Reuel Parker's Sea Bright 33

[gilberj]

Bearing off a little is pretty much the easiest solution......Romp is a lot more boat, though by account a good one. It sounds like the size of the project is a concern. Bringing in Romp also suggests a slew of Bolger barge type boats like Manatee, but again these are bigger projects. NIS 29 or 31 probably fit the mission better than the Bolger barges, if for no other reason than the build is easier. They have a very good reputation.

[gilberj]

I would certainly seriously consider a beamier version of the 33, but the more slender version will I think fight with the sea less.
With the original concept being a boat to sail for 3 months per year in the Bahamas, and presumably 9 months to make the money to pay for your degenerative habit, I suggest I would likely sail back to the States for storage, perhaps in your back yard.

[Sailor Alan]

I would certainly seriously consider a beamier version of the 33, but the more slender version will I think fight with the sea less.
With the original concept being a boat to sail for 3 months per year in the Bahamas, and presumably 9 months to make the money to pay for your degenerative habit, I suggest I would likely sail back to the States for storage, perhaps in your back yard.

Getting back to the Seabright-33, i agree the skinny, ‘standard’ version should be an excellent sailor. My concern is the wider version might cost quite a bit more, though this depends on if the displacement increases or not. In my experience, longer was always fairly cheap, but all these issues are relative.

I see from some old photos that Wimperal has a bracket mounted OB, the very installation i had troubles with. Mine was too high on one tack, too low on the other, and often lifted out of the water, being so far aft of the CG. It was also unreliable, at least in part because it was pretty exposed to salt air. I hope yours is better.


I have never been shipmates with a cockpit mounted OB, so cannot legitimately comment. The only comment i have heard is them “”choking’ on their own fumes, and occasionally choking the cockpit occupants, but this might be others prejudice.


i have found from personal experience that really thick insulation (> 8”- 10” thick), and NO paths for heat to pass between the inner and outer liners, will keep a solid block of ‘clear, hard’ ice from the fishing co-op for nearly a week. Arrange a drain, but not into the bilge, it will stink after a bit.


Good point about bringing the boat home for the winter, or summer, and there are lots of wonderful water to explore along the east coast too. It needs a proper truck, but i was surprised at the cheap Peterbuilts out there. A colleague converted a semi trailer into a motor home, and pulls it with a diesel Peterbuilt, no special license needed i think.

[skaraborgcraft]

I see from some old photos that Wimperal has a bracket mounted OB, the very installation i had troubles with. Mine was too high on one tack, too low on the other, and often lifted out of the water, being so far aft of the CG. It was also unreliable, at least in part because it was pretty exposed to salt air. I hope yours is better.


I have never been shipmates with a cockpit mounted OB, so cannot legitimately comment. The only comment i have heard is them “”choking’ on their own fumes, and occasionally choking the cockpit occupants, but this might be others prejudice.

I too have had issues with one sided transom mounted outboard in regards to keeping the prop in the water at times. The cockpit mounted ob, overcomes a lot of issues, the only outboards that choke themselves and the occupants (in my experience) are very old 2-strokes and any British Seagull. A modern 4-stroke outboard is very easy to live with at a fraction of the price of an inboard diesel installation. keeping it off the transom improves the look of the boat, keeps the weight of the stern and easier to operate when in arms reach. I think you get a good range of prop options on a few brands of outboards, i know Yamaha and Tohatsu do, i expect Honda and Suzuki do too.

[Rigadog]

We would probably leave this boat in moored Turtle Sound on Crooked Island, there's a couple good hurricane holes in there and we have some local friends who can keep an eye on it. It also might be possible to drag the 33 out (as originally drawn) on a trailer. This doesn't mean that we might sometimes feel like bring the boat back and sailing the east coast, or even sailing it down the coast of Central America as far as Colombia.
I asked Reuel Parker about the cost of building the redrawn 33, and he suggests that it would only be around 10% less than doing the 36 footer.

[Rigadog]

Another boat I am looking at: A bit roomier than the 33 Seabright, maybe a little less seaworthy(?) I had talked to a guy in the keys who built one and loved it.

[gilberj]

Yes it is another choice. A little stiffer and a little more room and larger all round, but probably not much more expensive than the 33. As for seaworthy.....I would want to be sure it can come back from a knockdown reliably, possibly adding ballast again. Then make it a watertight envelope with all openings, hatches, vents, ports, & doors etc. reasonably water tight, so if you do get into some nasty stuff you will not be taking water. I'd have to say I sort of prefer the 33. To me it looks a bit more attractive. The 33 will almost certainly be better in light conditions.

[Sailor Alan]

Another boat I am looking at: A bit roomier than the 33 Seabright, maybe a little less seaworthy(?)

This is another good choice. i suspect slightly more seaworthy, and probably a slightly better sailor with the board up too. More boyancy to weight i think. I suspect the CB will be less intrusive, the floor is wider. Not sure about the rudder, i have no experience, but suspect it might be heavy on some points of sail.

Though technically ‘bigger’ inside, i suspect it might seem, or feel, smaller. Those side decks will! crack your head, and the cabin sides seem closer than the ‘flush’ deck of the Seabright-33’s cabin. The rather narrow side decks will make getting forward on the lee side nearly impossible, though they give you a foot hold on the windward side. If you install hand rails, you may experience difficulties on the windward side as well.


A previous poster suggested doing a full size “mock up” to compare boat interiors. I think this is a good idea. Make it with 2X1 battens and door skins, cheap enough. Make sure you paint it in the colors you will use, color makes a huge difference to perceived space/size.


My color choices, after many years of sailing; i expect violent argument and rebuttal too.


First i paint the entire inside of the hull white, all of it. I use a porous paint so moisture can leach out. Many others prefer sealing the wood so moisture cannot get in.


As i do not like the grain of plywood, i seal and treat all exposed plywood, bulkheads, bunk fronts etc, a smooth glossy IKEA like white, no grain showing at all.


All ‘real wood’, trim, beams, fiddles, shelves, etc, including any veneers (not the ‘peeled kind, the ‘shaved’ kind) i treat with 50% beeswax, and 50% mineral spirits applied hot. Easy to clean, to refresh, and hard wearing. Linseed oil, and/or “Tung” oil probably do a similar job. This is a dull finish, not like the gloss of varnish.


Upholstery provides the ‘color’, perhaps blue, pale blue, or similar.


With this rig, you can enter “Schooner’ races too. But notice, it needs shrouds as designed, and it might be hard to convert to unstayed masts as rigged. But see my comments about using aluminum flag poles, and mounting them on bulkhead brackets. This might work here too.


My only complaint might be the Bowsprit, and Jib. The only times i have been really terrified in my sailing career, mostly racing i might add, is when doing something, to something, on the bow, in weather, and usually being extruded through waves as well. Usually something jammed, or stuck, or needed muzzling. I have never had to cut a headsail off a boat i was on, though i raced against several that did. A bit like watching $1,000US blow away. I have never had to deal with a Bowsprit so far.


Yes, i know, you say you will pull the jib in early, but the wind pipes up, and it gets rough, then its too late. Perhaps if the jib was set “flying’ you could recover it easier. Don't be fooled by roller furling etc, they too jam or unroll at the most inopportune time. Remember, you are cruising here.


Leaving your boat in florida with friends sounds excellent, and dragging it above the tide line sounds positive too. Just tie it down well too, storms happen, and its a long flight to put another line on it.

[Rigadog]

In my email exchanges with Mr. Parker, he says he believes that a beamier (10 ft.) 33 would cost around 10% less than the Seabright 36 in terms of materials and time; any thoughts. to me I'd say the 36 would cost around 15% - 20% ,ore - more going on in the interior, taller, beefier masts etc. Any thoughts?

[gilberj]

We tend to fill the available space, I think that is one of the corollaries of Murphy's law, or is it Parkers Law......Anyway .......If you have more space you will be tempted to do something clever with it, fill it with furniture of some sort. I'd guess the comparative cost would expand somewhat. Costs include extra building time.

[Sailor Alan]

In my email exchanges with Mr. Parker, he says he believes that a beamier (10 ft.) 33 would cost around 10% less than the Seabright 36 in terms of materials and time; any thoughts. to me I'd say the 36 would cost around 15% - 20% ,ore - more going on in the interior, taller, beefier masts etc. Any thoughts?

Of course, its up to you, its your boat. I agree with Gilberj, possessions increase to fill the space available. These all weigh something too, and not all can be stowed in the bilge, so stability is compromised by the very scheme you advanced to counter it. Remember the Vasa? We “rummage’ the boat each year, remove everything including stove and table, then put back the items necessary for racing. Excessive perhaps, but it keeps it light. Note; some racing skippers make you cut your tooth brush in half, but we are not that obsessive.


I personally would choose between the Seabright-33, and the Sharpie-36 more or less as designed. The Sharpie does not need the CB moved, but the Seabright does in my opinion. I think you should add a strake to the Seabright, and lower the cabin side too. Both need slight rig changes, though the Seabright has the rig of the Seabright-36 already done, simply scale it, while the Sharpie really needs free standing masts, a major change, unless you want to retain the shrouds. Im not sure about the -20%, but it might be worth simply building the bigger boat, does it have standing headroom? A major factor for us these days. This is where the Sharpie enters in, the length and nearly volume of the bigger Seabright, but the weight (and therefor cost) of the smaller. Also limited headroom, but a nice fast boat.


My opinion only, the Seabright-33 with Cat ketch, raked masts, looks so traditional, ideal in fact, for the region, including the whole Caribbean, it would be a winner all the way.


I think Reules ‘new cold molded’ construction might be a little easier than the plywood planks of the Seabright-33, but you can be pretty rough with the mating edges these days, modern fillers are better than the wood they attach. Strip planking, as described by Reuel, is also a good option. Ive always been a very rough, fast, woodworker, and relied on (glass filed) filler. Sad confession on such an august forum. Its not unheard of for someone to come to the PNW, buy a truck (trailer?) load of western red cedar, and haul it back the east coast for the boats skin.

[gilberj]

I think I prefer the 33 as designed, but you should look seriously at the accommodation space, perhaps with a mock-up. You don't want to spend a lot of time and money, to find the space is small and cramped for you and crew to cohabit comfortably..... The full width cabin (sort of) will be really nice and make it feel larger than it actually is. I have sailed with this sort of cabin. Rather than moving forward along the side decks, you scramble over the roof.....works just fine. I think I'd put a step or two on the aft bulkhead of the cabin. The full width cabin also provides a lot of reserve buoyancy high up where you want it in a hard chance. In my opinion and experience the full with cabin is better looking as opposed to a raised deck (where the vessel side extends up) as the distinct change in angle between the vessels side and the cabin side, makes it look less clunky (technical term) and is also potentially stronger.

[Rigadog]

Very good advise from both of you. It's a fine line between a project that is too big and one that doesn't meet your needs (or is it wants?). The Egret would be easier to build because it is a simpler form, but you are correct that I would need to get the rig changed (unstayed) and maybe get the aft mast moved out of the cabin(?), I would raise the deck on the Seabright just a bit to make the cabin look lower as suggested, but not a whole lot.
As far as the CB in the Seabright goes, would making it L-shaped help? Both designs are about the same displacement and so I'm thinking should cost roughly the same. Anyone want to guess a price per pound on these boats (not counting engines and sails)?

Does anyone like the idea of a full width cabin on the Egret? The reserve buoyancy up where you might need it is a good argument for doing it. On both of these designs I'd install 2 long run rail I think to clip onto since being up higher on a pitching deck would be more difficult with the exaggerated motion.

I also am intimidated about turning the hull ( the site is not accessible for a big machine, or small crane) so I was thinking maybe I could build and cover the bottom of the boat with xynole and epoxy 1st and then turn it over and build the rest of the boat right side up. On the Seabright I do the bottom and the box keel so the shape is true before turning. I also would be nice to see the boat right side up while building and eyeballing the work I think, What do you think>

[skaraborgcraft]

I would definately go with the raised sheer/cabin. I like the egret type mainly coz i prefer double-ender lines. Im sure you could mess with centreboard shape and placement as long as it ties in with the changes you may want to make with the sails and get it all balanced. If you built the bottom on an internal fromer you could achieve getting it finished and building the rest upright, not a bad idea, i wouldnt want to glass either boat laying on my back these days.

[gilberj]

Here is an example of the full width cabin on Windrush, the boat I grew up sailing. Photo taken in Wingfield Basin, Georgian Bay ~1972

[gilberj]

Since being mentioned a few times in this thread the Herreshoff Meadowlark, "Whimbrel".....

[Rigadog]

Whimbrel is a pretty boat! where was the picture taken?

[gilberj]

This photo was taken in Sabine Channel between Texada Island (in the background) and Jedediah Island in BC. Beautiful warm day with a easy force 3, Whimbrel moving 3 to 4 knots. Maria got in the dinghy and I tacked back and forth past her for 10 or 15 minutes.

[Sailor Alan]

Very good advise from both of you. It's a fine line between a project that is too big and one that doesn't meet your needs (or is it wants?). The Egret would be easier to build because it is a simpler form, but you are correct that I would need to get the rig changed (unstayed) and maybe get the aft mast moved out of the cabin(?), I would raise the deck on the Seabright just a bit to make the cabin look lower as suggested, but not a whole lot.
As far as the CB in the Seabright goes, would making it L-shaped help? Both designs are about the same displacement and so I'm thinking should cost roughly the same. Anyone want to guess a price per pound on these boats (not counting engines and sails)?

Does anyone like the idea of a full width cabin on the Egret? The reserve buoyancy up where you might need it is a good argument for doing it. On both of these designs I'd install 2 long run rail I think to clip onto since being up higher on a pitching deck would be more difficult with the exaggerated motion.

I also am intimidated about turning the hull ( the site is not accessible for a big machine, or small crane) so I was thinking maybe I could build and cover the bottom of the boat with xynole and epoxy 1st and then turn it over and build the rest of the boat right side up. On the Seabright I do the bottom and the box keel so the shape is true before turning. I also would be nice to see the boat right side up while building and eyeballing the work I think, What do you think>

Yes, make either CB “L” shaped, vertical extension either fore or aft (aft recommended in this case). Off set into a bunk front if possible.


I think Reuels design of cabin side to hull joint is perfectly satisfactory as drawn, but perhaps I'm missing something.


Build; with the Seabright, make the keel plate from solid steel (see above) or a welded steel form filled with scrap steel and concrete (see above). Paint and place in your building space. My preference would be to mount it on 4 (3 is better) castors so it can be moved side to side for planking and other tasks.


Take the bottom plywood, and coat the outside with cloth and epoxy, leaving about 1” ‘loose’ around the outside. The solid or laminated wood chine logs, frame caps, engine beds, CB stringers, etc should all be attached by now, screwing through the bottom ply, into the solid wood using ceramic coated deck screws. Lay this complete bottom onto the keel plate using bedding compound and through bolts.


Stand the frames/bulkheads against the frame caps, and screw in place. These bulkheads could also be ‘finished’, smooth coated and painted.


Now each ‘plank’ starting with the garboards, is cut to shape, check fitted, then the outside coated with cloth and epoxy, leaving about 1/2” of free cloth hanging out all round. This cloth needs only the first ‘coat’ of epoxy, its fine if the cloth ‘grain’ shows at this time. Again this plank is screwed to the frames using ceramic coated deck screws, well countersunk.


Do NOT worry about fit, there can be gaps between the planks 1/4” at least, and the outside of the joints should show a “V” like an old fashioned calked joint.


Now with the whole hull planked, go back over it with a thickened mixture of epoxy, and a painters wide spatula, and fill all the cloth grain, the countersunk holes, and the gaps between the planks. Much easier than covering the hull working ‘uphand’. Thicken the epoxy with sawdust (or micro-balloons) into a smooth paste. Reuel also recommends/uses this mixture. (take dry, clean sawdust, put it in an (old) food blender and ‘pulse’ until very fine). Sand and coat again until the desired finish is obtained. I use an angle grinder, carefully applied.


This method is only suitable for the Seabright as designed. The Sharpie should be built, strip planked, upside down, and mated to its keel after paint. Turning these hulls can be as easy as luring a local sports team, with breakfast, or afternoon beer, and providing each pair of players with a wide webbing strap, going under the vessel. Loops can be tied in each end of the straps, but let the team do that if they wish. These hulls are very light and stiff with the full ply bulkheads, so it is easy for a coordinated team to roll one over.


Though i would recommend a full width cabin, I'm not sure it would work on the Sharpie. You cannot raise the hull height, and i think the cabin side would tend to intrude were you to move it to the hull side. Aesthetics only. Your call.


Cost; i think strip plank from solid western red cedar would be cheaper over here, as plywood is a bit expensive, and we can get the wood direct from the mill. (you could even choose your own trees, but that takes longer for drying etc. I usually use pretty poor plywood, filled void stuff, and rely on the epoxy etc, but that is my risk.


Feeling ‘high, and unstable’ when on the cabin top is completely illusional. You are still not as high off the water as a similar power boat, and lower than most contemporary production sailboats. If the hull gets one more strake, and the deck therefor rises as well, then much of this illusion will go away.


A step, per Wilberj is excellent, and i have seen a small gear locker/box against the cabin bulkhead serve well, BUT; a favorite place to relax for sailors, including me, is leaning back against this cabin bulkhead, and a box or permanent step rather ruins this. The ‘box’ might also interfere with the new icebox opening. I suggest a folding mast step, or even a folding steamer trunk handle, looking like this, but upside down! http://www.zoro.com/g/00064409/k-G3371636?utm_source=google_shopping&utm_medium=cpc &utm_campaign=Google_Shopping_Feed&gclid=CMr2hM3K4 L4CFQKSfgodEE4Axw


For added stability on the deck/roof, i recommend a butterfly hatch with sides about 4-6” high along the centerline. Make it about 2’-3’ wide, and blend it into a LIFTING (not sliding) main hatch. This main hatch cover will have tapered triangular clear plexiglass side pieces that fold into place, raising this hatch, allowing a lookout from inside, and increasing local headroom. Now with the boat really heeled, you can ‘walk’ along the upper side of this extended ‘main’ hatch and ‘butterfly’ hatch all the way forward.


I would place a hand rail, i favor the 1.25” diameter stainless steel handicapped bath rail, lengthwise along the cabin top halfway between the hatch sides and the deck edge. This allows crawling space between it and the deck edge, and between it and the hatches going forward in weather. This fastened pipe increases the strength of the deck/roof amazingly well too. Ordinary galvanized steel pipe stock, “T”s, flanges, and “elbows”, well painted, could work too, a slightly more ‘workboat’ look. As a racer we have lifelines as well, and a tape ‘jack’ line for harnesses too.

[gilberj]

I am not that enthusiastic about a centre-line hatch. The Mizzen mast is just aft of the aft cabin bulkhead and would be in the way of the companion opening, and when not sailing the boom of the main is right over the opening. You might consider making a very large 'double-wide' hatch that allows easy access on either side of the CB case. This might also be a lifting section, allowing standing headroom in the aft area of the cabin while at anchor or on days with lighter winds while sailing. If you do that the whole structure should be strong enough to stand and walk on at least when closed, and should be able to be dogged down secure and watertight when sailing in stiffer conditions and passages.

[Rigadog]

Thanks again for all these good ideas, I really like the suggestions concerning hatches, could make a big difference at anchor for headroom. I like the triangular side lites as well. Agree about the sharpie cabin, probably best to leave it as drawn, but I would get the rig redrawn to perhaps get the aft mast outside and the rig should be unstayed if possible.
How wide could I safely make the centerline hatch on the Seabright? What about strip planking the Seabright? More time/money compared to ply? I do like the idea of working with smaller pieces of wood.

[Sailor Alan]

Cost is always tricky. There are some websites that claim a ‘dollars per pound’ for various boats, but so much depends on the level of finish on things like ports and fittings. These can vary wildly in costs.

In the PNW, we live in fir and cedar forests, apart from water and the odd mountain, its all we see from our house. We are certainly spoiled here, i can drive a few miles and get cedar from a small mill, and they will re-saw it to dimension, free. I use sawed timber as is, then plane/sand it after it is part of the boat. But i am a pretty rough boat builder too.

Plywood is relatively expensive here though.

Typical study plans include a materials list of some sort, so you could take that to a local lumber yard for a quote. Some specialist yards might respond online as well. Be prepared for sticker shock.

My son manages a boat yard in Seattle’s lake union, and he will not quote building costs by the pound either. Mind you, they do large, and ‘super yachts’ and mainly insurance claims too, so a different market.

Another factor is how you intend to build, and how many you are. With two people, long ply planks can go really fast. I once saw a couple of irish carpenters, offer up a plank, spill it, then take it to the bench, cut it to shape with a skill saw, plane it, then fasten it in about an hour. They did two planks identical each time, and never even checked the other side, simply fastened it on.

If you are alone, strip planks are easy too. Get an electric epoxy pump, and two long plastic hoses, one for each component. The ‘gun’, a hand held device, contains a ‘mixer tube’ a kind of clear tube/nozzle that throughly mixes the two components. When you finish work, after a day, or an hour, this ‘nozzle’ is the only thing discarded. It means you can do a few minutes gluing, or several hours, and there is virtually NO waste.

Now take a wood ‘strip’ and attach it to one end, the stern/transom usually, and move forward squirting glue into the gap as you move, and fastening it every so often with edge nails, and a screw into each frame/bulkhead. When you reach the end of a ‘strip’ butt joint the next one, and carry on. It goes very fast.

I do not think it very practical to do a strip plank Seabright-33. Each ‘plank’ would need to be created, and they are tapered both ways. If you want a smooth version, its almost a different boat, and it might be easy to make the design wider as well.

I like the centerline main hatch, having been shipmates with a couple of offset hatches. Sailing you always pass to windward of the mizzen, and simply enter the hatch. They might have been a little wider than ‘normal’, but the only limitation on width is the 90’ floating waterline. The hatches should be out of the water, by how much is hotly debated. The mizen is far better on the bridge deck than in the middle of the cockpit, that is really painful. Between two hatches is fine, and could be made free standing by duditious use of the steel bracket i described. It would be massive, and heavier than on the bridge deck, but possible. Some of these sail plans do not have a fore boom, and so hatch clearance is not an issue. If there is a fore boom, stow it to port or starboard of the hatch, or steev it up higher than your head. Our main boom has just clearance standing on the cockpit sole, and we rarely bump our heads going across the bridge deck below. Come to think of it, the boom is slightly higher when the sail is hauled up.

[Rigadog]

If I am getting the 33 redrawn I suppose i can get the lines faired for strip planking, but unless I can find a source locally for suitable cheap lumber I probably will stick with the batten seam method because from what I have read it shouldn't be too difficult.
One thing I'd like to be able to do is rig a boom tent of some type over the cockpit, would I have to change the sail from a sprit, and if I change one sail what about the other?

[Rigadog]

Of course, if I build in plywood the question is which type. I used some MDO from Harbor Sales couple of summers ago and was impressed with the quality, a few small voids here and there but generally very nice as compared to Fir. Have not see Meranti, or Okume though. Most folks seem to use fir. Reuel Parker recommends sheathing the hull with Xynole/epoxy; is this absolutely necessary? Could I just sheath the bottom and box keel for grounding From what I gather, the xynole is for abrasion resistance, not strength. Thoughts?

[gilberj]

I would either build as designed with ply and glass/epoxy, pretty much as Reuel Parker specifies, or Fair the curves for strip building. This modification should be easy. The main difference in building is a relatively few large pieces to get into place and fasten or a lot of little pieces. The glass or xynole or whatever does add a lot of strength laid inside and outside the plywood. I would at least sheath to above the waterline both inside and out, probably up the second plank upper seam. Above that may be just sealed with an epoxy coating.

[Sailor Alan]

Of course, if I build in plywood the question is which type. I used some MDO from Harbor Sales couple of summers ago and was impressed with the quality, a few small voids here and there but generally very nice as compared to Fir. Have not see Meranti, or Okume though. Most folks seem to use fir. Reuel Parker recommends sheathing the hull with Xynole/epoxy; is this absolutely necessary? Could I just sheath the bottom and box keel for grounding From what I gather, the xynole is for abrasion resistance, not strength. Thoughts?

Difficult questions. I usually use the lowest quality, or cheapest ply i can get away with, i.e. the MDO you mention. Douglas fir is heavy, but very strong, and quite suitable. Filled voids are fine in my book, and the finish will not really be seen. Paint the inside (white?) using porous paint remember. I used to use hot diped galvanized nails, they griped really well, but now i use ceramic coated deck screws. Look into plastic nails for plank fastening too.

Glass fiber, even woven, is very ridged. Though i have used it for covering a boat, and it improves strength, it is not well matched to wood, though better matched to plywood. Ie, the glass has to be broken before the wood will pick up much load. Equally, any movement in the wood, moisture or heat, puts a disproportionate strain on the glass.


Note; i carry a few toilet wax rings as temporary leak stoppers. These work well on splintered wood or plywood, from an impact for instance. They also work well on solid fiberglass, but make repair a pain.


Epoxy, by its very nature is extremely brittle, though fairly strong. Unless you modify it (aircraft grade epoxy costs $100/lb) it will retain this brittleness, and inflexibility. Epoxy is also fairly porous, not waterproof at all, and will osmote water through several layers.
Xynole, a polyester, by its nature is extremely stretchable, and the wood, and epoxy, will break before it even sees a load. Hence i would not use this combination either.


Assuming the ‘seam batten’ construction uses the battens like a stringer, a system i have some experience with, this should be fine, and you can use the technique i described for planks earlier, less the textile covering. These planks need only be in 8’ sections, so you could handle them alone. As each ‘plank’ is supported by ‘stringers’ about 8” apart, you can probably butt joint these planks as you go along. If you insist, use an angle grinder (or a power plane for a smoother job) to cut a scarf on the end of the plank, and lay in a single piece of woven glass in this joint. Rough grind the next scarf to fit. The adhesive used should be gap filling enough to not need exact fitting.


After filling the seams, screw countersinks, etc, I would paint the whole boat with two pot paint only, no textile covering at all. This is assuming the keel is external, and prevents the garboard planks from touching the sand. Remember, the keel was powder coated/galvanised before installation.


http://www.clcboats.com/shoptips/boa...urethanes.html


Though there must be more advice out there as well, much of it conflicting. This will allow you to build the boat right side up, and on its keel.


The boat i race on, built in the 50’s, has 1/4” thick cedar glued on vertically over the original planks. It was professionally painted with two pot interlux, and retains its finish year after year. Admittedly a ‘race’ boat, and always sailed with a vigilant race crew on board, hence rarely touching anything except water, its finish is unblemished after manny years too.


The boat yard my son manages, uses two pot interlux paint on their ‘super yachts’ and in fact never use gel coat at all for new work. They assume they will paint the whole boat anyway. Beautiful finish i might add.

[Sailor Alan]

If I am getting the 33 redrawn I suppose i can get the lines faired for strip planking, but unless I can find a source locally for suitable cheap lumber I probably will stick with the batten seam method because from what I have read it shouldn't be too difficult.
One thing I'd like to be able to do is rig a boom tent of some type over the cockpit, would I have to change the sail from a sprit, and if I change one sail what about the other?

First i didn't realize you described the rig shown in Reuels sketches as a “sprit’ rig. The sprit rig i am familiar with is the old thames barge rig, with a near vertical sprit.

However, i still do not know how you reef this rig. The only version i am familiar with is the ‘sharpie’ version where you roll the sail around the rotating mast. Only suitable for fairly light craft i would have thought. I do not like the boom/sprit in that position, it can hit the mast, and if a carbon fiber or aluminum mast, do unseen damage to its column stability. I wouldn't like it hitting a wooden mast either.


I personally, would never countenance such a spar/sprit on my boat. I would, however use a classic loose footed boom, probably hinged from the base of the mast, even a separate bracket, so there was no lateral load on the mast at this point. The boat i race on has a more conventional, fixed, boom, and the tent over it is rather too ‘close’ and very uncomfortable for socializing.


A friend has an interesting arrangement. He has a bridle that attaches to each end of a spar (he uses his spinnaker pole), hoisted by a halyard. Over this is a ‘sunbrella’ cloth shade held nearly flat across by fiberglass battens across above the spinnaker pole, and roughly the beam of the boat. Around the edge, a ‘wavy’ edge hangs down, with a lanyard every 3’ or so, on the end of each ‘batten’. These are tied to the lifeline, tensioning this cockpit cover against the breeze, independent of the boom. This spar/tent arrangement can be swung forward so there is some 'tent' befor the mast, it needs only a slit to do this.

[gilberj]

First I'll not debate elements of glass/ epoxy technology or theory. I feel less than knowledgeable, unqualified. I have done some work with glass in epoxy and with polyester. I took an introductory course on composite construction.
In the best world you would be best to vacuum bag the lay- up.
Sprit booms are very different from sprit yards. I have not got a lot of experience with either, a little. My impression is the sprit boom sail is not much different in reefing that a regular boomed sail. The sprit boomed sail has an advantage because it is self vanging. There is less force on the sheet and holding the boom down.

[Rigadog]

Thanks so much for taking time to give me input on this. Well, I finally made my choice and ordered plans for the Seabright 33 as drawn. It's easy to get seduced by larger, more complex designs/desires, but this boat should meet our needs after reconfiguring the interior a bit, and with any luck (and a ton of work) I should be able to have it in the water in a couple of years.
Since it's really just going to be me and my wife sailing, we will shorten the settees so they are about 3 feet long and retain a smaller fold down table. This will allow us to shoehorn in a hanging locker and a chest of drawers for clothes. We will also move the icebox to the side where the galley is. I may have a second icebox in the cockpit seat area for smelly fish or maybe a live well. The hatch will be altered as suggested to allow more light and better headroom. Looking into using steel plate for partial ballast. I'm up in the air on an inboard vs. outboard in well vs. no engine at all...
Now that the plans are ordered, feel free to to keep the suggestions coming. You all have so many good ideas.

Thanks, Frank

[skaraborgcraft]

Your outboard well could possibly double as a live well......important to get double function on small boat. Good choice i reckon, bigger is not always better.

[gilberj]

Congratulations on your decision. I think I would have made pretty much the same choice.

[Sailor Alan]

Thanks so much for taking time to give me input on this. Well, I finally made my choice and ordered plans for the Seabright 33 as drawn. It's easy to get seduced by larger, more complex designs/desires, but this boat should meet our needs after reconfiguring the interior a bit, and with any luck (and a ton of work) I should be able to have it in the water in a couple of years.

Excellent choice, well done.


I am not very experienced in coating hulls, but their are plenty who are. For advice on covering plywood with fabric, and/or painting it, see these forums. This is stitch and glue, but the principles are the same.


http://forum.woodenboat.com/showthread.php?127036-Epoxy-Stitch-and-Glue-Alternatives


The same holds true for gluing/bonding. There is good advice on this forum too.


http://forum.woodenboat.com/showthread.php?146943-Which-Glue


I would personally pick a brand like “West System’ or similar and go with it for all items. Mixing and matching doesn't always work.


I found this reference to reefing a sprit boom sail,


http://forum.woodenboat.com/showthre...prit-boom-sail


And this too, see the ‘jiffy reefing’ section.


http://www.jimsboats.com/webarchives...0Sprit%20Sails


Sounds like a fun project, good luck.

[Rigadog]

Thanks a bunch, the sprit boomed sails are supposed to work well but they do take getting used to in terms of reefing. I will take a look at all the info. I used West system to build this Mahogany soaking tub, but it is a the higher end cost wise and I will probably use another brand.

BTW, the flat spot down by the building in the picture is where the boat will be built. After it's done I have to somehow winch it up an incline to the driveway (the pile of rocks an the garden are gone). I hope it works or we may have to turn the boat into permanent guest quarters .

[Sailor Alan]

Thanks a bunch, the sprit boomed sails are supposed to work well but they do take getting used to in terms of reefing. I will take a look at all the info. I used West system to build this Mahogany soaking tub, but it is a the higher end cost wise and I will probably use another brand.

If the wooden tub is any indication of your workmanship, then your boat will be beautiful, and you WILL have to change your forum name.

Its a long time to go, but when you want to winch the boat out; get a couple of solid axles, possibly from an old mobile home, from a wrecking yard. Tack weld them to the keel (remember its steel, at least on the outside), tack weld a hook or eye to the keel at the bow (or stern, depending on direction pulling), and simply winch it up the slope. Technically you could transport it to the water this way, as long as you didn't exceed tractor, or agricultural equipment speeds (for unsprung vehicles).

[gilberj]

Charming idea, the wheel idea, it would work just fine too. Borrowing a farm hay trailer would be cheap. A boat mover would not cost the moon. I was considering moving Whimbrel to the farm for the winter.....would have cost a little north of $300 each way. A lot less than moorage in the marina.