From Mono to Tri

Discussion in 'Multihulls' started by Marvout, Aug 24, 2010.

  1. Marvout
    Joined: Aug 2010
    Posts: 28
    Likes: 1, Points: 3, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: Manitoba

    Marvout Junior Member

    I have no Tri experience at all and only probably only a couple of hours on a Hobbie 14. So I have some questions:

    When you are at anchor, how do you keep the boat from flopping from one ama to the other? Doesn't it drive you nuts that your boat is never level when at rest? What is it really like at harbor in a boat that either lists to one side or flops back and forth?

    The ama on most boats seems to be a hollow sealed space. How do you keep that dry and free from rot? (presuming plywood) I don't see enough access hatches to really open them up and let air through.

    Tri's are about speed and there is a lot of discussion of which boat is faster, but in the real world how much difference is there really? If I were to build either a Scarab 22 or a Buccaneer 24 out of ply, load them the same and the boats were sailed by me, how much real speed difference would there be between two boats like this.

    Lots of other wonderings, but I'll spend more time in the archives and read more of the past posts.

    Marvin
     
  2. ThomD
    Joined: Mar 2009
    Posts: 561
    Likes: 25, Points: 18, Legacy Rep: 111
    Location: TO

    ThomD Senior Member

    "When you are at anchor, how do you keep the boat from flopping from one ama to the other? Doesn't it drive you nuts that your boat is never level when at rest?"

    Compared to what? Monohulls in a swell can develop far more anoying motions. No question that cats have a better chance of being stable. If you are buying the boat to cruise many do prefer cats for just that reason + They can be like bungalos, no stairs to climb to get around on deck while sailing + large flat deck + more carrying capacity. A lot depends on how big tri, and what type. Larger tris, with more immersed floats can be pretty level. More racy tris with floats that will barely kiss the water when the boat is sailed level in light air, will have the most flop at anchor. Wider beam will reduce angle kissing floats flop to.


    "The ama on most boats seems to be a hollow sealed space. How do you keep that dry and free from rot? (presuming plywood) I don't see enough access hatches to really open them up and let air through."

    First there is the assumption that they are going to get wet in there. Properly sealed they shouldn't get too wet. Some designs come with lots of deck plates installed, and some folks leave those completely off, so that even if rain water comes in vapour pressure never builds up. Of course in a heavy sea the plates need to be in place.

    The two boats you mention lower down, have very different structures. The kendrick is heavy ply and heavy glass inside, and out, and stitch and glue. This is a very rugged, and with luck well sealed structure, less sringers or bulkheads for an erant fastener when driven blind, to leave a hole where water or vapour would cause trouble. With the Bucc, you need to be pretty careful when decking that you don't miss a narrow frame and split open a pathway for water. Other things worth considering are painting the interior so that when the deck plates are off, the sun doesn't burn out your epoxy. On lightweight decks it pays to lightly glass the undersides, since the deck is often the most likely area for rot. My amas, kinda like the Bucc, have been stored out of doors for 20 years, and they are still good. When off the boat I store them uside down and with the sockets inward, which requires a trip around the boat...

    "Tri's are about speed"

    I would say they are about power, which translates into different things, for different boats...

    " and there is a lot of discussion of which boat is faster, but in the real world how much difference is there really? If I were to build either a Scarab 22 or a Buccaneer 24 out of ply, load them the same and the boats were sailed by me, how much real speed difference would there be between two boats like this."

    Boat speed is a combination of a lot of things, some of which are variables like sails. What happens with a lot of small tris, is they, in likely order, end up on a mooring, end up on a trailer, end up trailer sailed. It is very difficult to make a boat that will trailer sail and be fast. It has been done, but I would suggest it can double your budget, and your build time. The main reason boats like the F series and the Scarabs exist is optimised trailering. And even at that, I am not sure I would be able to build anything larger than an 18 to optimise for actual sailing from a trailer. I am talking about my limits, been there tried that. My curent boat takes us days to get rigged, we have some difficult launch conditions, but there can be an amazing number of steps to get a boat in the water at the begining of the year. If we were doing it over and over, it would go faster, but obviously in our case we aren't.

    Anyway, the point is that trailering and trailer sailing is a huge compromise. And I am a great believer in all the taunts Kurt Hughes has thrown around about how he can design a faster sail boat than the Fs etc... for about the price of their pulpit (Ok he didn't say the last bit, though I built one for a 1/3rd the cost of the beams, actually might have been a 1/4.)

    If you look at the scarab the ply is 2-3 times heavier, and the glass also, than a bucc. Now there are advantages to that, it will survivie road conditions and water... Buccs on the other hand are crazy light, in the main hull in particular. Also as a platform for customization, the simple beam system, makes it very easy to taylor add ons for speed, like custom floats. Toy being a great example of an almost unrecognizable, upgraded Bucc. If speed was your main concern, then I would go with the Hughes, he is only interested in speed, and you will not get much else in a simple plywood Hughes. The new 23/24 is a really powerful boat compared to the one I built on a shoestring budget. Ultimately speed is about everything, and if you go down the list he pretty much designs boats where every detail is adressed for speed (he also designs a decent cockpit). For instance neither the bucc or the 22 have daggerboards of modern section, underhung rudder, 80 percent beams, massive floats, etc.... All these boats will be fast though, and it depends whether you are racing or not, as to how much speed you really will see the results of.
     
  3. Marvout
    Joined: Aug 2010
    Posts: 28
    Likes: 1, Points: 3, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: Manitoba

    Marvout Junior Member

    Right now I'm dreaming. I have no idea how soon I would end up building a Tri. I've seen the Farriers in the past, found the Scarab 22 a while ago and have been following Olivier's build. I was convinced though, that there had to be 'simpler' boats out there than that. Just recently I've found the Buc24 and that really opened my eyes to the possibilities that I might be able to do something myself. Some how the Scarab 22 feels like it is out of my reach, especially in foam. But as I look at the Buc24 and the things I would really want to change on it, I don't know how far different it would be from building a Scarab22.

    I haven't built a boat to the plans yet. I was inspired by a CLC kayak and designed my own and built it. My sailing canoe is from John Garden's book that he had drawn for cold moulding and I reverted it back to lapstrake. My current sail boat is a 25% enlarged Shellback. So, I'm not adverse to messing with designs, but I'm a little more hesitant with multi's since the load forces are so much greater. Needless to say, I doubt I would manage to build exactly to the plan.

    I don't live in an area where there are many or any Tri's or Cat's. I've seen a Constant Camber 26 (I think). So, again, I'm researching 'in the dark' so to speak. I guess I'm trying to figure out what real world benefits and differences there are between different tri's of approximately the same dimensions. I can understand/see that boats like a Buc24 and a Scarab 22 are very different. But does that turn into 1-2 knots at 15knots or more like 5? I really want to ask 'how fast do they go?' but I know that isn't really answerable. My speed question is really not about actual speed, but the resulting range. If I end up out on the water for a day, how far can I expect to get? I guess I'm trying to figure out just how important it is to pick the right boat.

    As I get braver with my little open 13' mono, I'd like to go further, but bobbing around at 2knots is a bit of a bore. I feel like no one told me, when I was getting into boats, that I would spend so much time crawling around at speeds slower than a walk or else on shore wishing that the small craft warning was over. Lake Winnipeg where I sail is a pretty big lake and part of my interest is getting into something larger that can handle the lake a bit better.

    Marvin
     
  4. Corley
    Joined: Oct 2009
    Posts: 3,781
    Likes: 196, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 826
    Location: Melbourne, Australia

    Corley epoxy coated

    I've heard that some tri owners buy an inflatable dinghy and push it under one of the floats to keep the boat from walking from float to float, personally on the boats I've been on I've hardly noticed it as it's not a violent motion it's also very dependent on the amount of dihedral that the particular design has the more cruising focussed tris generally have only a small amount of dihedral and some have permanently immersed floats.

    Most ply tri floats now are glassed with epoxy so their ability to withstand lack of ventilation is dependent on the quality of the original epoxy embalming process, epoxy offers a much more waterproof solution with much better adhesion than the polyester style resins of the past.

    As ThomD has said the bucc is a much lighter design and with a good set of sails would outperform the scarab 22 which is a much heavier boat designed for regular towing and with a folding system that adds considerable weight It all comes down to different design briefs really and in a small boat small amounts of extra weight in the design make a lot of difference.
     
  5. aussiebushman
    Joined: Oct 2009
    Posts: 283
    Likes: 33, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 132
    Location: Taralga NSW

    aussiebushman Innovator

    As already implied by others, you have opened a real can of worms here, but there will be a solution available to you. My earlier boats - including a crusing catamaran have had fixed keels but with all of their advantages, being literally tied to a mooring or pen when not in use has immense potential problems, not the least of which is maintenance. Another problem is that unless you have the time and funds to cruise extensively, the boat is rarely where you would like it to be, meaning if you want to go interstate (or whatever) and sail when you get there, your options for using your own boat are near zero. Hence the real advantages of a trailerable unit, albeit with restrictions of its own.

    Personally, I have come to the conclusion that the trailerable option wins, but now you get to the second aspect of your questions. How many persons will be available (always) to launch and rig it, then put it back onto the trailer later? I looked carefully at an F24 and would guess that handling the mast and rig alone would take 2 strong and experienced persons. The Catri 24 has the same folding system as the F-boats but with foils and would by all accounts be a wonderful boat, but the same issues apply in terms of handling. If I had the money though, my choice in these larger, trailerable tris would be the Dragonfly 28 see http://www.dragonfly.dk/boats/dragonfly-28/presentation.aspx

    The smaller, lighter boats will be much easier to handle, but obviously there will be compromises in terms of space and probably speed. For me this is no big deal, others will disagree. The Scarab looks like a great contender, but the cost was too high for me, so I opted for Kjell Nillson's Trinardo with greater flare in the main hull and - especially with thanks to Richard Woods and others for advice - much more volume in the amas to handle the local conditions. The attached pictures are at a relatively early stage of construction, but will indicate the general principles.

    Hope this helps with your decisions

    Alan
     

    Attached Files:

  6. tspeer
    Joined: Feb 2002
    Posts: 2,319
    Likes: 303, Points: 83, Legacy Rep: 1673
    Location: Port Gamble, Washington, USA

    tspeer Senior Member

    Not so. I crewed a fair amount on an F27 and was a part owner of an F24. The skipper of the F27 regularly single-hands his boat, and I've lowered & raised the rig repeatedly by myself on the F24. It's no problem at all.

    The process goes like this:
    - Put the mast roller stand on the transom (slots are into molded into the transom for it). This will support the mast when it's down and allow you to move it fore-and-aft.
    - Pull the pin on the gooseneck and store the boom with the mainsail rolled around it. The topping lift supports the clew, so you only have to hold the gooseneck end to lay it on the deck or put it in the cabin.
    - Put the gin pole in the mast (F24) or put the bar across the beam ends (F27).
    - Attach the trailer winch to the spinnaker halyard. Pull a little tension on the halyard to take the load off the forestay. Remove the pin from the forestay and take a strap around the furler & spin halyard to support the jib & forestay/furler.
    - Lower the mast onto the support at the transom. The trailer winch has a friction clutch that allows it to be cranked backwards to lower the mast without disengaging the pawls.
    - Take the halyards out of the deck hardware and secure to the mast. Pull the plugs on the electrical cables to the mast.
    - Release the pins holding the mast to the deck.
    - Pick up the mast foot and move it forward to the pulpit. The mast will be nearly balanced on the aft support, so there is not much weight to carry. There is a fat pin on the pulpit that fits into the hole in the mast where the gooseneck goes through. This secures the mast fore-aft and laterally at the step.
    - Strap the mast down, remove the gin pole (F24) (bar stays on the beam ends for the F27), and secure all loose items. It is not necessary to remove the shrouds. Just coil them up and secure from flopping around.

    That's it. It doesn't require 10 strong men and a boy to do it. Raising the mast is just the reverse. It can be done single-handed even on an F31.

    When I was crewing on the F27, we would be away from the dock about half an hour after the skipper pulled into the parking lot. Most of what we crew did was simple fiddly stuff, like taking off the light bar & cable, unstrapping the boat, untying the rudder, feeding the winch cable to the skipper, etc. The skipper did pretty much all the on-deck stuff himself. It didn't take him much longer to do it all by himself than it did with crew.

    The Farrier designs really are fabulous trailer sailers. Very well designed for single-handing in all aspects.
     
  7. tspeer
    Joined: Feb 2002
    Posts: 2,319
    Likes: 303, Points: 83, Legacy Rep: 1673
    Location: Port Gamble, Washington, USA

    tspeer Senior Member

    If you want to build because boatbuilding is what you enjoy, then by all means have at it. But if you are interested in sailing and building is what you think you need to do to get there, I'd advise against it. A good used boat is going to be cheaper in the end, and you'll be sailing immediately.

    I think the F27 is the most bang for the buck you can get these days. They have depreciated to a stable value, so you will get your acquisition cost back when you sell it. The performance is a little slower than the more modern models, but not by all that much. (An F27 is faster than my Hammerhead 34.) And you know you'll have a guaranteed market for the boat when you do sell it. Not to mention having other boats like it for class racing and to be able to pick the brains of like owners. With the aft cabin and center cockpit, it's a great family boat that keeps kids secure. And there's the privacy of separate cabins (pretty much) when cruising with two couples on board.

    If money is the obstacle, then look to partner with someone else. I bought a quarter interest in an F24, and that was a great starter multihull for me. The total cost of ownership was US$220/mo/partner. (The monthly dues dropped to US$110/mo when we paid off the loan.) That included paying off the loan, mast-up dry storage at a marina, insurance, registration, taxes, replacements & repairs, saving towards big ticket items like new sails and outboard - the lot. If anything broke, you replaced it and sent the receipts to the treasurer to get reimbursed from the partnership. The boat was well equipped, because it felt like we got 75% off on every purchase!

    And for sure, go sailing on different boats before you even think of buying or starting on a build. You'll learn a whole lot and get a far better appreciation of what you really want and how to get it. Start going to meetings of your local multihull sailing club and you'll meet lots of friendly, knowledgeable people that share your interest. Racing skippers are always in need of crew - especially someone that is enthusiastic, has some experience sailing, and can be counted on to show up every time. It's a whole lot cheaper sailing on other people's boats!
     
  8. Marvout
    Joined: Aug 2010
    Posts: 28
    Likes: 1, Points: 3, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: Manitoba

    Marvout Junior Member

    Tspeer - Very sound advice. I've got a Kayak, a sail canoe and a 13' sailing boat behind my belt. Each one was some form of adaptation or modification of plans, so they were very from scratch. So, I think <grin> I know what I would bet getting into building. But, I appreciate hearing your comment.

    Good to know I can get a rig up solo. I figured it would be a matter setting the process and hardware up properly. Is there a way to do this on the water? There are a few bridges I'd like to get under.

    ....

    Speaking of Opening cans of worms...
    I've wondered why I never see any marketing pictures of grown men sitting in the cabins of some of these Tri's. Now I know why.... They don't fit. I plugged a few Tri drawings into CAD, scaled them and stuck 'me' into the boats. I'm a regular 6' tall and half my head sticks out a cabin of a Scarab 22' - this explains the hatch. I can't imagine spending all that money to buy/build one and not being able to sit up in one.

    Marvin
     
  9. aussiebushman
    Joined: Oct 2009
    Posts: 283
    Likes: 33, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 132
    Location: Taralga NSW

    aussiebushman Innovator

    Tom

    Very happy to be corrected over the mast raising/lowering technique - I spoke in ignorance having merely seen the size of the rig. I certainly intend to use the gin-pole technique on mine even though it is a smaller and lighter section than the F24

    Thanks, Alan
     
  10. Team Scarab
    Joined: Mar 2010
    Posts: 5
    Likes: 0, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: Queensland, Australia

    Team Scarab Junior Member

    Hi Marvin,
    If you click on http://www.teamscarab.com.au/construction/scarab-22.html
    you will see a fully grown 6 foot man (me) sitting in a partly constructed Scarab 22. The top of my nut is just above the hatch coaming (about 2.5 inches). Note there are no cushions but they don't add much when sitting. The top of the hatch coaming is also about a half inch below the underside of the hatch at the side, with the pop top up there is plenty of room.
    Hope this helps.
    Regards
    Ray Kendrick
     
    Last edited: Aug 30, 2010
  11. Marvout
    Joined: Aug 2010
    Posts: 28
    Likes: 1, Points: 3, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: Manitoba

    Marvout Junior Member

    Ray,

    I've been to that page many times and never noticed you sitting there. Sorry. I encourage you to post even more pictures of your builds.

    Would you ever consider raising the cabin design so that the pop top wouldn't be needed? I realize that the boat looks very sleek the shape it is right now, just wondering if alternates are considered.

    Marvin
     
  12. ThomD
    Joined: Mar 2009
    Posts: 561
    Likes: 25, Points: 18, Legacy Rep: 111
    Location: TO

    ThomD Senior Member

    "A good used boat is going to be cheaper in the end, and you'll be sailing immediately."

    I don't think that has to be true on cost. You can build a really nice boat for not much money, but it is certainly true on time. That is where the Fs shine as you say. The overall financial package would be pretty sensible. Plus, if you are like a lot of people, that whole boat thing can last a few years, then on to motorcycles! Buy and sell is the only way there.

    http://www.multimarine.com/ L7 beams and half hulls make for a fast build.

    I built my Hughes 24 for 3-4 grand, and, and the costs of stuff like epoxy have actually come down. You can't get much of a second hand boat for 3 grand. They sell canoes for more than that.

    For me, I have to say the whole thing was kinda a process of slipping into it paycheck by paycheck. Never spent more on it than normal people spend on cigarettes and beer (canadian prices). But sure, I should have bought a Newick when I had the chance. Or a G32.

    By the way, when I built my Hughes the plans cost 200 bucks. One shouldn't begrudge the cost of plans, but when talking about spectacularly low build prices, the possibility of self-design is greater these days. There are a lot more people with the smarts to do it. Not suggesting it, but just saying real low prices and the increasing number of self-designers go together. As big a factor as the lack of a design fee, is the fact one can Tailor the whole thing to materials that make sense to the objective of cheapness in one's own back yard. Designers normally have a totally different price structure to the one I have because they live in Oz or Seattle.
     
  13. ThomD
    Joined: Mar 2009
    Posts: 561
    Likes: 25, Points: 18, Legacy Rep: 111
    Location: TO

    ThomD Senior Member

    I think for trailering the smaller end is more reasonable for a lot of uses. I'm intrigued by the Scarab 18, if it proves to have a useful load. Stuff like sub-maximum trailering width. It sounds great to be trailering a 30 foot trimaran at highway speeds through, say Montreal, but the reality with 3 kids in the car, and lanes reduced for construction etc... Is sometimes not a restful vacation starter...
     
  14. Marvout
    Joined: Aug 2010
    Posts: 28
    Likes: 1, Points: 3, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: Manitoba

    Marvout Junior Member

    The 18' looks like a nice size from a boat hauling/rigging point of view. I'm just not sure I could get used to the speed trade-off. I kind of view the boats in the 22'+ size as being 'full-size'. Being slower on the water just to have 4' less boat on land doesn't seem worth it. Everyone would have their own personal rules for this kind of thing. Besides, the 22' seems to have a short interior, I can only imagine how much shorter the 18' must be.
     

  15. ThomD
    Joined: Mar 2009
    Posts: 561
    Likes: 25, Points: 18, Legacy Rep: 111
    Location: TO

    ThomD Senior Member

    It is mostly a mater of layout, at least as far as berths are concerned. I am always struck by the fact that my 7' Bolger dingy has a better berth than My Hughes 24. :)

    I think a compromise is the trailerability vs home making. It sounds easy, and indeed there are certainly build advantages to a trailerable:individual parts, ease of moving off site, and so forth. The downside is the complexity. Where a Hughes or Bucc has beams you can buy at the metal supermarket, making the old ply F-boat beams looked like a larger job, per, than making my amas, and even then it wasn't immediately obvious that they would be waterproof (doubtless were given how many there are around), it looks like a labyrinth. Presumably these are part of the reason one can buy these parts today for about what I paid for a Ford Ranger in '08.

    Another thing one should carefully analyse is exactly how many times one will have to mount and dismount the build parts during construction. With a Cat, the answer in once, you level them, measure diagonals and freeze them in space to never come apart. I took it to a bit of an extreme, because while I had a build space for the components, when I assembled them, a particularly rainy summer, I seemed to have to put the boat together, and apart again dozens of time. The more complex the system often the more schlepping around of rather heavy components there is.

    It is one of those things that is rarely compared. People will discuss at length CM vs. CC, vs. KSS, Vs. vertical foam. But rarely do the demands of a build on space, or the complexity of assembly stages get discussed, and it can be a big part of the job. One thing about the Farrier folding system, as done by others now also, Is that you have not only the weight of the amas but the beams also, integrated. With the Hughes, the beams slid in sideways, which can be a challenge for build space. In the worst case you would need about 34 feet of beam to get them in, and at least 25. The bucc has detached beams and they are half length, and they mount from the top. Etc...
     
Loading...
Forum posts represent the experience, opinion, and view of individual users. Boat Design Net does not necessarily endorse nor share the view of each individual post.
When making potentially dangerous or financial decisions, always employ and consult appropriate professionals. Your circumstances or experience may be different.