Cruiser design poll...

[Polarity]

OK design fans here's the next part

- If you just got here, welcome, and please see the next post, first!

We have collectively voted to design a power cruiser to go coastal hopping for a week. Where, how fast, staying at anchor,marina or gas station, how many people etc is undecided as yet...
...So will it be... (drum roll heard in the background)....

Option 1 - Trailerable, couple, home build $

1 Coastal hopping
2 Trailerable
3 Range 300 miles
4 Crew, 2 minimum
5 Price range, under 50K US, for home built.
6 Must be able to carry on a normal conversation at 3/4 throttle.


Option 2 Tough, family+friends, pro build $$$

1.Capable of handling a wind against tide/current situation (say the Gulf stream at 2.5knts, against a solid f4) - medium nasty.
2. Not trailerable, lives at the marina for long season use (see 1.)
3. Range of 600 miles minimum - spending time at anchor rather than on the dock.
4. Sleep 4 in comfort, with space for a couple of kids in the bilges if needed.
5. Designed for Semi-custom production with a set number of options by a relatively small yard.
6. protected prop(s?) in case of umm.. "operator error".


Option 3 Maxi Trailerable Hardbottom Inflatable $$

1 Very fast coastal hopping
2 Range 600 miles
3 Crew 2-3
4 Welded Aluminum Construction
5 High speed in all weather & in darkness.
6 Small shop one-off, CNC kit, moderate $$
7 Diesel Waterjet


Option 4 - Medium to high-speed coastal cruiser:$$$.5

1. LOA 30 to 35 feet
2. Range 400 to 500 miles at a cruise of 20 to 30 knots. Still economical at displacement speeds
3. Accomodation for 4 - possibly 2 more occaisionals on convertible dinette / sofa.
4. Designed for semi-custom production - but still possible for owner/builder construction.
5. Light weight - economical to build, power and operate.
6. Powered by 2 large (200+ hp) 4-stroke or dfi 2-stroke outboards. The installation of a single o/b possible if lower cruise speeds considered.


Option 5 - Crewed, heavy, cruiser $$$$

1) 42-48’ semi-displacement (but on the heavy side-cruise @9-10 max @ 14Kts)
Cored fiberglass (weight and maintenance)
2) Crewed by 2 at all times! Sleep 6 (2 state rooms, convertible saloon)
3) Range of 800-1000 mi
4) Twin screws for maneuverability in foreign harbors, reliability
5) Custom production with plan adjustment for competent one-off construction
6) Covered aft deck w/ soft enclosure


Now a few more guideline (Ok who yawned? ) :-

* If it's not specified... - its up for discussion eg number of hulls, material, location, speed, build type, length, cost, market etc etc.

*To keep the diversity going, the originator of the chosen design option might elect not to give any further specifications and let the discussions (or even 1 day poll) decide, it's up to them..

*This poll will run until Wednesday

*Dont forget to post why you voted for what and any ideas you already have for that option.

*Oh yes .. time to vote NOW!

Cheers
Paul

[Polarity]

confused

The low-down on what's going on is here:

http://boatdesign.net/forums/showthr...=&threadid=439 for the original concept
http://boatdesign.net/forums/showthr...=&threadid=441 for the first vote
http://boatdesign.net/forums/showthr...=&threadid=464 for the second
http://boatdesign.net/forums/showthr...=&threadid=483 for where these suggestions came from and who was responsable!

Now you can vote with confidence

Cheers

Paul

[duluthboats]

Well I’m going to hold my vote for a day or two. My mind is open, a little anyway. After reading the archives I found out that many, who visit here, know a great deal about boats. I think the real fun will start when we pick our target. I do want to encourage all who are reading this thread to vote and tell us what you think.
Gary

[8knots]

In regards to option 5, (my vote and my pet project) I feel i must clarify Crew. My idea of crew is 2 or a couple! Can handle the boat in all conditions. 1 would be able to handle her easily with the bow thruster. Hmmmm.... Toys ..yes toys by the credit card load. By the time I get around To building her I will be in a walker and a gps chart plotter will cost $400.00 He He He! I think we should give her a full compliment of electronics though. A plus in safety factor for the week long warrior! 8Kts

[tom28571]

Ivoted for the trailerable coastal hopper but could get very interested in the high speed lightweight boat too. I'm less interested in working with an open budget and maxed out facilities, etc. Lots of designers/builders are working to satisfy the well heeled sector. It seems to me that the tough job is working to a tight budget and providing the most for the buck in the form of performance and usability.

A friend has been looking to me to help him find a boat like the small trailerable of option 1 in a store bought version. The list of possibilities is very, very small. This nitch is not being served. The reasons are probably obvious. That is not the large market and it's harder to build a boat that will satisfy it than to build one that will appeal to the first time buyers coming in the showroom. Nevertheless I think that there are more hard and interesting design decisions to be made there than in the other categories.

My friend ordered a C-Dory last week. He had to make a couple of concessions in that the boat does not have a self bailing cockpit and uses a porta-pottie stored under the bunks. We ought to be able to make better choices in either category that is chosen.

[Polarity]

...is for the RIB. But I'm thinking about 2 hulls for a smoother ride, more cruising space, economy at slower speeds. Multihull RIB ? Why not? ...

Paul

(and why...)

[ErikG]

I voted for option 1.


I agree with (almost) all that Tom said.
I think it would be more challenging to design a cheap but with well used interior space on a tight budget.

Tom I think there is only a small market for these boats because there are "none" to choose from. I think an affordable trailerable small cruiser would be what a lot of people wants. But since they can't afford whats on the market and dont want to build themselves there are no options available. I think that there's a huge market waiting to happen but only if the PRICE is right.

It has to bepretty cheap and easily driven. Not really needing 2x225 HP outboards to make it move since they are not what I would consider cheap.

A small boat has enough to have opinions about if we ever want a completed design. BUT on the other hand is that what we are aiming for?
For me the ideas and opinions about anything and everything regarding this design are the most interresting.

ErikG

[Willallison]

I voted for option 4 (the medium to high speed cruiser) because......well.....it was my idea!
Actually, to those who follow this forum on a regular basis, you will notice that it is essentially the same boat that I referred to in my post regarding ULDB powerboats (don't know how to put a link in to that thread) - it is somewhat of a pet project of mine.
I see the boat as being reasonably rugged, the use of outboards will allow a shallow draft and as I have mentioned previously they are (relative to the other alternatives) cheap to buy, easy to install and nowadays, economical to run.
To me it is an extension of the boat proposed by Tom - and like him, I could get excited about that project too.

1. An LOA of 30 to 35 ft means the boat is big enough to accomodate its crew in comfort, yet not too big to handle or maintain.
2. The range of 4-500 miles means the boat is capable of putting in at least 50 miles / day with a reasonable safety margin. Where I cruise, that would be considered a pretty high daily average and so puts the boat into the "serious" short passagemaker category.
3. Accomodations for 4. In my experience, cruising with any more than four (unless of course they happen to be your family!) is too much of a hassle. Indeed I find my most pleasant cruises are the ones I spend simply in the company of my wife (+ our 2 dalmations...)
4. Semi-custom / owner bilder construction, speaks for itself, but raises all sorts of questions regarding build materials etc.
5. Lightweight. I see this as one of the most critical aspects of the design. In order to perform with the outboard power I have suggested - at least with anything resembling economy - the boat needs to be light. Few, if any production boats, seem to address this issue - it's simply a matter of pouring in all the goodies that the consumer supposedly expects and piling in the power necessary to make it go. The use of smaller water tanks in combination with the newer generation of small watermakers, for instance can reduce the amount of weight carried.
6. The outboard issue I have already covered.

The thing that I look forward to most however, is seeing how effective the design process will be when conducted by a group.....

[duluthboats]

Well I just cast my vote for option 1. My reasons are selfish.
This is the only option that I could aford to own and operate. I also think that this boat could fill a hole in the market. I know two other people looking for a boat like this. The "Boomers" are slowing down and are finding that going in comfort is as important as getting there. With a boat like this on a trailer I have access to the East coast thru the Great Lakes, or the Gulf coast down the Mississippi. I suspect I could get help from many of you on this project even if the group picks another design. I do have some ideas for option 4
Gary

[nemo]

Hi everyone,
I'm pretty new to this forum, but I'd like to join this "project". My vote is for option 4, but what about a stern-drive or a v-drive propulsion?

[Polarity]

... good to have some more Med representation!

Paul

[Jeff]

My vote is for option 4, but what about a stern-drive or a v-drive propulsion?

Welcome nemo!

Paul is officially in charge of this project, but my feeling is that it just depends on whether you can sell that alternative as either better or equally meeting the primary goals of option 4:

Could you use a stern drive or v-drive and have your design:
1.) Still economical at displacement speeds. Range 400 to 500 miles at a cruise of 20 to 30 knots
2.) Still possible for owner/builder construction.
3.) Economical to build, power and operate.

Or would there be serious sacrifices in economy and ease of construction/maintenance?

What would be your motivations to want a stern drive or v-drive rather than an outboard? Will has pointed out some strong advantages of using an outboard a few posts up: less expensive to buy and operate, easy to maintain, shallow draft, and lightweight. On the other hand, it would be interesting if you create or propose an alternate way of achieving the same goals.

Again, Paul is in charge, so if he wants to keep the project moving in a straight line please ignore what I've said. But I think there’s still plenty of room for fine tuning and discussion, if you want to try and convince the others that there is a better way. At least looking at design competitions, it seems often the winning entry has taken liberties showing that it can achieve the spirit of the guidelines by discovering and proving a better option to one of the details. In this case I'm not sure if there is a better option for the concept at hand, but I'm sure everyone would love to hear your ideas.

[Jeff]

(don't know how to put a link in to that thread)

It's easy - you can just visit that thread and copy the URL from the address bar of your browser. When you paste a URL into any thread it becomes a link as long as it starts with either http:// or www.

http://boatdesign.net/forums/showthr...=&threadid=341

If you want to link to a specific post rather than a whole thread, each post also has a small button on the bottom labeled "post link" - you can either click it to put the URL into your browser's address bar to copy it from the address bar, or you can right click on that icon and choose "copy shortcut" (IE) or "copy link location" (Netscape) or "copy link address" (depending on the browser.)

For example if I wanted to link to the specific post in which Tom included a drawing:
http://boatdesign.net/forums/showthr...=1250#post1250

You can also use a variety of quick codes as shown at http://boatdesign.net/forums/misc.php?s=&action=bbcode to include different types of links.

[Jeff]

P.S.

I voted for Option 1 because it seems like a very realistic project with a lot of flexibility. I came very close to voting for Option 4 though because that also seems very intriguing ever since the Ultra Light Displacement discussion was posted.

Actually, every one of these options would make for a very interesting project

[duluthboats]

Welcome aboard nemo,
The larger this group gets the better it is. If option 4 wins you can take a shot at convincing us to change the drive. Paul hasn't pulled out the rule book yet. Some of us old timers are set in our ways, so you should have a good argument.

If it's not to personal to ask, what part of Italy are you from?

Well I'm off for the weekend again, back on Sunday.

For those that haven't voted. OPTION #1!!!!!


Gary