Seeking info on Tri-Star or Piver trimaran 23 to 27 Feet

If anyone is interested, I have the original Seaskiff Boat Plans book on the Arthur Pivor NUGGET, I can photocopy the plans and email them..1962.

 

Hello Landlubber!

As the proud owner of a Nugget I'm mighty interested !

 

pedcab, send me a private email and I will photocopy the docs for you

 

I would stay away from a Piver tri. Not good boats, no resale value, horrible engineering. In a few words a waste of time and money.
Jim Brown designed rather good boats but more for high sea cruising than coastal cruising, the normal use of these small boats. But putting a bit of money in plans which are INVESTMENT, you have Kurt Hughes with the cylinder mold, Malcom Tennant, Cross and others.
In small sizes, cats are cheaper and easier to make. Beams can be made from industrial aluminium tubes or even used masts. Two Hulls to make,not three, less surface, less complicated. A good tent at mooring on the wide deck of a cat is more comfortable than the cramped inside of a small tri.
I know that by experience...
Coastal cruise is funnier with a lively and fast boat able to move in the light winds prevalent in summer, the season of main use of these boats. You won't sail with a force seven wind with a 25-27 boat, or in the middle of a harsh winter. So keep it light, it's not an ocean cruiser.

 

Hi again Landlubber

I'm afraid I can't send you an email cause your contact info is restricted here at the forum.

If you send one to me at pedro.mf.cabral@gmail.com or if you send me your e-mail via PM I'd be happy to answer you...

Thanks in advance!

Regards!

 

On its way mate.

 

Thank you very much

PEdro

 

I actually talked to Ed Horstman about the 23- 26' designs you mentioned and he was quite passionate about how well they sailed. He is semi retired from multihulls now but one of the 2 boats he keeps is his old 25' which is no where near as modern but performs well according to Ed. He lives in a airplane hanger in Montana and is a very interesting guy who has kept up on his aerospace roots. The boats have a blend of volume and performance that many have found to be a good compromise and his plans are a very good value on todays market. Styles change but how a boat works doesn't, many get caught into the trap of pursuing performance they won't use while missing on the utility they need. Even those old Pivers have good off wind speed and simple enough construction so anyone can have a self propelled waterfront cottage. Finding a old boat that needs a new hull is economical and often seen in the world of classic yachts , why not classic tris and cats ?

 

SeaRunners and Tri-Stars

I've owned two Searunners, a 25 and a 31, and I've been on and sailed on some Tri-Stars from Ed Horstman. Years back Ed and I had some nice chats via email, and I visited his home when he was still in the LA area, though I met his wife only as he was out.

Searunners are great boats for cruising. The center cockpit does chop up the interior though. They have lots of storage, but again, in part due to the center cockpit over two engine/storage or dual storage areas, plus elsewhere. You also don't get a nice double berth without converting the dining area if you have a 31 or a 34. Write me at fredmgoldfarb@hotmail.com for more info on my experiences.

Horstman, unlike Jim Brown, who was self-taught, was a trained aeronautical engineer working in the Industry when he designed, built, lived aboard, and did a Hawaii race on his first boat, a 40'er. Later he applied design and engineering theory to his line of tris, and his books go into detail about why he did what he did. For example: Tri-Stars don't have very much more windage than say Searunner, though they look like they would. This is because what the human eye sees is not what the wind "sees", which is the overall profile, including hull sides and cabin sides. There is a little more windage on a Tri-Star bow, but not a huge amount more in practical terms. Strength is easy to show, as the "monocoque" construction and "raised deck" design of the Tri-Stars gives fewer joints, and more overall boat strength than other designs. Visually however, many sailors have mixed views on the aesthetics of a Tri-Star, but to me, given equally good paint jobs, a Tri-Star is as "pretty" or moreso than a Searunner, which has a fairly "conventional" look. Tri-Stars, like Searunners, have very enviable safety records, better use of interior space, double berths for 4 starting with the 24'er, and frankly sail as well as any Searunner I've owned or been on, and sail much better than the older Pivers. They are not real speed machines however, but give what Dick Newick would probably call a good "two out of three" when it comes to speed, accommodation, and cost, all being in moderation for the Tri-Stars.

If you plan to live aboard while cruising, a Tri-Star 27-9 or a Searunner 31 is probably the minimum size to get. If you like interiors where you don't have to cross the cockpit to get to a (single) berth or the head, get the Tri-Star. The galley in both is about equal in usefulness, just arranged slightly differently. For deck space and ease of deck movement while at dock or sailing, the Tri-Star beats the Searunner 31 open wing design (the one I had). If I had a dog (which I do now but didn't when I had the Brown 31), I'd go for the Tri-Star too, as it let's the pooch go for a walk while sailing much easier than on the Brown!

There are many Browns around for sale too, but Tri-Stars, which I know were built in probably as many numbers as the Searunners, don't show up much for sale, except in the larger sizes (38'ers and up). I suspect Tri-Star owners keep their boats longer than do Searunner owners due to being very satisfied with their choice, so it's harder to find a Tri-Star of a given size, but they are out there so you have to look more.

Again, email me at fredmgoldfarb@hotmail.com if you'd like to chew the fat on these designs.

 

SeaRunners and Tri-Stars

I've owned two Searunners, a 25 and a 31, and I've been on and sailed on some Tri-Stars from Ed Horstman. Years back Ed and I had some nice chats via email, and I visited his home when he was still in the LA area, though I met his wife only as he was out.

Searunners are great boats for cruising. The center cockpit does chop up the interior though. They have lots of storage, but again, in part due to the center cockpit over two engine/storage or dual storage areas, plus elsewhere. You also don't get a nice double berth without converting the dining area if you have a 31 or a 34. Write me at fredmgoldfarb@hotmail.com for more info on my experiences.

Horstman, unlike Jim Brown, who was self-taught, was a trained aeronautical engineer working in the Industry when he designed, built, lived aboard, and did a Hawaii race on his first boat, a 40'er. Later he applied design and engineering theory to his line of tris, and his books go into detail about why he did what he did. For example: Tri-Stars don't have very much more windage than say Searunner, though they look like they would. This is because what the human eye sees is not what the wind "sees", which is the overall profile, including hull sides and cabin sides. There is a little more windage on a Tri-Star bow, but not a huge amount more in practical terms. Strength is easy to show, as the "monocoque" construction and "raised deck" design of the Tri-Stars gives fewer joints, and more overall boat strength than other designs. Visually however, many sailors have mixed views on the aesthetics of a Tri-Star, but to me, given equally good paint jobs, a Tri-Star is as "pretty" or moreso than a Searunner, which has a fairly "conventional" look. Tri-Stars, like Searunners, have very enviable safety records, better use of interior space, double berths for 4 starting with the 24'er, and frankly sail as well as any Searunner I've owned or been on, and sail much better than the older Pivers. They are not real speed machines however, but give what Dick Newick would probably call a good "two out of three" when it comes to speed, accommodation, and cost, all being in moderation for the Tri-Stars.

If you plan to live aboard while cruising, a Tri-Star 27-9 or a Searunner 31 is probably the minimum size to get. If you like interiors where you don't have to cross the cockpit to get to a (single) berth or the head, get the Tri-Star. The galley in both is about equal in usefulness, just arranged slightly differently. For deck space and ease of deck movement while at dock or sailing, the Tri-Star beats the Searunner 31 open wing design (the one I had). If I had a dog (which I do now but didn't when I had the Brown 31), I'd go for the Tri-Star too, as it let's the pooch go for a walk while sailing much easier than on the Brown!

There are many Browns around for sale too, but Tri-Stars, which I know were built in probably as many numbers as the Searunners, don't show up much for sale, except in the larger sizes (38'ers and up). I suspect Tri-Star owners keep their boats longer than do Searunner owners due to being very satisfied with their choice, so it's harder to find a Tri-Star of a given size, but they are out there so you have to look more.

Again, email me at fredmgoldfarb@hotmail.com if you'd like to chew the fat on these designs.

 

The Tri Stars also have great endplate effect for the sails because of the flush deck. I salvaged a Searunner 31 last year and had to cut up the main hull as there was rot on top of the rot. Part of the problem are the wings which angle up toward the amas requiring counter platforms with little air flow clearance for level surfaces. Friends with larger sizes mention that the wings can pound. When the boat heals the angled up bottom wing becomes a flat surface to the waves. If it was flat to start with as the boat heels it becomes more of a angled face for softer impacts. I noticed this in my Nicol which has the level wings and lighter weight of eliminating extra furniture weight. I liked the center cockpit as it puts the payload and crew in a good spot but think it adds weight with a 2nd hatch,extra floors etc...I think Old Sailor busted me asking wharram questions on Scott Brown's forum site as from last year I started to think about things to do with the mast, amas etc... I wound up with. If I put together a new 31 hull for people to rent it would definitely be modified to eliminate the extra weight and rot traps. When the boat was designed highway transport demanded 8' demounted beam but it is a bit wider now. I would extend the bulkheads clear of the sides so the a-frames don't have to pierce the membrane, the other great rot trap. A fairing in front of them or board along the cabinside would take care of the no projection rule when transporting to the assembly site. As I remarked to Imaginary Number in an e-mail the molded chines are heavy and expensive needing a lot of epoxy. I would replace them with chine logs like the old Brown 41. Developing skills with tools can save weight and money. We have quite a few searunner 31s in the NW and they sail great making a rebuild ponderable but at the same time I started doodling with Wharram mods as a way to use the mast and let the local hippies go sailing to keep them away from my Nicol! Seriously all those boats are proven designs now and fun for adventure sailing. Ed said his most popular design was his 27-9. The main thing is it is faster to learn about boats if you are sailing them versus trying to figure it all out by theory then build one. There are used boats out there that can get you sailing sooner but make sure they have good gear so you can use it on your next dream boat !

 

I eventually had some rot problems with my Searunner 31. One place was around the A-Frame bulkheads by the cabin sides, another was due to some previous owner (I was #4) installing an overhead light in the forward dressing area using a self-tapping sheet metal screw that just barely pierced the fiberglass sheathing on the cabintop. Over the years, meaning closer to or more than around 10 years, moister got in and caused interply delamination, which was both expensive and nasty to fix. If I had a Searunner again I'd either want the solid wing version, or perhaps do a "Wharram" deck and use narrowish planks between the cross beam members, to give a more or less solid feel, no bouncy net or trampoline circus acts, yet allow lots of air and water to pass through. The potential problems for water to enter sacred places and cause rot would still exist however.

I always wonder why some people panned the Tri-Stars when they had better use of interior space, better deck space, sailed every bit as good as the Searunners, and if anything would be easier to build than at least a solid wing deck Searunner. Neither designs were speed demons, both handled well and offered alternative designs for fast, comfortable cruising. The Tri-Stars never ever had even a small keel, something the Searunners had (at least on the plans, though mine was built without the minikeel), which would have made them even better for sitting on drying tidal areas, beaching, or even storage on land.

One terrific thing about Searunners however are the central cockpits, which are a great place to sail the boat from.

 

I'm sorry for the comment but that's an awfully generalist statement, and a mighty unfair one for all those who took time and effort building their Pivers with the best materials and techniques arround.

As said before I'm the owner of a finely built 1960's Nugget, which was given to me in need of a few restoration repairs, and it has never ever let me down nor did I have any difficulties getting out of trouble where similar sized monohulls foud themselves in deep s#$%t.

I wish I was like you, Mr. Wise Guy...

 

Your last phrase calls for a little answer, Mr. Very Wise Guy.

My very first multihull navigation experience was in 1969 on a Toria by Kellsal. As I'm a retired naval engineer having worked in a number of projects or boats from 2.5m to 265m, mainly warships, from the sail boat, profesional fishing boat to the warship, and in between my personal five 18m2 cats, three coastal cruising cats from 20 to 30 feet, two formula 40 cats, one 13.6 m cruising cat, three 60 feet race trimarans, and two 25 meter charter catamarans, plus some power multis, so I'm beginning to have a little idea about sail and power multis and their engineering. I'm not designer but I have some notions of design. I almost forgot, before being engineer, I was naval carpenter and loftman.

I'm happy you're happy with your Nugget, but it seems we have not the same standards about performances, engineering and seakeeping.

So the poor generalist I'm, with my little experience of multihulls, I do repeat:
PIVER TRIS ARE CRAP; bad design (V hulls are not good in multis), bad engineering and poor performers, and totally outdated by my standards, born from ñy little experience..

 

Correction, I don't wish I was like you... I'd probably be walking instead of sailing if I was...

Fortunately that's not the case

PS: Congratulations on your achievements.