Page 1 of 3
Posted: Fri Dec 19, 2008 8:49 am
My wish list includes a low power boat I can camp on. I've found a few that I like and a few that are S&G, but not one that I like that is also S&G.
I love this one I found the other day. I even ordered the "plans". It isn't S&G, but the lines look to me like it would be VERY easy to develop that way. Looks like materials would be minimal too. Only change I'd make is to make it 19-20 feet(it's 17).
I know it's a departure from typical JEM offerings, but I bet it's purpose and simplicity would appeal to many of the same people who enjoy this board. And, unless someone can prove me wrong, there isn't another S&G cruiser out there that would fit in the class with this that doesn't look like a floating refrigerator box. I've been looking for a LONG time.
After I finish my current/next project, I will build something along these lines.
Posted: Fri Dec 19, 2008 8:50 am
PS The power suggestions for this one are 2hp-6hp. The one in the pic is a 3hp.
I bet a trolling motor would do it just fine for short outings.
Posted: Fri Dec 19, 2008 9:33 am
Interesting idea. Is there a link somewhere that would describe this a little more?
One thing: With power boats, you design for the forces exerted by an engine and the associated movement through the water. You also have to design within the parameters set by the U.S. Coast Guard. Specifically, the horse power rating that is derived by a formula using the boats length and transom width. The wider the transom, the higher h.p. rating you can get. (There's other parameters involved but that's the main one).
For every power boat that has been designed with a specific max h.p. in mind, there's always some builders that want to slap an engine on that's 20% higher than the max. While a designer would likely not be held legally liable for a builder not following recommendations, putting on too big of a motor, and getting hurt (or worse), I know I wouldn't want that on my conscious.
So if something like this were to be developed, I'd size the transom so the max h.p. rating given by the U.S.C.G. would only allow up to 3hp, maybe 5hp depending on the design. Kind of a "poison pill" effect but that's what I'd be comfortable with.
Posted: Fri Dec 19, 2008 9:44 am
This one looks close but not exactly it.
Posted: Fri Dec 19, 2008 9:56 am
It's one I found at DNGoodchild. Not much description, but here's a link.
Here's another one I like. Completely different style, but same program(rivers, lakes). Looks much bigger, but based on the measures, it is about the same size. Description says it will do OK in big water. Although it should do better than "Ella Mae", I'm skeptical. I actually like this one better for more comfort if the chop gets up, but my expectation is that it would be considerably more complex.
The trick is finding one designed for low power.
Posted: Fri Dec 19, 2008 10:06 am
Something with a max beam of 47-48" would be appealing because then you can make the frames easily from a sheet of plywood and make good use of the 4 x 8 board.
Posted: Fri Dec 19, 2008 10:29 am
I agree. The only trouble with that is having a generous enough flare to "comfortably" sleep two. I'd rather add a sheet or two of wood and be a tad more comfy - admitting that will be relative in a boat this size anyway. I do some canoe camping and 10% more room would make 100% difference.
Besides, the additional width would help with the volume to offset the weight of the camping gear.
I'd want to keep the slight v forward 'cause even though it is for small water, I will likely frequently cross mildly choppy water to get there. Also, it would keep the "pat pat pat" as the boat rocks at anchor from keeping baby up all night.
I've slept(albeit uncomfortably) in a flat bottom jon and it will drive you crazy.
Posted: Fri Dec 19, 2008 10:30 am
I can post some more info on "Ella Mae" when the plans arrive. -hopefully today.
Posted: Fri Dec 19, 2008 10:32 am
Yea I just sketched a top-view outline of a basic 19' x 48" shape. Looks funky and not that useful.
Posted: Fri Dec 19, 2008 11:02 am
That cabin roof looks as though it would/could slide up and down. If it had a stowed position for underway, and an extended position for camping, you could get more headroom. Just a thought.