Phil Bolgers Martha Jane

[skuthorp]

Phil Bolgers boxy boats have never really interested me but afte reading about his Martha Jane in the WB 2011 Small Boats Mag. I think that it fulfills all the right criteria for me and where I sail mostly.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pu2t7CdOZWU
and a previous build
http://mkstocks.tripod.com/boats/martha_jane/



It's ugly duckling appearance is somehow appealing but I cannot quite get used to that stumpy bow transom though the steps are an idea I had already considered. I have sailed a Birdwatcher and liked it's practicality, the high house option looks a bit odd but probably is more friendly for overnighting etc. Water ballast reduces the overall trailerable weight but I too would hesitate about having in direct contact with wood in a badly ventilated area. Some sort of fabricated plastic tank/s might be the answer.
Has anyone any comments, Birdwatcher is probably a bit big for my purposes though I like it better.

[Steve Paskey]

Has anyone any comments, Birdwatcher is probably a bit big for my purposes though I like it better.

I'm confused by this ... in what sense is Birdwatcher "bigger'? Martha Jane is just as long as Birdwatcher, but she's a bit wider and MUCH heavier.

Martha Jane is 23'6" long with a 6'0" beam and a dry weight of something like 1300 to 1400 pounds.

Birdwatcher is the same length, but the beam is 5'7." I can't find anything here with the weight, but I don't think the original version weighs more than 800 pounds.

[JimD]

If you want an ugly boat then Martha Jane deserves a place on the list.

[James McMullen]

Sku, by all means, do whatever is necessary to meet somebody who has one to go sailing on a Martha Jane before you do anything rash like start building one from a magazine description written by an owner enthusiast. You really, really, really ought to make an objective assessment yourself to see if this particular set of features and compromises corresponds to your preferences. This kind of boat has next to no resale value so you really had better make sure unless you've got money to burn.

[dld]

a friend built a martha jane, sailed surprisingly nice.
when we sat up by the mast the front hole filled up with water coming in the foot holds it really messed up the control of the boat ; ) oops

inside the cabin was like being in a 55 gal drum with some one beating on the side, even a little ripple against the hull was to much to bear.

the birdwatcher sail really well and was comfortable in side, don't know what the difference was but it did not have the drum sound in it.

Both boats were fun to sail in. The birdwatcher seemed smaller than the martha jane

[brucehallman]

a friend built a martha jane, sailed surprisingly nice.

I got a chance to see George Brodlicks Martha Jane sail at Gloucester during the Bolger Memorial event, and it had jaw dropping speed compared with the keel boats also sailing in the harbor that day.

[gilberj]

Resale??? A guy builds a boat ...resale is not a huge consideration. A Bolger design will sell to certain people, these boats have a lot of fans. My own choice in boats does not include a Bolger box, but I very much admire the path the Mr. Bolger followed and his descriptions to go with them all.

[DGentry]

FWIW, that's a Birdwatcher II in the pic - a much more complex build.

My aging copy of Bernie Wolfard's old catalog claims that the original Birdwatcher weighs 600lbs, empty.

[David G]

I have to admit that I'm a Bolger fan, and so... biased. I think both the BWII and the MJ are interesting boats... each in its own way. And odd boats as well. You just have to decide which sort of oddity best suits your needs - if either of them does. I've never seen a MJ in the flesh. There is, however, a BWII in the Coots fleet. Looking at the plans, my impression is that there is more volume of space 'below' in the MJ, and a more enclosed feeling space. The BWII has a fair amount of usable space. It's all sitting height. With all the glass, it's quite airy in there. With the length, it's easy to dedicate areas for specific tasks. Sailing performance manages to be both brisk and comfortable. The rig is easy to set up. I'm guessing she's also considerably easier to trailer, launch, and retrieve. But... keep in mind... you're always inside. Unlike the MJ - there is no cockpit. Think that over. Is that really sailing... for you? Here in the Pacific NW, it serves to extend the sailing season considerably.

The looks are considerably different as well. I can appreciate the MJ as a sort of slyly sophisticated, while rudimentary looking, boat. She makes me think of a boat that might have been used in Middle Earth (if they had plywood). Sort of a semi-British, folksy, look. The BWII aesthetic, OTOH, makes me think of the 60's. Sputnik and kidney shaped swimming pools.

Sailing reports on the MJ seem to be good. I can report that the BWII sails very nicely, goes to windward decently, is comfortable and forgiving, and is comfortable to sleep aboard if you want a cruiser. Keep in mind, though, that I'm not an experienced sailor. There may be nuances I do not apprehend.

[skuthorp]

Steve, I must have misread the article re the length, I was thinking of 18' or so. I like the OS cockpit and with my very thin water leeboards and her bottom shape are just about perfect. BTW, the Mayfly plans you sent me are in the queue.
I know the design is not everyones cuppa of course and not really mine but the review and remarks here encourage me. I will look at Birdwatcher again but I hadn't thought about the lack of a cockpit.

[peterchech]

Just out of curiosity, out of my own ignorance perhaps, why on earth would anyone build a boat like these ones, which are essentially just heavy sharpies with extra freeboard, instead of building an actual sharpie, like one of reuel parker's designs?





The first, a traditional new haven sharpie, would be blazingly fast, though prob has limited seaworthiness and cabin space. The second, an egret, would be very seaworthy as well and probably has similar cabin space to the MJ.

Both of these designs are easy to build and would be prob just as cheap as bolger's box boats, but they are soooooooo much prettier, and the 27'new haven sharpie supposedly can plane at 15 knots in the right conditions. MJ doesn't do that...

However, there must be a reason, or else nobody would be building these boats, right? ahem, right?

[pippo]

Another Bolger boat, Black Skimmer, was said to be able to "sail circles" around a Egret. The BS is mentioned in the Martha Jane chapter in Bolger's "Boats with an Open Mind" as a starting point for the latter design... and MJ cabin was described as "cavernous" by Bernie Wolfard of Common Sense Designs who was marketing Bolger's designs before the split...

[JimD]

... why on earth would anyone build a boat like these ones, which are essentially just heavy sharpies with extra freeboard, instead of building an actual sharpie, like one of reuel parker's designs?

Presumably for the cabin space and general roominess, although as another poster says, all these thin walled plywood boats are incredibly noisy inside. If you really want a practical, usable cabin you have to think insulation and sound dampening.

[JimD]

How about the Chebacco version with the big cabin? Not nearly as ugly and if it turns out the cabin drives you nuts you can cut it off and have a pretty boat left over.

[James McMullen]

Another Bolger boat, Black Skimmer, was said to be able to "sail circles" around a Egret. The BS is mentioned in the Martha Jane chapter in Bolger's "Boats with an Open Mind" as a starting point for the latter design... and MJ cabin was described as "cavernous" by Bernie Wolfard of Common Sense Designs who was marketing Bolger's designs before the split...

Lots of things are said by people interested in selling boat plans. And Mr. Bolger was an excellent and very persuasive writer. . . . . .. .
But I'll go ahead and repeat what I said--you'd better try it out for yourself before committing. Actual sailors as opposed to armchair sailors aren't always as persuaded by words as they are by empirical testing.

You'd better check out what Lance Gunderson says about his long-term experiences sailing his Black Skimmer. Also, sailing circles around a trad. Egret is no particular feat. I've done it myself in a skin-on-frame umiak, fer goshsakes!

That doesn't mean a MJ or BS might not be for you, but go into it eyes open and take the hype with a grain of salt.

[brucehallman]

Here is a picture of George Broadlick's MJ in 2009.

I think this is not a boat for someone concerned about the appearances. It does have some positives going for it... Being gigantic in capacity for a 23'6" boat. Extremely shallow draft. With the water ballast tanks empty, makes a great trailer sailer. The balanced lug cat yawl rig is well liked by many. And, I can speak from first hand observations, it is a great boat if you enjoy sailing fast and beating the pants off of some other boats costing 10x the price.

[James McMullen]

Just be sure you're comparing apples to apples. Many other light centerboarders are faster in calm conditions than heavier blue-water cruising boats--what does that have to do with anything? Now if you claimed you were beating an Etchells or Dragon upwind then I'd actually be impressed. Of course if you really like sailing fast then a planing dinghy or a multihull is very much faster yet. I do like lug cat-yawls very much though. I gave up a sloop-rigged planing dinghy to focus on my ballast-keeled Stone Horse and my trailerable sail & oar boat myself. I've also decided I don't care for the compromises to all-season cruising or the compromises for trailering, daysailing or rowability of an in-betweener trailerable cabin sailboat, preferring a dedicated example of two different types. Of course your mileage may vary if you have different requirements or strictures. . . .every boat is a compromise.

[skuthorp]

I think I'd better continue my research, Bolgers box boats certainly seem to polarise and I do take the point about resale of such radical designs. I'll get hold of Bolgers "Boats with an Open Mind". Im trying to remember if Birdwatcher was noisy as I only had one out for an hour or two. I wonder how many have actually been built, and if they were a work in progress for Phil Bolger in that the continuing development of the design principles was the main point.
Thanks for all the input, I'll look at the Sharpies as well now.

[Nicholas Scheuer]

I know the owners of TWO Martha Janes, an have sailed my 28-ft Shearwater Yawl in company with both. While my Shearwater is a bit faster, it's not by much.

Are you aware of the Bolger design modification specifying a pair of sponsons positioned high on the quarters that keep the hull from swamping if knocked down?

Neither if the MJ's I've seen have that mod. Both are located in New England. I could ask the owners whether they'd care to show you their boats if you like.

Moby Nick

[brucehallman]

...was noisy ...

This issue of "they are noisy" in regard to Bolger hard chine boats comes up a lot. I own one, and the noise involved is the sound of water splashing and water gurgling under the boat. Whether or not the sound of water gurgling bothers someone depends on the person. Speaking for myself, the sound of water while on a boat no matter how noisy, is not a bother. Ditto with the sound of seagulls, both are natural sounds to my ears.

(I may not be typical, but the sounds that drive me crazy are the clanging of metal halyard clips on extruded aluminum masts and the noise from jet ski engines. Those sound un-natural and not nautical in my ears.) You be the judge if gurgling and splashing water while on a boat is annoying to your ear.

Regarding resale value, good luck finding any used boat with a decent resale value! They all are money sinkholes in my opinion. Better to view it as purchasing some enjoyment, and not as "investments".

[perldog007]

Sku, by all means, do whatever is necessary to meet somebody who has one to go sailing on a Martha Jane before you do anything rash like start building one from a magazine description written by an owner enthusiast. You really, really, really ought to make an objective assessment yourself to see if this particular set of features and compromises corresponds to your preferences. This kind of boat has next to no resale value so you really had better make sure unless you've got money to burn.

I have to admit James, never gave much weight to the resale argument until some random guy ( likely in need of new glasses ) offered me a grand for my GLD. No such conversation regarding my Big Tortoise has occurred.

[JimD]

... I think that it fulfills all the right criteria ...

Pray tell, mate, just what are said criteria?

[brucehallman]

... my 28-ft Shearwater Yawl ...

I presume you are speaking of one of those Eddy and Duff Shearwater Yawls! Wow, I am impressed. How many exist in the world? No more than a handful is my guess. Bolger designed, sort of a big sister to the Dovekey.

[Breakaway]

No such conversation regarding my Big Tortoise has occurred.

That's cuz no one would think for a minute that you could bear to part with it.

Kevin

[brucehallman]

... why on earth would anyone build a boat like these ones, which are essentially just heavy sharpies with extra freeboard, instead of building an actual sharpie, ...

The word "sharpie" comes from the long narrow "sharp pointed bow" nature of these boats. Long narrow boats have streamlined more straight flow lines compared with wider boats.

Interestingly, Phil Bolger deconstructed the 'streamlining' characteristic of Sharpies and developed a series of boats called Advanced Sharpies. The biggest distinction of these Advanced Sharpies is that, (unlike older 'classic' sharpies which have the problem of rooting as result of their flat bottoms), the Bolger Advanced Sharpie carries a deeper curvature in the bottom which solves the rooting problem. The natural extension of the lines from this Advanced Sharpie curvature results in the bow extending above the waterline (in the air). This forward portion of the hull in the air is approximately useless, so Bolger cut it off for economy of length. The effective "sharpie" length:beam ratio of the flowlines of the Advanced Sharpie is measured to the imaginary bow before cutting off. That said, the Martha Jane is a bit wide to be considered a Sharpie, or an Advanced Sharpie, though it does reflect these same Bolger design principles established with his Advanced Sharpie work.

[wardd]

are the as curvatures of bottom and side the same?

[Nicholas Scheuer]

Yup, brucehallman, "Dovekie's Big Sister", fr'sure! I have hull #7 of 11 built. My TRUE NORTH differs from the others in that she was built with a shorter mast stepped more amidship and rigged as a true Yawl. There was one other rigged like mine, but that boat was refurbished by E&D to include the an original-style Cat Yawl rig.

I've sailed TN for 14 years, and sailed Dovekie #56 for 12 years prior to that.

TN has been towed to Maine twice, to the Strait of Georgia once, to Kentucky Lake several times, to the North Channel 3 or 4 times, to Vineyard Sound once, to the Texas Gulf Coast once, and to many other lakes around the USA. Shearwater really is no more difficult to tow over long distances than a Dovekie, provided a more powerful tow vehicle is employed.

Moby Nick

[brucehallman]

are the as curvatures of bottom and side the same?

Yes, nearly identical curvature in the sides versus the bottom.

If you heel a hull shaped like this over 45 degrees on its side (and disregard everything in the air), you see what looks to be an extremely efficient "V-hull".

[Nicholas Scheuer]

One feature of Dovekie and Shearwater that works against them, compared to Martha Jane and a lot of other Bolger designs, is the utterly flat bottom (no rocker, no deadrise). When Dovekie and Shearwater are heeled, it is curved topsides working against flat bottom, and no wonder a Martha Jane can keep up pretty well inspite of it's "ugly Bolger Box" design.

Moby Nick

[Woxbox]

The latest copy of Messing About in Boats shows the latest development of a 23' and change sharpie from Phil Bolger and Friends. It's much more attractive both to look at and in practical terms. It starts with a sharpie hull, adds the walk-through, glass sided cabin of a Birdwatcher, and adds the forefoot from the advanced sharpies. The result is a boat that's roomy, airy and still a relatively quick and easy build. I'd do one of these over the Martha Jane -- which I have the plans for -- any day of the week.

[WI-Tom]

I saw George Brodlick sail his Martha Jane in the Texas 200 this year. Surprisingly fast boat for its looks, and he had no problem at all tacking up a narrow channel dead upwind to the Padre Island Yacht Club. Never missed a tack. At the remote camps he just ran it up onto the beach, very convenient indeed. MJ is not for me, but I was impressed.

Tom

[brucehallman]

I saw George Brodlick sail his Martha Jane in the Texas 200 this year.

I saw him in Massachusetts, you saw him in Texas. He told me how many miles he had trailered his Martha Jane, but I forget. It was many many thousands of road miles, sailing her everywhere and back. The MJ is plainly a workable trailer sailer.

[skuthorp]

Pray tell, mate, just what are said criteria?

Easily trailerable but not too heavy, roomy and steady enough to accomodate a not-very-nautical SWMBO, a fair turn of speed, single hander, useful as a camp cruiser and most important, be suitable for very thin water. She doesn't seem a difficult build either and that's good. I already have a boat with a leeboard and am cool with that. She doesn't look like any boat I've contemplated before but........... she seems efficient ans ticks most of the boxes. But I'm not decided yet.

[pippo]

I seem to remember that the MJ design was recently revisited by PB&F who specified to add ballast in the form of a steel plate on the bottom in order to stiffen the boat a little bit...

[James McMullen]

45 degrees of heel? Yikes! That's not really what those boats are designed to sail at, is it? I would find that totally ergonomically unacceptable. You can't sit comfortably or safely move around the boat at that heel. I'll put in a reef when it gets to 20 degrees.