I'm having rowboat built - is it overpriced?

[arsinoe]

Hi

Newb here. Sorry if I don’t get all the boating terminology right.

A few days ago, I contacted a local designer of small boats (let’s call him X) with the intention of hiring him to design a fairly large rowboat for me. He collaborates with a builder of small boats who would then build the boat according to X’s design.

After discussing the basics with me, X drew up a boat plan that he sent me. The hull design looks very similar to Newfoundland Boatworks’ „Liz“ (see http://www.newfound.com/liz.htm ). However, the Liz has a round hull and my boat would have two chines on either side (apparently this is cheaper). Also, whereas the Liz is a little over 18 feet long and has a beam of 37.75 inches, my boat would be well over 27 feet long (for decent hull speed) and have a beam of about 3.75 feet. I intend to sit astern and row the boat (with a sliding rigger) while two passengers, sitting side by side and facing forward, are located forward. The boat would have a deck except for where the rowing station and the passengers would be.

Because speed is important, I would like the boat to be as light as possible, but cost is a factor, and even the cheapest option X offered (the equivalent of about 19,000 US dollars) is at the very top of my price range. This option calls for a plywood hull with the outside of the hull covered in fiberglass. According to X, the weight of the hull would be about 176 pounds (I think this includes the weight of the deck).

I live in Europe in a country where things are pretty expensive. In order to get better value for my money, I was thinking about having a boat designed and built in the US, Canada or Great Britain instead and having it shipped over. Does anyone have an opinion on whether this would be a viable (i.e. cheaper) option? Or am I in fact expecting too much and the quoted price of about 19,000 dollars for a boat with the above specs is actually reasonable (or at least justified)?

Any advice welcome.

[Ike]

A custom designed and built boat is not cheap. 19K? Sounds about right. Of course if you used an existing design it would be a lot cheaper.

[Rick Willoughby]

Will depend somewhat on what fittings are included or provision for them. This detail typically takes a lot of time.

Here are some stock scull prices for a boat of similar length. Smaller displacement but high tech by comparison with what you want:
http://www.sykesna.com/m29.htm

There is a lot of work in one-off design and construct. If you are using professionals to design it and to build it you will pay a lot of money for their time.

You may find there is value in looking around at a standard build. I know there are some a bit smaller than you want.

You must be an exceptionally strong rower if you can make use of a 27ft boat of that beam and weight. Have you done estimates on the power required to push it up around hull speed.

I expect you will pay for volume rather than weight when shipping a boat from somewhere. I would not be surprised at a cost of USD10,000 to get it from USA. Road freight from UK would be considerably cheaper. That distance in Australia would be less than AUD1000 I expect. I had a 21ft OC1 shipped 2000km for AUD50 but it could be handled by one person and was stacked on top of normal load. It weighed 16kg.

Rick W

[mark775]

Consider Brooks Boats´Peregrine - lengthened. I´ll build you one at 22´in glued lapstrake for about half of that and we can ship. I´ll complete it and send survey and picture portfolio prior to commitment, if you wish (I have other buyers). Why the hard chines? They are slower. I wouldn´t dream of cladding a pretty little boat like that in glass - heavier with no pay-off. One just uses BS 1088 sapelle and a ding here or there doesn´t matter. As soon as one clads a boat, an environment for rot is produced.

[apex1]

For double chine in ply / Epoxy I would say 10 to 12 k is a reasonable price. But as mentioned, a one off is a hell of a job for the design only. So I assume you will end up at the same level, even if done abroad. @ 22.000 Stutz

No one around here with a existing design that fits ???

oops some are faster.............

RICK........a 40ft container US eastcoast to Europe is less than 1k$

[TeddyDiver]

Around here you can get one stockplan boat with 2500-3000€. Something unic could be twice that. However these boats are made to be used, not as decorating the pier, so no tropical hardwoods or multiple lackquer...

[whoosh]

Around here you can get one stockplan boat with 2500-3000€. Something unic could be twice that. However these boats are made to be used, not as decorating the pier, so no tropical hardwoods or multiple lackquer...
teddy in another thread asked you where you downloaded the ce recreational boat stuff>?

[arsinoe]

Thanks to all who have responded.

You may find there is value in looking around at a standard build. I know there are some a bit smaller than you want.

From the research that I've done on the Internet, it's precisely the fairly large size of the needed boat that is the problem (plus a few special features in terms of the way it's outfitted).

Here are some stock scull prices for a boat of similar length. Smaller displacement but high tech by comparison with what you want:
http://www.sykesna.com/m29.htmRick W

Unfortunately, A racing-shell type boat won't do. It wouldn't be suitable for the intended use.

You must be an exceptionally strong rower if you can make use of a 27ft boat of that beam and weight. Have you done estimates on the power required to push it up around hull speed.Rick W

I am actually a fairly strong rower (though not an exceptional one). I have a background in racing shells, and for more a year now I have been rowing 60 minutes a day on my rowing machine. Still, it's true that rowing this boat, especially with passengers, will be a challenge, and yes, I have done estimates (and concluded that it should work out). Besides, I won't have the boat built without first going out in a touring quad with a couple of passengers, seeing how fast I am and making an educated guess as to how fast I would be in the boat as envisioned.

Consider Brooks Boats´Peregrine - lengthened. I´ll build you one at 22´in glued lapstrake for about half of that and we can ship. I´ll complete it and send survey and picture portfolio prior to commitment, if you wish (I have other buyers).

Thanks for the offer. I might have taken you up on it if the general consensus here had been that I'm being overcharged, but since that doesn't seem to be the case, I guess I'll go with the mentioned designer and builder. In my experience, ordering things from abroad ends up costing about twice what you would have expected what with value-added tax, customs and shipping. Besides, there's something to be said for being able to actually meet the people doing the work and talk to them in person. I get along well with the designer, he seems genuinely interested in the project, and he did mention that I would have the opportunity to assist in the building, which would reduce the price somewhat.

Why the hard chines? They are slower.

Simply because the designer said that was the cheapest option. I'll certainly ask him how much more a more rounded hull would cost.

I wouldn´t dream of cladding a pretty little boat like that in glass - heavier with no pay-off. One just uses BS 1088 sapelle and a ding here or there doesn´t matter. As soon as one clads a boat, an environment for rot is produced.[

Unfortunately, I'm not knowledgeable on this subject, so I'm depending on the expertise of others. What do other readers here think? Would glass cladding on the outside of the hull really only be heavier, more expensive and conducive to rot without offering any appreciable benefits? I probably should mention that the designer suggested plywood 6 millimiters (0.236 inches) thick, and it is only the outside of the hull that would be have glass cladding. The boat will be moored to a buoy in running water year-round.

The designer also said the glass cladding would mean that the wood would not be visible on the outside of the hull. Is this correct? I had assumed that a single layer of glass would be transparent.

22.000 Stutz

Good one!

Thanks again for your replies.

[TeddyDiver]

teddy in another thread asked you where you downloaded the ce recreational boat stuff>?

Any help from this http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/...94L0025:EN:NOT

and the standards http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue...CS1=47&ICS2=80
and the same in diff order http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue...m?commid=54258
Some parts of the standards I've found also translated in finnish but reckon that's not usefull to you, and for a few more specified questions I've got answered by some forum members as a "quote" taken of the specific standard.

[TeddyDiver]

Simply because the designer said that was the cheapest option. I'll certainly ask him how much more a more rounded hull would cost.
Would glass cladding on the outside of the hull really only be heavier, more expensive and conducive to rot without offering any appreciable benefits? I probably should mention that the designer suggested plywood 6 millimiters (0.236 inches) thick, and it is only the outside of the hull that would be have glass cladding.
The designer also said the glass cladding would mean that the wood would not be visible on the outside of the hull. Is this correct? I had assumed that a single layer of glass would be transparent.

You should do search the forum (and also google) strip plank canoe. This techinique is the best for you purposes and it's obvious that the designer you have been dealing with isn't well aware of the method.
If the designer can draw a more or less round bilged boat it's rather simple task to make such boat in strip plank epoxy glassed in round 80-100hours.

[apex1]

arsinoe
the designer suggested plywood 6 millimiters (0.236 inches) thick, and it is only the outside of the hull that would be have glass cladding. The boat will be moored to a buoy in running water year-round.

The designer also said the glass cladding would mean that the wood would not be visible on the outside of the hull. Is this correct? I had assumed that a single layer of glass would be transparent.


The boat should definitely be covered by glass Epoxy inside and out!:!:
The plywood then acts as the inner layer of a sandwich construction where the outer skins carry the load mainly. That provides extraordinary strenght if executed in a proper way!
Leaving the inside unsheathed is a No No for the matter of strength and weather protection!
Naturally glass epoxy is transparent! But usually the outside sheathing has to be faired and is covered then by paint.
I am a bit in doubt about your choosen designer in terms of wide knowledge.:confused:
If you are not much pressed for time I may be able to offer a professional solution. I´ll send you a Private Message (topside right corner). Or e -mail

Agree with Teddy in terms of method and estimated time (if done by pro´s)

Regards
Richard

[apex1]

I wouldn´t dream of cladding a pretty little boat like that in glass - heavier with no pay-off. One just uses BS 1088 sapelle and a ding here or there doesn´t matter. As soon as one clads a boat, an environment for rot is produced.
That is the pure nonsense
Keep your mouth shut as long as the adults discuss a matter!

Regards
Richard

[Rick Willoughby]

.....

RICK........a 40ft container US eastcoast to Europe is less than 1k$

This is vastly different to what a friend priced from Canada to Europe for a 30ft light weight boat - it would easily fit in a 40ft container. Can you give me some detail on the carrier?

Rick W.

[Rick Willoughby]

........
I am actually a fairly strong rower (though not an exceptional one). I have a background in racing shells, and for more a year now I have been rowing 60 minutes a day on my rowing machine. Still, it's true that rowing this boat, especially with passengers, will be a challenge, and yes, I have done estimates (and concluded that it should work out). Besides, I won't have the boat built without first going out in a touring quad with a couple of passengers, seeing how fast I am and making an educated guess as to how fast I would be in the boat as envisioned.



........

Have you done any rowing on a calibrated machine. If you know the power level you can sustain I can give you estimated performance for the boat you have nominated and an optimum hull for the same displacement and power level.

Rick W

[apex1]

This is vastly different to what a friend priced from Canada to Europe for a 30ft light weight boat - it would easily fit in a 40ft container. Can you give me some detail on the carrier?

Rick W.
With pleasure Rick! I´ll check that on monday in my office and PM you!
But 30ft in a 40 box? usually the 30´boats are wider than 2,45mtr. and that is a point where the cost explodes!
Regards
Richard

[arsinoe]

Have you done any rowing on a calibrated machine. If you know the power level you can sustain I can give you estimated performance for the boat you have nominated and an optimum hull for the same displacement and power level.

That would be great (really great). I use a Concept 2 rowing ergometer. Last week I was on it for 30 minutes and achieved an average of 223 watts (once I was properly warmed up, I was putting in up to 245 watts). Two days ago I was on it for an hour and achieved an average of slightly over 200 watts.

I believe that, with another year or two of training, I'll be able to sustain 250 to 275 watts for an hour (this is just an educated guess).

The boat's main purpose is rowing outings of 30 to 40 minutes' duration with one or two passengers on board.

@apex1

Thanks for the e-mails and info; I'll have to digest it all, but you will definitely be hearing from me within the next few days.

[rasorinc]

How about something like this for under $5,000.00 US
https://www.boatdesigns.com/products.asp?dept=190

[Rick Willoughby]

That would be great (really great). I use a Concept 2 rowing ergometer. Last week I was on it for 30 minutes and achieved an average of 223 watts (once I was properly warmed up, I was putting in up to 245 watts). Two days ago I was on it for an hour and achieved an average of slightly over 200 watts.

I believe that, with another year or two of training, I'll be able to sustain 250 to 275 watts for an hour (this is just an educated guess).

The boat's main purpose is rowing outings of 30 to 40 minutes' duration with one or two passengers on board.

@apex1

Thanks for the e-mails and info; I'll have to digest it all, but you will definitely be hearing from me within the next few days.

The attached shows the lineplan for roughly optimised full displacement version. I chose KMT of 0.7m as this gives reasonably safe conditions for boarding. This sort of hull works well with a double chine construction. You get nicely faired lines and very little compromise in performance.

By the way if I was going to the expense you are going to with the design and build I would certainly consider using modern materials such as carbon fibre over corecell or glass over corecell if you want to reduce cost somewhat. I would never leave a lightweight timber boat on a mooring.

A hull like this is suitable for flatpack construction so all panels could be laser cut.

The boat ended up 8m long with maximum beam of 1.1m at a displacement of 280kg. The dimensions you initially provided are not too far off this.

The basis of the power level is your 250W applied at 70% efficiency. This efficiency is what can be achieved with modern sculling set up using CF oars etc.

You could expect a little under 6kts at 250W efficiently applied.

This power level is the sort of output that requires regular training to maintain it.

I have also attached a 3D render of a similar shape hull that I did preliminary design for pedal power. If you are considering a recreational boat for touring around then I think pedal power offers a lot of advantages. It is more efficient than rowing. You face forward so you do not get a sore neck. It can reverse easily. It will turn better. You can sprint to impressive speeds. The particular boat is a bit narrower and has ballasted keel for self-righting. It is also fully enclosed if need be.

Rick W

[mark775]

That is the pure nonsense
Keep your mouth shut as long as the adults discuss a matter!

Regards
Richard

For real? Sorry, but you are simply DEAD WRONG and one rude mother, to boot. Epoxy inside and out is a plastic bag, one scratch and you have a plastic bag with a hole with whatever type of wood you tried to save money on, whereas a boat built like I describe is built for a lifetime. If one wants to build an epoxy boat, build it - but why use the wood for the form? By the way, the "chosen designer" has more knowledge than you´ll ever have and builds a damn fine product- I just don´t happen to agree with the choice of cladding 6mm with glass and epoxy to have a fast boat. The poster had not yet postulated that the craft would be wet year´round when I posted and I´m now not convinced anything meets all requisits. Also, I live in the land of stitch and glue glass/epoxy-sheathed Tolman skiffs. I see more rot there than you can imagine - you with your bit of "sandwich knowledge". Is it the plywood that is the "inner layer of the sandwich where the outer layer carries the load mainly" or the "...sheathed inside...for the matter of strength" that is the critical factor? Do you have ANY idea where you are going with this? Did you not hear that he wanted it to be fast? How much weight do you suppose cladding this thing is going to add? Decks and all, 6mm, glass fabric, epoxy, you say fairing compound - this thing is going to be a tank! Sandwich construction is another thing and has its place - with a lightweight core perhaps for a fast (but not practical day to day) boat or more heavily done for taking bumps and bruises of beaching or working but NOT HERE. Sorry apex, ol´boy but I don´t believe you are qualified to give "professional solutions". And with your tone, you would do well to just keep YOUR mouth shut. "Regards" - Mark

[arsinoe]

How about something like this for under $5,000.00 US
https://www.boatdesigns.com/products.asp?dept=190

It's a nice-looking boat, but I think I need something a little longer.

I would never leave a lightweight timber boat on a mooring.

Funnily enough, the designer I talked to said that a lightweight timber boat with glass cladding would actually last longer than a boat with a fiber/core/fiber hull under these conditions. He said that any dents which compromised the wood could simply be left to dry and then filled up and painted over, after which the strength of the hull wouldn't be reduced. In the case of carbon or glass fiber, on the other hand, any dents would reduce the boat's strength. The lower weight of a fiber hull is tempting, of course, but price is an issue.

By the way, the buoy that the boat would be tied up to is in the river current about 30 feet from the bank, and there are no other buoys next to it (only ahead and astern). In other words, my boat would not constantly be knocking against a dock or another boat.

You could expect a little under 6kts at 250W efficiently applied.

This information is extremely helpful - thanks!

I think pedal power offers a lot of advantages.

So it does. But the thing is that I love rowing. Love it.

Thanks again to all for your input.

[Rick Willoughby]

......


Funnily enough, the designer I talked to said that a lightweight timber boat with glass cladding would actually last longer than a boat with a fiber/core/fiber hull under these conditions. ........

I would like to the evidence he bases this on. I have seen a number of examples of soggy timber inside glass hulls. Yet to see similar failure in a foam plastic core.

Rick W

[TeddyDiver]

Epoxy inside and out is a plastic bag
;) please http://www.westsystem.com/ss/ read some info...

[apex1]

For real?

For real! to say more is´nt worth.

[RHP]

Sounds to me like you'd like the atlantic rowing race boats designed by Phil Morrison. You can get one of the earlier ply designs for around GBP10,000 and either keep it as it is or lob off the fore and aft accomodation and run it as a bare hull. The exchange rate is certainly in your favour at the moment as well as nearly all the boats are priced in Pounds.

Look at these links:
http://www.oceanrowing.com/Sale/index.htm
http://www.woodvale-challenge.com/Boats+for+Sale+and+Rent

They're great sites in their own right and might get you into something you may regret........

[arsinoe]

Sounds to me like you'd like the atlantic rowing race boats designed by Phil Morrison. You can get one of the earlier ply designs for around GBP10,000 and either keep it as it is or lob off the fore and aft accomodation and run it as a bare hull. The exchange rate is certainly in your favour at the moment as well as nearly all the boats are priced in Pounds.

Look at these links:
http://www.oceanrowing.com/Sale/index.htm
http://www.woodvale-challenge.com/Boats+for+Sale+and+Rent

They're great sites in their own right and might get you into something you may regret........

Oh, I've been snooping around oceanrowing.com for years now. It's a fascinating pastime, but I definitely would regret it if I got into it myself.

As for buying that kind of a boat, it seems to me that, by the time I imported it and had all the necessary changes made, I'd still have something that, though a bit cheaper, wouldn't be optimal for my purposes. If I'm going to part with a fair bit of cash anyway, I'd rather get it done right.

But thanks for the heads-up.

[mark775]

TeddyDiver, Thanks for your opinion, polite and informative. I happen to use SystemThree but have quite a bit of experience with both and have read all that the manufacturers have put out. Like I said before, if it´s going to get knocked around a bit, encapsulating ply with epoxy is not my cup of tea but to each their own (at least its better than poly on ply, which is not hard to be). If I was going to do it, bearing in mind that the skins were doing most of the work, I´d do a pretty heavy satin weave skin, or better yet two 4oz. layers of s-glass, being careful not to allow pooling of resin and working absolutely as neat as possible with veil tape over seams. Foam would make a better core for this as its use is in understanding that the skins are the strength in this type of build and saves the weight of the plys and glue (admittedly, okoume is light and stiff but IMO not rot resistant enough and sapelle is great stuff!) For a short-lived boat of this type, okoume would be an option but bump the buoy and well...anything with any voids is out of the question, as well, hence the importation of British Standard 1088. In short, if one is going to encapsulate plywood, do it well, and the finished product is going to be heavier than it needs to be.

[whoosh]

i built boats most of my life, never got rich
What you need to say to your guy is, give me hours estimate, and hourly rate, plus detail materials
I built a lot of boats this way, hourly rate plus materials, it was a trust situation
you would(unhappily ) pay your tooth doc 400 an hr, your lawyer the same, your accountant 200,
so your boatbuilder who spent his WHOLE life learning, the trade, gets 50
In my case 100k of machines
wait til some useless lawyer want a boat, will bill him by the minute!! tee hee
A tennis or golfer get millions!! where is the sanity

[Rick Willoughby]

i built boats most of my life, never got rich
What you need to say to your guy is, give me hours estimate, and hourly rate, plus detail materials
I built a lot of boats this way, hourly rate plus materials, it was a trust situation
....

One part of our country has a well-tested formula for multi-million dollar contracts based on "Target Estimate".

You start with a reasonable but incomplete engineering specification and an open book approach to materials, labour and profit margin. As the scope is refined the target estimate is reviewed. Once the scope is firm the target estimate is locked in and the principal pays what it costs if the cost exceeds the target. If the cost is under the target then the contractor and principal share the difference.

This method of contract reduces legal costs and removes the contractor's risk so does not need to be factored in. It also provides incentive for the contractor to save money. It requires a savvy principal and both parties to act with integrity. If these conditions exist then it is the best form of contract I have seen in the way it delivers win-win outcomes.

I have seen situations where the scope is not firm up until 60% of the work has been done and it still works well. It does happen that there is an agreement to revise the target based on recognised scope change. By this time the principal may have already recognised value the contractor has added to cost savings and some bonus payment acknowledge.

Rick W

[apex1]

One part of our country has a well-tested formula for multi-million dollar contracts based on "Target Estimate".

I have seen in the way it delivers win-win outcomes.

Rick W
A fair contract, wich is in use by some of the global players in our business, like Lürssen and A&R, some Dutch do it a similar way.
The problem is, the average buyer of small craft is used with fixed prices for a boat. He does not understand the complexity of a custom built.
The widespread manhour / material contract has a disadvantage for the customer, it is easy for the yard to squeeze out more hours than necessary.
The way you recommend is the better although hard to achieve.
Regards
Richard

[TeddyDiver]

I´d do a pretty heavy satin weave skin, or better yet two 4oz. layers of s-glass.
Sorry but what's it in g/sqm?
Anyways the outer skin should allways be strong enough to cope occasional scratches among other things.

[RHP]

Whilst I realise this isnt the veritable oil tanker you are looking for, its a fun boat able to take a passenger and will still giving you a good work out without the hernia.

http://www.virusuk.demon.co.uk/yole/index.html

Where are you in CH by the way?

[arsinoe]

Whilst I realise this isnt the veritable oil tanker you are looking for, its a fun boat able to take a passenger and will still giving you a good work out without the hernia.

http://www.virusuk.demon.co.uk/yole/index.html



Definitely a fun boat. A week ago I went to see a retailer for Virus boats and had the opportunity to try out their sliding rigger - I want one.

Where are you in CH by the way?

Call me paranoid, but I have this thing about not giving out information on the Internet that might let *THEM* know who I am and where to find me.

[RHP]

Ok. I lived in Lausanne (Pully to be exact) for 5 years and there were 2 Virus boats in Pully port and a local school that had about 10. There was a distributor on the other side of Geneva, dont know if he's still there though. I used to have a FirstClass 8 on Lac Leman by the way but in truth there was rarely a decent wind.

The virus is one you could throw in the water at 5 minutes notice and have a good workout.

[whoosh]

that sounds like a good approach
Also what the owner should do is reallly search the company If in doubt he should take some sort of INSTRUMENT BY WAY SECURITY over the materials he has paid for
I will copy your post and frame it and put it where I can refer:))

[apex1]

Sorry but what's it in g/sqm?
Anyways the outer skin should allways be strong enough to cope occasional scratches among other things.

4oz sq yard = 125 g m² roughly ....:) known as "surfboard cloth"
and this:
http://boatbuildercentral.com/howto/ply_test.php
could help Mark too.

Regards
Richard

[Peter Belenky]

The estimate may be reasonable for a one-off design, but the concept suggests to me that you have not considered all aspects of the problem. A single sculler can row a light, narrow 27' boat at fairly high speed. Adding two passengers weighing 300 lbs. or so would slow it down. Seating them abreast would necessitate greater beam, as you know, but that would increase the surface area of the boat. Surface area, itself, is the greatest source of resistance. While a racing shell is stabilized by the oar blades, passengers without oars (and possibly with unequal weights) would need a more stable hull form, increasing surface further. Combining the concentration of large passenger weight and the greater beam, the light materials used for a single scull would provide inadequate strength, so the hull would have to be made of heavier materials as well. In the end, you would have a boat that is slow for a single rower, hard to steer, and clumsy to handle on water or land.

The last point raises a different set of problems. Even if you have a place to moor it, a light, wooden boat should be stored out of the water. If it were launched by hand, the weight and bulk would require more than three people to launch it. If it were stored on a (long, expensive) trailer, you would need a tow vehicle, a large parking area and a long ramp. If you plan to transport it some distance to water, a long trailer will make travel awkward and will have to be parked.

At last, you may want to consider a different way of enjoying life on the water. Perhaps one or both of your passengers will have departed, work may take you elsewhere, or physical impairments may make rowing infeasible. Will you find a market for your dream boat? When you count the cost, it is proper to think of the expected depreciation, not the initial investment.

Professional designers and builders may be worth their hire for an unique work of art that will attract wealthy collectors, but you are not in that category, nor is your boat. To me, the only alternative that seems to make sense is to buy a stock rowing boat large enough to carry three in tandem. For relatively calm water, that could mean a German touring gig, such as produced here:
http://www.baumgarten-bootsbau.de/html/englisch.html.
Possibly a 2X+ double scull with cox could be modified to replace one of the sculling positions with a second cox seat. For open water or portability, something shorter, like a Chesapeake Light Craft Chester Yawl
http://www.clcboats.com/shop/boats/rowboats/sliding_seat/CLC-CHESTERYAWL.html
A fiberglass Whitehall
http://www.whitehallrow.com/row_boats.php
or others on the market would be more practical.