When designing a new boat, it is standard procedure to study what has been
done before in that area. We usually know how other boats performed and it is
not difficult to extrapolate from all that data to predict a new design's performance
and characteristics.
VPP programs are another tool but only measure speed potential.
Boat design manuals are full of graphs and formulas and professional designers
keep archives if not databases of designs and plans.
We have a good collection of boat plans and hundreds of books and magazines.
In this case, we will compare characteristics, ratios and features from boats that fit our description.
We will start with the designs that we listed during the previous step and
add a few others.
(Despite their names, all the boats below are around 27-28'. Many of the
specifications are in metric.)
Our preferred design was a mix of the RM800 and the Flot 26 designed by S.
Langevin.
The Flot 26 is designed for aluminum, 7 panels for the hull instead of our 5
but all other characteristics are very close to our ideal boat.
Flot 26:


Pros:
Cons:
The RM800 appeared on the previous page, when we looked at standing headroom but here is some more information:



Pros:
Cons:
The boat is very wide: 11' for 28' long! I suspect that despite good reports
in French sailing magazines, she may be difficult to control under certain conditions.
French have different standards: very good sailors, they expect boats to behave
like a racing car but we want a cruising boat.
We will need less beam but not much less. The advantages of the wide beam are
clear: the boat is incredibly spacious, inside and outside.
Another point is that the RM800 is designed for twin keels. We exchanged mail
with Marc about reselling the plans but the hull was designed exclusively for
the twin keels and they were impossible to make for an amateur. This means expensive
castings: out of question.
Some features of the RM800 will be discussed later: there are great ideas in
that design.
Before we proceed with other boats, note the similarity in the layouts.
In each case, the designer was able fit a nice, wide double berth in an aft
cabin and there is standing headroom in most of the boat.
Those three boats look good too.
The 7/8 sailplans of the RM800 and Flot 26 are attractive. They could be rigged
as cutters if the builders prefer.
From first hand experience, reports from reliable friends, magazine tests, gossips
etc., we also know that those boats sail well, each in his own way.
To this list, we could add the Multichine 28 from Roberto Barros. That architect
is designing in the same style but the Multichine 28 is in reality a 29 footer,
32' LOA and a little bit out of our range.
We looked at the Dudley Dix designs and while they look great, none fitted our
description.
Let's include some production boats.
Researching our magazine archives, we found a fascinating comparison article
between the RM800 and three well know production boats:
the Etap 26,


First 260

Note the angle of the tiller and the wake: with a wider boat like the RM800 you would be in troubles!


Features that I like: the centerboard integrated in the keel.
Hunter 280.


Features that I like: just as in the RM800, nice skirt and portholes, nice interior layout with the typical forward double bunk and U shaped saloon. The Hunter 28 is the largest boat in our group.
Here is the table with their specs in metric and some ratios:
|
Flot 26
|
RM800
|
Etap 26
|
Hunter 280
|
First 260
|
VG27
|
|
|
LOA
|
8
|
8
|
7.85
|
8.46
|
7.5
|
8
|
|
Beam
|
3
|
3.4
|
2.78
|
2.93
|
2.76
|
2.95
|
|
ratio L/B
|
0.38
|
0.43
|
0.35
|
0.35
|
0.37
|
0.37
|
|
draft low
|
0.3
|
0.5
|
0.85
|
0.75
|
||
|
draft deep
|
1.75
|
1.2
|
1.55
|
1.22
|
1.85
|
1.6
|
|
SA/m2
|
42
|
40
|
30
|
29
|
35
|
40
|
|
empty kg
|
1,600
|
1,800
|
2,300
|
2,950
|
2,300
|
1,700
|
|
loaded kg
|
2,100
|
2,400
|
?
|
?
|
?
|
2,400
|
|
ballast kg
|
400
|
(950)
|
850
|
950
|
600
|
650
|
|
SA/D
|
20
|
16.7
|
13
|
9.8
|
15.2
|
16.7
|
|
ballast/D
|
19%
|
(40%)
|
(28%)
|
(26%)
|
26%
|
27%
|
The (figures in italic) are thoseabout which I have doubts either because the brochure states displacement = empty boat weight and I had to guess or because they are out of the norms.
The last column shows the specs around which we will design our boat.
There is much to say about the boats listed above and the choices we made but we'll keep that for next week. I wanted to post this to give you something to think about on the week-end!
In the next step, we'll start to sketch our boat.
Which one is your preferred boat?
Flot 26
RM800
Etap 26
First 260
Hunter 280
VG27
Custom Search
|
|