Old Quarter Tonners -Magic Bus

CT, maybe you mix with polite and well mannered Aussie liberals??
And I guess Kiwis are all loud mouth, opinionated, outspoken, far right wingers throwing raw meat onto the barbie??
Because when the worlds first sport boats appeared (NZ? - maybe the odd backwater corner in the US too?) there was plenty moaning and carping on the bar here - because I was a journalist then with ear to the ground/sand/polluted mud/tidal bank.
Sure, the LD believers were happy the way the tide was turning against backward conservatism ...but they were in the minority. A few years had to go by before LD acceptance became the norm in this country - but I guess those polite and liberal thinkers in OZ, they had seen the light (no pun) from the moment of sporty boat inception?
 
The 12 Foot Skiff, 14 Footer, Cherub and (formerly) the Moth designers all used to talk about how much their designs were restricted by their short overall length.

You could argue that's a case of rules not keeping up with their environment... In 1946 12ft was a reasonable length for a boat for two late teens or small adults, and 14ft was a reasonable length for two average size adults, what with the size people were, the amount of rocker boats had then, and all the rest of it. But if you were writing de novo rules today for boats for those 1946 sailors' great grandchildren then those lengths would probably be 14ft and 15'6 just because people are larger and rocker is lower...
 
I would argue that it was wings (racks), trapezes and to a lesser extent hiking boards lead to the development/need for longer hulls on sailing dinghies. A 12 foot hull carrying twin trapezes is a very twitchy beast. Push the hull length out 14 - 16 feet and the beast is stabler if not tamed.
 
CT, maybe you mix with polite and well mannered Aussie liberals??
And I guess Kiwis are all loud mouth, opinionated, outspoken, far right wingers throwing raw meat onto the barbie??
Because when the worlds first sport boats appeared (NZ? - maybe the odd backwater corner in the US too?) there was plenty moaning and carping on the bar here - because I was a journalist then with ear to the ground/sand/polluted mud/tidal bank.
Sure, the LD believers were happy the way the tide was turning against backward conservatism ...but they were in the minority. A few years had to go by before LD acceptance became the norm in this country - but I guess those polite and liberal thinkers in OZ, they had seen the light (no pun) from the moment of sporty boat inception?

Gary, I was also a sailing journalist at the time, which is part of the reason I sailed so many of those boats, and I also had my ear to the ground. I was often switching from IOR, JOG boats and Etchells to Young/Elliott type and back again, as were many of us.

Nothing I said indicated that Aussies are more polite and well mannered. Maybe the reason I didn't see the moaning and carping was because I recognise that the people who preferred other types were not "backward conservatives", but simply people who had other interests and who sometimes (and sometimes rightly) were concerned about the impact of the new boats on existing events. If people went in with the view that their taste in boats was the only right one of course they were going to cause reaction among people who were less narrow-minded.

Depending on one's definition of "sportsboat" of course, the type could be seen to be 165 years old (early 'sandbaggers'), or 120 years old (Raters), or 85 years old (Jollenkreuzer), or 40 years old (Highlander 25, Toucan) or 30 years old (Libera, Asso 99, etc) and to come from a range of countries, and to have caused only a few people to get their knickers wired up.
 
You could argue that's a case of rules not keeping up with their environment... In 1946 12ft was a reasonable length for a boat for two late teens or small adults, and 14ft was a reasonable length for two average size adults, what with the size people were, the amount of rocker boats had then, and all the rest of it. But if you were writing de novo rules today for boats for those 1946 sailors' great grandchildren then those lengths would probably be 14ft and 15'6 just because people are larger and rocker is lower...

Yep, one of these days I must calculate the all-up weights (including wet sailing gear and equipment) to see how much they have changed.

To look at the issue I pondered a few posts back in a different way - we have several 12' development classes; the 12 Foot Skiff, the R Class*, the Oz Cherub, the UK Cherub, the N12. The class with the massive rig is obviously faster, but while it's a wonderful boat can it really be called "better" than a R or Cherub?

The Rocket 7.8 could be seen to be like the UK Cherub or the R Class; a boat with limits on dimensions, but few restrictions on shape. The theoretical Rocket 780 with 10'+ beam would end up more like a 12 Foot Skiff. Seems to me that both are interesting but that one is not really "better" than the other.

Nick, good point. On the other hand, it's interesting to see how much slower short boats were in comparison with longer craft, a few decades ago. I think the Rs and Cherubs were rated slower than Finns, and Mander thought it was pretty cool when the Rs could beat the Xs. So arguably in performance terms length is less important these days when high-performance boats spend so much time planing, and hulls are lighter.
 
Hi Guys, new here, but an interesting thread. One of the boats mentioned in this thread a few times is Alcatraz, which i own. she is going through a pretty big refit at the moment including removal of the wings, new transom design, new keel, new cockpit, new engine, big interior makeover, full paint, new rudder etc. She is on my back lawn and we only recently removed the shed.
feel free to ask any questions.http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=106521&stc=1&d=1457849564
 

Attachments

  • IMG_2488.jpg
    IMG_2488.jpg
    520.3 KB · Views: 810
Gary Mull 1/4 Ton

Recently found the Gary Mull "Tequila Sunrise" in very bad shape at a private Dock in the Bay Area. Anyone willing to save her?
 

Attachments

  • DSCN3142.jpg
    DSCN3142.jpg
    417.1 KB · Views: 845
sean9c in 2011 said:
Thanks a lot MF, it brings back fond memories.
I finally waded through the whole thread. Someone mentioned that MB had a daggerboard, that's not correct, at least in the QTC that it won the boat had a keel. I even remember talking to Paul and Murray as they were sanding on it.
A little info about after the '76 QTC.
I'm from socal. After the QTC a guy in LA contracted with Whiting to be the distributor for his boats in the US. I don't remember who the guy was, I do remember that he ran logistics for one of the airlines at LAX, sailed out of MDR and wasn't very experienced.
This guy ordered 2 QT's from Whiting, the boats were to be shipped less hardware and rigging. The first boat arrives, it is a daggerboard boat, significantly different hull shape than MB way more distortion. I remember seeing the boat and being stunned, it was like they took a bow, middle and stern from 3 different boats , with the middle being a beach ball, and stuck them together. I'd seen MB and didn't think it's shape was particularly distorted, this new boat was way different. So the boat shows up needing to be finished, the owner contracts with Sails by Watts for sails and for a friend of mine who was working there to finish the boat and sail it. A couple of other friends get involved, it's a big thrash to get the boat done, owner is never around to make decisions or pay bills so my friends are going out of pocket for all the hardware, not to mention labor.. Boat gets done and we do a little testing against our boat, the Whiting boat is extremely tender and isn't showing any speed. Run out of time and everyone has to go to San Diego for the NA's ('77, I think). In the mean time Stan Teel, another friend, is building the Peterson designed Blitz that Ulman will sail and the Goose guys from SD are getting the Nelson designed Blivit.
At the NA's Blivit, Blitz and ourselves are about the same speed. I think Blivit ends up winning we were second and Blitz third but it was all close. The Whiting boat was really off the pace and I don't think even finished the regatta. The owner basically gives up on the whole program, refused to reimburse my friends even for their out of pocket costs for the hardware. I never saw the boat or heard about the owner again.
The second boat the guy orders arrives from NZ, he doesn't even claim it at customs so it languishes there or however it works until it goes up for auction along with all the other unclaimed junk. Another friend from San Pedro ends up buying it from auction, he replaces the board with a Peterson looking keel, fairs out the worst of the hollows, there was no rig so he found an old E22 rig. This became a PHRF boat named Fat Bottom Girl, I sailed on it a little and I think we won a PHRF champs at some point. The boat ended up sinking a while later.
A lot has been said about how MB and Fun changed the game. That is true but they were also the right boats for the '76 QTC where it was pretty breezy, if it was a lighter wind regatta I think the results would have been different. Light air I don't think they would have kept up with Business Machine, Fred Again and those sort of boats
Thanks for giving me a reason to think about old times again, it was fun.

As you said Paul Whiting got a distributor in the US after winning quarter-ton cup in Texas with Magic Bus (MB) in -76. At least two quarter-tonners were imported. Maybe also other tonners like the half-tonner Savoy Truffle. Do you anything about this yacht?
SAVOY TRUFFLE half-tonner designed by Paul Whiting, Berkeley Marine Center in SF Bay CA, pic by Cree Partridge
173764733_10222586599766020_6453840476249998898_n.jpg

From inside, pic by Tony Carr
268904154_10219681447059034_1486715141888074470_n.jpg
 
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 any potentially dangerous or financial decision, always employ and consult appropriate professionals. Your circumstances or experience may be different.

  • Back
    Top