It being such a privelege to have your input to this board, would you please take a few moments to comment on the H-37c, its mission, maybe a little history, and perhaps some personal knowledge/experience? We are leaving in a fews days for retirement aboard "Duet" in Mexico. I look forward to your answer. Thanks
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
For now what I have on the 35-36-37
Thanks, Dave, for the nice comment. It's nice to be appreciated. I am even this week doing research on the 'upper end' of the Hunter series, the 33, 35, 36 and 37. Some of the drawings are archived with me and some with Hunter in Alachua. I have already contacted them through the 'chain of command' but will phone John or Warren personally if this does not work. As most people know the 33, 35, 36 and 37 were conceived after the smaller boats as the Hunter line progressed upwards in boat size. The core of my own involvement was in 1972-74 with the 25 and 30 and then later in '77-80 with the 54. I know that Hunter themselves stipulated development on the 35 and 36 on their own and consulted my father only after they'd decided, for the obvious cost savings in lofting (and design fees), to make each boat from existing tooling. The 35 was a 'patch job' or 'stretch' of the 33– parts were laid up in the 33 moulds, popped out and grafted together (like Frankenstein's monster) into a longer hull, and then faired in with the fibreglass equivelent of Bondo. There was no proper lines drawing from the beginning (though one was crafted later as a record). This is more common in the industry, even now, than most would like to believe. (In some cases others' hulls are used as starting points– which borders on plagarism or copyright infringment, but it's common anyway. Is this what they mean by yacht design being a 'black art'?) The 36 was initiated in the same way but from the 35– a second-generation stretch job! When Hunter came to my father and said, 'So what's the sail plan for the 36?' he scoffed in that half-amused cynicism of his and said, 'H*ll if I know! I didn't design that boat!' [laugh] But it is true that the development of both hulls was done under his design auspices and he is rightly credited for having conducted them from the idea phase into the production phase. Being an experienced boatbuilder in many modes of construction and an abstract thinker able to seamlessly connect the idea to the concrete example, this kind of development was right up his street. The 37 however was designed as an all-new boat, about 1977 if I remember correctly which is probably before the 35 and 36. I believe it to be perhaps the best sailing boat of the whole line. The cutter rig was in vogue then– look at all the 37's contemporaries out there– and we had just done the first cutter rig on a Cherubini 44 which was Warren Luhrs' own boat. The idea was that as boat size increases, sail sizes do too, and on a one-masted boat they can become really ornery to handle for a couple in their 50s who were the target market for the boat. So on a cutter the goal was manageable sail sizes for shorthanded sailing. Nowadays with roller furling it's mere cake to deal with it. I have a few accommodation plans and one or two preliminary sail plans for the 35-36-37 boats round here, and I think lines for one of them, but I am still cataloguing 300-odd drawings in anticipation of printing and marketing posters of them one day and it is slow going. As I come upon more information I will certainly make it known to those who welcome it in these boards. J Cherubini II Cherubini Art & Nautical Design Org. JComet@aol.com
Thanks, Dave, for the nice comment. It's nice to be appreciated. I am even this week doing research on the 'upper end' of the Hunter series, the 33, 35, 36 and 37. Some of the drawings are archived with me and some with Hunter in Alachua. I have already contacted them through the 'chain of command' but will phone John or Warren personally if this does not work. As most people know the 33, 35, 36 and 37 were conceived after the smaller boats as the Hunter line progressed upwards in boat size. The core of my own involvement was in 1972-74 with the 25 and 30 and then later in '77-80 with the 54. I know that Hunter themselves stipulated development on the 35 and 36 on their own and consulted my father only after they'd decided, for the obvious cost savings in lofting (and design fees), to make each boat from existing tooling. The 35 was a 'patch job' or 'stretch' of the 33– parts were laid up in the 33 moulds, popped out and grafted together (like Frankenstein's monster) into a longer hull, and then faired in with the fibreglass equivelent of Bondo. There was no proper lines drawing from the beginning (though one was crafted later as a record). This is more common in the industry, even now, than most would like to believe. (In some cases others' hulls are used as starting points– which borders on plagarism or copyright infringment, but it's common anyway. Is this what they mean by yacht design being a 'black art'?) The 36 was initiated in the same way but from the 35– a second-generation stretch job! When Hunter came to my father and said, 'So what's the sail plan for the 36?' he scoffed in that half-amused cynicism of his and said, 'H*ll if I know! I didn't design that boat!' [laugh] But it is true that the development of both hulls was done under his design auspices and he is rightly credited for having conducted them from the idea phase into the production phase. Being an experienced boatbuilder in many modes of construction and an abstract thinker able to seamlessly connect the idea to the concrete example, this kind of development was right up his street. The 37 however was designed as an all-new boat, about 1977 if I remember correctly which is probably before the 35 and 36. I believe it to be perhaps the best sailing boat of the whole line. The cutter rig was in vogue then– look at all the 37's contemporaries out there– and we had just done the first cutter rig on a Cherubini 44 which was Warren Luhrs' own boat. The idea was that as boat size increases, sail sizes do too, and on a one-masted boat they can become really ornery to handle for a couple in their 50s who were the target market for the boat. So on a cutter the goal was manageable sail sizes for shorthanded sailing. Nowadays with roller furling it's mere cake to deal with it. I have a few accommodation plans and one or two preliminary sail plans for the 35-36-37 boats round here, and I think lines for one of them, but I am still cataloguing 300-odd drawings in anticipation of printing and marketing posters of them one day and it is slow going. As I come upon more information I will certainly make it known to those who welcome it in these boards. J Cherubini II Cherubini Art & Nautical Design Org. JComet@aol.com
K
Ken Palmer
Is this great or what?
I am so excited to have J. Cherubini II in our forums. Our posts now have answers that truly make sense, written by the son of the designer of our sailing vessels. I hope that your comments continue, and that all that read them appreciate the time you are taking to keep us informed. Ken Palmer, S/V Liberty http://www.LakeOntarioSailing.com
I am so excited to have J. Cherubini II in our forums. Our posts now have answers that truly make sense, written by the son of the designer of our sailing vessels. I hope that your comments continue, and that all that read them appreciate the time you are taking to keep us informed. Ken Palmer, S/V Liberty http://www.LakeOntarioSailing.com
E
Ed Schenck
S
Sam Lust
"Borrowing"
It seems that "borrowing" lines and swapping of molds isn't all that uncommon. Irwin and Endeavour boats in the 31 - 43 foot range in the 70's 80's seem to come from the same group of molds, just being stretched and tweaked as desired. They were in the same Florida town and shuffling molds would not have been a big problem. What sort of illegal acts do I have to perform to get my hands on copies of the original drawings for the 33? Having a set of them on the wall might be even better than having a rudder that didn't bend. ( I gotta stop running over stuff! )
It seems that "borrowing" lines and swapping of molds isn't all that uncommon. Irwin and Endeavour boats in the 31 - 43 foot range in the 70's 80's seem to come from the same group of molds, just being stretched and tweaked as desired. They were in the same Florida town and shuffling molds would not have been a big problem. What sort of illegal acts do I have to perform to get my hands on copies of the original drawings for the 33? Having a set of them on the wall might be even better than having a rudder that didn't bend. ( I gotta stop running over stuff! )
Drawings
I am even now working on getting the privilege and responsiblity of archiving Hunter's stock of obsolete Cherubini drawings. I consider my dad's work primarily art now (if you saw how he actually drew you'd understand) and believe it ought to be more widely seen as such, through exhibits and publications, etc. As I have said in a number of places I may be able (pending Hunter's OK) to make prints available over next year. I may have to lean on personal relationships for this but for now am doing it through the chain of command, so to speak. In the meantime please bear with me and let's see what they tell me. Thanks for the continued support. JC
I am even now working on getting the privilege and responsiblity of archiving Hunter's stock of obsolete Cherubini drawings. I consider my dad's work primarily art now (if you saw how he actually drew you'd understand) and believe it ought to be more widely seen as such, through exhibits and publications, etc. As I have said in a number of places I may be able (pending Hunter's OK) to make prints available over next year. I may have to lean on personal relationships for this but for now am doing it through the chain of command, so to speak. In the meantime please bear with me and let's see what they tell me. Thanks for the continued support. JC
- Status
- Not open for further replies.