Scow with a hint of bow?

I doubt that it will disrupt the IRC that much, because it probably takes into account the length of quarter buttocks. A scow has much longer quarter buttocks than most pointed bow monos. Sail carrying ability is quite closely related to quarter buttock lengths. With a scow bow, it is possible for the quarter buttock to be longer than the at-rest waterline. I imagine the IRC also takes into account the weight of the boat.

An alternative to the scow bow is the apple bow. This is when the maximum beam is so far forward that the bow (in plan view) has an almost semi-circular shape. Joshua Slocum's SPRAY was like this, But it was quite heavy. It did, however, have an excellent course-keeping reputation. He sailled it around the world alone with no self-steering vane, and no engine.

An apple bow has a lot of tight, compound curves, and is relatively difficult to plank up. But it is an excellent shape for fiberglass.

 

Sounds like that describes a lot of old Dutch types also. Then there was "cods head and mackerel tail" types, which seemed to be a common cruising type before the IOR types became popular.

 

Where's the evidence that the Rocket is as fast as is claimed? It's hard to see from a video but it certainly doesn't look like 17 knots of boatspeed if that's what's claimed.

The national French handicap doesn't show the other cruising scows to be particularly fast at all.

I still can't work out why the scow shape is said to be superior. Why not take the 800 lines and extend the bow? For a marginal increase in surface area and weight, you get far more deck area, a lighter displacement/length factor, more interior space and more speed in most, if not all, conditions.

Lots of scows are like taking a 10m boat and chopping off the front 1.5m. It makes for an inferior boat, not a better one.

 

Depends, I do not think it is as black and white as you may like to suggest. Given a length restriction, the pram bow can have better deck space, below accomodation and higher righting moment. I cant speak to sailing qualities as I have never sailed one, but even as a coastal boat or a weekender to potter around on, i can see why the extra space "for a given length", would be attractive, even if often the boats are not.

 

IIRR you can can have 2 of 3:

affordability

performance

accommodations

?

(There are different expressions of this ^, but the truth is, boat ownership is getting harder by the day, and the dream is a seductive one.)

 

Well. When you extend the bow, you lengthen the boat. I think there is a fair argument that the so-called scow bow is faster on points of sail other than windward, per length of boat. My boat, which is an actual scow, has quarter-buttocks that are longer than the at-rest water line 9.5 ft to 7.0 ft respectively. I think it can also be argued that a scow bow boat has better manners when driven hard downwind.

For most racing, this will not do. The reason is that upwind performance is crucial for most sailboat racing. And a scow bow will not do as well upwind, even for its length, than a pointed bow boat will do. So, in order to win most upwind/downwind races, the scow bow must be fast enough downwind to make up for its deficits upwind. This is probably why we don't see too many of them in mixed racing fleets.

Most sailboat cruising is not mostly, equally upwind and downwind. It is mostly cross wind and down wind, with some upwind sailing. Upwind sailing does still matter, even with cruising sailboats. But it is nowhere near as important as it is with racing sailboats.

I think it is all too easy to take the wrong lessons from racing sailboats. For instance, to be a good racer, a sailboat has to have a deep, wing-like keel, a very tall mast, and a minimal, unprotected rudder. Such not only alows it to sail upwind much better, but allows it to carry less ballast. Such boats can be and are cruised successfully. But are vulnerable to keel strikes, due to their deep draft and relatively light construction. The tall mast is more difficult to raise and take down, and is more vulnerable to bridges it may have to pass under.

So, a sailboat with a blunter bow, longer keel (longer than it is deep), and a shorter rig, may be a better choice for a cruising sailboat. Its longer keel allows for not only less draft, but sturdier construction. It will also likely track better, without an auto-pilot or wind vane streering. And it may even be faster when casually sailed. This is because the blunter bow is less likely to burry itself in the back of a wave and cause the boat to broach.

 

Yes. Watching the behaviour of the scow bowed foiling boats in the Southern Ocean on the way to Cape Horn certainly show the benefit of a lifting bow shape.

 

Yep, when you lengthen the bow you lengthen the boat. Apart from possibly increasing mooring costs (as Skara pointed out, quite rightly) what's wrong with doing that if it can be done with little or no increase in cost, handling issues etc?

The history of the sport shows that the claims that races are normally won upwind are very suspect. Look at many of the great breakthrough boats of the sport; Imp, the early Farrs, Ragtime, Ganbare to name a few were not the fastest boats of their time upwind; they won largely on their downwind speed.

The first boat I ever owned was a scow so I know them and like them. The issue is that much of the modern promotion of scows seems to be based almost entirely on claims that they are bigger/faster/etc for their overall length, and overall length is arguably a very poor way of comparing boats. Take the Rocket 8000. Chop 1.5m off the bow. It will now be a faster, roomier boat for its LOA - but it would be an inferior boat in just about every other way to the original.

We can almost always cut off a boat's ends and it will become faster and roomier for its LOA, but that doesn't mean it's a better boat overall than one with the same measurements but more length.

 

One has to define what is the appropriate comparison, because boats of different lengths will not cut it for those who want the maximum performance in a boat that will fit in an 8m berth. I will be the first to say a 10m boat will most likely be a faster performer, but its an apples and oranges comparison. For some people, the cost difference between an 8m to 10 or 12m berth is enough to give up the sport entirely. I can not justify the extra cost of anything over 8m, and that is solely for storage reasons. If i could afford to store a pointy 12m boat, i would.

 

I chose the Rocket 800 for all the pros and cons that comes with this scow design! But not only for upwind performance.... I suspect that with the high aspect ratio keel and tall sailplan it will be better anyhow than a full keel skeg rudder sailboat!

The goal is for the most boat for its lenght including performance, comfort and berth price.

I am not planning to do wold circumnavigation! At most if ever island hoping in the caraibes.

 

The main advantage of a scow bowed vessel, is related to the increased RM.
The shape of a scow, seen in plan view, is simply wider than a traditional vessel (in the front part).
This gives a scow an higher RM, therefore, given a specific length, it can carry bigger sails, ie more power.
Just this.

Then. Is it a scow slower upwind? I dont know. In Class 40, scow bowed vessel are showing a higher upwind speed than traditional ones. Manuard says a scow is even faster upwind, as it does not cut the wave, but stays over it. He says the main limit of a scow upwind is that the bow goes more up and down with waves.

 

One of the first Mini Scows taking part in the Mini Fastnet showed the scow was as fast as a traditional pointy upwind. Apparently it was the human factor that eased off, as pointed out, the motion is way more violent upwind. Lots of scow shapes to choose from, some bluff, some sharper and chined.

 

It was mentioned that scows tend to pound when sailing into the wind. Traditional inland scows pound quite a bit when sailing into the wind unless they are sailed on about a 15 degree or greater heel angle. In the old days, they were often sailed at a much greater angle of heel. At this steep angle, they present a very narrow beam and cut through the waves with ease.

This said, I have no experience with these broad bowed scows that sail off shore. Technically ILYA scows are totally impractical for off shore work. In my experience, any boat can pound when presented with waves/chop beyond the hulls ability. So, I have a very hard time seeing how the current off shore scows can have any real advantage from the departure from a more traditional bow shape. (In conditions of a steep chop). In smooth water, of course, I would expect them to rise above their bow wave and plane.

I am a scow sailor, staring when I was quite young and the boats were all wood and works or art. I know all about scows pounding through chop. My wife, who loves to sail, is not a fan of getting our little MC, sailing at the angle of heel that allows the MC Scow to “knife” through the chop frequently found on the lake we live on.

First picture is our scow, second picture was found in the 1962 book “Sailing” a National Geographic publication and the final picture is the E-Scow my father and his brother sailed and raced as teenagers in the 1930’s and when not serving in the 1940’s

 

Have you seen the current generation of Mini Transats?They are actually racing to the Canaries as I type.

 

Much of the racing is off-wind and the hull shape mean they have the ability to have more sail power, or the ability to hang onto sail longer=faster.
1 scow bow lost out to a pointy (mini transat series) on one of the Fastnet races, but still beat many other pointys. The skipper acknowledged that beating upwind was "uncomfortable", but these are racing boats, even the pointy ones are wet and uncomfortable beating into a F7. It did however perform better than he expected, given the rough conditions.