Help me choosing right design

Discussion in 'Multihulls' started by sharan69, Mar 12, 2014.

  1. sharan69
    Joined: Mar 2014
    Posts: 4
    Likes: 0, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: Bulgaria

    sharan69 New Member

    I have decided to build small sailing catamaran. It will be used in Mediteranean, mostly weekends, with 2-3 weeks long voyages few times per year.
    My requirements are: easy and quick to build,relatively cheap, 8 - 10m LOA, full bridgedeck, standing headroom at the bridgedeck, outboard motors. And of course good sailing abilities :)
    After long research I have reached following short list:
    Waller 880 - low headroom, strip planked(hard to be built)
    Waller Coral Cove 31 - low headroom
    Roger Hill 10m plywood cat - seem OK
    Schionning Wilderness 1030 - a bit too big, seems to be expensive and more hard to build, otherwise is my first choice
    Schionning Cosmos 930 - strip planked(hard to be built), no study plans

    And I do not have even a slightest idea about the sailing performance of any of those... ( As a minor requrement - I would like to be faster than my friend's Dufour 45ft monohull- dunno if its possible)
     
  2. redreuben
    Joined: Jan 2009
    Posts: 1,666
    Likes: 69, Points: 48, Legacy Rep: 349
    Location: Beaconsfield Western Australia

    redreuben redreuben

    Fast, comfortable, cheap. Pick any two.
    Example 8m, and full headroom bridge deck will not give you great sailing performance.
    Strip plank is only slow when the pedantic glue on one strip at a time.
    If you are prepared to look at Waller then check out the Simpson designs at Boatcraft Pacific. http://boatcraft.com.au/Shop/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=32_33

    Further, in your size range I'd be considering trimarans.
     
    1 person likes this.
  3. cookiesa
    Joined: Mar 2007
    Posts: 122
    Likes: 0, Points: 16, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: Launceston, Tasmania

    cookiesa Senior Member

    I love the Cc31, bought the study plans and definately plan on building it next for some serious cruising
     
  4. Richard Woods
    Joined: Jun 2006
    Posts: 2,170
    Likes: 144, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 1244
    Location: UK, USA and Canada

    Richard Woods Woods Designs

    I would be interested to know why my designs were not on your short list. You may not like the Gypsy or Romany, but the long cabin Sagitta, Eclipse and Vardo would suit your needs. And certainly they will be as fast as most 45ft monohulls.

    When we were liveaboard cruisers on our Romany (slower than those three designs I just mentioned) we entered a race in the Bahamas and were first to the windward mark in 15 knots of wind. Beating a Bavaria 50, Beneteau 36, Whylie 40 etc, not forgetting a PDQ36 and FP Orana. Then we did again in the second race.

    Richard Woods of Woods Designs

    www.sailingcatamarans.com
     
  5. Steve W
    Joined: Jul 2004
    Posts: 1,803
    Likes: 55, Points: 48, Legacy Rep: 608
    Location: Duluth, Minnesota

    Steve W Senior Member

    K designs KD860 might be a good choice along with Richards boats. You are not going to get standing headroom on the bridgedeck of any cat with good sailing abilities. Actually K designs has quite a few interesting designs.

    Steve.
     
  6. redreuben
    Joined: Jan 2009
    Posts: 1,666
    Likes: 69, Points: 48, Legacy Rep: 349
    Location: Beaconsfield Western Australia

    redreuben redreuben

    I still haven't seen anything that convinces me that the asymmetric hulls and "vortex" panels work to windward.
    Happy to be shown otherwise though.
    KD boats due to high lb ratio can't carry much payload compared to other cruisers. imho.
     
  7. Steve W
    Joined: Jul 2004
    Posts: 1,803
    Likes: 55, Points: 48, Legacy Rep: 608
    Location: Duluth, Minnesota

    Steve W Senior Member

    Yes, I would like to know for sure if the vortex panels work or not too. Of course
    it would not be too difficult to install daggers if they didn't.

    Steve.
     
  8. redreuben
    Joined: Jan 2009
    Posts: 1,666
    Likes: 69, Points: 48, Legacy Rep: 349
    Location: Beaconsfield Western Australia

    redreuben redreuben

    True, but then you have a whole boat designed for another concept wrapped around them, hardly ideal.
     
  9. Steve W
    Joined: Jul 2004
    Posts: 1,803
    Likes: 55, Points: 48, Legacy Rep: 608
    Location: Duluth, Minnesota

    Steve W Senior Member

    Most of the k design boats are just simple truncated vee hulls, it would be very easy to run a trunk down against the outside skin with minimal intrusion into the interior. Any cat of any design from any designer would benefit, performance wise from the inclusion of daggerboards but they have their downsides too. To me it is obvious that a daggerboard boat is going to go to weather better than any other compromise, the question I have is, how do boats such as the KD 860 go upwind when compared to a similar boat with LAR keels. Kohler had them on the cruising boat they lived and cruised on and he continues to use them so they probably work as well, but I would like to hear from someone with experience but no bias.

    Steve.
     
  10. ThomD
    Joined: Mar 2009
    Posts: 542
    Likes: 13, Points: 18, Legacy Rep: 111
    Location: TO

    ThomD Senior Member

    Fast and cheap, you can't beat a Kurt Hughes. That's fast in both the speed and build sense. Capacity is not his strong point, but on a cat you get a fair amount in those sizes.

    Nothing much matters if the boat never gets launched. So you need to visualize the different building methods. Some require a lot more space, or different conditions to build. Look for methods with fewer parts, of if a lot of parts, as few steps as possible in assembly. Materials need to be priced out a little, because there are big regional differences. I can get marine grade 6mm for 15 bucks a sheet. Normally in europe, composite is about the same price as wood. A pal of mine just paid out 3K for some of the wood in a Wharram beam. That is a lot of carbon fiber, or foam.

    The idea you can only have 2 of fast, spacious/comfortable and cheap (etc... there are other combos of three) is probably true for designs by one designer. In other words, in an all other things equal scenario. But Hughes are fast and cheap, even at a fixed comfort level. Less material is cheap. Higher PC can mean more space, better ride in certain situations, cheap to build, faster to build, etc...

    Wharrams are slow, heavy, slow to build, uncomfortable and expensive. I think they have some great points. But you have to understand that it takes longer to make oversized epoxy fillets, they make the boat slower, and they cost more, use up more internal space, compromise your health more, etc... Wharrams do not use strategies that leverage the synergies of various components. So the much vaunted flexible beams are not the back of a cockpit, or a beam to a deck, etc... The pods do not provide synergy to the beams and hulls. They use many beams where two would work, because the deck is not a giant shear panel for the two hulls. The beams my pal just bought wood for are not tubular, giving up huge advantages in structure, drag, cost, etc... They depend on the characteristics of old growth lumber where other options are readily available at far lower cost. Wharrams are great boats, probably more popular than the next 3 contenders. Just pointing out that there are free lunches out there in certain cases.
     
  11. Gary Baigent
    Joined: Jul 2005
    Posts: 2,955
    Likes: 99, Points: 48, Legacy Rep: 509
    Location: auckland nz

    Gary Baigent Senior Member

    Here be yer boat; don't urinate around with cats.
    Trimaran foiler of light construction: tensioned ply, strip planked paulownia/red cedar, foam/glass - take your pick - 10x10 metre length/beam with spacious accommodation including standing headroom; will whip any cat to windward, eat them in light airs, and offwind with foil assist, check my stern elegance.
    Only trouble is it's mostly in my imagination ... but will become reality. Ha.
     

    Attached Files:

  12. cookiesa
    Joined: Mar 2007
    Posts: 122
    Likes: 0, Points: 16, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: Launceston, Tasmania

    cookiesa Senior Member

    Can't see a double set of dagger boards improving the performance where boards are already specified! :) lol
     
  13. Richard Woods
    Joined: Jun 2006
    Posts: 2,170
    Likes: 144, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 1244
    Location: UK, USA and Canada

    Richard Woods Woods Designs

    Clearly if you regularly beach your boat (like many UK and French multihull sailors do) then LAR keels not only protect the hull bottom, but also make it easier to have inboard engines and you don't need kick up rudders.

    That's why I now draw super-shallow keels even on my boats like Transit, Eclipse and Sagitta which have daggerboards.

    I did fit end-plates to one of my LAR Strider Clubs, but it didn't seem to make enough of a performance difference. Certainly the fences were prone to damage when beaching, particularly on a rocky beach. And impossible to clean and anti-foul when on the beach.

    Even of you don't dry out you may well run aground and maybe have to motor off at an angle, rather than straight backwards. Fences would come under big twisting loads in that situation

    What I have found when sailing a daggerboarded boat fast in a big cross sea is that it is hard to steer with the boards fully raised. The boat steers better with them lowered slightly. Nothing new there, it's the same when sailing a dinghy

    Obvious really, because if the rudder is the deepest part of the boat then it's a case of the tail wagging the dog when the bows are hit by a breaking wave. Not having a "pivot point" may cause tacking problems

    I am one of the few designers who has fitted LAR keels and daggerboards to the same hull (the Strider). And as they were production boats the weights and rigs were the same. No question the daggerboarded boat points higher, sails faster and pitches less in all conditions. The least performance difference is in strong winds and flat water. No surprise there, that's what theory would suggest.

    ThomD - I'm glad someone else thinks that Wharrams are expensive and time consuming to build.

    Richard Woods of Woods Designs

    www.sailingcatamarans.com
     
  14. cavalier mk2
    Joined: Mar 2010
    Posts: 2,074
    Likes: 39, Points: 48, Legacy Rep: 214
    Location: Pacific NW North America

    cavalier mk2 Senior Member

    When I priced Wharrams their Classic design range actually came out to be the least expensive build in terms of material because they used less epoxy than the newer designs. Not much to making them or streamlining the design if you don't like the beams.
     

  15. jamez
    Joined: Feb 2007
    Posts: 488
    Likes: 25, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 231
    Location: Auckland, New Zealand

    jamez Senior Member

    Classics don't require epoxy or glass. Tikis, are stitch n' tape and epoxy rich. I costed a T26, as one would expect it was not cheaper in comparison with any other similar weight ply/epoxy/glass boats considered. No point in building a Tiki to try and save money, but if that is the type of boat that pulls your chain.....
     
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.