Some Guys Like a Big Transom on Their Girl

Sep 8, 2014
2,551
Catalina 22 Swing Keel San Diego
Sorry, I didn't realize that this thread was exclusive to only performance related issues of new hull designs... however I do see that is specifically what the OP said, I just didn't think I was breaking any rules by commenting on overall construction quality. Some posters mentioned how the sailing characteristics of new design hulls are not their cup of tea, so taking into consideration the comments of those who have sailed both (because I have sailed neither over 34 feet LOA), and my own observations of build quality, I was only saying that leads me back to more time tested lines on a hull for considerably less $$$, where I can tailor all the details to the higher standards I would expect from the current offerings in new production hulls. Man I love run-on sentences... lol.

Cloud,

I TOTALLY get what you are saying. And I respect your choice on what to do with your own money. My comment (and it was a bit snarky, sorry!) was directed at the placement of your comment HERE, in this very interesting thread about modern sailboat performance. Interjecting a comment on your option on the built quality of these boats without ANY thought on the actual topic sounded unseemly, and well, like sour grapes. If you want to start a thread about construction details on new boats, start one. I'll probably comment. I have my fair share of stories.
 
Nov 8, 2010
11,386
Beneteau First 36.7 & 260 Minneapolis MN & Bayfield WI
Back to our regularity scheduled program, already in progress...

A US take on wide-transomed boats, the new Catalina 275 sport. It carries it's full beam ALL the way back to the transom. The crazy idea that someone might trailer this girl limits the beam to 8'6". I think it looks like a fun boat. Will it plane? I have not heard. The actual displacement ended up being over 5000 lbs, not the 4500 they guessed when drawing here.

 
May 24, 2004
7,173
CC 30 South Florida
Woodster,

This is actually not true, but an often-told misconception.

From the mid 30s thhrough the end of WWII, the US government commissioned Owens-Corning, DuPont, and American Cyanamid with developing fiberglass for aircraft design, and lavished millions of dollars on the work. By the end of the war, the strength, durability, and design characteristics of fiberglass were VERY well known.

At least to engineers.

What IS true is that many old-school boat builders simply used fiberglass as a replacement for wood, and used the scantlings and schedules for wood boats on the new boats. As the majority of them were not engineers, it would take a new generation of engineer/navel architects to sort that out.

Fast forward. Now we have boats that are stronger, lighter and faster than the old designs. Gotta love science.
Jackdaw I totally agree with your debunking of the fiberglass myth and your conclusion that today's boats are stronger, lighter and faster. Referring to the old fiberglass boats you say it well when indicating old school boat builders may have simply used fiberglass as a replacement for wood. I think that helps understand why older boats may have been overbuild. The technical data and material science was probably known but the boat designers may not have known how to marry it to boat building. I think the actual myth could have been the general thinking that we had all this material data on wood. I think wood boat designers and builders relied more on time tested parameters than the engineering data available for wood. Perhaps when the time came to make the transition we lacked the basis for comparison. The construction processes were different and so would procedures for repairs. A lot was not known but we do know now that boats are stronger than they were.
 
Jun 2, 2007
404
Beneteau First 375 Slidell, LA
We were at the St. Pete boat show too. No one has mentioned the big increase in freeboard that goes along with the increased beam. Good grief, with the two combined it looked like the new Beneteau 38 was twice the size of our old 375. Wife and I were really turned off by the Ikea interior, though.
On a completely unrelated note, it was great getting to meet John Kretschmer at one of the seminars.
 
Nov 8, 2010
11,386
Beneteau First 36.7 & 260 Minneapolis MN & Bayfield WI
We were at the St. Pete boat show too. No one has mentioned the big increase in freeboard that goes along with the increased beam. Good grief, with the two combined it looked like the new Beneteau 38 was twice the size of our old 375. Wife and I were really turned off by the Ikea interior, though.
On a completely unrelated note, it was great getting to meet John Kretschmer at one of the seminars.
Sandy,
That's the 38 with the modular interior. What did you think about it concept-wise?

Tall freeboard is not a function of wide beam, the extra beam just helps make it look somewhat proportional if the designer wants to use extra freeboard to get more volume. Some wide transomed boats have sexy low freeboard as well.

 
Jun 2, 2007
404
Beneteau First 375 Slidell, LA
No, of course the two don't have to go together, but the manufacturers are obviously trying to maximize interior volume. On the Bene 38, without the main bulkhead in place it looked like a gymnasium down below. Personally, I couldn't picture myself trying to move around with the boat heeled in a seaway.
 
Aug 8, 2013
15
Oday Javelin & 222 Spring Creek Fl
I see your point

Well that sounds a little like a fox and the grapes story, but I'll bite.

Any new $250000-$500000 production boat (just like a house for that matter) will have issues that need to be corrected after the sail. Buy a new house, and the punch list keeps the contractor coming back for a solid month. Same with boats. When buying a new boat, you pick the boat and the dealer. Visit the yard when it's being built. Review it before it ships. Review it after it gets to the dealer. Dealer sails with you for a shakedown. I have friends with J-109s and J-111s and they had to do the same thing.


All I can add is that you have a fine suit of clothing there Sire;)
 
Jan 1, 2006
7,586
Slickcraft 26 Sailfish
The current issue of SAIL has a picture of the new maxi Comanche from behind that made me think of this thread. If you're looking for an example of a wide hull, with the width carried all the way aft, on a flat bottom, this is it. It's approaching catamaran wide. In the picture it looks like the crew is almost as high above the water on the weather side as a cat. Otherwise it looks like a pretty wet ride. The blurb quotes Ken Read as saying this is the beginning of a 3 year cycle with the boat. After that, I guess it gets sold and it's on to the next extreme. At least it's good for the builders and their employees.
 
Dec 29, 2008
806
Treworgy 65' LOA Custom Steel Pilothouse Staysail Ketch St. Croix, Virgin Islands
Flat bottom pounding

I just returned from an offshore passage from Rhode Island to Bermuda, and Bermuda to Tortola in a Jeanneau 54 Sun Odyssey. It is true that there is a lot of space in the cabins and saloon, and the cockpit was spacious and comfortable. However, that flat bottom was unnerving. So many times per minute, when we rounded wave crests and that flat bottom hit the trough, it amazed me that the boat didn't just split open, the pounding was so violent. I'm afraid I could not own a boat with such characteristics and feel comfortable with it.
 
Nov 8, 2010
11,386
Beneteau First 36.7 & 260 Minneapolis MN & Bayfield WI
Some thoughts from the guy who designed the current Volvo Ocean Race (VOR65) boat:

As you move into this high sail area, high stability, light displacement (planing race boat) design space, the chined hull form starts become very appealing. For a given beam, the chine lets us maximize form stability when heeled, while the flatter sections that result provide dynamic lift that assist the boat into the transitional planing regime and provide a more optimal shape for high speed. On these wider boats, the chine also acts to give some directional stability to the boat when sailing at heel, which assists handling and allows for higher average speeds especially on the short-handed boats. There are an infinite number of takes on how to blend the chines into the sections forward, but the objective is to develop a shape that is fine enough to go through waves well but one that also provides dynamic and buoyant lift to keep the bow up when sailing at speed and heel. Remember that unlike a powerboat we have to resist a sizeable pitching moment from the sails and this needs both a hull that reacts well with speed and the help of crew weight and stack aft and the use of water ballast in some cases. The quest for dynamic bow up trim has been one drive for the use of spray strakes and other sectional features forward that we have seen implemented on a number of VO70’s and IMOCA 60’s.

For classes like the TP52’s or IRC 72’s that sail more windward-leeward races and have lower average speeds, the small amount of low speed added drag from the chine makes the choice a little more nuanced. We see explorations of shapes both with chines and with rounded off chines or lifted high hard bilges. The choice to go with chines is all about rule limitations, the type of racing and the targeted sailing conditions.

That covers the high performance choices you say, but why is it that so many of the latest production cruising boats have chines?

Clearly these boats aren’t designed to plane and sail around the ocean at high speed. No doubt, some of it is fashion bringing some of the high performance features down to the masses and giving the boats a straighter, more modern look. Beyond a fashion statement there are some advantages in allowing wider total beam aft, resulting in more deck space and the ability in smaller models to fit twin wheels. For cruising boats, chines can be complementary to the function of twin rudders. Performance differences aside, cruising boats often appreciate the control that twin rudders and chines provide when the boat is overpowered. For these heavier cruising boats there is a drag penalty due to the chine but it allows a big increase in form stability and a much larger interior volume for accommodations. Compare a modern 35’ cruising boat with one from even 5 years ago and the amount of usable interior volume and deck space that’s been added is staggering. The chine helps us achieve this interior volume without significant waterline beam increases. This keeps the low speed and low heel drag manageable while taking advantage of the control and righting moment of the chines at higher heel angles. The increased form stability also helps us achieve stability requirements without piling on keel weight that is a significant cost center.

The bottom line is there are no hard and fast rules about where and when to use a chined hull shape. As with all the other parts of a yacht design, nothing comes for free and each design needs to balance the performance trade-offs with the design objectives to come up with the right solution.
 

ghost

.
May 18, 2007
50
NULL NULL Toronto
Here is a good comparison, a 1979 Viking 34 & a 1996 First 36S7. Only 2 feet different but size difference is huge.
 

Attachments

Jan 1, 2006
7,586
Slickcraft 26 Sailfish
I'd like to introduce the comparison between the hard chined modern high end racing boats and the venerable sharpie. Of course sharpies weren't designed for speed, or to plane or to race, with their workboat origins. But with modest lateral resistance they could dig that hard chine in and create some lateral resistance. and work to weather. Skip to the future: The hard chine, as said by Jackdaw's source, allows the same directional stability (Lateral resistance), while having the flat planing aft sections. Of course the work boats needed form stability, with shallow draft, so baymen could dredge for oysters, or rake for clams or whatever. The racing boats need form stability from the chine to lift the flat bottom out of the water to reduce drag in the upwind mode.
If I'm not off base here, I think it's fascinating that an old design is reinvented, and completely re-vitalized for the most modern designs.
As far as the application to cruising boats, I'm not sure it works. But I'm willing to hear other opinions. For blue water applications I'm more skeptical, especially in light of NotCook's experience. And, my less important experience of being slapped around in my H356 by a following sea.