Give me every reason...

[Venchka]

why I should not build one of these boats. Valid, incontravertable, "No way, Jose", very real reasons why either of these boats would be the worst expenditure of time and money boatbuilding has ever seen.

Secondly, same criteria, is one boat clearly better than the other?

Keep it analytical, nautical and seamanlike. "The are both B#@% Ugly" is unacceptable.

All remarks to be confined to the two designs below. This is not a boat building fishing trip for every alternative design available.

Fair enough? Bring it on. Hit me with your best shot.

By the way, it's really slow at work. I had to come up with something to stay awake.

split into two posts to allow lots of images.

Number One is william Atkin's flat bottom gaff sloop Red Onion. The photos below are in fact Red Onion built plywood on frame. I would build that way. Minka's sail plan is the knocabout rig from Wild Oats. The two rigs are interchangeable. I am leaning towards the gaff sloop. Should I or shouldn't I?

http://www.boat-links.com/Atkinco/Articles/Minka/EmergeS.jpg http://www.boat-links.com/Atkinco/Articles/Minka/DrivewayS.jpg http://www.boat-links.com/Atkinco/Articles/Minka/InteriorS.jpg http://www.boat-links.com/Atkinco/Articles/Minka/FernRidgeS.jpg

Minka (http://www.boat-links.com/Atkinco/Articles/Minka/index.html)

Red Onion sail plan:

http://www.boat-links.com/Atkinco/Sail/images/RedOnion-1.gif

Red Onion lines:

http://www.boat-links.com/Atkinco/Sail/images/RedOnion-3.gif

Red Onion plans:

Red Onion Plans (http://www.boat-links.com/Atkinco/Sail/RedOnion.html)

Wayne
In the Swamp. :D

[ 08-02-2005, 03:42 PM: Message edited by: Venchka ]

[Venchka]

...continued

The other boat is Red Onion's new sister Wild Onion by John Atkin.

Sail plan:

http://www.boat-links.com/Atkinco/Sail/images/WildOnion-1.gif

Lines:

http://www.boat-links.com/Atkinco/Sail/images/WildOnion-3.gif

Wild Onion plans:

Wild Onion Plans (http://www.boat-links.com/Atkinco/Sail/WildOnion.html)

Wayne
In the Swamp. :D

[ 08-02-2005, 03:41 PM: Message edited by: Venchka ]

[Keith Wilson]

Good reasons not to build Red Onion? It's UGLY. Atkin himself said so; that's why the name, ugly enough to bring tears to your eyes. Wild Onion was an attempt to revise it to look prettier, but it isn't all that much better. They're both dead simple boats, sort of like a Stevenson Weekender a generation earlier, but without the ornamentation. After sailing your gorqeous Caledonia Yawl, you won't be satisified with anything that's not at least as good-looking. Narrows the field a bit, eh? ;)

[Venchka]

You aren't playing fair. I am trying to be objective. Dismiss the "what does it look like from 50' away on the trailer" mentality.

Wayne
In the Swamp.

[Keith Wilson]

Who am I to argue with the designer himself? ;)

It's ugly. If you're going to go to all that work, you want something that in the end you stand around staring at a lot, just because it's so beautiful. You can do that with your yawl, and it's really nice, isn't it? Makes you forget the money and time that went into it, right?

Life's too short to build an ugly boat, whatever its virtues, if you can tell the difference (and you can).

If you want a small cruising boat, build one that looks like this:

http://www.portlandcompany.com/bpoint/Images/24GoingL.jpg

[ 08-02-2005, 04:46 PM: Message edited by: Keith Wilson ]

[Seth Wood]

Holy Cow, a Bridges Point 24. I've been drooling over the no-cabin version in the Joel White book.

Are they only glass, or can they be built in wood?

[Keith Wilson]

Glass only AFAIK; I don't think they sell plans, alas. There's already a Rozinante thread, and I wanted the prettiest small cruiser I could google up on short notice.

[JimD]

There are no valid reasons why you should not build either one. Both ought to sail as well as any comparable design. Aesthetically (I know it doesn't count in this thread) I still like them both. Take your choice of flat bottom or V and start building, or at least order the plans which are as inexpensive as you'll find anywhere and start thinking about how you'd build. :cool:

[Venchka]

Keith,

You don't play fair at all. If this were a Yahoo! group and I was Big Brother, you would be banished! :D

Jeff,

The board in these boats is huge compared to modern designs. I have figured out that the centercase makes a perfect front for the stove flat and either a built in ice box or locker. It won't be that far off-center. I'll see what happens with your idea. Thanks!

Jim,

The order form was filled out and the check written a few months ago. Then some Stuff happened. Maybe I'll treat myself to the plans for Christmas.

When I have the Atkins' plans I can play "what if" between the two ugly ducklings and the plans for the curvy little number I have now.

I reckon if I can put one of these boats together, it will be beautiful in my mind. As for what others think, here it comes Y'all, "It just doesn't matter."

Keep the comments coming. I'm learning something new everyday.

Wayne
In the Swamp. :D

[Dennis M]

Where did Atkin say Red Onion was ugly? In Practical Small Boats, the story that leads to Red Onion is about a friend of his who built a boat without any plan or much skill. When it was finished, it was unfair and out of proportion. His friend called that boat, "Red Onion." Why? According to Atkin's friend, "everytime I look at it it brings a tear to my eye."

Edited to add: Wayne, FWIW: I do not think the boats look ugly. I've certainly seen uglier, e.g., Bolger's AS-19.

[ 08-02-2005, 10:01 PM: Message edited by: Dennis M ]

[JimD]

.

[ 08-02-2005, 10:25 PM: Message edited by: JimD ]

[Wayne Jeffers]

Wayne,

I think you already know my thoughts on these two.
-- Practical little trailerable sailboats.
-- Boats you can build without investing 5 years and half your life savings.
-- Proven designs.
-- Everything you need for cruising in protected waters, without frills you don't need.
-- Not as pretty as the typical Olin Stephens design, but prettier than most Phil Bolger designs. smile.gif
-- Building the V-bottom won't be half so difficult as you want to believe. ;)

I like the Wild Onion, with the Red Onion gaff rig, mainly for the shorter mast for ease of trailering.

Wayne

[Bruce Hooke]

Wild Onion, being V-bottomed, should ride through waves more comfortably. On the other side of the coin, a V-bottomed boat is more work to build than a flat-bottomed boat...

[JimD]

Originally posted by MIke:
You got mail, Wayne. I did not place my blasphemy in open view.Ah, c'mon, Mike. Where's the fun in that?

[Hwyl]

It would also sail about as well as it looks. There are plenty of modern designs that sail well.

Here is Duley Dix (how can you go wrong with a name like that) Cape Henry 21
http://www.dixdesign.com/ch21rig.gif

http://www.dixdesign.com/ch21wallis1.jpg

[JimD]

All remarks to be confined to the two designs below. This is not a boat building fishing trip for every alternative design available.

[JimD]

Ok, Mike, got it! smile.gif

[JimD]

Originally posted by MIke:
Jim, wait till you see my 23 foot round stern, on the jig right now. :D I can't wait. I want to see it now. Start a new thread! :D

[Hwyl]

Originally posted by JimD:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> All remarks to be confined to the two designs below. This is not a boat building fishing trip for every alternative design available.
</font>[/QUOTE]O.K. I think "it's ugly" has value, because, with a few notable exeptions, ugly boats are slow or unmanaegable. Also Wayne is somewhat motivated by good lucks.

The most important part of a boat are the foils.

The centreboard has had no design effort whatsoever, it's a kitchen table turned sideways now have the benefit of NACA foils, huge difference in performance.

The rudder seems to have had some design effort, in completely the wrong direction. It seems to maximize the wetted surface/efficiency ratio. Surely if you have a drop centreboard, youd have a drop rudder too. The rudder as drawn would lose ability when the boat heels, it's heavy, it's a classic case of how not to do it.

The bow, I tend to like vertical stems and bowsprits, this one somehow seems to be crying out for a "knockabout" style bow.

The chine: Bolger has done a lot of research on the angles of chines and the water flow over them, Bolger can be quirky, but I respect him on this. This boat violates all those rules.

The building style. Wayne, from other posts, I know that you are determined to build a trailerable pocket cruiser. A desirable quality would be a high strength to weight ratio, this boats scantlings are beefy to make up for older building methods, so you have a heavy weak boat that won't sail and that lacks any aesthetic integrity.

Want any more? Gareth

[Billy Bones]

Hi Wayne,

I've poked around these two designs too.

The Atkins' all knew their stuff--it might be an understatement to say that they forgot more about boats than this whole forum ever knew. So if an atkins says a flat bottom is good, then it's good.
Still, I'd be inclined to choose a hull with some deadrise. My Pooduck skiff has a flat bottom panel(narrow) and it slaps considerably LESS than my ol' Rhodes 19 did with its shallow deadrise, so this is probably a groundless prejudice on my part.

And a flat bottom seems pretty easy to deal with at the ramp, unlike some complex multichine shapes.

The aesthetics of a single-chine over the more slab-sided look of the flat bottom hull might help me make the decision. Also, the deadrise hull might be somewhat easier to keep the water pumped out of ( a minor problem in my skiff).

Ultimately, no, there is no damning factor in your decision with either of these boats from where I sit, anyway.

What a pleasant choice to have to make!

Good luck whatever.

[htom]

The ugly Red Onion was a different boat.

If you're planning on a lot of beaching or grounding on flats, the flat bottom might be more friendly, which would be Red Onion.

I'd go with the roomier interior of Wild Onion, using Red Onion's gaff rig.

[Stephen Hutchins]

I don't see how anyone could like something that they think is ugly. (At least when it comes to boats) I used to think pugs were ugly 'till I got to know them. But boats are like women; Who in their right mind says "Hey that gal sure is ugly, but I'll bet she's a great person, I'll ask her out anyway."

[JimD]

Originally posted by Hwyl:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by JimD:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> All remarks to be confined to the two designs below. This is not a boat building fishing trip for every alternative design available.
</font>[/QUOTE]O.K. I think "it's ugly" has value, because, with a few notable exeptions, ugly boats are slow or unmanaegable. Also Wayne is somewhat motivated by good lucks.

The most important part of a boat are the foils.

The centreboard has had no design effort whatsoever, it's a kitchen table turned sideways now have the benefit of NACA foils, huge difference in performance.

The rudder seems to have had some design effort, in completely the wrong direction. It seems to maximize the wetted surface/efficiency ratio. Surely if you have a drop centreboard, youd have a drop rudder too. The rudder as drawn would lose ability when the boat heels, it's heavy, it's a classic case of how not to do it.

The bow, I tend to like vertical stems and bowsprits, this one somehow seems to be crying out for a "knockabout" style bow.

The chine: Bolger has done a lot of research on the angles of chines and the water flow over them, Bolger can be quirky, but I respect him on this. This boat violates all those rules.

The building style. Wayne, from other posts, I know that you are determined to build a trailerable pocket cruiser. A desirable quality would be a high strength to weight ratio, this boats scantlings are beefy to make up for older building methods, so you have a heavy weak boat that won't sail and that lacks any aesthetic integrity.

Want any more? Gareth</font>[/QUOTE]
Keep it analytical, nautical and seamanlike. "The are both B#@% Ugly" is unacceptable.
And moving right along...There are almost no foil centerboards thick enough (thickness must be about 10% of length, yes?)to be effective but through wishful thinking people fair them to foil shapes anyway. You could fair Red Onion's CB the same way if you wanted. The rudder is a classic shoal draft barn door rudder as has appeared on catboats and other shoal draft boats for centuries. True, it's not as efficient as a high aspect ratio rudder. So change it to a deeper kickup design if you like. The barn door type has its good points as well. Mainly, fewer moving parts and less likely to be damagaged. You have a point about scantlings. I'd reduce them. Take a look at the scantlings for a similar size and weight plywood boat such as Glen-L's Tango and use those. They are given on line in the List of Materials section.


Bolger has done a lot of research on the angles of chines and the water flow over them...This boat violates all those rules.
I thought it was Bolger who violated all the rules. But anyway, I'm unfamiliar with these rules. I don't see much about the chine angles to complain about.

[ 08-03-2005, 12:09 PM: Message edited by: JimD ]

[zenda]

Personally, I'd choose the v-hull of the two every time; no appreciable difference in cost or building time and better performance.

[Tom Robb]

IIRC as to Bolger on chines, the curve of the sides need to match the rocker curve of the bottom in order to prevent/minimize water crossflow (pressure differential driven) which causes turbulent drag and wild steering. The stem needs to end above the waterline too.
Feel free to correct me.
The theory leads to bottoms with way more rocker or way narrower beam/length ratio than you may be used to seeing.
Any way he claims, from considerable experience, that it works.

[JimD]

Tom, it makes sense that the stem shouldn't be below the waterline as it is in Red Onion. That is the one thing that seems a little strange about her. Most other sharpie designs do seem to have more rocker forward with the bottom meeting the stem at the waterline, not below. Lucky for me I wouldn't build a flat bottom boat. Like zenda I'd go for the V.

[zenda]

Hey guys,
I don't want to take input from this discussion, but I've posted a question about a boat choice and would appreciate your educated input. If this comment is impolite, forgive me; I'm new to forums.

[Venchka]

Zenda,

You're fine. That was exactly correct. Most polite.

Wayne
In the Swamp. :D

[Dennis M]

With respect to stems: As Tom pointed out above, Bolger has his particular view. I've sailed one of his boats that was pretty well configured that way, and it maneurvered very sweetly, was a lively sailer. It was made from 1/4 ply, so the bottom oil canned like the devil, which was rather disconcerting.

Stambaugh, in Good Skiffs, believes the stem should be submerged. Why? It adds WL length and reduces pounding. Unfortunately, I've not sailed a skiff with said stem to see who is more correct. The Bolger design pounded like crazy.

[Bill Perkins]

My recollection is that Bolger's chine theory refered to a special case :flat bottom and vertical sides ,but I need to reread his stuff.I would go for the V bottom ,expecting better light air performance .

[ 08-03-2005, 04:30 PM: Message edited by: Bill Perkins ]

[Lucky Luke]

Well, Venchka, may be "it" (can't say "she"!) will turn into a swan :rolleyes: ....and may be I shall sleep with Britney Spears smile.gif :eek: :D tongue.gif :cool: ...!!!!

[ 08-05-2005, 01:24 AM: Message edited by: Lucky Luke ]

[John B]

LL.is that a good thing or a bad thing or just an unusual thing? :D

The best reason, Wayne, is that you can do better.

[ 08-05-2005, 01:45 AM: Message edited by: John B ]

[JimD]

So far as I can see the only legit reason against that falls within the requested parameters is that the flat bottom version maybe would be better with more rocker forward so the bottom meets the stem somewhere closer to the waterline, and that's still just a maybe. No such problem with the v bottom. How about it, Wayne? Do you want to hear all the other reasons that folks are just bursting to offer such as they are simple, chined boats that won't win beauty contests and WB forum peer pressure says they must in order to qualify as worthy of building, and so on?