16' Performance Micro-Cruiser:

[Hydroptera]

Ok.... enough.

If you'd like to design a 22 footer, then go ahead. Be prepared for someone to ask you why you didn't go for 28 feet though.

Laurie

[kenjamin]

Dear Mr. McGowen,

Part of the problem with electric drive systems is the vague descriptions of what complete systems cost and the kind of performance you get for the specific amount of money spent. You have obviously specified the electric drive system for the Fundy Cat 16. I simply want to know what it cost and the performance it should offer.

You probably feel like you've been thrown to the sharks by participating here on the forum. Sorry about that as I know we can be a bit of a rough crowd. As for me, I would just like to educate myself about the cost and performance for a particular system like the one for the Fundy Cat 16.

[James McMullen]

Ok.... enough.

C'mon now, Laurie. Don't storm off in a huff. I am well aware that there are lots of different people who have lots of different reasons why they would prefer lots of different boats. That's why skaraborcraft and Kenjamin and myself are asking you questions, to clarify why you are choosing these particular sets of compromises. I doubt that I would ever fit your target demographic for a variety of reasons, but I'm curious who you think might fit, and how you would answer the objections raised so far.

Maybe you don't wanna argue with a bunch of armchair amateur boat designers or something, but you ought to know that just between the three of us above, we've built at least 60 boats altogether. You're not getting casual, kneejerk criticism, you're getting some serious questions from fairly invested small boat guys.

[Hydroptera]

Dear kenjamin:

You're jumping around a bit.

Look at what's the same in both systems: the shafting, seal, prop, then compare what's different: fuel tank, piping, exhaust, engine, controls (for an inboard system) vs what's found here http://www.electricmotorsport.com/st...rts_marine.php (and from similar companies) + batteries + charging. Then factor in the future and operating costs mentioned earlier. Armed with that you can do your own, unbiased research.

Good luck!
Laurie

[skaraborgcraft]

Ok.... enough.

If you'd like to design a 22 footer, then go ahead. Be prepared for someone to ask you why you didn't go for 28 feet though.

Laurie

What i asked was is the design length limited because of state regulations regarding registration? Im not in the US,so i dont know about these things,but often read here that people keep boats under a certain size to avoid costs...i was just wondering if that was the case here,but you didnt answer that question.

If i were to design a 22ft boat ,i would make it clear as to why it was this length,and not 28. My own restrictions would more than likely be on draught and displacement because to me,self lauching and recovery on a trailer would be an important design consideration,i may also want to keep displacement at 1000kg because i dont want to buy a large vehicle just for towing. If i was designing a boat for my own needs,it would probably not suit the masses and what may be commercially viable,but so what,at least i wouldnt have to compromise too much,and it would be clear exactly why this design was like so and so.

As Ken says,it can feel like the sharks are cruising,but a lot of what is said is just personel opinion,and genuine curiosty to learn how and why you decide certain design elements. When you first pictured this boat in your minds eye before putting pen to paper (or should that be finger to keyboard?), did you see here reaching along in a gentle 10 knot breeze under sunny skys and a flat sea? Personally i take the worst conditions i have sailed in,then ask myself do i want to re-live that in the boat in question? So, forgive me if i sound a little harsh and critical,but we have a difference of opinion, just because a boat has a self bailing cockpit,is self righting and good sail control does not automatically put it on the short list as an able rough water offshore cruiser.

How much water does that cockpit hold when it is full to the coamings and how long does it take to drain? Cheers

EDIT: Just seen James post. He is talking sense. He has been around long enough to know we dont bite unfairly!Im certainly not after an argument, just seeking clarification, i never argue, but i may have a heated debate!

[JimD]

I hope we haven't seen the last of Mr McGowan. I would really like to hear him say a few words about the catamaran I mentioned earlier. Aesthetically I think its a true beauty, and I can't see a thing about it I don't like. And looking at his website I think there are some brilliant designs. Of the lot, FC 16 is the only one that doesn't appeal, so its unfortunate that this discussion has focused on the controversy regarding expensive, complex, yet small cruisers as that will always be a contentious topic.

Evergreen 6.0:



Nahlah:



Czarina:



Carolina Cruiser:





Zip:

[skaraborgcraft]

Its all very well quoting frictional resistance in winds so light that, even with such a large sail area to its displacement, it should perform better than something longer. How many people go sailing or choose a sailboat to cruise if the local wind conditions wouldnt allow you to even get to hull speed under normal canvas? Its great that it can drift along in very light winds,but how much slower is the bigger boat going to be? You are talking less than 4 knot boat speed. How many people here would be happy ghosting along at that speed? Add a current and possible tide conditions of a couple of knots and you are not going anywhere,and in some places going backwards.Need to get into a rocky anchorage in the skerries along the coast,then need to get there before dark,typical passage planning normally requires a n average speed towards the destination,and when that speed drops,the majority of people start the donk. YES, there ARE advantages to a smaller boat,im not saying its not without its positive attributes,but how many people fall into the demographic (James word)that you so well described? Sailing conditions are so varied between East and West coast of the States, and in Europe,pretty much any weather can happen in any day. But when a designer is suggesting his boat is capable in rough offshore conditions,he should not be surprised if someone wishes to question that. Just because i see it as a coastal weekender,does not mean its not capable of more, just that "I" would not choose to do so. Im sure someone out there will see this as their perfect boat to suit all their own requirements,and Laurie should be pleased that his design is fulfilling someones ideal boat role. Dont take any notice of me,im just someone tapping away on a keyboard with an opinion. Cheers

[kenjamin]

I live in a place where the Fundy Cat 16 would be a good choice for someone who wanted to explore the Intercoastal Waterway, maybe go outside on nice days, and throw a switch for quiet reliable auxiliary propulsion when needed and still have a little left over space on his or her side of the garage. When one thinks about the average amount of time spent enjoying sailing or micro-cruising compared to the amount of time the boat actually sits in the garage, the Fundy Cat 16 begins to make a lot of sense. High-end electric drives seem to cost at least twice as much as what a small outboard would but when you consider they're at least 10 times quieter and pollute less, then even that would be a good purchase if the funds were available. My only problem with the Fundy Cat 16 is figuring out what it would cost to build and outfit as described and what the range and performance of the electric drive would be. Seems like to me that the boat's designer should have that kind information readily available to anyone showing an interest. Or is it that, if you have to ask, you can't afford it?

[Tom Lathrop]

Maybe we are seeing why designers are sometimes reluctant to post information about their designs here on the forum. Most often, a design reflects ideas about what the designer thinks is appropriate to suit some particular situation at a particular time. All 16' boats are not alike, nor should they be. If there were only one way to skin a cat, all boats would be identical and where is the fun in that? I think I may have been a bit harsh in my first post also. Perhaps we should cut some more slack to those who are willing to put ideas out there that the rest of us can knock around. Mr McGowan has been pretty patient and, in reality owes no one here anything.

[skaraborgcraft]

Maybe we are seeing why designers are sometimes reluctant to post information about their designs here on the forum. Most often, a design reflects ideas about what the designer thinks is appropriate to suit some particular situation at a particular time. All 16' boats are not alike, nor should they be. If there were only one way to skin a cat, all boats would be identical and where is the fun in that? I think I may have been a bit harsh in my first post also. Perhaps we should cut some more slack to those who are willing to put ideas out there that the rest of us can knock around. Mr McGowan has been pretty patient and, in reality owes no one here anything.

I think this would be the first place i would come to get some real feedback on a design. There is so many experienced sailors,builders and designers. You can take the comments you like,and ignore those you dont. However, what you cannot do in real life is ignore valid questions by those people that may be potential customers and builders of a boat you have designed. All of us are just people on keyboards,we can write what we like,take notice of what we want,and ignore what we choose and have a choice to respond or not,so i dont lose any sleep over it. This is the best place i know to get your head pulled from out of the clouds and get grounded pretty quick when it comes to ideas. I may have strongly different views about certain things,but at least i understand that may be due to completely different enviroment and boat usage to someone else,and so its not so much an argument on a design itself,on so much as how people envisage to use it. Mr McGowan is obviously a talented designer,i dont think anyone here questions that. If he chooses to answer my queries with " it should be able to go wherever a Montgomery 17 does",then thats fine and i thank you. I dont see why Ken didnt really get the answer he was seeking on propulsion,i would have thought that was the kind of information you would have gone through when making the desicion for your components,and should have on hand. As Tom says, we are not owed anything,but some of us do come here to gain knowledge and normally we find most people on the forum are willing to share their experience and knowledge to those that show an interest......but obviously its a choice. Cheers

[JimD]

I wish Carl hadn't chosen to showcase this particular McGowan design. FC is just not the sort of boat that is well received on this board. It was almost guaranteed to start a fight and now we've put off another pro designer with overwelming negative criticism. Had we been talking about a lug rigged yawl such as Nahlah things might have gone differently.

[skaraborgcraft]

Im not sure i agree Jim,remember the Souricoeau (mouse) thread? That boat got a lot of peoples backs up,and i cant say i liked the looks so much,however,for where i sail and the conditions,that boat could really extend my cruising time into late autumn,or until the ice starts forming,it is actually a well thought of wee yacht.And im quite sure even those whos initial response was it looked like a suppository,after much debate,did concede that it had merits.You could say that thread started of looking real ugly,but i bet Eric got a few plan orders from it. I dont where KHPs(i think Ed) last post re;FC went, but he was full of praise for its positive attributes. Im glad the FC was posted,because i now think that a boat like mouse,with an FC rig would be a great boat,and not something i would have previously considered. Even i get fed up with the same designers boats being bought up all the time,its nice to see something different being posted. Im not sure if "overwhelming negative critisism" is entirely accurate. Surely the purpose of a forum is to discuss. If the designer himself does not wish to take part or be specific in his answers,thats entirely his choice,but driven off? I dont think so. Cheers

[JimD]

Skaraborgcraft, I hear what you're saying. Still I would have liked this to have been a thread showcasing the body of work of a particular designer. I think that would have left a lot of room for all of us to find something we like and an opportunity to throw a few compliments around as well.

[skaraborgcraft]

Skaraborgcraft, I hear what you're saying. Still I would have liked this to have been a thread showcasing the body of work of a particular designer. I think that would have left a lot of room for all of us to find something we like and an opportunity to throw a few compliments around as well.

Jim, hopefully Mr McGowan will pop in and see whats happening and maybe if i keep my thoughts to myself ,he may choose to discuss some of his other designs,there was a nifty lookin trimaran on his home page. Maybe you could send him a PM and entice him back? Cheers

[James McMullen]

". . .overwelming negative criticism. . ."

I totally disagree, Jim. If the criticism is valid, then it needs to be addressed. And if it is invalid, and can be so demonstrated and refuted, then that also is very useful.

But the worst possible approach for improving the body of knowledge about small boats is for blanket, uncritical acceptance. If this, or any, design is truly an improvement on the status quo, then it can handle some skeptical investigation. And if it can't, then it isn't an improvement. But either way, nobody wins by stifling questioning.

I've learned some interesting things from this thread that I never would have known if it weren't for running this design past the critical gaze of several different perspectives.

Skaraborgcraft, don't you dare keep your thoughts to yourself! Don't you dare!
That's not what community discussions are about. Don't worry, if you're wrong, we'll tell you.
And I expect the same courtesy if I should happen to be wrong about something someday.

[JimD]

". . .overwelming negative criticism. . ."

I totally disagree, Jim. If the criticism is valid, then it needs to be addressed. And if it is invalid, and can be so demonstrated and refuted, then that also is very useful.

But the worst possible approach for improving the body of knowledge about small boats is for blanket, uncritical acceptance. If this, or any, design is truly an improvement on the status quo, then it can handle some skeptical investigation. And if it can't, then it isn't an improvement. But either way, nobody wins by stifling questioning.

I've learned some interesting things from this thread that I never would have known if it weren't for running this design past the critical gaze of several different perspectives.

Skaraborgcraft, don't you dare keep your thoughts to yourself! Don't you dare!
That's not what community discussions are about. Don't worry, if you're wrong, we'll tell you.
And I expect the same courtesy if I should happen to be wrong about something someday.

After rereading the thread I can see that you are right as far as my use of the word 'overwhelming.' The negativity isn't overwhelming, its more like the typical annoying picking that goes on here so routinely that we forget what its like to be on the receiving end of it. Personally, I've always had a soft spot for small boats whose size rendered their utility questionably incommensurate with the amount of work and money required to build them. One of my favourite boats ever is Tim Nolan's Heather, which he freely admitted fell into such a category (according to my recollection of our correspondence some years ago), and that he designed and built it mainly just to see if he could. Yet its a fabulous boat and I think the boating world is a better place for it having been done. So I hope a few FC 16s get built, too. Not by me or you, but by the occasional pocket cruiser enthusiast to whom it appeals.

Heather:

In 1973 I designed Heather for my own personal needs... intrigued with the challenge of creating a compact yet fully-appointed cruiser.

[Daniel Noyes]

overwelming negative criticism.

Jim may have a point here guys, something we have all been guilty of from time to time.
Compare the tone of discussion on this thread with http://forum.woodenboat.com/showthre...esign-Pelegrin ... basically the same boat!

[kenjamin]

Reading back over my comments about the design, overall they were very positive and I do like the boat a lot. There are some very good reasons for having a compact short boat on your side of the garage. If your boat is longer than 16' then where the heck are you gonna park your Harley? All kidding aside, the Fundy Cat 16 seems to be a very well thought out boat even if it isn't the right length for some people (it's four feet too long for me). I just think that the main advantage of offering the boat as a kit is that most of the building costs are better known from the start. Unfortunately this designer has basically said the cost are similar to a diesel installation but that doesn't tell me much. He basically told me to go figure it out for myself. Seems like more information about the costs and options for auxiliary power would be advantageous to the designer who wants to sell plans. He could even offer a low cost outboard motor well option if there's someone out there who wants to ruin the planet will all the pollutants from their 4 HP four-stroke outboard. (OK, that was sarcasm) It seems the designer's main objective is to sell high-end electric drive systems but he's afraid to say how much the specified system designed for his boat actually costs. I hope Laurie McGowan is successful in his promotion of electric drives but I don't think that dodging the question of actual costs and performance helps his cause. We all know that high-end electric drive systems with regenerative options are going to cost more up front. It would be educational to know how much more. This forum is basically free advertising for designers. Even if I don't buy the boat plans, there are plenty of guys out there who could afford the electric drive system, want a smaller more easily handled boat, and who might be more interested in it if more free information were provided. I think Mr. McGowen is missing a golden opportunity to promote his boat design and his green aspirations but maybe I'm just a grumpy old man with a four horse Yamaha.

[gilberj]

In the main I think most of the comments were qualified positive. I like the Fundy 16. My biggest concern is the probable/possible cost. If designers and builders don't push at the limits then we are hard aground on the shoals of what has been done before. I made a comment above about microcruising being about doing more with less. I still think that, but there have been some fairly crude short cuts made which, in my opinion do not really express the mandate. I have cruised several times in boats which were 10 feet and less. They were not designed or built for cruising. They were adopted for the job because they were there, and a few dry bags (in this case mostly garbage bags) to keep things dry was all that was really needed. I have also made several extended wilderness canoe and kayak trips.
A microcruiser is to my way of thinking a step further than the skiff loaded for a cruise, or kayaks, or canoes. With all the former you will haul up on the beach at night and sleep ashore. That is OK, really, but a microcruiser will have acceptable sleeping accommodation, room for some cooking, and sufficient weatherliness to not become a hazard as soon as the wind pipes up. Matt Layden's designs are initially a little crude, slab sided flat bottom, ballasted sharpies, but a brief study, shows them to be, well thought out cruising systems.
The Fundy 16 meets those requirements completely.
Microcruiser's are not generally ocean passage makers, though, near coastal passages are certainly possible.

[mcdenny]

Ken, kind of off topic but I bet the reason Laurie didn't have costs and specs for the E drive system is that it really hasn't been spec'ced out yet. The kit he referenced is missing a lot for stuff you would need. Like comparing the cost of buying a diesel engine vs. the cost of and installed engine with prop, shaft, stuffing box, throttle and shift controls, fuel tank, and on and on. Lots of costs and lots of options beyond just the engine. Lots of effort required just to define a complete system and price it out plus huge cost differences between wet lead acid, AGM and lithium battery options, battery charger power, battery bank size. This would be a pretty time consuming and academic exercise without an actual client expressing her needs / wants.

If you want an outboard you can price that in five minutes at a web site like Jamestown Dist.

Denny Wolfe

[kenjamin]

Thanks Denny, you're probably right. I was apparently expecting too much so Laurie McGowen, I apologize. I just thought that Mr. McGowen would have already specified all the parts from the description on the web site and I thought that he would have been a good objective person to ask about prices and performance of the system and the options for regeneration. I already have my little four horse four stroke Yamaha outboard. I was just curious as to how a high-end electric system stacked up performance-wise and cost-wise against my little outboard. As I said earlier in this thread, I was real impressed with the system you put together for your launch and just had a desire to learn more – now, not so much.

Thanks again for your voice of reason. I get a little wound up sometimes.

Fair winds, Kenjamin

[Hydroptera]

No problem guys. I explained to Denny that I'm really busy right now and have a hard time answering questions that, at times, sound like "how big is a duck"? There are all kinds of setups - both electric and liquid fueled, and a simple electric one might include a used MinnKota bought on eBay plus a battery (a setup even cheaper up-front than a 4-stroke outboard), and a 'quality' inboard setup might include some of the components I mentioned earlier, or what Denny uses in his lovely electric launches. Even though it's like learning a new language for many of us at first, when you start looking into the electric option the few components used start to make sense. And these parts are improved upon every year. The lifespan of the motors themselves are often measured in tens of thousands of working hours, and usually operate near 90% efficiency. These, too, are things that should be factored into the real price of the electric option.

All the best,
Laurie
www.mcgowanmarinedesign.com

[JimD]

... "how big is a duck"? ...

I have a Vancouver Island bird book that describes the size of a robin as 'robin sized'. Seriously.

[kenjamin]

Sorry, Mr. McGowen, I was under the impression that you had already had spec'ed a particular system for the boat.

Thirty years ago, I had the budget electric system you described above. It was a freshwater unit that I used for a couple of seasons in saltwater. Not sure there were saltwater units back then but the little Minn Kota that I had always started and worked. Seems like it was the deep cell marine battery that I managed to ruin first before I got my little 2 HP Evinrude.

If I ever wear out my 4 HP Yamaha, I will definitely check into the electric option. Thanks again for your patience with us more demanding forum members. Best of luck with your Fundy Cat 16. Seems like a really nice boat to me.

Fair winds,
kenjamin

[Hydroptera]

Thanks, Kenjamin. Happy sailing!
Laurie