W17 trimaran...What do ya think??

On the website, it mentions that the first boat came in overweight. How realistic is the 400# weight target for amateur or first time builders?

 

If one keeps to the material listed and the instructions in the extensive Build Manual followed, then its certainly doable, though constant care and awareness of weight is required. Keep in mind that several small changes were made after the first boat was completed and what were initially suggested as 'lighter options' have now been moved to become the prime choice, as the first boat seems very strong. A small buoyancy reserve was also added as it became apparent that not all countries have access to the same materials and weights.
But as all small multihulls (particularly trimarans) are very weight sensitive, I have suggested that if a particular owner is very heavy or expects to build heavy, then he should first contact me for my specific recommendations on this. But for 95% of cases, the updated plans and instruction will work just fine. My own boat is 1/2 built and I am right on target as others are reportedly too.
The thing to realise with this design is that it would be easy to deepen the main hull to add more buoyancy, but this would create more rocker and slow the high end speed of the boat. So this boat has been designed to be trimmed somewhat forward for low speeds (by sitting more forward) and then moving crew aft only as far as needed to keep the transom running free.

mike
www.smalltrimarandesign.com

 

Is 780# the revised displacement at DWL?

R

 

MiKE.
In your book on "20 trimarans from 20 to 24 ft", you never mentioned the Lock Crowther Buccaneer 24. How come?
I can't understand that since you have previously said that you owned two of them in the past.
You also said "But can the boat still capsize one might ask? Of course, any boat can be capsized."
"But some will add a racing rig and push this fun boat to and beyond its limit so sooner or later, of course someone will flip"
In the forty one years since 1969 I have never heard of a Buccaneer 24 capsizing and some have been outrageously over rigged. (ask Samnz)

 

Yes Randy, actually it checks out to 790 but I've not bothered to change the figure for the small difference. And keep in mind that a boat can still sail ok with slightly deeper immersion, especially in a good wind, and displacement picks up quicker once the amas take some load.

My apologies to OldSailor7. I was just saving the B24 for later ;-)
You may not have noticed but somewhere on the website it does give a partial list of other small tris that I planned to review for a second report and the B24 was certainly there. I've just had to put that aside for the moment to look after the website, W17 and W22.
As I mentioned for the W17, some multis will never be capsized in their lifetime, its just that they CAN be, though there are certainly some configurations of boats that are more capsize resistant than others and I think I know a couple of reasons why the B24 is/was one of those.
The floats are set relatively high with what I call high dihedral and in fact, the boat, as I am sure you well know, can be sailed on the center hull only and be very fast in light weather. The high dihedral results in far more heel than most modern tris and this acts as a safety valve by releasing sail load earlier. The buoyancy of the ama is also somewhat less than used for newer designs and that's another reason. But the high dihedral also made the two B24's I owned very skittish with relatively high heel angles and after I upgraded to the Dragonfly 25R, I could not believe how much more stable and powerful it was and FAR more comfortable at the mooring where the transverse accelerations on the B24 were hard to keep up with! Speed is certainly not everything, but the best I did with a B24 was 17-18K and it felt like 150+ in a car ... totally wild ... while I could do 22K in the D25R and eat lunch at the same time! Stretching out the B24 stern lines would certainly help but for a low cost plywood tri, its still a design I would recommend. It was quite brilliant for the period ... and thankfully, the totally essential waterstays on all Buccaneers that I saw were of solid stainless flatbar, as a failure there would disintegrate the whole boat as I'm sure you well know. But I'm still a total Crowther fan .. all Lock's boats had something unique and effective, and most performed well above average.
You also cannot compare the stability of a 17 footer with that of 24. Typically, the larger boat will be harder to flip - but as I've said, some designs more than others.
But perhaps we should stay on the original thread here, as there are already many for the B24. Thanks for the comment & reminder though.

mike
www.smalltrimrandesign.com

 

Thanks Mike for your balanced and curteous reply.
I was worried that you might think I was "having a go" at you. Which of
course I wasn't.
I used to sail my B24 in the lagoons between the islands in Toronto harbour with an all girl crew. People on shore were amazed at how fast she (and the crew) tacked in close quarters. This of course was due to the floats clearing the water as the boat came head to wind.
"Flopping" at anchor or on a mooring was never a problem because we used a bridle attached to an eye bolt on the inner sides of the crossarms, which kept the boat head to wind at all times.
The worst boat for "snap rolling" I had was my Piver "Nugget".
The wash from a passing power cruiser woud cause the deep V float to immerse and then jump back out like an orange pip being squeezed. We lost a few saucepans of hot soup that way during the four years of wonderful cruising we had on that little Piver tri.

 

No problem OldSailor,
Being as you were in Canada where I also worked for 40 years, why not send me an email thro the questionnaire on my site and we can chat off-forum about things outside this thread? (3rd option down)
mike
www.smalltrimarandesign.com

 

I probably should have asked before I ordered the plans ...

The estimated build time is 3-400 hours?

Based on the experiences reported by builders to date do you feel this is accurate?

Could you break it down into time to build the "kit", time to assemble the boat, and time to finish and rig?

R

 

Building time breakdown

A difficult question to answer with much degree of accuracy, as we all work at SUCH a different rate! But 400 total is still a good average I'd say.
There's a pretty good chart of both labor and material costs included with my Small Trimaran Report available thro' the website - based on 'averages'. (Ian F has some published too, though his give somewhat higher figures than mine, which I guess is justified as his boats are certainly more expensive and complex, in good part due to their folding systems. Neither of us wish to give artificially low figures though).
So one needs to consider both 'complexity and personal experience' when estimating this. There's also another factor.
Some (and I might include myself in this) could certainly shorten this average time, but as we actually enjoy the process, we tend to drag it out, playing with little details and putting in outrageous time for the sheer pleasure of it ;-) Details that are totally unnecessary, other than being, 'for ourselves'.
(Of course, if you are setting this up as a course for those who've never built anything before, then you'd need to add a margin to the figures).
But let's say you're 'all-round average' and finish in 400 hrs. Assuming you have some basic power tools like a table saw, jig saw & jointer, then I would say there's about 70 hours to prepare a kit (set up a table, cut parts, sheath 1 side and assemble the DB case) ; 240 hours to assembly everything and 90 hours to paint and rig etc. (This assumes a suitable mast was already available).
Repeat boats, if that is to apply, could be done in about 20% less time I figure - aided by knowing how things go together as well as having many little templates and other aids already at hand.
The other great thing about a flat bottom boat like this - particularly when fine and narrow, is that they will sit on a small utility trailer of just 36-40" width that go on sale for $199. I've used mine for transporting timber and plywood also, even if it rides like a truck when too lightly loaded. I will be publishing details of how to lengthen it at the tongue to carry the W17 and this conversion work can be done in just one day.
Hope this answers your question ok and welcome to the W17 fleet - you're #30!

cheers
mike
www.smalltrimarandesign.com

 

Yes it does. Thank you. I will probably have to hire space and help when I get to the build. So time = budget for me. A 60 day build schedule requires 7 hour days. One helper cuts it to 4 hours/day on average. Very doable!

I fell into the too much time spent on details on the boat I have yet to finish. I got to the "don't forget anything before you start on the deck" point in one summer three years ago. I've stalled at that point. There is no way I can sell my last mate on the new project until I finish the one I started long ago.

This summer will get the mini runabout done to clear the way for the W-17.

I'll get the templates and jigs built before I secure the space to make the assembly move along smoothly.

R

 

Hurry up and build it!! Then we will have someone else sailing a small multihull in BC. You'll be able to join us on our Strike 18 trimaran and Walter on his Reynolds 21 cat

Richard Woods of Woods Designs

www.sailingcatamarans.com

 

We built our Buccaneer 24 in 482 man hours, so I think 400 man hours for the W17 is very do-able.

 

LOL ... I have to plan this ... or I'll be sleeping in the damn thing. Spring of 2012 is earliest possible with the idea of towing up to BC for the summer. I have to finish one boat, sell the Laser II and the Catalina 30 before I can do this and remain married ...

R

 

You see Randy, Richard is just itching to get a ride on a W17, so you'd better do me justice and get it right

After reading that you're thinking of building in 60 days with added helpers, here's just a 'heads-up' about how that typically effects the total time. Unfortunately, it rarely works out that you can do it in the same total manhours like that and a good part of that is the lack of job understanding & planning time. This is normally accomplished during uncounted time that one might spend on a couch with the Build Manual, learning about & planning what you'll do during the next couple of days etc. When you're rushed and working a full day, you just don't get that time, so you have to think and plan as you work and that surely slows the job.
And adding another hand is great when you can really hand out a completely independant job to them, but on a small boat like the W17, there's rarely a job that you cannot do more efficiently alone. And even if you each built an ama so you're not in each others way, you'd then lose the learning curve advantage for the 2nd one, so that's not effective either.

So personally, if it's at all possible, I'd try to spread the time over a longer period than 60 days or 'sub-contract out' say, a quite separate part like the beams, the main hull, foils or even the rig, to a capable helper, so you could be efficient on whatever other part YOU wanted to do. But now you'll have to plan ahead for two ... so allow yourself extra couch time too ;-)
Planning is everything if time is important to you ... and in such a short build period, I'd certainly plan to get all your materials on hand before you start.

Good luck ...
mike
www.smalltrimarandesign.com

 

My past experience agrees with this. I have started the search for materials. I'll get all the hardware in Canada next summer. I get a pretty good deal on Harken and Rontan stuff from my rigging contacts. I'll price West System stuff and look at local alternatives. The first thing people want to do in Mexico is use polyester for fiberglass work ... need to change that. The first feelers on plywood got a dear in the headlight look on Marine Grade, and only slightly less positive on exterior grade. We may have to import the wood and that must be from a Canadian or US manufacturer to avoid a 20-40% import duty to witch 15% IVA would be added. It might be that we can build foam core panels for less than we can buy high quality wood. That is why I asked about support for local materials.

The first thing I would build is and jigs and templates with the idea that I can do just as you suggest, sub-contract assemblies. I have almost a year to study how much of the boat can be pre-fabricated prior to assembly. My normal schedule is Canada May-October and Mexico November-April. So the build would begin in November 2011 with a target of a demo sail at an International Junior Regatta in early February. That is three months, so 60 days over that time is a Monday-Friday schedule.

I've seen some smiles from the people I've talked to, so we might have interest for more than one boat. Possibly 3-5. My boat will live in the water, others will be dry sailed from dry storage at the club. One of my friends in BC used to sail a Hobby out of the dinghy club in Vancouver and sold it in the last couple of years due to the hassle of dry storage and kids that have grown up and moved out. If I can get him hooked, I'd build two and avoid the towing back and forth. I have dock space in BC too. Keep one in BC with him as boat partner and hook my best crew here in Mexico that is looking for a boat into the idea so he and his wife can sail with me and my wife. So there is three off the top.

I'm rambling ...

e-mail coming back to you soon Mike

Randy