Buccaneer 24 Builders Forum

Bruce, just layup two lengths (or one long length) of carbon on your plastic table, the same width (or slightly greater) than your foil thickness (around 45% or so of your foil chord) - then when cured, longboard the carbon sides to straight, cut your foam (you have to allow a little for the carbon thickness) and glue each side to the carbon. When cured the foam should not bend because of I beam backbone. Lay on your outer skins.
Alternatively, you could use a slim length (say 3-4mm) of oregon, Port Orford cedar or whatever light, strong wood available, for a core and laminate the carbon each side to make a very stiff I beam. With your expertise, you'll have zero problems. Remember you can always nail the foam flat while glue cures. Goes without saying that sanding and eyeballing will be required.

 

I built sailed raced and lived aboard (for short periods--like two weeks) both the Nugget and the Buccaneer 24.
In my experience of both over a period of six years, the B24 is a far superior boat in a number of ways. In particular the deep V floats of the Nugget gave the boat a nasty snap roll from passing boat wakes. Given a Norm Cross LAR keel though it was quite a fast boat, and enabled a double in the main hull and two berths in the ends. The open plan was a pain though.
From a safety point of view the Buc was the stronger and more seaworthy. I was prepared to sail the New York/Bermuda race in mine. Samnz experiences in racing "The Green Death Trap" will bear that out I am sure.
The Nuggets solid wooden crossbeams were heavy and their folding method was very suss. I wouldn't like to have gone deep sea in mine. Piver was lost at sea in a similar Piver 25. Also the Nugget was not able to be loaded up any more so than the B24.

 

I'm not convinced anyone is really sure what Arthur Piver disappeared in, other than it was one of his own designs.
In my 1979 edition of " The Case For The Cruising Trimaran" Jim Brown says it was a 25' boat, but does not give the model. He writes that a friend of his described it as "...a mess. It had hinges in the crossarms to fold for trailering, and the hinges were working loose. The hull was leaking, the windows were weak, the rig was sloppy... and Piver acted like he wasn't up for it. The whole thing came together like he just didn't care."
In Volume 1 of Jim Brown's "Among The Multihulls" on page 112, Jim says Arthur borrowed a 25' Dart (which was one of his racing designs).
On the Fraser Aerotechnology website, Richard Fraser quotes Lauren Williams (Piver's draftsman, and an accomplished designer in his own right):
"When Art was lost he was sailing from San Francisco to San Diego as a 500 mile prerequisit for the OSTAR. His 33 ft. Stileto had already been shipped to England so he bought or borrowed a dumpy little 28 ft. Encore, of his design, but built by someone in Sacramento."
http://www.fraseraerotechnologycompany.com/MarineDivision2.html
In any case, the real problem seemed not to be the boat design, but poor construction and/or maintenance, coupled with either indifference or over confidence.

 

Mind you, I mentioned the Piver Mariner because the plans are $48 on Ebay, and it is a capacious boat (Piver's Rule, a trimaran can carry three quarters of its' built weight, 1700 x 0.75 = 1,275). It uses plywood box beams instead of solid timber beams, and they do not have to be hinged.
That said, the Buccaneer 28 weighs only 300 lbs. more than the Mariner and carries 2,000 lbs. IF plans become available, it would be a much better choice.
If the plans do not become available, a Wharram Tiki 26 weighs 1,560 pounds, is rated for a 1700 lb. load, and builds in 700 hours.

 

The Mariners Museum prints the plans at a very affordable rate, the low cost plans are part of the interest here I think. 2000lbs payload for a Bucc 28 seems awfully high. The guy to talk to about Pahi 31s is Steve Turner over at the Scott Brown Multihull forum if you can get the thing to work. They will tell you it sails better with the gaff sail. The Wharram people sent me study plans for a 35' stretch version on request. The real question is how big can it be and does it have to dismantle. A used searunner 31 would really fit the bill here and can be found for very little. The Bucc 24 is a pretty boat but sometimes utility does a better job.

 

This is the Buccaneer builders forum but we don't seem to be getting much input from Bucc Builders except for Bruce, who is mainly modifying an existing boat.
I have shipped 37 sets of Buccaneer 24 plans to date.
Where are they?. Where are they at.?
I can only think of one who has posted pics of the start of his build.
Come on Guys, lets hear from you.

 

Darth.
Those pics you posted did nothing but remind us of how clunky, boxy and out of date those old Pivers are today.
HOWEVER in those days they were all we had.
No one can take away from Arthur Piver the tremendous boost he gave to the Multihull movement from 1955 to 1968.

 

The Mariner plans sold on Ebay.

 

When was that Darth. ??

 

Curious looking Mariner.

 

The Mariner plans sold on Ebay approximately 4 hours after I gave the link for them in this thread. It may be a coincidence, but they had already gone through one offering with no bids, and were midway through another. Apparently someone else shares my appreciation of boxy obsolete trimarans.

After my 11:47 post, cavalier mkII commented that a 2,000 lb. payload for the Buccaneer 28 seemed awfully high. I posted the cut sheet to back up my figures, and since you can't post a picture without at least a five character text message, I chose to include an update on the status of the Mariner plans. It never occurred to me that someone might think that I thought that a drawing labeled "Buccaneer 28", was a Piver Mariner. Silly me.

 

Lol Darth.

 

Thanks Darth, it still seems high but I haven't seen the midsection. The Bucc 33s I've seen are pretty skinny....

 

Real world displacement

Down under, boats weigh less- many of the older designs in particular seem to be 10-20% less than what they come in at up here on "top" of the world. Must be something to do with gravity being less down there Up here in my part of the world, a Buc 24 would be very light at 1200 lbs, only Gary could get one under a 1000 Lbs, and most of them are 1400-1600 lbs with sails and a motor. They are maxed out at 2200, not leaving a whole lot of payload. The crew better be light and not eat much. I have back-figured the weight of a 24, and 1000-1200 is possible based on the square footage of material, but most of us can't hit those targets, and might not want to. A 4mm bottom doesn't leave any margin for rot/trailer loading/rocks/docks/etc, and it takes some experience to keep the coatings and other structure that light. I expect a 28 would be around 2500 based on the same type of estimate, still very good. I also suspect that many other of the tri/cat design specs are equally "optimistic" Just an opinion of course B

 

Here is the only drawing I have that shows a section of the Bucaneer 28. Boatdesign.net has a limit of 2500x1600 pixels for .jpg so I can only offer it at reduced resolution. What would really be nice is a lines plan and a table of offsets.