Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 123 ... LastLast
Results 36 to 70 of 106

Thread: Wharram Catamarans , discussion required !

  1. #36
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    2,490

    Default Re: Wharram Catamarans , discussion required !

    Quote Originally Posted by Lugalong View Post
    Chris, you started it (for me), saying " I have yet to meet a designer who is such a fool... etc."
    Forgive me then for assuming that you have pretty much met them all (the British, the Hawians and Californians, the French and Australian cat designers, as well as others like Spronk) who are near unanimous in their differing design philosophy to Wharram.
    Then oh!, you have ownership experience covering a few Hobies, a few dinghys, sailboards, and Keeler or two!.
    Fine!, we might do well to keep on thread with the premise that apart from Wharram, the rest of catamaran design falls into a top end one having U section hulls with twin daggerboards, and then the multi chine variations of the theme.
    Otherwise, there are keels, as a compromise to handle drying out on the inevitable rock, fill out the options available......unless there is some strange reason to include complications, like centreboards (inside keels) or in nacelles, slung between the` hulls.

    I agree with you that hulls having lower WSA include a basic design element that does show Wharram up, and having once committed to depth of V section for lateral area, there is virtually no way out of the performance trough/pit, committed to.
    But then the quicker turning/tacking configuration demands constant attention or steering energy input for all the many hours of open Ocean sailing that is (hopefully) the expectation.
    Also, designing for performance by the average designer's book, will invariably go along with a Bermudan sloop rig, making sail balance for steering, a very limiting one.
    This is another area that singles out Wharram.....and is maybe OK for a different thread as well.
    I'm not sure why you decided to make this personal, with utterly incorrect claims or implication that I change boats often (yep, every 25 years is "often" ), didn't care about those on a budget, or that I implied I have met all the cat designers. The original post said that "any negative opinions about Wharram catamarans are highly appreciated". I said Wharrams had good points and some issues and that Vee shaped hulls were not "better" as claimed. Isn't that what Ersin specifically asked for?

    I haven't claimed to be an expert. I'm not. I've only spent a few weeks cruising three different cats, my wife and I have only owned four small cats, and my family has only 40 years experience with cruising cats including about eight years of full time living on board. I never said nor implied that I had met all the cat designers. I've been able to sail and/or talk design with some and read others. That is enough to show that they are not idiots and the choice of U sections is a reasonable one - I didn't claim it was a "better" choice as Ersin said it was in Post 16.

    Yes, Vee shaped hulls are better for SOME people or SOME applications - I never said they weren't. The fact that a design feature has strengths and is better for some situations does not mean that it is "better" as Ersin wrote in post 16, and when a poster ASKS for negative opinions it is hard to see why we should ignore his specific request.
    Last edited by Chris249; 11-06-2018 at 08:17 PM.

  2. #37
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    2,490

    Default Re: Wharram Catamarans , discussion required !

    Quote Originally Posted by ersin boke View Post
    As you see I submit this thread to learn something about Wharram cat. This means that I have no any idea untill last week about cat boats. Then I do not know which hull sahpe is better for cats really I do not know.

    I wonder how yo know that your sailing experience more than me ? and what is the criteria ? winning races? thousants of sailing miles?

    But I can say this. All "modern " cruising boats generally have bemudan rig. Main and genova have furling. If you start to reef such rig, Center of effort of main sail closed to the mast. Similarly when you reef the genova , center of effort of this sail moves to the forward also. This means that , main sail force and moment arm of this sail reduced but this is not same for genova. Force on the genova reduced but length of moment arm increased. This means that turning moment on the boat increase(not force ) "Generally " after 20 knos The moment due to the main sail did not balance the moment due to genova. If wind increased to 30 knots boat starts to turn . At that time rudder can not enough surface to turn to boat. I call this position as stall . sure maybe not correct English word. Ofcourse some different trims for both sails to go. But in this case speed is reduced .

    For Wharram , I try to say maybe V shape is required for his design if you think his design totally. I did not say that V sahape is better than U shape. Because I do not know which one is better.

    For modern cruising boats I am not sure they are really "modern" . This is my opinion and not based a technical data. Just an instinct.

    Again thank you for yor comments. As a goddamn engineer At least I learn that catamaran hulls can be different as U sahpe and V shape.
    Sorry if I've got it wrong, but from your posts here, which have said things such as "I have limited knowledge and all writings here just my observation during the sailing with my small wooden boat Thımas Gilmer's blue moon Tayo Mar.....Four years ago I bought this small wooden boat..." i believed that you had only been sailing for a few years. I apologise if I misunderstood.

    Regarding "out of control" monos - yes, in a sloop rig the centre of effort of reefed sails MAY move forward - but that is entirely under the control of the sailor. You can easily move the centre of effort around just by changing the sheet tension, vang, backstay, jib car position, etc, without reefing or unreefing. And since a modern hull form tends to develop weather helm when heeled, a good sailor can just ensure that they move the centre of effort forward to match the increasing weather helm, and the boat can continue to track perfectly well. As noted, I've sailed in heavy air, including under storm trysail alone, in small modern boats and you could steer with two fingers much of the time. If a modern boat can't do that then it's the fault of the sailor, their sails or the individual design, NOT of the type in general.
    Last edited by Chris249; 11-06-2018 at 10:57 PM.

  3. #38
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Istanbul , Turkey
    Posts
    168

    Default Re: Wharram Catamarans , discussion required !

    Chris,

    You are right I wonder the negative aspects of Wharram. Before reading your post , I was reading Mike Waller Coral Cove design.
    Not only you , for all members who wrote their opinions are valuable . Agrree or disagree is not so important. Important thing is you and other writers to this thread , spend their time to share the knowledge and experience with me and all the members who involved to this subject. This is highliy appreciated.



  4. #39
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Whangarei New Zealand
    Posts
    592

    Default Re: Wharram Catamarans , discussion required !

    Quote Originally Posted by Chris249 View Post
    I'm not sure why you decided to make this personal, with utterly incorrect claims or implication that I change boats often (yep, every 25 years is "often" ), didn't care about those on a budget, or that I implied I have met all the cat designers. The original post said that "any negative opinions about Wharram catamarans are highly appreciated". I said Wharrams had good points and some issues and that Vee shaped hulls were not "better" as claimed. Isn't that what Ersin specifically asked for?

    I haven't claimed to be an expert. I'm not. I've only spent a few weeks cruising three different cats, my wife and I have only owned four small cats, and my family has only 40 years experience with cruising cats including about eight years of full time living on board. I never said nor implied that I had met all the cat designers. I've been able to sail and/or talk design with some and read others. That is enough to show that they are not idiots and the choice of U sections is a reasonable one - I didn't claim it was a "better" choice as Ersin said it was in Post 16.

    Yes, Vee shaped hulls are better for SOME people or SOME applications - I never said they weren't. The fact that a design feature has strengths and is better for some situations does not mean that it is "better" as Ersin wrote in post 16, and when a poster ASKS for negative opinions it is hard to see why we should ignore his specific request.
    "making this personal" was the unintentional result of my bringing up the often expressed view ( by the more modern catamaran design stalwarts) That Wharram design lacks adherence to basic performance criteria...... which is true, of course, once the craft is powered by a Bermudan sloop rig.
    Since I am not here to promote the Wharram ethos as a continuation of a so called ancient Pacific tradition, I have to agree that a Bermudan sloop rigged Wharram, has it's performance inadequacies exposed (certainly, as a B sloop candidate), and it might be better to add more chines and a transom stern, to alter the dynamics.
    Next thing is to add a deckhouse and integral connecting beams, to produce a plymaran, just like other designers have done.

    Who cares?.... certainly Ersin made it known that he is looking at the unconventional rig aspect as as well.
    This is where youre very clear leaning toward conventional design group-think, highlights the maverick nature of Wharram design, and comes across as somewhat confrontational.
    Good then, I suppose, if this is the intention of the thread, and is appreciated by the contributors.

  5. #40
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Searsport, Maine
    Posts
    198

    Default Re: Wharram Catamarans , discussion required !

    Ersin, there are some photos of my Blue Moon in the "changing boats" thread. Follow the link in the first post: http://forum.woodenboat.com/showthre...Changing-boats

  6. #41

    Default Re: Wharram Catamarans , discussion required !

    I think it's worth noting the Hobie 16 has a deep V hull and no daggerboard, just like the Wharram cats, and that's one of the bestselling boats of all time. If this is such a terrible arrangement I doubt Hobie would have sold 100k+ H16s.

    This Tiki 21 owner estimates he gets 3-4kts VMG when beating, which is very respectable by monohull standards (maybe on par with a J/22 or j/24)

    http://tiki21littlecat.blogspot.com/...-windward.html

    Off the wind Wharrams can be legtimately fast, like this Tiki 38 hitting 18.9kts:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u50DVuFcoRQ

    So, no, the performance of Wharram catamarans is not great among multihulls, but they're not "slow."

  7. #42
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    2,490

    Default Re: Wharram Catamarans , discussion required !

    Quote Originally Posted by seasnail View Post
    I think it's worth noting the Hobie 16 has a deep V hull and no daggerboard, just like the Wharram cats, and that's one of the bestselling boats of all time. If this is such a terrible arrangement I doubt Hobie would have sold 100k+ H16s.

    This Tiki 21 owner estimates he gets 3-4kts VMG when beating, which is very respectable by monohull standards (maybe on par with a J/22 or j/24)

    http://tiki21littlecat.blogspot.com/...-windward.html

    Off the wind Wharrams can be legtimately fast, like this Tiki 38 hitting 18.9kts:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u50DVuFcoRQ

    So, no, the performance of Wharram catamarans is not great among multihulls, but they're not "slow."
    No one said the Vee hull was terrible. It's just that they are not "better" as was claimed - they do some things well and there are some things they don't do as well as other shapes. The Hobie 16 you mentioned is a great boat and it can actually be seen as a good illustration of the shape's strengths and weaknesses.

  8. #43
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    2,490

    Default Re: Wharram Catamarans , discussion required !

    Quote Originally Posted by Lugalong View Post
    "youre very clear leaning toward conventional design group-think..... comes across as somewhat confrontational.
    Please stop making these confrontational personal remarks, especially when they are as ludicrous as alleging that my hanging onto craft for 34 to 10 years is "go(ing) through many boats in your effort to keep up with the crowd."

  9. #44
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Whangarei New Zealand
    Posts
    592

    Default Re: Wharram Catamarans , discussion required !

    Quote Originally Posted by seasnail View Post
    I think it's worth noting the Hobie 16 has a deep V hull and no daggerboard, just like the Wharram cats, and that's one of the bestselling boats of all time. If this is such a terrible arrangement I doubt Hobie would have sold 100k+ H16s.

    This Tiki 21 owner estimates he gets 3-4kts VMG when beating, which is very respectable by monohull standards (maybe on par with a J/22 or j/24)

    http://tiki21littlecat.blogspot.com/...-windward.html

    Off the wind Wharrams can be legtimately fast, like this Tiki 38 hitting 18.9kts:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u50DVuFcoRQ

    So, no, the performance of Wharram catamarans is not great among multihulls, but they're not "slow."
    Hobie 16's have a hard wearing bottom of their close to V hull section, by virtue of the glass composite laminate.
    Thi s is one of the characteristic that makes them popular.
    Considering that a wooden hull is the subject of this discussion, any mind with a basic understanding of materials and structures will get it why Wharram hulls opt for this compromise.

  10. #45
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Whangarei New Zealand
    Posts
    592

    Default Re: Wharram Catamarans , discussion required !

    Quote Originally Posted by Chris249 View Post
    Please stop making these confrontational personal remarks, especially when they are as ludicrous as alleging that my hanging onto craft for 34 to 10 years is "go(ing) through many boats in your effort to keep up with the crowd."
    I think I get it now -- your post #24, telling about your carbon composite cats that are so fragile as to need trolly hauling in and out of the water, was the misleading info..... I just cannot see something like that lasting for 30 odd years.

    This was supposed to be a discussion about Wharrams and wooden craft as such.

    I had a little Wharram that had been on the water for 30 odd years, and was still sound enough to handle bouncing on the bottom, in 4 ft seas (when the anchor dragged in a blow), without showing any more than scuffed anti-foul.
    This is info that might be relevant to a person enquiring about Wharram cats.
    This stuff about other designers using performance data to better effect than Wharram, might as well go along with suggesting that other materials rather than wood will offer other advantages that Wharram doesn't.
    What's the point?

  11. #46
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Southern Maine
    Posts
    20,376

    Default Re: Wharram Catamarans , discussion required !

    Lugalong, you have to stop insulting those who disagree with you.

  12. #47
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Whangarei New Zealand
    Posts
    592

    Default Re: Wharram Catamarans , discussion required !

    Quote Originally Posted by Hwyl View Post
    Lugalong, you have to stop insulting those who disagree with you.
    Humble apologies to anyone and everyone who feels insulted by anything I may have said based on my lack of appreciation for modern catamarans.

  13. #48
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Istanbul , Turkey
    Posts
    168

    Default Re: Wharram Catamarans , discussion required !

    " geršekten ne oluyor anlamadım. Ben sonušta Wharram katmaranları ile ilgili ÷zellikle olumsuz taraflarını ÷ğrenmek istemiştim. "

    Do you guys understand something from this Turkish sentences. ? Sure not. I wrote this sentences try to explain my position I can not follow . Who insulting to who?

    Seasnail 's sailing was a good example for Wharram . Thank you. Wharram is an important designer. Nobody can say opposite. Ofcourse with new materilals and and new designers develop the catamarans with different ways ar for different demands. I try to say V shape can be an important selection in whole design of Wharram. Maybe not. I do not know. Same about keel. adding keel for high board cats maybe required. Again I do not know. I am just making some assumptions and tye to learn from the people who have more experience than me in this subject.

    Today , ıt was a terrible working day for me and at this moment approx. 00.30 am İn Turkey İstanbul and I have a glass of malt and read the discussions. I can only say that how lucky we are. We are on the sea, we have boat and I wish all the problems in our life could be like here and like wich one is better U or V ?

  14. #49
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Searsport, Maine
    Posts
    198

    Default Re: Wharram Catamarans , discussion required !

    Amen, Ersin. Let's all go sailing and have a beer after and talk about what design was "better"

  15. #50
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lindstrom, MN
    Posts
    2,279

    Default Re: Wharram Catamarans , discussion required !

    The Polynesian Catamaran Association might be of interest here: http://pca.colegarner.com/
    Management is the art of counting beans. Leadership is the art of making every being count. --Joe Finch

  16. #51
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    977

    Default Re: Wharram Catamarans , discussion required !

    Another great Wharram resource can be found here:

    https://wharrambuilders.ning.com/

  17. #52
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    389

    Default Re: Wharram Catamarans , discussion required !

    "1 Easy to built."

    No easier, and in some respects harder to build than other stitch and glue type multis. Why harder? Because Wharram boats have never been efficiently engineered and waste titanic amounts of epoxy getting the job done, which is a lot more work for you. Also, on the boats that use 2 panels per side, which is either the 26 and up or the 30 and up, there is no well worked out system for gaining control over the panel fairness.


    2 less material cost if compare with monohulls

    Depends what you are comparing, but technically monos have the best efficiency of materials and work to habitable space. Ballast can be an issue depending on where you live and what kind of ballast, from none, to a complex system of say a bronze cast shoe, is required.


    3 construct each part independently.

    This is certainly an advantage though many small boats, and some rather large ones also have this advantage. In Any multi there are many independent parts to build, though.

    4 required small construction area

    Not bad here, though you can say the same for similar better designed cats.

    5 easy to move , turn easily for painting and epoxy process

    Again, same as many boats.

    6 feel free for interior design

    Basically they just don't finish the interior, which you can do on any boat, clever marketing with the nude girls lounging around and the "flexi space". However, that just means you have to figure it all out for yourself, and to the extent that you do anything after the lid goes on the hull, you are in for a treat doing the work later.

    7 traditional design lines

    Not really, unless you are talking about the Ethnic designs. But I do think one of Wharram's great achievements was to make a low end cost boat, and make it look really nice. Whether you can call it traditional seems a bit of a reach.

    8 more stable with gaff rig as wingsail.

    Well you can reef and reduce sail on any boat, and the more efficient your hull the less sail you need to just chug along. I like the rig, and would put it on another boat if I couldn't afford a better rig at the outset, and it suits the Wharram pretty well.

    9 Double ender design

    I do like these a lot. on a short boat though, they are not very efficient. Or a boat with large overhangs. you loose even more. Biggest advantage as I see it is you can deploy a parachute or a drogue without having to round up. In survival situations that could be what it took. But not something I will experience.

    Further problem is that multis used to be notoriious for hobby horsing. This has been solved through higher PC hulls, which the wharram lacks. A fat transom to stop the pendulum starting also helps.

    10 so fast

    So Slow. For 2200 lbs you could theoretically have one of the Gougeon's 35 foot trimarans, with massive beam, and you could beat million dollar carbon fiber monsters as they have been doing for decades. Or rig it light and tool around. You could have almost as much beam as the T-30 is long, in situations where that maters.

    The Wharram hull shape is the least efficient multi shape, in use today. You really can't have less sailing efficiency and have displacement. It's the worst. And the companion to that is it also has the worst interior space.

    11 so light. 30 feet catamaran is just 1000 kg.

    Not really that light, and it is really a 25 foot boat with a higher mooring charge, not a 30 footer.

    12 due to that just 10 HP outboard engine is enough to take her 7 nautic miles

    OK.


    13 No more difficulties for inboard disel engines.

    Outboards are a pain to get working right on multis and do not deliver the same performance as inboards do (where they can be used. Inboards are not an option, really, but there are some situations where the 1/2 burn of gas might be an advantage. I like simple engines, so outboards for me. It does irritate me that most of the boats I have plans for the designer doesn't even tell you how to mount the engine. One just had a box drawn on it with "4 hp". Wharram does detail it.

    14 No propeller resist during the sail, because engine is taken to up easily

    Most small boats you can have that also. To me the great thing about multis is if they are really light and really low resistance, then they sail when others are required to motor. Wharrams are a bit of a fail on that score. But the reality is most people want their boats to motor most of the time, so a dedicated competent installation suits them. They could be using retractable outboards for the cost of a diesel installation.

    13 due to this design, sail area is not so big and easy to handle for single hand sailors.

    Well if you put the same rig on a boat with better form and lower resistance it would be better.

    14 Less maintanence cost.

    Than what? Wharrams have some bad spots on them, like the beams and sockets. These vary a lot, but I don't trust some of the details I have seen built or as described on the plans. For instance the rigging of a dolphin striker inside the T-30 front beam, which is rather brilliant, but it does mean water, chafe, hardware working in an area you can't really see. Of course you built it once and could replace it with a few evenings work in the off season.

    15 Near 50 m2 deck area

    But very little freeboard, so it is going to be wet. It is one of those funny things that a guy living in the wet misery of the UK dreamed this up. It was clearly a desire to be transported anywhere else.

    16 lot of place for storage , bike , dinghy etc.

    Rule one with multis is keep them light. You can have one indulgence like a bike, but you need to keep it as light as possible. You can pull up to the shore almost, so in some situations you might not need a dingy, though in a harbour...

    17 lot of area for solar energy panels without any obstacle during the sailing.

    Yeah, well mind the weight of those batteries.

    18 Easy and flexible connection for main parts which is compatible to the waves

    Well, this is actually a good idea... When the Gougeons do it. It is one of the stupider ideas that Wharram has latched onto. Wharram seems to be more an artist and adventurer, and dreamer than an engineer. He takes the two belts and suspenders with a bib front trouser approach to everything. For instance I have compared his epoxy fillet sizes to those in the Gougeon book. He is using the sizes that you need for a cantilevered element on his panels. Insanely oversized, and costly. He does everything that way. Rather than saying "if I bond these elements together I can use my saloon in conjunction with my beam to stiffen my platform", as you mentioned, everything is a separate element. Then everything has to be full strength in itself. It is obviously untrue you need flexible connectives, he just had no idea how to calculate the loads and the dimensions of what we now take as regular design elements. I have no problem with people managing their structures if they can't calculate them. Nobody really can calculate them as a trailblazer. And he was one of the first. But there is no more reason to have flexible connectives than to have a longitudinally articulated monohull. And there is no guarantee that the flexibility will work in ways that are beneficial, rather than just inefficient. You could have flexible crank arms on a bicycle, in order to deal with road vibe, but it would be terrible inefficient. Good bike suspension increases comfort and efficiency. But it usually amounts to something more complex than a bunch of rope tying stuff together.

    19 Nice ladder and gangway solution

    20 no keel and close to shallow water

    Some of the smaller Tikis have no keel, and that was at least one advantage to the bad hull section. The Tiki 30, I was disappointed to find out, has a low profile keel, even more drag and less draft, and awkward looking.Slightly hard to make something that angular take the ground without rubbing through the glass. I didn't like that. I asked if I could build it without the keels, like most of their designs. After decades of preaching no keels, they were kinda miffed I asked (good people to work with though)

    21 lot of easy but effective solutions besides these are such as rudder, esay wheel system , Double anchor possibilities etc."

    Basically his first rudder was a mess in mid Atlantic. So he came up with the current one, and it isn't bad. But it isn't supper easy to make, efficient, and somewhat messes up the advantage of having a double ender, if you throw out a parachute and then end up backing down on the rudders. Though folks have done that and it may be all in my mind. I say not super easy to build because it does use all those holes so you just need to be careful how you go about it so there is no wear through the epoxy, yet the cord is good, and so forth. just sticking a pipe cleaner soaked in epoxy through the holes would not do it for me.


    Jim Brown of trimaran fame said two things at this point that are useful here:

    People's arguments for one style of boat or another are just rationalizations for positions they have already decided on (he said it much better);

    When you actually go cruising out in the oceans of the world, you see a lot more Wharrams than anything else. (though if you don't go out there the opposite is probably true).
    Last edited by Tomcat; 11-10-2018 at 04:43 PM.

  18. #53
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Cape Town, South Africa
    Posts
    106

    Default Re: Wharram Catamarans , discussion required !

    Tomcat's response is great, gives the pro's and cons of the boat in a nice way.
    If I can add a little after sailing and sleeping aboard a Tiki 30 for a few weekends, not much experience but perhaps more than some.
    - The space below is very small, the bunks although shown as doubles, only work as such if you take turns sleeping on top of the other person, or don't move while sleeping and only sleep on your side. We resolved this by myself sleeping in the forward sail locker when having 3 or more persons on the boat overnight. Not much headroom in there !
    - The wingsail is terribly inefficient at going upwind, as it has a lot of twist, even if you sheet the main in on a Hobie mainsheet system, there is no way to control the leech twist, so it might point better with a normal sloop rig mainsail - if I was to build / buy one, I would look into that. Although that is what makes the boat safe, as all the sail power is lower down.
    But if you read the OP's first post, the boat would suit his needs reasonably well. If reaching or running it is quite fast compared to most cruising mono's, we could reach at 9-12knots in 15-18knots of wind, so for covering distance it is better than most mono's. We also sailed past a Lagoon 48 catamaran on a reach, we had a full rig up, while they had one reef in with their highly roached full-battened mainsail. Yes it's no comparison as they probably have a dishwasher and microwave oven, and a lot more room below, but if his budget allows for a Tiki 30, a Lagoon 48 is probably not the boat he's after. Maybe CLC's Madness would be a possible candidate.
    And contrary to Wharram's marketing style, a Lagoon 48 will probably attract more topless females than a Tiki 30.

  19. #54
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Northern Europe
    Posts
    9,566

    Default Re: Wharram Catamarans , discussion required !

    Quote Originally Posted by SteveMSA View Post
    And contrary to Wharram's marketing style, a Lagoon 48 will probably attract more topless females than a Tiki 30.
    Quite possibly, but perhaps the wrong kind of topless females, i prefer the type that does not require a washing machine and tumble dryer to go cruising......

  20. #55
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    730

    Default Re: Wharram Catamarans , discussion required !

    Please back to the boats.

  21. #56
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Northern Europe
    Posts
    9,566

    Default Re: Wharram Catamarans , discussion required !

    Its like someone arguing that a Land Rover has no place in this modern world being based on a design that has changed very little since its launch in 1948. People still buy them for their functionality.....those same like minded people might very well build a Wharram. "Better than" is subjective to the end user.

  22. #57
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Northern Europe
    Posts
    9,566

    Default Re: Wharram Catamarans , discussion required !

    AS far as the engineering goes, isnt everything that has a long service life over engineered? Airplane wings could be built much much lighter, but are built with significant saftey factors that increase the weight, for obvious reasons. Wharrams have never been aimed at the "performance" crowd, but will mostly be faster than a "normal" monohull off wind. It like complaining that an oil tanker does not spin in its own length and is tricky to berth single handed, or that a tug boat is no good because it cant plane. Horses for courses, pick accordingly.

  23. #58
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Istanbul , Turkey
    Posts
    168

    Default Re: Wharram Catamarans , discussion required !

    "1 Easy to built."

    No easier, and in some respects harder to build than other stitch and glue type multis. Why harder? Because Wharram boats have never been efficiently engineered and waste titanic amounts of epoxy getting the job done, which is a lot more work for you. Also, on the boats that use 2 panels per side, which is either the 26 and up or the 30 and up, there is no well worked out system for gaining control over the panel fairness.

    "Titanic Amounts of epoxy " I like that. But two panel using is important I think. When I watch the const. videos , After the first panel, bottom parts are locating Titanic amount epoxy job and painting. If they use thicker than this , doing bottom part works can be difficult. Secondly , in his const. method, no need any workbench for other stitch and glue method.








  24. #59
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    730

    Default Re: Wharram Catamarans , discussion required !

    You could build a Tiki 21 or smaller to find out if you really like them. That way you learn a lot without sinking lots of money in a boat that you will never recover. And there is another guy building this boat and I suppose you follow his thread. It all takes time, and you could decide to build Melanesia. I have been out in her and she is fun. Better then his larger boats.
    What also bothers me is the number of Wharram Cats in bad state: Rotting beams, delamination. I think he hardly bothered how to keep a boat clean so the maintenance would be easy. Hard to reach corners everywhere.

  25. #60
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Melb, Vic, Aus
    Posts
    309

    Default Re: Wharram Catamarans , discussion required !

    The Classic designs will use a lot less epoxy and may be quicker to build? You can see people putting the Tiki beams and lashings on them as well. The classic Designs had a lot of rot problems in the beam troughs.
    You will find that Wharrams build times are out, for a first time builder you could double it and be pretty close.
    Personally if I was to get a Wharam again i would be looking at a good second hand one. I would be looking for general build quality and attention to detail throughout to get a sense of the builders skill level, then from there get a survey as you can get rot in the beams which can be difficult to pick up but easy to fix if it is there.
    Wharrams have been all over the world many, many times. If you are happy with that level of camping comfort go for it. It will surely get you to where you want to go.
    Good luck!

  26. #61
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    730

    Default Re: Wharram Catamarans , discussion required !

    PA160412.jpg

    This Wharram cat was, after many years without maintenance, returned to the builder, who stripped and cleaned her. He put in daggerboard cases, a complete cabin, modern fullybattened rig, and here she is: Completely de-Wharramed, a different boat. Much better now. It was the only 'Wharram' at the CTCmeeting this year in the Netherlands. Wharrams are out, even 'uncool' I am afraid.

  27. #62
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Northern Europe
    Posts
    9,566

    Default Re: Wharram Catamarans , discussion required !

    ^ Nice conversion. I dont expect Wharram would approve. If he chopped the mainsail off at that top batten, could lose 6ft off the mast, and have a fat head mainsail, while keeping the foresail the same size.

  28. #63
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    730

    Default Re: Wharram Catamarans , discussion required !

    Skaraborg, he knows the boat. The builder is his brother in law, kind of.

  29. #64
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Northern Europe
    Posts
    9,566

    Default Re: Wharram Catamarans , discussion required !

    Quote Originally Posted by FF View Post
    Skaraborg, he knows the boat. The builder is his brother in law, kind of.
    Ha! Maybe more painfull for him then? I dont know if he is really bothered by people modifying his designs, but there is a long history of people doing just that. I did hear he was not a fan of rigid beam attachments.

  30. #65
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Whangarei New Zealand
    Posts
    592

    Default Re: Wharram Catamarans , discussion required !

    Quote Originally Posted by skaraborgcraft View Post
    Ha! Maybe more painfull for him then? I dont know if he is really bothered by people modifying his designs, but there is a long history of people doing just that. I did hear he was not a fan of rigid beam attachments.
    Yep, a conversation with the man himself made it quite clear that a platform rigid enough to take that sort of rig is outside his basic philosophy, although, he is probably not so dogmatic as to allow another persons different desires to become an issue; its just that his designs do not lean toward rigidity.

    My brother-in- law, bought one of the first Capt Cook 42ft Wharram/Boon designed cats, which was Bermudan sloop rigged.
    On the craft's very first outing in Ocean swells - Leaving the Durban harbour channel and encountering some Indian Ocean swell outside), the beam carrying the mast made a loud crack.

    All it took to fix the problem was to put in an over-engineered solid laminate beam of heavy hardwood.

    I suppose my brother in law could have built a massive house( with the same windage as that in the above modified Wharram), but instead used the deck space to keep toys like bikes, dinghys and a microlight aeroplane.
    It was amazing how much that cat could carry, by the time a 6 cylindar truck engine with hydraulic-drive prop on a drop-down leg had been added and a number of diesel fuel 44 gal drums as well.
    It was more like a well loaded safari Landrover, than a Landrover turned into a monster truck like the cat we see in the above pic.

  31. #66
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Pacific drifting
    Posts
    175

    Default Re: Wharram Catamarans , discussion required !

    DSCF0159.jpg

    Living " large "

    62 ft floating shanty town.

  32. #67
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Northern Europe
    Posts
    9,566

    Default Re: Wharram Catamarans , discussion required !

    Ideal for endless wandering of the oceans where one might not have to pay marina fees and yard storage. A perfect South Pacific retirement home.

  33. #68
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    389

    Default Re: Wharram Catamarans , discussion required !

    Quote Originally Posted by skaraborgcraft View Post
    AS far as the engineering goes, isnt everything that has a long service life over engineered? Airplane wings could be built much much lighter, but are built with significant saftey factors that increase the weight, for obvious reasons. Wharrams have never been aimed at the "performance" crowd, but will mostly be faster than a "normal" monohull off wind. It like complaining that an oil tanker does not spin in its own length and is tricky to berth single handed, or that a tug boat is no good because it cant plane. Horses for courses, pick accordingly.
    I am not talking about mythical, single use, aircraft wings. I am talking about overweight and poorly conceived details that you don't see anywhere else. And here is the kicker. You didn't tend to see those details in their factory built glass boats.

    I am not railing against Wharram generally, they have a great design. Wharram wants the boats to weigh what they do. It is part of his practice of building within workboat parameters. I am not criticizing the design. I am saying that for what they are they are not efficiently designed or fast to build as, or cheap. There are cheaper ways of adding weight to your design than with epoxy.

  34. #69
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    389

    Default Re: Wharram Catamarans , discussion required !

    Titanic Amounts of epoxy " I like that. But two panel using is important I think. When I watch the const. videos , After the first panel, bottom parts are locating Titanic amount epoxy job and painting. If they use thicker than this , doing bottom part works can be difficult. Secondly , in his const. method, no need any workbench for other stitch and glue method.
    Sorry, I don't get your first point.

    The fact they don't need to be built on a frame is common to many other boats. Constant Camber, CM, Kiss. It is really the whole stitch and glue vibe. You use the edge of the panels to define the shape, and the materials in the hull to support it. Though some S&G boats need frames.

    On epoxy he will use like a 3" fillet, where the coast guard might accept a 1.5 or 2. And that is a ton more epoxy.

  35. #70
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    389

    Default Re: Wharram Catamarans , discussion required !

    Quote Originally Posted by beam reach View Post
    DSCF0159.jpg

    Living " large "

    62 ft floating shanty town.
    Look, that thing has 6 beams, probably solid, and yet a huge house that could be the beams for the boat if only they spaned the boat, with more room, and safety.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •