Is the Toto too small for a 250 pounder?

--- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, "grafxmangrafxman" <grafxman@...> wrote:
>
> Is the Toto too small for a 250 pounder?
>
Toto as designed has 180 lb floatation. Michalak claims, "In good
conditions she will paddle two adults" Larsboat has a "30" plug added
in the middle to gain capacity."

So the preferred choice might be to decide if you might have a second
person with you some of time, and are not concerned about the added
hull weight with Larsboat.

Nels

Actually the quote is "180 pounds of buoyancy volume if the hatch cover
stays watertight" so I'm not sure exactly what that means when the
description also says it will paddle two adults. Are those 90 pound
adults? I was hoping that someone who has actually built one, who
perhaps weighs 200 pounds or thereabouts would respond and say yes it
has 6 inches of freeboard or no it only has 1 inch of freeboard. Thanks
anyway Nels.

Roger

--- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, "Nels" <arvent@...> wrote:
>
> --- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, "grafxmangrafxman" <grafxman@> wrote:
> >
> > Is the Toto too small for a 250 pounder?
> >
> Toto as designed has 180 lb floatation. Michalak claims, "In good
> conditions she will paddle two adults" Larsboat has a "30" plug added
> in the middle to gain capacity."
>
> So the preferred choice might be to decide if you might have a second
> person with you some of time, and are not concerned about the added
> hull weight with Larsboat.
>
> Nels
>

I weigh 180 and often take my daughter along, for a total of about 235 lb.,
at that weight it is fine.

Bill


On Sat, Mar 1, 2008 at 6:44 PM, grafxmangrafxman <grafxman@...>
wrote:

>   Actually the quote is "180 pounds of buoyancy volume if the hatch cover
> stays watertight" so I'm not sure exactly what that means when the
> description also says it will paddle two adults. Are those 90 pound
> adults? I was hoping that someone who has actually built one, who
> perhaps weighs 200 pounds or thereabouts would respond and say yes it
> has 6 inches of freeboard or no it only has 1 inch of freeboard. Thanks
> anyway Nels.
>
> Roger
>
>
> --- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com <Michalak%40yahoogroups.com>, "Nels"
> <arvent@...> wrote:
> >
> > --- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com <Michalak%40yahoogroups.com>,
> "grafxmangrafxman" <grafxman@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Is the Toto too small for a 250 pounder?
> > >
> > Toto as designed has 180 lb floatation. Michalak claims, "In good
> > conditions she will paddle two adults" Larsboat has a "30" plug added
> > in the middle to gain capacity."
> >
> > So the preferred choice might be to decide if you might have a second
> > person with you some of time, and are not concerned about the added
> > hull weight with Larsboat.
> >
> > Nels
> >
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Thanks a lot Bill. That's what I was hoping to hear.

Roger


--- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, "Bill Turnbull" <BillTurnbull@...>
wrote:
>
> I weigh 180 and often take my daughter along, for a total of about
235 lb.,
> at that weight it is fine.
>
> Bill
>
>
> On Sat, Mar 1, 2008 at 6:44 PM, grafxmangrafxman <grafxman@...>
> wrote:
>
> >   Actually the quote is "180 pounds of buoyancy volume if the hatch
cover
> > stays watertight" so I'm not sure exactly what that means when the
> > description also says it will paddle two adults. Are those 90 pound
> > adults? I was hoping that someone who has actually built one, who
> > perhaps weighs 200 pounds or thereabouts would respond and say yes
it
> > has 6 inches of freeboard or no it only has 1 inch of freeboard.
Thanks
> > anyway Nels.
> >
> > Roger
> >
> >
> > --- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com <Michalak%40yahoogroups.com>,
"Nels"
> > <arvent@> wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com <Michalak%40yahoogroups.com>,
> > "grafxmangrafxman" <grafxman@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Is the Toto too small for a 250 pounder?
> > > >
> > > Toto as designed has 180 lb floatation. Michalak claims, "In good
> > > conditions she will paddle two adults" Larsboat has a "30" plug
added
> > > in the middle to gain capacity."
> > >
> > > So the preferred choice might be to decide if you might have a
second
> > > person with you some of time, and are not concerned about the
added
> > > hull weight with Larsboat.
> > >
> > > Nels
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

THE 19TH ANNUAL MIDWEST MESSABOUT WILL BE HELD THE WEEKEND
OF JUNE 6, 7, & 8 2008 @ GUN CREEK CAMPGROUND @ REND LAKE IN
SOUTH CENTRAL ILLINOIS.

Although the focus of this event is on homemade boats,
factory boats are always welcome as are people with
no boats but who have an interest in homemade boats.

This is a very loosely-organized (in other words, it's
disorganized) event. Generally people just kind of
hang-out and look at each other's boats and maybe
try-out each other's boats and talk about each other's
boats and so on and so forth.

Although most people camp in the campgound (reservations
can be made here )

http://www.recreation.gov/welcome.do?topTabIndex=Home


...a few people stay at some nearby rental condos (very nice
and right next to the campground- in fact you drive right
by the condos to get into the campground)

http://www.rendlake.org/lodging-dining/luxurylodge.shtml

People usually start arriving Friday around mid-day, and
people are usually packing-up and leaving Sunday by noon,
so Saturday is the big day. If you show up at noon on
Sunday most people will be gone by then.

Although there are some camp spots right on the water,
if you can not get a spot on the water or are staying
at the condos, you can usually leave your boat at one
of the waterfront spots. I have reserved spots #48 and
#56, and Wisconsin Rob has reserved #55

If you would rather sleep on your boat, you can dispense
with the camp spot/condo and leave your trailer and
vehicle at the launch ramp parking lot. I believe that
the ramp fee is $3.00/ day and I have done this in the
past. By the way, if you pay the $14.00/ night for a
campspot, use of the ramp is included at no extra charge.

The ramp parking lot is well lighted and located between
a golf course and the campground and even has decent
"facilities."

WARNING WARNING There is usually a bass tournement
on Sat. morning at the ramp so it is a noisy place
from 4:00 to 6:00 am Sat.

You are on your own as far as meals go, with the following
exceptions: It is customary for some of us to breakfast
Saturday and Sunday mornings at a greasy spoon
about 2 miles from the campground. There is a gas
station/convenience store right there also,
and is a good place to pick-up ice or whatever.

And there is a group supper on Saturday evening. If you
wish to bring food or donate money for the supper you
are welcome to but not required to. This is how the
Sat. group supper works: in the late afternoon we will
get a head count of how many people want to eat my cooking
vs. the number of people who are smarter. We will then
inventory such food that anyone might have brought. Then,
a couple of us will make a trip into Super Walmart to
pick up everything else we need for the supper, which usually
consists of burgers, hotdogs, chips, chile and/or beans, etc.

I will take care of the dessert.

By the way, we used to shop at Big Johns Grocery but
Big John shut down when Walmart opened.

That is pretty much it. Although I think you can still
get a campspot even if you show up with no reservations,
things have been getting more and more crowded each year.

It is also sometimes possible to find someone willing to
share their campspot with a fellow boater- sometimes such
arrangements are made on this board.

Here is a write-up on last year's event:

http://homepages.apci.net/~michalak/15jun07.htm


and here's another;

http://www.chebacco.com/articles/020/02/article.html


That's about it.


Max

> Toto as designed has 180 lb floatation.

This is the volume of the flotation chamber in cubic feet times the
weight of water in a cubic foot.  180 lbs floatation would float the
weight of the boat if swamped.  Subtract the weight of the boat from
180 and you might get 120 lbs.  The normal life jacket has 22 lbs of
bouyancy.  So, the floation in the boat might keep the boat plus 5
adults in the water alongside of it afloat, all of them wet and miserable.

My Piccup Pram has about 760 lbs of floatation, so if it were upside
down I could put 3 adults on the bottom and we would all be completely
dry...that is if we could get out of the boat and onto the bottom
without getting wet.

This is different than the displacement which is the weight of the
water that the boat displaces.  If you take the normal displacement
given on a set of plans and subtract the boat weight you have the
weight of allowable crew and supplies.  e.g. My Piccup displaces 490
lbs.  Subtracting 100 lbs boat weight gives 390 pounds of crew and
supplies.  Or 2+ adults.  I've had 4 adults in it and it is slow, but
sails fine that way.

Jim gives his expected displacement on his plans at the waterline at
the bow.

Whew.  That's a lot of words when you already have your question
answered.  Sorry.  I just got started and couldn't stop writing.

Reed

--- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, "captreed48" <captreed@...> wrote:
>
>
> > Toto as designed has 180 lb floatation.
>
> This is the volume of the flotation chamber in cubic feet times the
> weight of water in a cubic foot.  180 lbs floatation would float the
> weight of the boat if swamped.  Subtract the weight of the boat from
> 180 and you might get 120 lbs.  The normal life jacket has 22 lbs of
> bouyancy.  So, the floation in the boat might keep the boat plus 5
> adults in the water alongside of it afloat, all of them wet and
miserable.
>
> My Piccup Pram has about 760 lbs of floatation, so if it were upside
> down I could put 3 adults on the bottom and we would all be completely
> dry...that is if we could get out of the boat and onto the bottom
> without getting wet.
>
> This is different than the displacement which is the weight of the
> water that the boat displaces.  If you take the normal displacement
> given on a set of plans and subtract the boat weight you have the
> weight of allowable crew and supplies.  e.g. My Piccup displaces 490
> lbs.  Subtracting 100 lbs boat weight gives 390 pounds of crew and
> supplies.  Or 2+ adults.  I've had 4 adults in it and it is slow, but
> sails fine that way.
>
> Jim gives his expected displacement on his plans at the waterline at
> the bow.
>
> Whew.  That's a lot of words when you already have your question
> answered.  Sorry.  I just got started and couldn't stop writing.
>
> Reed
>
The Piccup Pram has to be one of the greatest little designs for
carrying capacity and safety and can fit in the back of a truck box to!

I found what your wrote to be very helpful:-)

Nels

Just a reminder. As drawn by Jim, the only flotation chamber is
located in the stern.

My .02. Adding a bow flotation chamber - as many have done - should I
suspect, double the flotation.

Bryant

--- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, "captreed48" <captreed@...> wrote:
>
>
> > Toto as designed has 180 lb floatation.
>
> This is the volume of the flotation chamber in cubic feet times the
> weight of water in a cubic foot.  180 lbs floatation would float the
> weight of the boat if swamped.  Subtract the weight of the boat from
> 180 and you might get 120 lbs.  The normal life jacket has 22 lbs of
> bouyancy.  So, the floation in the boat might keep the boat plus 5
> adults in the water alongside of it afloat, all of them wet and
miserable.
>
> My Piccup Pram has about 760 lbs of floatation, so if it were upside
> down I could put 3 adults on the bottom and we would all be completely
> dry...that is if we could get out of the boat and onto the bottom
> without getting wet.
>
> This is different than the displacement which is the weight of the
> water that the boat displaces.  If you take the normal displacement
> given on a set of plans and subtract the boat weight you have the
> weight of allowable crew and supplies.  e.g. My Piccup displaces 490
> lbs.  Subtracting 100 lbs boat weight gives 390 pounds of crew and
> supplies.  Or 2+ adults.  I've had 4 adults in it and it is slow, but
> sails fine that way.
>
> Jim gives his expected displacement on his plans at the waterline at
> the bow.
>
> Whew.  That's a lot of words when you already have your question
> answered.  Sorry.  I just got started and couldn't stop writing.
>
> Reed
>

Oh, no, not another set of plans to order!

Bryant

--- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, "Nels" <arvent@...> wrote:
<snip>
> The Piccup Pram has to be one of the greatest little designs for
> carrying capacity and safety and can fit in the back of a truck box to!
>
> I found what your wrote to be very helpful:-)
>
> Nels
>

--- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, "Bryant Owen" <mariner@...> wrote:
>
> Oh, no, not another set of plans to order!
>
> Bryant


Actually I modified mine so it's more like a Mixer...a great little boat.

Reed

Tell us more about this PP/Mixer. Why? How did it work?

Bryant

--- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, "captreed48" <captreed@...> wrote:
>
> --- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, "Bryant Owen" <mariner@> wrote:
> >
> > Oh, no, not another set of plans to order!
> >
> > Bryant
>
>
> Actually I modified mine so it's more like a Mixer...a great little
boat.
>
> Reed
>

> Tell us more about this PP/Mixer. Why? How did it work?
>
> Bryant


With the Piccup Pram I thought that the bottom of the bow transom was
too low.  At first every wave I encountered splashed up and over the
fore deck and ran down into the cockpit.  I added a splash board on
the deck that diverted this water over the side and that helped.

Then it seemed that waves I met going to windward were hitting the
bow transom and slowing the boat down.  I cut off the bow transom,
added about a foot to the side and bilge planks and brought them to a
point, much a Jim M. did in his Mixer design.  All of this was done
in correspondence with Jim and led to the Mixer design.  I found the
boat to be drier and faster to windward.

A significant difference?  Maybe not, but I'm happy with the
results.  Now I'm thinking of building an IMB. In that design the
waterline is quite a ways below bottom of the bow transom.

Reed

Thanks a lot Reed. Like Nels, I too found your explanation very helpful
and it explained something I knew nothing about. Unfortunately it made
my head explode and now I have to go to the hospital.  ;)

Roger


--- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, "Nels" <arvent@...> wrote:
>
> --- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, "captreed48" <captreed@> wrote:
> >
> >
> > > Toto as designed has 180 lb floatation.
> >
> > This is the volume of the flotation chamber in cubic feet times the
> > weight of water in a cubic foot.  180 lbs floatation would float the
> > weight of the boat if swamped.  Subtract the weight of the boat from
> > 180 and you might get 120 lbs.  The normal life jacket has 22 lbs of
> > bouyancy.  So, the floation in the boat might keep the boat plus 5
> > adults in the water alongside of it afloat, all of them wet and
> miserable.
> >
> > My Piccup Pram has about 760 lbs of floatation, so if it were upside
> > down I could put 3 adults on the bottom and we would all be
completely
> > dry...that is if we could get out of the boat and onto the bottom
> > without getting wet.
> >
> > This is different than the displacement which is the weight of the
> > water that the boat displaces.  If you take the normal displacement
> > given on a set of plans and subtract the boat weight you have the
> > weight of allowable crew and supplies.  e.g. My Piccup displaces 490
> > lbs.  Subtracting 100 lbs boat weight gives 390 pounds of crew and
> > supplies.  Or 2+ adults.  I've had 4 adults in it and it is slow,
but
> > sails fine that way.
> >
> > Jim gives his expected displacement on his plans at the waterline at
> > the bow.
> >
> > Whew.  That's a lot of words when you already have your question
> > answered.  Sorry.  I just got started and couldn't stop writing.
> >
> > Reed
> >
> The Piccup Pram has to be one of the greatest little designs for
> carrying capacity and safety and can fit in the back of a truck box
to!
>
> I found what your wrote to be very helpful:-)
>
> Nels
>

The broad, blunt bow transom was the one thing that threw me off.
Which is why I got Mixer plans. Any comment on the Mixer?

Bryant

--- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, "captreed48" <captreed@...> wrote:
>
> > Tell us more about this PP/Mixer. Why? How did it work?
> >
> > Bryant
>
>
> With the Piccup Pram I thought that the bottom of the bow transom was
> too low.  At first every wave I encountered splashed up and over the
> fore deck and ran down into the cockpit.  I added a splash board on
> the deck that diverted this water over the side and that helped.
>
> Then it seemed that waves I met going to windward were hitting the
> bow transom and slowing the boat down.  I cut off the bow transom,
> added about a foot to the side and bilge planks and brought them to a
> point, much a Jim M. did in his Mixer design.  All of this was done
> in correspondence with Jim and led to the Mixer design.  I found the
> boat to be drier and faster to windward.
>
> A significant difference?  Maybe not, but I'm happy with the
> results.  Now I'm thinking of building an IMB. In that design the
> waterline is quite a ways below bottom of the bow transom.
>
> Reed
>

Hi,
On Saturday I went sailing with Rob Kellock on (in?) his recently-
completed Philsboat, and thought I'd write a few words about the
experience.
The weather was the sort which would probably stop most people from
going out, and there was quite a low turnout at the club we sailed
from. Not all that cold-perhaps 16-17 degrees (Centigrade!=approx
62F),
but it rained quite heavily pretty much the whole two to three hours
we were there. I was soaked, but not cold, when we were getting ready
to go as there was very little wind initially. So little in fact that
Rob eventually disqualified himself from any race placing by starting
the motor. This was just for getting us over the line and a hundred
yards or so along the course to a spot where the trees near the
clubhouse no longer blocked the wind. Philsboat tho' was a fair match
for several other boats in the initial drifting conditions. The wind
was picking-up and once out past the trees and into the open estuary,
it was, I guess, 12-15 knots for the rest of the course.
Now it was very noticeably cold when I stuck my wet head up out of
the slot, or passed in front of the forward opening when tacking, but
sitting on the floor on one of Rob's beanbags I was warm and
comfortable, with no sensation of wind-chill at all. The rain
continued, and enough came thru the slot and down the mast to
overwhelm the absorbent properties of the beanbag!, to the point
where about an inch or two was collecting on the leeward side of the
floor and had to be bailed out. And this is summer! But the cabin
still felt warm compared to the open cockpit of a conventional
trailer-sailer in similar conditions where you'd need either a
wetsuit or full wet-weather clothing to avoid risking hypothermia. I
was wearing shorts and t-shirt with a thin nylon non-waterproof
windbreaker, and all was totally wet from the time spent at the ramp,
but for two hours in the boat I felt fine.

We did a mixture of up and downwind legs and a close reach and the
GPS often showed more than 4knots, so for a slightly shortened
version of the hull whose hull-speed might be only 4.5knots or so,
it seems to go quite well. We tried deliberately heeling the boat to
see if the longer waterline would give extra speed, but if it did we
couldnt detect it. But we weren't sure the wind-speed was constant
enough for an adequate test. The boat tends to stay flat on its
bottom with two of us aboard-I'm only about 140lbs and I guess Rob is
not a lot more-on an upwind tack with our backs against the side
there was almost no heeling. But on the other hand you CAN get the
bottoms of the windows down at waterlevel if you lose concentration,
and as Rob hasn't had time to fit the seats (he will tho') its then a
bit of a struggle to stop yourself sliding down the floor to the
leeward side. Personally I loved the entirely open cabin space, and
the beanbags, seemed like you could be on a 25foot boat. But without
the seats, you need maybe a simple batten along the centreline to
brace your feet. Or even hiking-straps like a racing dinghy! might
work?
On the helm, the boat felt good, with what seemed like the right
amount of weather-helm. Easy control with one hand generally. I tried
steering downwind with the board raised, but to me it felt like the
boat was sliding around, and it felt more under control with the
board. Might be faster without, but not sure what would happen in a
sudden gust...still you don't have to worry too much, knowing that
Rob has already done an inadvertent capsize test and survived. It's
extremely reassuring to know that the boat you're in can fall on its
side and get up again without being full of water. Of course I
already knew this fact, but its not until you're actually in the boat
that it really makes an impact-you can somehow 'feel' that its true,
rather than just 'knowing'.

So, lots of plus's for this boat, maybe I should mention some of the
not quite so good aspects which Rob is trying to get answers to.
I can confirm that although the boat tacked reliably yesterday with
the weight of two of us, it sure seems that going from starboard to
port tack is less certain than when swinging the other way. Rob
doesn't know yet for sure why this is so, but I think the overall
performance is detectably better on port tack than on starboard, so
perhaps there's just a little more speed when going into the tack
from port.
Rob has had trouble changing over to port tack when sailing solo, so
I suggested he takes some ballast and see if that helps, and to try
bearing away more to get speed just before the tack. But these are
really just a workaround and not getting to the underlying cause.
Another idea would be to build a second leeboard, or at least a
second (port-side) mounting to try the board on the other side-I
guess this should either confirm or deny the board as being the
cause. Any other ideas gratefully accepted by Rob I'm sure.

A second issue is that the boat won't point very high, or at least
not while moving well. Seems like it needs as much as 130 degrees
from tack to tack, in the 12-15knots  wind. Less is possible, but
speed falls. Is this typical for these sorts of boats with lugsails?
(Rob has a junksail). I have no experience with either a Michalak
hull or a lug/junk rig of this size, so just don't know. I found it
difficult to 'read' the junk sail to know if it was sheeted
correctly, but Rob seems to be able to tell when its luffing.

Conclusion.
Rob has built himself a solidly made boat including making all the
rig and sail himself, in around six months, and for not a huge amount
of money. I went sailing in pouring rain and enjoyed it immensely.
These 'birdwatcher type' boats have got to be the answer to marginal-
weather sailing.
Thanks Rob!
Alan.

Hi Everyone,

I'm getting to the point where my project might actually be a boat.  Can
any IL boat builders give me a run down on the process to get a HIN and
IL registration?  Any contact numbers or web sites?   Mostly interested
in the HIN process, I assume the local DMV can do the IL numbers.

Also, calculating my materials, engine, equipment, and gas,  the boat
should weigh  just about 475 pounds.  Know of any good trailer deals
within an hour or 2 of Bloomington?  Right now, I'm considering ordering
this:

   http://www.ahoycaptain.com/shop/product130.html
<http://www.ahoycaptain.com/shop/product130.html>

Because they'll ship it for free.  But I worry a bit because it's built
for 500 lbs, max.

Thanks!

carl

Bloomington, IL







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I have used our local title service now for 2 sailboats 2 kayaks and
1 canoe. all homebuilt. They were able to apply for the title and
state sticker and illinois numbers.. the hull ID is also assigned by
the DNR  .. not the dmv

I'm in Moline,  and I've taken pictures along, but they've never had
any questions about materials lists, materials costs etc.

The want to know type of construction, sail, paddle, or power, length
of boat etc.

Trailer I just lucked into at a local boat dealer where someone else
had upgraded and left them with an extra empty trailer.

John

-
-- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, "ch_bunch" <ch_bunch@...> wrote:
>
>
> Hi Everyone,
>
> I'm getting to the point where my project might actually be a
boat.  Can
> any IL boat builders give me a run down on the process to get a HIN
and
> IL registration?  Any contact numbers or web sites?   Mostly
interested
> in the HIN process, I assume the local DMV can do the IL numbers.
>
> Also, calculating my materials, engine, equipment, and gas,  the
boat
> should weigh  just about 475 pounds.  Know of any good trailer deals
> within an hour or 2 of Bloomington?  Right now, I'm considering
ordering
> this:
>
>   http://www.ahoycaptain.com/shop/product130.html
> <http://www.ahoycaptain.com/shop/product130.html>
>
> Because they'll ship it for free.  But I worry a bit because it's
built
> for 500 lbs, max.
>
> Thanks!
>
> carl
>
> Bloomington, IL
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Hi Alan.

Sounds like you fellows had a great time which is the main thing.

130 degrees from tack to tack seems like something is wrong somewhere.
Michalak claims 100 degrees should be doable with the lug as designed.
You may also want to review this article as the writer got to near 90
degree tacks with his junk rig according to GPS readings.

http://www.duckworksmagazine.com/06/howto/junkrig/index.htm

It may be a combination of both the sail and leeboard alignment.

Just a guess though.

Nels


--- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, "Alan" <logicaid@...> wrote:
>
> Hi,
> On Saturday I went sailing with Rob Kellock on (in?) his recently-
> completed Philsboat, and thought I'd write a few words about the
> experience.
> The weather was the sort which would probably stop most people from
> going out, and there was quite a low turnout at the club we sailed
> from. Not all that cold-perhaps 16-17 degrees (Centigrade!=approx
> 62F),
> but it rained quite heavily pretty much the whole two to three hours
> we were there. I was soaked, but not cold, when we were getting ready
> to go as there was very little wind initially. So little in fact that
> Rob eventually disqualified himself from any race placing by starting
> the motor. This was just for getting us over the line and a hundred
> yards or so along the course to a spot where the trees near the
> clubhouse no longer blocked the wind. Philsboat tho' was a fair match
> for several other boats in the initial drifting conditions. The wind
> was picking-up and once out past the trees and into the open estuary,
> it was, I guess, 12-15 knots for the rest of the course.
> Now it was very noticeably cold when I stuck my wet head up out of
> the slot, or passed in front of the forward opening when tacking, but
> sitting on the floor on one of Rob's beanbags I was warm and
> comfortable, with no sensation of wind-chill at all. The rain
> continued, and enough came thru the slot and down the mast to
> overwhelm the absorbent properties of the beanbag!, to the point
> where about an inch or two was collecting on the leeward side of the
> floor and had to be bailed out. And this is summer! But the cabin
> still felt warm compared to the open cockpit of a conventional
> trailer-sailer in similar conditions where you'd need either a
> wetsuit or full wet-weather clothing to avoid risking hypothermia. I
> was wearing shorts and t-shirt with a thin nylon non-waterproof
> windbreaker, and all was totally wet from the time spent at the ramp,
> but for two hours in the boat I felt fine.
>
> We did a mixture of up and downwind legs and a close reach and the
> GPS often showed more than 4knots, so for a slightly shortened
> version of the hull whose hull-speed might be only 4.5knots or so,
> it seems to go quite well. We tried deliberately heeling the boat to
> see if the longer waterline would give extra speed, but if it did we
> couldnt detect it. But we weren't sure the wind-speed was constant
> enough for an adequate test. The boat tends to stay flat on its
> bottom with two of us aboard-I'm only about 140lbs and I guess Rob is
> not a lot more-on an upwind tack with our backs against the side
> there was almost no heeling. But on the other hand you CAN get the
> bottoms of the windows down at waterlevel if you lose concentration,
> and as Rob hasn't had time to fit the seats (he will tho') its then a
> bit of a struggle to stop yourself sliding down the floor to the
> leeward side. Personally I loved the entirely open cabin space, and
> the beanbags, seemed like you could be on a 25foot boat. But without
> the seats, you need maybe a simple batten along the centreline to
> brace your feet. Or even hiking-straps like a racing dinghy! might
> work?
> On the helm, the boat felt good, with what seemed like the right
> amount of weather-helm. Easy control with one hand generally. I tried
> steering downwind with the board raised, but to me it felt like the
> boat was sliding around, and it felt more under control with the
> board. Might be faster without, but not sure what would happen in a
> sudden gust...still you don't have to worry too much, knowing that
> Rob has already done an inadvertent capsize test and survived. It's
> extremely reassuring to know that the boat you're in can fall on its
> side and get up again without being full of water. Of course I
> already knew this fact, but its not until you're actually in the boat
> that it really makes an impact-you can somehow 'feel' that its true,
> rather than just 'knowing'.
>
> So, lots of plus's for this boat, maybe I should mention some of the
> not quite so good aspects which Rob is trying to get answers to.
> I can confirm that although the boat tacked reliably yesterday with
> the weight of two of us, it sure seems that going from starboard to
> port tack is less certain than when swinging the other way. Rob
> doesn't know yet for sure why this is so, but I think the overall
> performance is detectably better on port tack than on starboard, so
> perhaps there's just a little more speed when going into the tack
> from port.
> Rob has had trouble changing over to port tack when sailing solo, so
> I suggested he takes some ballast and see if that helps, and to try
> bearing away more to get speed just before the tack. But these are
> really just a workaround and not getting to the underlying cause.
> Another idea would be to build a second leeboard, or at least a
> second (port-side) mounting to try the board on the other side-I
> guess this should either confirm or deny the board as being the
> cause. Any other ideas gratefully accepted by Rob I'm sure.
>
> A second issue is that the boat won't point very high, or at least
> not while moving well. Seems like it needs as much as 130 degrees
> from tack to tack, in the 12-15knots  wind. Less is possible, but
> speed falls. Is this typical for these sorts of boats with lugsails?
> (Rob has a junksail). I have no experience with either a Michalak
> hull or a lug/junk rig of this size, so just don't know. I found it
> difficult to 'read' the junk sail to know if it was sheeted
> correctly, but Rob seems to be able to tell when its luffing.
>
> Conclusion.
> Rob has built himself a solidly made boat including making all the
> rig and sail himself, in around six months, and for not a huge amount
> of money. I went sailing in pouring rain and enjoyed it immensely.
> These 'birdwatcher type' boats have got to be the answer to marginal-
> weather sailing.
> Thanks Rob!
> Alan.
>

> 130 degrees from tack to tack seems like something is wrong somewhere.
> Michalak claims 100 degrees should be doable with the lug as designed.
> You may also want to review this article as the writer got to near 90
> degree tacks with his junk rig according to GPS readings.
>
> http://www.duckworksmagazine.com/06/howto/junkrig/index.htm
>

I agree with Nels on the shallow tacks.  (Actually it was the same
with the one junk rig I tried.)  In the article Mike Mulcahy makes a
cambered junk sail that I would bet increases the weatherliness.  In
following this thread I've wondered if the boat has enough weather
helm to tack well.  That thought is just from my experience with a
balanced lug that needed a good weather helm to tack quickly.

Reed

--- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, "jtweigandt" <john@...> wrote:
>
> I have used our local title service now for 2 sailboats 2 kayaks
and
> 1 canoe. all homebuilt. They were able to apply for the title and
> state sticker and illinois numbers.. the hull ID is also assigned
by
> the DNR  .. not the dmv
>
> I'm in Moline,  and I've taken pictures along, but they've never
had
> any questions about materials lists, materials costs etc.
>
> The want to know type of construction, sail, paddle, or power,
length
> of boat etc.
>
> Trailer I just lucked into at a local boat dealer where someone
else
> had upgraded and left them with an extra empty trailer.
>
> John
>
> -
> -- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, "ch_bunch" <ch_bunch@> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Hi Everyone,
> >
> > I'm getting to the point where my project might actually be a
> boat.  Can
> > any IL boat builders give me a run down on the process to get a
HIN
> and
> > IL registration?  Any contact numbers or web sites?   Mostly
> interested
> > in the HIN process, I assume the local DMV can do the IL numbers.
> >
> > Also, calculating my materials, engine, equipment, and gas,  the
> boat
> > should weigh  just about 475 pounds.  Know of any good trailer
deals
> > within an hour or 2 of Bloomington?  Right now, I'm considering
> ordering
> > this:
> >
> >   http://www.ahoycaptain.com/shop/product130.html
> > <http://www.ahoycaptain.com/shop/product130.html>
> >
> > Because they'll ship it for free.  But I worry a bit because
it's
> built
> > for 500 lbs, max.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > carl
> >
> > Bloomington, IL
> >
> >
> > http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/ctaf/displayitem.taf?
Itemnumber=5002
> >
> > Try this, cheaper, even with freight, and holds the weight. That
price on the alum trailer is way to much for the size. And the
capacity is way to little for the price.
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>

--- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, "nadapesca" <emmonskw@...> wrote:
> http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/ctaf/displayitem.taf?Itemnumber=5002
>
> Try this, cheaper, even with freight, and holds the weight. That
> price on the alum trailer is way to much for the size. And the
> capacity is way to little for the price.
>

Thanks for the reply.

My boat is 15 1/2 feet long.  Think I could modify that trailer to
fit?

carl

--- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, "ch_bunch" <ch_bunch@...> wrote:
>
>
> Hi Everyone,
>
> I'm getting to the point where my project might actually be a
boat.  Can
> any IL boat builders give me a run down on the process to get a
HIN and
> IL registration?  Any contact numbers or web sites?




I have registered 2 or 3 homemade boats in Illinois and
it is fairly easy.

Fill out a form and send it in with some money.


Info and forms here:

http://dnr.state.il.us/admin/systems/boats.htm




along with the instructions

http://dnr.state.il.us/admin/systems/Boats/pdf/boatpg3.pdf




Call the number on the instructions to double-check the
fee amounts before you mail it in.




Max

--- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, "jtweigandt" <john@...> wrote:
>
> I have used our local title service now for 2 sailboats...

You mean a private title company?  Like those listed under "title
services" in the yellow pages?

> the hull ID is also assigned by the DNR  .. not the dmv

Whoops.  I knew it was one of those 3-letter government agencies.
Like FBI or CIA or something.

Does the title service get the HIN, too, or is that something I need
to take care of first?

> Trailer I just lucked into at a local boat dealer...

I'll  have to do some calling around.

Thanks for your reply!

carl

--- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, "captreed48" <captreed@...> wrote:

> following this thread I've wondered if the boat has enough weather
> helm to tack well.  That thought is just from my experience with a
> balanced lug that needed a good weather helm to tack quickly.
>
> Reed

I was looking in Derek Van Loan's book, "Design and Build Your Own Junk
Rig." In it he states that with a centerboard hull the CE of the sail
should be located ahead of the CLR of the board by a figure of .03 to
.10 times the waterline length. This is called "lead" and for a 15 ft.
hull it would be tween 6 and 18 inches ahead of the CLR. (Sorry I don't
have the metric equivalents).

On the plans Michalak puts the CE of the balanced lug directly above the
CLR of the leeboard. In other words - no lead. The further ahead the CE
the more weather helm correct?

That was also the case when we looked at the junk rig for the new
Caroline design. The mast could  be moved ahead by 18".

Caroline also has the advantage of a mizzen sail which aids in tacking
by assisting the rudder to kick the stern through stays.

Nels

If I may - my .02. Things to consider.

1. Not sure about the exact figure for junk sails but the CE of a
balanced lug in actual use probably "leads" i.e. the sail is not
parallel to the centreline.

2. Jim recommends fastening the halyard to the yard about 40% aft of
the luff rather than the common 33% to counter twist. This I think
might, in practice (see #1), also put the CE a bit forward.

Bryant - who only pretends to understand such things.

--- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, "Nels" <arvent@...> wrote:
>
>
> --- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, "captreed48" <captreed@> wrote:
>
> > following this thread I've wondered if the boat has enough weather
> > helm to tack well.  That thought is just from my experience with a
> > balanced lug that needed a good weather helm to tack quickly.
> >
> > Reed
>
> I was looking in Derek Van Loan's book, "Design and Build Your Own Junk
> Rig." In it he states that with a centerboard hull the CE of the sail
> should be located ahead of the CLR of the board by a figure of .03 to
> .10 times the waterline length. This is called "lead" and for a 15 ft.
> hull it would be tween 6 and 18 inches ahead of the CLR. (Sorry I don't
> have the metric equivalents).
>
> On the plans Michalak puts the CE of the balanced lug directly above the
> CLR of the leeboard. In other words - no lead. The further ahead the CE
> the more weather helm correct?
>
> That was also the case when we looked at the junk rig for the new
> Caroline design. The mast could  be moved ahead by 18".
>
> Caroline also has the advantage of a mizzen sail which aids in tacking
> by assisting the rudder to kick the stern through stays.
>
> Nels
>

I recently ordered plans for Woobo to use for exploring the Texas Gulf
Coast (protected waters) and maybe a little camping .

  As I prepare to build the Woobo the Birdwatcher cabin designs seem
more appealing . I have a 3 yr old who loves the outdoors , especially
fishing and camping so the cabin seems safer than an open design .

I'm leaning towards the JB jr , but my only reservation is ; how does
it handle chop or rough water ?

Hi,
I read somewhere in one of JM's articles that he puts the CE where he
does because his hulls have a raised forefoot. Thus the real centre
of lateral resistance is further back from the bow than it would be
for a hull with an immersed forefoot, and so the CE needs to be
further back as well.
Weather helm reduces as the CE moves ahead doesn't it? ie: the head
of the boat will be blown more off the wind and eventually you get
lee helm if it (CE) is too far forward...
Cheers,
Alan.
--- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, "Nels" <arvent@...> wrote:
>
>
> --- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, "captreed48" <captreed@> wrote:
>
> > following this thread I've wondered if the boat has enough weather
> > helm to tack well.  That thought is just from my experience with a
> > balanced lug that needed a good weather helm to tack quickly.
> >
> > Reed
>
> I was looking in Derek Van Loan's book, "Design and Build Your Own
Junk
> Rig." In it he states that with a centerboard hull the CE of the
sail
> should be located ahead of the CLR of the board by a figure of .03
to
> .10 times the waterline length. This is called "lead" and for a 15
ft.
> hull it would be tween 6 and 18 inches ahead of the CLR. (Sorry I
don't
> have the metric equivalents).
>
> On the plans Michalak puts the CE of the balanced lug directly
above the
> CLR of the leeboard. In other words - no lead. The further ahead
the CE
> the more weather helm correct?
>
> That was also the case when we looked at the junk rig for the new
> Caroline design. The mast could  be moved ahead by 18".
>
> Caroline also has the advantage of a mizzen sail which aids in
tacking
> by assisting the rudder to kick the stern through stays.
>
> Nels
>

--- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, "Alan" <logicaid@...> wrote:
>
> Hi,
> I read somewhere in one of JM's articles that he puts the CE where he
> does because his hulls have a raised forefoot. Thus the real centre
> of lateral resistance is further back from the bow than it would be
> for a hull with an immersed forefoot, and so the CE needs to be
> further back as well.
> Weather helm reduces as the CE moves ahead doesn't it? ie: the head
> of the boat will be blown more off the wind and eventually you get
> lee helm if it (CE) is too far forward...
> Cheers,
> Alan.

Right on all counts. I seemed to have become confused when thinking of
what we had figured out for Caroline. It has a different hull shape than
Philsboat as well as the mizzen sail.

Nels

--- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, "hawkinsamps" <hawkinsamps@...> wrote:
> I'm leaning towards the JB jr , but my only reservation is ; how does
> it handle chop or rough water ?


I coulda sworn Rick Bedard wrote somewhere about how JB Jr. handles
chop. But after about five minutes of searching this group's messages,
and searching Duckworks, I haven't found what I thought I remembered.
Anyway, the gist of my (possibly illusory) memory is: if you sail it
heeled over a bit it presents a V to the waves, and does surprisingly
well.

He also wrote about his technique for rigging a bridle to hold the
boat at anchor at an angle to the waves to eliminate wave-slap. Back
in August-September 2007 we had a great go-round of questions and
answers about JB Jr.

Search for "sctree" in this group -- it'll bring up all Rick's
postings. Also, check out
http://www.duckworksmagazine.com/03/r/outings/peaches/ and do a quick
Google search of the Duckworks site for his other articles. It's hard
to read them and not begin immediately building a JB Jr.

Garth
(still just in the dreaming-of-JB-Jr phase, watching the rain fall and
melt our snow)