start that sometime this winter. That'll give some relief for the itching (and introduce another kind of itch...). Then I'll get the boat back from the outboard dealership at some point as well. That boat also needs some work done.

“25+ ft”, “speed” and “dont want to spend $200 everytime I go out” - doesnt compute for me!

For someone who has been with boats their whole life I am surprised you dont have a more realistic view of what you want in a boat.

BarraMan wrote: ↑Fri Nov 16, 2018 7:15 pm “25+ ft”, “speed” and “dont want to spend $200 everytime I go out” - doesnt compute for me!

For someone who has been with boats their whole life I am surprised you dont have a more realistic view of what you want in a boat.

I've only ever had small boats...

Christer wrote: ↑Fri Nov 16, 2018 7:57 pm
I've only ever had small boats...

Well, keep doing that until your wallet is unbearably heavy, then go bigger until it feels light again.

I can't remember the last time I took my heavy boat out and only spent $200 on fuel. And it is much smaller than your maximum size (although it is normal for me to run it fairly long distances). But I can easily burn $300/day in fuel. Very easily. You start doing that a couple of times a month and all of a sudden you're spending all winter paying off your summer.

I actually realized just the other day that my annual fuel costs are enough that if I switch to a C17 for my inshore fishing etc, the additional boat, motor and trailer would pay for itself within about six years. If I got rid of the glass tank (which I can't until my employers change their minds again) I could literally build a new C17 sized boat every four years or so, and give the old one away complete with motor and trailer, and it would cost about what I spend on fuel right now.

Don't underestimate the cost of making 5000 pounds skip on the water like a flat rock.

All the above is really just to say: build the small boat, enjoy the process, take your time and perfect the details, then think about whether you'd be even happier with a few more days on the water, but a $5,000 annual pay cut (after taxes, of course).

The Prowler VT650 is certainly an interesting boat, but I have to say:

1) Its a good thing that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, because for me, that is one ugly boat.
2) It looks like quite a complex build.
3) they clearly have no taste when it comes to boat colour schemes!
4) Its interesting that they talk 50 - 90 hp motors - but put 115s on the demo boat! I think that boat with 2 x 50 hp motors would be a "dog". Its a BIG boat to only have 100 ponies to play with!
5) They may have been around for a while with sailing and large power cats - but although an Australian company, I have never heard of them or the VT650.

cracked_ribs wrote: ↑Fri Nov 16, 2018 8:29 pm

Christer wrote: ↑Fri Nov 16, 2018 7:57 pm
I've only ever had small boats...

Well, keep doing that until your wallet is unbearably heavy, then go bigger until it feels light again.

I can't remember the last time I took my heavy boat out and only spent $200 on fuel. And it is much smaller than your maximum size (although it is normal for me to run it fairly long distances). But I can easily burn $300/day in fuel. Very easily. You start doing that a couple of times a month and all of a sudden you're spending all winter paying off your summer.

I actually realized just the other day that my annual fuel costs are enough that if I switch to a C17 for my inshore fishing etc, the additional boat, motor and trailer would pay for itself within about six years. If I got rid of the glass tank (which I can't until my employers change their minds again) I could literally build a new C17 sized boat every four years or so, and give the old one away complete with motor and trailer, and it would cost about what I spend on fuel right now.

Don't underestimate the cost of making 5000 pounds skip on the water like a flat rock.

You burn $300 at $4 a gallon...or 75 gallons.
75 gallons at $6 is $450
Let's say you get 75 miles.

10 mph cruise 5mpg Skoota 24
max speed 25mph

At cruise, the Skoota uses 15 gallons or at $6; 90$ bs 450$

Yeah, that is pretty close to real economics.

Imagine saving $360 a weekend for gas.

Forget the Skoota. Some of JM designs will do better than 1mpg I'll bet.

I have considered the Sk28, in fact - it's not set up to fish and trailering it is ridiculous but it's actually so much more efficient that if I had more free time I could almost break even running it the whole length of Georgia Strait, around Vancouver Island, up the strait of Juan de Fuca and out to the tuna as opposed to trailering a production boat to the west coast of the island and running just fifty or sixty miles out.

But I just don't have the time. I don't think I could handle Skoota pace.

Gas for me is indeed more like $6/gallon and I have to do 80-100 mile runs pretty regularly but it's true, if I could switch to a P21 with a 115, say...it would pay for itself.

On the other hand I will say that being able to continue at 20kt in steep, rough water is worth something when you have a lot of miles between you and shore. The deep V/pig iron combo slugs through a lot of gnarly water at speed. Although the fuel consumption is roughly equivalent to the amount of water on the windshield, as far as I can tell.

cracked_ribs wrote: ↑Fri Nov 16, 2018 9:26 pm I have considered the Sk28, in fact - it's not set up to fish and trailering it is ridiculous but it's actually so much more efficient that if I had more free time I could almost break even running it the whole length of Georgia Strait, around Vancouver Island, up the strait of Juan de Fuca and out to the tuna as opposed to trailering a production boat to the west coast of the island and running just fifty or sixty miles out.

But I just don't have the time. I don't think I could handle Skoota pace.

Gas for me is indeed more like $6/gallon and I have to do 80-100 mile runs pretty regularly but it's true, if I could switch to a P21 with a 115, say...it would pay for itself.

On the other hand I will say that being able to continue at 20kt in steep, rough water is worth something when you have a lot of miles between you and shore. The deep V/pig iron combo slugs through a lot of gnarly water at speed. Although the fuel consumption is roughly equivalent to the amount of water on the windshield, as far as I can tell.

The Skoota can autopilot and you can radar alarm, flir alarm, yada yada.

I am building the 32 to fish. And cruise. And I am quite happy at 25mph if I need it. The other thing is no way do the displacement craft need to drop to 5 mph in weather.

The obvious downside is you can't win the race around V.I. But I don't want to...

You burn $300 at $4 a gallon...or 75 gallons.
75 gallons at $6 is $450
Let's say you get 75 miles.
10 mph cruise 5mpg Skoota 24
max speed 25mph
At cruise, the Skoota uses 15 gallons or at $6; 90$ bs 450$
Yeah, that is pretty close to real economics.
Imagine saving $360 a weekend for gas.
Forget the Skoota. Some of JM designs will do better than 1mpg I'll bet.

Its unclear to me what you are getting at with that post Fallguy.

The Skoota can autopilot and you can radar alarm, flir alarm, yada yada.
I am building the 32 to fish. And cruise. And I am quite happy at 25mph if I need it. The other thing is no way do the displacement craft need to drop to 5 mph in weather.
The obvious downside is you can't win the race around V.I. But I don't want to...

I am sure that you put a lot of research and thought into what design best met your needs, as did I, before you settled on the Skoota 32. Likewise I hope that you find your boat exceeds your expectations, as I have with mine.

The issue here is that IMO Christer is all over the place with what he is looking for in a boat across size/performance/economy/amenities - and is just not going to find all of his desires satisfied in one design.

I went from a 14' alloy boat with a 40 hp 4 stroke $50 dollar a day fishing boat to a 22' composite boat with a 250 hp 4 stroke $200 a day fishing boat. At first I was concerned about the increased cost of operating the bigger boat until one of my mates pointed out that it is a BIG boat with a BIG motor and a large capacity to take family and friends (generally 3 rather than 2) to remote places. I've put 100 hrs a year on my motor in the two years since it "splashed", and many times more than that on the boat because we spend most of our time on the trolling motor.

I could do almost everything with my 14' boat that I do with my 22' boat - but not with the same comfort and safety!

We were sitting comfortably on 20 kts in this video. Thoughts of economy tend to be put on the back burner in such conditions.

[youtube]https://youtu.be/bfa67LO6qmU[/youtube]

In my little boat I would have been doing 6 kts max. I have no idea how a Skoota 32 would go in such conditions!

I am fortunate in that the build and operating cost are not an issue for me, but I have seen many people buy big boats and once the novelty has worn off realise that they can't reasonably afford to use them.

BarraMan wrote: ↑Fri Nov 16, 2018 10:10 pm

You burn $300 at $4 a gallon...or 75 gallons.
75 gallons at $6 is $450
Let's say you get 75 miles.
10 mph cruise 5mpg Skoota 24
max speed 25mph
At cruise, the Skoota uses 15 gallons or at $6; 90$ bs 450$
Yeah, that is pretty close to real economics.
Imagine saving $360 a weekend for gas.
Forget the Skoota. Some of JM designs will do better than 1mpg I'll bet.

Its unclear to me what you are getting at with that post Fallguy.

I think he is pointing out that I, specifically, am burning a LOT more fuel than I could be.

Which is totally true. My program could be almost satisfied with a Skoota as well. If the beam and speed are not obstacles they're sure efficient and presumably very smooth.

I am a little more wired for Mangusta type action myself, though.

I think he is pointing out that I, specifically, am burning a LOT more fuel than I could be.
Which is totally true. My program could be almost satisfied with a Skoota as well. If the beam and speed are not obstacles they're sure efficient and presumably very smooth.
I am a little more wired for Mangusta type action myself, though.

Oh......OK!

In that video we got to our fishing spot in 40 min at 30 kts and came back in 60 min at 20 kts. In my little boat it would have been 1 hr out and 3.5 hrs back!!!

30 knots in open water is really moving in a small boat!

I can definitely relate to the conditions...this is a pretty typical day for me. Of course seas never look like anything on camera and things had calmed down enough that we were joking and taking pictures but behind us there is a pretty big flybridge that would bark the props one moment and all but disappear the next.





Well big by my standards...I think it was not more than 30'. We'd been talking at the gas dock earlier and he was very worried about heading out. But I don't think he was very experienced.

Also we were not doing anything like 30...more like 13. And earlier when we were leaving the river, it had been genuinely pretty rough. There was a 40' trawler leaving at the same time and even he was all over the place at the rivermouth.

The return trip is always the bugger.

It ain't about you two fellows

Trying to help Christer understand fuel realities.

Most marine fuel is taxed at a higher rate than fuels you can get else where. Diesel is dyed so law enforcement can identify who is not paying their taxes.

It ain't about you two fellows

Nor you!

Trying to help Christer understand fuel realities.

That pottering around at 12 kts is an economical way to go?

We’re trying to help Christer understand reality - period !

BarraMan wrote: ↑Sat Nov 17, 2018 8:08 am

It ain't about you two fellows

Nor you!

Trying to help Christer understand fuel realities.

That pottering around at 12 kts is an economical way to go?

We’re trying to help Christer understand reality - period !

Yes on all.

The 12 knot Skoota speed is 5 mpg and you don't need to back off for weather because the bdeck is high enough ( well, within reason weather I suppose). Course, he doesn't like the looks of them...

I love all your comments Barraman. Video was great, too.

The Skoota is at displacement speeds; not really any hump. So the slower you go; the better the economy. A fuel meter is nice because it can deliver the vessel range, and you know if you can make port at 20 knots for a dinner bell or need to run at 10 and eat soup.

Your boat would be a great boat around here; especially on Lake of the Woods.

The video looked like following seas. Most vee hulls perform okay there; the head seas are what pound you to death at throttle.

Anyhow, I don't know if Christer understands that a 25' planing hull is gonna drink heavily; thus the breakdown on fuel...

I have a buddy that toys around his 25' speedboat on the river here and he says he drops $400 a weekend in gas.

fallguy1000 wrote: ↑Sat Nov 17, 2018 9:38 am
The 12 knot Skoota speed is 5 mpg and you don't need to back off for weather because the bdeck is high enough ( well, within reason weather I suppose). Course, he doesn't like the looks of them...

To be fair it doesn't sound like one would fit in his slip, either. If he has to lay out a pile of cash for a second slip just to get a boat that would be cheaper to run, that's not necessarily a good strategy either. Particularly if the boat doesn't turn his crank.

Anyway it seems pointless to continue suggesting big anything to someone whose next project sounds like it's going to be a little boat, or fixing up an existing boat. When my wife heads off to the gym, I don't start talking about how a great deadlift is 500 pounds - she's not about to go gorilla a bar into a pretzel. When she expresses interest in crazy gymnastic moves like those beach workout people do on youtube, I don't give her an equally distant alternative goal, I say "yeah, that looks like crazy core strength...aren't you doing a core day tomorrow? Keep at it, that's how you get to that point!"

No point worrying about a distant dream of a boat. The goals will change 500 times before the plans get ordered anyway.

Focus on the immediate goals: a small boat and time on the water. It's more productive and you don't have to argue with people about whether their distant goal is better than your distant goal. In fact you probably won't be arguing much at all, because you'll be building, which is always better.

Yay! Big change of .. everything.

The dragon just landed a job in Oslo, which is on the other side of the country from where we live now. She starts the second week of January, so we'll be moving some time come spring, I guess. I need to find a job over there as well.

So there will likely be no building anything this winter, except maybe a few transport crates.

To top it off, she mentioned how nice it would be to have a boat with which we could cross over to Denmark - a 103 nautical mile trip at the shortest point between the two countries, and a lot longer from Oslo. That crossing is over Skagerrak, which has quite a temperemental weather system. It is quite possible to cross with leisure boats in 2-4 hours in good weather - people do it every summer - but if I'm attempting that trip with kids on board, I'm going to want something bigger and safer than a 18 foot open bay boat.

So, just to put all the discussion about the aforementioned boats to an end - I'm going to need something else. Since I don't yet even know where we'll live or if I can get a mooring slip, further discussion about which boat to build is kind of pointless. We can pick it back up after the move and after we've settled in and researched possibilities for mooring.

The good thing is I'll live a lot closer to suppliers of both epoxy and marine plywood and can go pick up everything in person - no need to wait for shipping.

That program brings us back to a DE23 or a P21.
I have made that crossing many years ago and it can get real though with the currents.
I agree that you need more than an open boat unless you stick to good summer days.

jacquesmm wrote: ↑Sat Nov 24, 2018 11:44 am That program brings us back to a DE23 or a P21.
I have made that crossing many years ago and it can get real though with the currents.
I agree that you need more than an open boat unless you stick to good summer days.

Yes, it does indeed. I also noticed the OP21 as a possible candidate. It leaves a bit more room in the cockpit while still being possible to button up with a soft top when the weather gets rough. I've only ever crossed on the ferries between Norway and Denmark, and it can get plenty rough even on those.

In any case we'll need to move first and get everything in order before I can start building anything. Hopefully I'll get to start my build before I get too old to enjoy the boat...

Christer congrats on the wife's move. Yep take it slow and wait till you get there. That crossing can be nasty went through it twice while I was in our Navy once no problem, once when it's current and winds decided to throw up 20' waves I was officer of the deck on a 695' GMC at night that second time.

Good luck on the move and we will hear from you when you are ready to get started again.

Tom

Two big positive aspects of this development:

1) sounds like your life is suddenly defined by this move; every decision will get slotted in around the parameters of the relocation, including building budget and space,

2) now you have a specific set of requirements for the boat and you can scrap a ton of possibilities that would definitely not work.

My suggestion remains the same: once settled, build the small boat for your daughter and enjoy the experience of building again. While you sand, you can daydream about the next project. I used to make most of my big decisions while bicycling, precisely because I had enforced thinking time.

Good luck with the move!