A New 33' Quasi Mac?

[AWKIII]

Hi All.

Sorry for the delay in posting. I am finishing things up here in California and am scheduled to head back to Colorado tomorrow. Just thought you would like an update:

The Agreement has been finalized and contracts have been signed! We will be building two boats simultaneously...the one design racer and the cruiser. When I left the yard yesterday they had already cleaned the molds and were waxing them. We will build the hulls first, then the decks and finish up with liners. The first of the hulls will be ready to be pulled around the second week of January and will be used as the prototype for the cruiser.

The first two boats will be constructed in Southern California. We have still not made any decisions moving forward. California is a tough place to do business. It is expensive and there are air quality issues that will need to be addressed. Obviously, Colorado is also an option we are looking at.

It is important to note this boat will not be a "powersailor" when compared to the MacGregor 26 or Hunter Edge. This is a 33' boat designed to sail exceptionally well and be easily launched, rigged and retrieved from a trailer. However, we spent a tremendous amount of time looking at the motoring side of things and think we have developed something pretty interesting. Based on initial calculations, it looks like we will be able to drive 8 knots (9.2 mph) of boat speed with a 15 to 20 horse 4-stroke outboard. It can have power tilt, electric start and controls led to a pedestal.

9.2 isn't shabby. Especially when you consider there are no adjustments to daggerboards, rudders or ballast to deal with. The other advantage is cost. No more $6K to $8K in engine expense. A fully featured 15 or 20 is a bargain.

That's the scoop from the left coast.

Regards,

Art

[ralphk]

Nicely done Art:

You're at a threshold now and will feel a variety of forces pulling you in different directions.

My years as a project manager is kicking in now, and I'm sorry if my tone over the next paragraph comes across a little preachy.

It seems to me that there are dozens of outstanding sailboat designs in the marketplace, that very capable people, have spent countless months fine-tuning.
There's probably an order of magnitude more brainstorming and sketching out there, that never got past the prototype stage.
As more good ideas flow in, about qualities people desire in the boat, I feel that it might be time to restate the design objectives.

To me and the admiral, the value proposition is;

1) Unmatched trailerability for a midsize
2) Affordability (relative to class)

To the forum:
Racing performance, cruising convenience, appearance, bling factor: are all purely subjective and depend on the end-users expectations.
No one, not Art, not Roger, can outright win at these; only compromise.

whew! There, I'll get off my soapbox
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Here's my wish list to ensure that #1 trailerability goal is met.

- If at all possible; single-handed mast raising.
- Primary and manual backup system for raising centerboard single-handed
- Similarly, means to raise the rudder single-handed
- Option of a dedicated mast raising halyard preferred or fittings/hardware to ensure that use of the jib halyard as the mast raiser is idiotproof. (even in fading light being attacked by mosquitoes )
- Mast raising Ginpole upsized from MacGregor 26X/M
- Option for single-handed partial mast lowering, as when navigating under bridges
- Flotation/displacement attributes so that the required launch ramp is similar to MacGregor 26X/M requirements
- Supports for mast (when stored or trailering) on deck upsized from MacGregor 26X/M
- Upgraded hardware (preferably recessed) on the topsides to attach baby stays. for mast raising/lowering
- Upgraded hardware (preferably recessed) on the topsides for a mast support at midspan for trailering and winter storage.
- Galvanized trailer with electric brakes, suitable for saltwater immersion (# of axles TBD)
– Guides, self-centering bunks, to ensure exact placement of displacement hull on trailer.
- Geometry of any temporary mast supports working in concert with future dodger/bimini enclosure framing.


Ralph k.

[AWKIII]

Hi Ralph.

There is no doubt in my mind there will be criticism directed at the boat. There hasn't been a perfect one built and there never will be.

I believe the biggest complaints we will encounter are the 8' beam (some will want 9' plus) and the fact it will not carry a 50 horse engine.

We are focusing primarily on sailing performance, trailerability and affordability. As discussed, we feel the boat will do 9 mph with a 15 horse outboard which will move most around at a pretty decent clip. There has never been an intention to re-invent the powersailor nor build a competitor to it.

As far as ease of rigging, launching and retrieving....the process will be simple and painless. I have seen photos and a video clip of a young woman doing it by herself.

Affordability is a pretty subjective term. The results of the poll are pretty interesting. A new base Mac without transport or motor is closing in on $22K. A fully equipped boat runs in the $32 to $35K range. There is a large percentage of respondees who expect a boat over 7' longer in length with better build quality and hardware for almost the same price. This will be impossible to deliver. However, the middle to upper price ranges in the poll are more realistic.

There should not be any concerns about the quality of construction or finish work. Hardware, spars, etc. will be name-brand. The boat will have comfortable and practical cruising amenities below but there will not be a forest of wood used to finish it off.

Will keep you all updated.

Art

[Richard O'Brien]

Here are some of my ideas: I'm guessing the Naval architect is saying " Oh no, not another amateur design" I know that's my reaction with new clients sometimes."

[Indulgence]

When cruising, aside from shore time, we might spend six hours in the cockpit, two
in the cabin (more in bad weather), eight in our berths and maybe ten minutes a day in the head.

I don't pretend to know squat, but it seems to me the layout of a boat ought to reflect these usages.
It would be nice to have a slightly larger head than in our Mac and I totally agree with placing
it forward. But given the choice I wouldn't waste nearly so much boat space on the separate head and shower.
We always seem to be looking for places to store things more than anything else.

- The hanging locker next to the companionway step is perfect. The head on our 26X often serves
this purpose!

- I'd suggest combining the shower/head into one cabinet. It's footprint could be increased during
use with a fold away door.

- One hanging locker is enough, ditch the one next to the head.

Move the bulkhead between the cabin and the vee berth forward
a couple of feet (to the front of the centerboard trunk) and maximize
cabin/cockpit space. Bench seat with storage across from head.

Nice work Richard. I have some troublesome clients and I often say
it is way easier to improve and modify a prelim design than hand them a blank piece of
paper. Thanks for doing this.

Laurie

[Richard O'Brien]

Ok here's another possibility: I like the idea of having a separate draining locker near the stern for a small generator, but everything else is movable for me.

Thanks Ralph, for giving us something to work with.

[Duane Dunn, Allegro]

My only concern about the last two designs access. So some people are seated at the table playing a game of cards, and another person comes down from the cockpit and wants to use the head. Now we have to interrupt the card game, move the cards to half a table area, make people get out of their seats, fold the table down. The guy goes to the head, 5 minutes later needs to get back aft, do it all again. You get the picture. I think it is a mistake to set things up in a way that people have to move to let other people do something else. It's exactly what was bad in the early M design and no doubt why Roger quickly changed the M layout.

I would offer a very different division of the cruising hours base on my last 7 years with our X. Out at anchor in a beautiful marine park with a family. Sleeping, 10 hours; Cooking and Dining below, 3 hours; Watching a movie below, 2 hours; Relaxing in cockpit with kids below doing an activity, 2 hours; Various trips ashore via dinghy, 4 hours; Naps below, 2 hours; Housekeeping below, 1 hour.

In general, on our cruises, there is almost always one or more persons down below doing something. Having a cabin that facilitates multiple activities at the same time, interference free, always with clear passage for people to move around is very important. I'm looking at this from a true cruising standpoint, many people, out for many days. There needs to be places where people can go to do something and not be in the way of other people doing something else. Asking someone to move for the 3rd time on a day or weekend trip is no big deal. Asking someone to move for the 50th time on a 2 week cruise gets very old for both parties.

[Richard O'Brien]

I drew the table along the axis of the keel well, because i assume it rises afoot or two above the bilge? As Duane observed, the table is awkward. I too kind of like other options? Maybe the table can be set perpendicular to the wall like the post 2004 M design. Would that force someone to step over the keel "trunk"? Any other ideas? Maybe the seating could be U-shaped. Do we need to make the settee long enough for a berth too?

Richard

[Duane Dunn, Allegro]

My comments were mainly to point out issues with the table forward / seating on both sides layout.

I much prefer the first design with the entire port side a long stretched out U seating area with table and no table on the starboard side. The starboard side is the long galley and an aisle that is always open for passage, never blocked by a table.

I do like the enlarged head with shower and the vee shaped standing area just aft of the vee berth. The shower might be a bit large however. I would think a combo of the head options in the later drawings with the port seating and starboard aisle/galley of the early option would be possible.

[Québec 1]

The ranger 33 has a great interior and it is 9.7 feet wide!

http://www.members.dca.net/pwink/ranger/ranger.htm

[ralphk]

Thanks Richard for posting another iteration and giving us some really good ideas.
I especially like the deep locker for a genny and a locker encroaching on the portside aft berth.
We too, use the Mac26X head as a storage locker, so it limits us to Marina slips every evening, at least when the Admiral is present.

The biggest challenge is of course, is what to do with the table and the darn swing keel well?
I am most impressed with how Duane and Richard have thoughtfully considered usage patterns to support the design configuration.

I'd like to draw both layouts and dimension the walking path from the companionway to the forward hatch location above the v-berth.
It seems to me that a barrier free route is pretty important for the majority of users.

I just thought of another variable that really changes the usage of the cabin.
Is the owner likely to purchase a full enclosure?
We own the Dowsar enclosure and so 75% of the meals, afterdinner cocktails and 50% of the cardgames (family of 5) are all played in the cockpit.
(I suppose that one could make the argument that acquiring a nice enclosure is the response to inadequate living space from the factory.)


Please get your suggestion's in, by Jan. 1st and I'll try to accomodate.

Ralph k.

Belated Merry Christmas.

PS The drafting likely won't happen until New Year's as my primary computer is being rebuilt from the keel up.

[ralphk]

Another

Should the galley be to starboard or port?

[bubba]

Where is the photo of it on a trailor and what do you pull it with ?

[AWKIII]

Merry Christmas!

I have never taken the time to figure out how to post pictures to the site.

If someone would PM me with their e-mail address, I will forward them for posting.

What you will be seeing is a few shots of the One Design Racer. Please note this is NOT the re-designed version. There was only one built as a prototype and it was sold. I have several photographs of it but have not had the time to scan them. The two are essentially identical. However, the transom and cockpit were completely redesigned.

As you will see, this boat is an absolutely perfect platform to build a trailerable cruising 33 footer from. We are simply adding freeboard plus adding height and length to the cabin coach roof. The ports will be re-positioned as necessary.

Art

[AWKIII]

Hi Guys.

Keep banging away!

I haven't commented on any of the ideas as I do not wish to inject my own personal opinions. It is very important for me to see what the potential end user wants in a boat...not what I think they want.

We need to nail down the layout as soon as possible. I am due to head back to California in mid-January and want to bring the drawing with me.

After you have agreed on a final layout, we can talk about systems. Electrical, plumbing, etc.

A couple of comments.

1. Be very careful when looking at the interior of the Ranger 33. She carries over 9 and a 1/2 feet of beam. The difference is massive and it is nearly impossible to compare it with a boat with 8'.

2. I would suggest coming up with a different entry/exit point for the rear double. This boat is not going to have the massive freeboard of the MacGregor and I am not sure at this point if there will be sufficent room to enter from center line due to the depth of the cockpit flooring.

Art