Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: Rough chop capable?

Expand Messages
  • emmons_kevin
    ... Rough chop is usually considered short but close together waves that are being driven harder by tide or wind, or both. The chop comes from the feel of
    Message 1 of 22 , Mar 4, 2005
      --- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, "wwbaginski" <wwbaginski@t...> wrote:
      >
      > --- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Hallman <bruce@h...> wrote:
      > > > caught out in some pretty good chop
      > > > Paul
      > >
      > > One issue about chop that Phil Bolger has deduced
      > > is that, for a power boat, you can't beat the benefits
      > > of having a boat that is long enough to 'bridge' over
      > > the chop. He designed a 15 skiff, 29 feet long!
      > > It slices over the top of the chop.
      > > He named it Slicer.
      > >
      > > Google the words "bolger" and "slicer" and/or go to URL
      > >
      > > http://www.duckworksmagazine.com/05/excerpts/maib/1/index.cfm
      >
      > What you colleagues mean by 'rough chop'? In my english /polish
      > dictionary is 's all the same. Any measure (for example Beaufort
      > scale)? Any illustrating description please? Thanks in advance.
      >
      > -Wojtek


      Rough chop is usually considered short but close together waves that
      are being driven harder by tide or wind, or both. The "chop" comes
      from the feel of it, imagine chopping a side of beef or something
      with a cleaver, the short jarring hand movements are a minature feel
      of a choppy bay with quick 1-2 foot waves.
    • wwbaginski
      ... First thanks all who let me uderstood what s rough & chop . Good lesson. Well I ve seen Pudget Sound a few years ago, the weather in Seattle was
      Message 2 of 22 , Mar 4, 2005
        --- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, pdubyou@y... wrote:
        >
        > I'm going to go through with building a 13' to 17' boat. Something I
        > can stand up in to do some crabbing and shrimping. Having been
        > caught out in some pretty good chop (higher than the freeboard, but
        > when your a cork it doesn't come over the sides) on Puget Sound inmy
        > little jonboat, I'd like to find something a little 'safer' feeling.
        > Which designs have you all found to be reasonable in the mildly rough
        > stuff? I'm still trying to decide between power and sail (and sail
        > is winning).
        >
        > Paul

        First thanks all who let me uderstood what's 'rough & chop'. Good
        lesson. Well I 've seen Pudget Sound a few years ago, the weather in
        Seattle was beautiful those days, but I felt respect for Pudget Sound
        anyway. A lot of water! I don't know what kind of boat is required for
        crabbing and shrimping, but, in my opinion, the only JM sailboat
        responsible to cross Pudget Sound is Vector. In other cases I would
        keep close to a shore.

        -Wojtek
      • John Ewing
        What about Fatcat2? What do you guys think of its chances out in the kind of chop being discussed here? John ... From: wwbaginski To:
        Message 3 of 22 , Mar 5, 2005
          What about Fatcat2? What do you guys think of its chances out in the kind of
          chop being discussed here?

          John


          ----- Original Message -----
          From: "wwbaginski" <wwbaginski@...>
          To: <Michalak@yahoogroups.com>
          Sent: Friday, March 04, 2005 4:13 PM
          Subject: [Michalak] Re: Rough chop capable?


          >
          >
          > --- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, pdubyou@y... wrote:
          >>
          >> I'm going to go through with building a 13' to 17' boat. Something I
          >> can stand up in to do some crabbing and shrimping. Having been
          >> caught out in some pretty good chop (higher than the freeboard, but
          >> when your a cork it doesn't come over the sides) on Puget Sound inmy
          >> little jonboat, I'd like to find something a little 'safer' feeling.
          >> Which designs have you all found to be reasonable in the mildly rough
          >> stuff? I'm still trying to decide between power and sail (and sail
          >> is winning).
          >>
          >> Paul
          >
          > First thanks all who let me uderstood what's 'rough & chop'. Good
          > lesson. Well I 've seen Pudget Sound a few years ago, the weather in
          > Seattle was beautiful those days, but I felt respect for Pudget Sound
          > anyway. A lot of water! I don't know what kind of boat is required for
          > crabbing and shrimping, but, in my opinion, the only JM sailboat
          > responsible to cross Pudget Sound is Vector. In other cases I would
          > keep close to a shore.
          >
          > -Wojtek
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > Yahoo! Groups Links
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
        • wwbaginski
          Multichine hulls like Fatcat2 were reported as good for such described conditions too. At least I was checking Mixer reports, because the set of Mixer plans is
          Message 4 of 22 , Mar 6, 2005
            Multichine hulls like Fatcat2 were reported as good for such described
            conditions too. At least I was checking Mixer reports, because the set
            of Mixer plans is expectet to cross the Atlantic and land inside my
            mailbox in Warsaw soon. But i think the real question is what,s
            around? Shallow lake or river, or may be sea bay? Is it the extremal
            state or is it able to rise on?

            -Wojtek

            --- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, John Ewing <john.ewing@s...> wrote:
            > What about Fatcat2? What do you guys think of its chances out in the
            kind of
            > chop being discussed here?
            >
            > John
            >
            >
            > ----- Original Message -----
            > From: "wwbaginski" <wwbaginski@t...>
            > To: <Michalak@yahoogroups.com>
            > Sent: Friday, March 04, 2005 4:13 PM
            > Subject: [Michalak] Re: Rough chop capable?
            >
            >
            > >
            > >
            > > --- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, pdubyou@y... wrote:
            > >>
            > >> I'm going to go through with building a 13' to 17' boat. Something I
            > >> can stand up in to do some crabbing and shrimping. Having been
            > >> caught out in some pretty good chop (higher than the freeboard, but
            > >> when your a cork it doesn't come over the sides) on Puget Sound inmy
            > >> little jonboat, I'd like to find something a little 'safer' feeling.
            > >> Which designs have you all found to be reasonable in the mildly rough
            > >> stuff? I'm still trying to decide between power and sail (and sail
            > >> is winning).
            > >>
            > >> Paul
            > >
            > > First thanks all who let me uderstood what's 'rough & chop'. Good
            > > lesson. Well I 've seen Pudget Sound a few years ago, the weather in
            > > Seattle was beautiful those days, but I felt respect for Pudget Sound
            > > anyway. A lot of water! I don't know what kind of boat is required for
            > > crabbing and shrimping, but, in my opinion, the only JM sailboat
            > > responsible to cross Pudget Sound is Vector. In other cases I would
            > > keep close to a shore.
            > >
            > > -Wojtek
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > Yahoo! Groups Links
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
          • John B. Trussell
            Short, beamy, shallow boats tend to stop when they hit a wave. The center of effort on gaff rigged catboats moves forward when reefed and this can lead to a
            Message 5 of 22 , Mar 6, 2005
              Short, beamy, shallow boats tend to stop when they hit a wave. The center of effort on gaff rigged catboats moves forward when reefed and this can lead to a lee helm. My guess is that Fatcat, with its beam and "over the water" hull would be slow and wet in rough water. I seriously considered building a Fatcat, but opted for a longer narrower boat with an easier to rig mast. As a trailer sailer, sailing primarily on inland lakes, rough water capabilities are not high on my list of priorities.

              John T
              ----- Original Message -----
              From: John Ewing
              To: Michalak@yahoogroups.com
              Sent: Saturday, March 05, 2005 6:51 PM
              Subject: Re: [Michalak] Re: Rough chop capable?


              What about Fatcat2? What do you guys think of its chances out in the kind of
              chop being discussed here?

              John


              ----- Original Message -----
              From: "wwbaginski" <wwbaginski@...>
              To: <Michalak@yahoogroups.com>
              Sent: Friday, March 04, 2005 4:13 PM
              Subject: [Michalak] Re: Rough chop capable?


              >
              >
              > --- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, pdubyou@y... wrote:
              >>
              >> I'm going to go through with building a 13' to 17' boat. Something I
              >> can stand up in to do some crabbing and shrimping. Having been
              >> caught out in some pretty good chop (higher than the freeboard, but
              >> when your a cork it doesn't come over the sides) on Puget Sound inmy
              >> little jonboat, I'd like to find something a little 'safer' feeling.
              >> Which designs have you all found to be reasonable in the mildly rough
              >> stuff? I'm still trying to decide between power and sail (and sail
              >> is winning).
              >>
              >> Paul
              >
              > First thanks all who let me uderstood what's 'rough & chop'. Good
              > lesson. Well I 've seen Pudget Sound a few years ago, the weather in
              > Seattle was beautiful those days, but I felt respect for Pudget Sound
              > anyway. A lot of water! I don't know what kind of boat is required for
              > crabbing and shrimping, but, in my opinion, the only JM sailboat
              > responsible to cross Pudget Sound is Vector. In other cases I would
              > keep close to a shore.
              >
              > -Wojtek
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > Yahoo! Groups Links
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >



              Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
              ADVERTISEMENT





              ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Yahoo! Groups Links

              a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
              http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Michalak/

              b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
              Michalak-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

              c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.




              ------------------------------------------------------------------------------


              No virus found in this incoming message.
              Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
              Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 266.5.7 - Release Date: 3/1/2005

              ----------

              No virus found in this outgoing message.
              Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
              Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 266.5.7 - Release Date: 3/1/2005


              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • John B. Trussell
              Wojtec--The definition of rough water depends in part on what you are used to and in part on the size of the boat from which you are making your observation.
              Message 6 of 22 , Mar 6, 2005
                Wojtec--The definition of "rough water" depends in part on what you are used to and in part on the size of the boat from which you are making your observation. I have a Mixer.

                You sail Mixer while sitting (or reclining) on the bottom of the boat. Depending on how tall you are (I'm 5ft 7 inches tall), your eyes are about 2 1/2 feet (maybe .8 meters) above the water. From this pesrspective, a 2 foot wave (.6 meters) constitutes "rough water.

                Since the crew of a Mixer usually weighs quite a bit more than the boat, once the crew is seated on the bottom, the boat is very heavily ballasted and has considerable sail carrying capacity. I have been caught out in rising winds and experienced waves in the 2 foot/.6 meter range. Mixer has a fair amount of rocker and a strong sheer--I think it is unlikely that Mixer will take water over the bow or the stern. However, the boat pounds badly in 2 ft/ .6 meter waves, throws a fair amount of spray when going up wind, and goes fairly slowly under these conditions. Of the wind, Mixer will "surf" down the face of a wave, but I've never been able to get a prolonged plane out of her.

                All things considered, I think Mixer is a very useful boat with as much seaworthiness as anyone can hope for from a 12 ft dinghy.

                John T
                ----- Original Message -----
                From: wwbaginski
                To: Michalak@yahoogroups.com
                Sent: Sunday, March 06, 2005 5:46 AM
                Subject: [Michalak] Re: Rough chop capable?



                Multichine hulls like Fatcat2 were reported as good for such described
                conditions too. At least I was checking Mixer reports, because the set
                of Mixer plans is expectet to cross the Atlantic and land inside my
                mailbox in Warsaw soon. But i think the real question is what,s
                around? Shallow lake or river, or may be sea bay? Is it the extremal
                state or is it able to rise on?

                -Wojtek

                --- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, John Ewing <john.ewing@s...> wrote:
                > What about Fatcat2? What do you guys think of its chances out in the
                kind of
                > chop being discussed here?
                >
                > John
                >
                >
                > ----- Original Message -----
                > From: "wwbaginski" <wwbaginski@t...>
                > To: <Michalak@yahoogroups.com>
                > Sent: Friday, March 04, 2005 4:13 PM
                > Subject: [Michalak] Re: Rough chop capable?
                >
                >
                > >
                > >
                > > --- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, pdubyou@y... wrote:
                > >>
                > >> I'm going to go through with building a 13' to 17' boat. Something I
                > >> can stand up in to do some crabbing and shrimping. Having been
                > >> caught out in some pretty good chop (higher than the freeboard, but
                > >> when your a cork it doesn't come over the sides) on Puget Sound inmy
                > >> little jonboat, I'd like to find something a little 'safer' feeling.
                > >> Which designs have you all found to be reasonable in the mildly rough
                > >> stuff? I'm still trying to decide between power and sail (and sail
                > >> is winning).
                > >>
                > >> Paul
                > >
                > > First thanks all who let me uderstood what's 'rough & chop'. Good
                > > lesson. Well I 've seen Pudget Sound a few years ago, the weather in
                > > Seattle was beautiful those days, but I felt respect for Pudget Sound
                > > anyway. A lot of water! I don't know what kind of boat is required for
                > > crabbing and shrimping, but, in my opinion, the only JM sailboat
                > > responsible to cross Pudget Sound is Vector. In other cases I would
                > > keep close to a shore.
                > >
                > > -Wojtek
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > Yahoo! Groups Links
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >




                Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                ADVERTISEMENT





                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Yahoo! Groups Links

                a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
                http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Michalak/

                b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                Michalak-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.




                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                No virus found in this incoming message.
                Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
                Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 266.5.7 - Release Date: 3/1/2005

                ----------

                No virus found in this outgoing message.
                Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
                Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 266.5.7 - Release Date: 3/1/2005


                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • wwbaginski
                Right, John. That,s why I pointed Vector for Puget Sound area. BTW thanks a lot for Mixer info. -Wojtek ... are used to and in part on the size of the boat
                Message 7 of 22 , Mar 6, 2005
                  Right, John. That,s why I pointed Vector for Puget Sound area. BTW
                  thanks a lot for Mixer info.

                  -Wojtek

                  --- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, "John B. Trussell"
                  <John.Trussell@w...> wrote:
                  > Wojtec--The definition of "rough water" depends in part on what you
                  are used to and in part on the size of the boat from which you are
                  making your observation. I have a Mixer.
                  >
                  > You sail Mixer while sitting (or reclining) on the bottom of the
                  boat. Depending on how tall you are (I'm 5ft 7 inches tall), your
                  eyes are about 2 1/2 feet (maybe .8 meters) above the water. From
                  this pesrspective, a 2 foot wave (.6 meters) constitutes "rough water.
                  >
                  > Since the crew of a Mixer usually weighs quite a bit more than the
                  boat, once the crew is seated on the bottom, the boat is very heavily
                  ballasted and has considerable sail carrying capacity. I have been
                  caught out in rising winds and experienced waves in the 2 foot/.6
                  meter range. Mixer has a fair amount of rocker and a strong sheer--I
                  think it is unlikely that Mixer will take water over the bow or the
                  stern. However, the boat pounds badly in 2 ft/ .6 meter waves, throws
                  a fair amount of spray when going up wind, and goes fairly slowly
                  under these conditions. Of the wind, Mixer will "surf" down the face
                  of a wave, but I've never been able to get a prolonged plane out of her.
                  >
                  > All things c

                  onsidered, I think Mixer is a very useful boat with as much
                  seaworthiness as anyone can hope for from a 12 ft dinghy.
                  >
                  > John T
                  > ----- Original Message -----
                  > From: wwbaginski
                  > To: Michalak@yahoogroups.com
                  > Sent: Sunday, March 06, 2005 5:46 AM
                  > Subject: [Michalak] Re: Rough chop capable?
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > Multichine hulls like Fatcat2 were reported as good for such described
                  > conditions too. At least I was checking Mixer reports, because the set
                  > of Mixer plans is expectet to cross the Atlantic and land inside my
                  > mailbox in Warsaw soon. But i think the real question is what,s
                  > around? Shallow lake or river, or may be sea bay? Is it the extremal
                  > state or is it able to rise on?
                  >
                  > -Wojtek
                  >
                  > --- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, John Ewing <john.ewing@s...> wrote:
                  > > What about Fatcat2? What do you guys think of its chances out in the
                  > kind of
                  > > chop being discussed here?
                  > >
                  > > John
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > ----- Original Message -----
                  > > From: "wwbaginski" <wwbaginski@t...>
                  > > To: <Michalak@yahoogroups.com>
                  > > Sent: Friday, March 04, 2005 4:13 PM
                  > > Subject: [Michalak] Re: Rough chop capable?
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > > --- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, pdubyou@y... wrote:
                  > > >>
                  > > >> I'm going to go through with building a 13' to 17' boat.
                  Something I
                  > > >> can stand up in to do some crabbing and shrimping. Having been
                  > > >> caught out in some pretty good chop (higher than the
                  freeboard, but
                  > > >> when your a cork it doesn't come over the sides) on Puget
                  Sound inmy
                  > > >> little jonboat, I'd like to find something a little 'safer'
                  feeling.
                  > > >> Which designs have you all found to be reasonable in the
                  mildly rough
                  > > >> stuff? I'm still trying to decide between power and sail
                  (and sail
                  > > >> is winning).
                  > > >>
                  > > >> Paul
                  > > >
                  > > > First thanks all who let me uderstood what's 'rough & chop'. Good
                  > > > lesson. Well I 've seen Pudget Sound a few years ago, the
                  weather in
                  > > > Seattle was beautiful those days, but I felt respect for
                  Pudget Sound
                  > > > anyway. A lot of water! I don't know what kind of boat is
                  required for
                  > > > crabbing and shrimping, but, in my opinion, the only JM sailboat
                  > > > responsible to cross Pudget Sound is Vector. In other cases I
                  would
                  > > > keep close to a shore.
                  > > >
                  > > > -Wojtek
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                  > ADVERTISEMENT
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  > Yahoo! Groups Links
                  >
                  > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
                  > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Michalak/
                  >
                  > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                  > Michalak-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                  >
                  > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
                  Service.
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  >
                  >
                  > No virus found in this incoming message.
                  > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
                  > Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 266.5.7 - Release Date: 3/1/2005
                  >
                  > ----------
                  >
                  > No virus found in this outgoing message.
                  > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
                  > Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 266.5.7 - Release Date: 3/1/2005
                  >
                  >
                  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • vicskiff
                  John T Jim s Electron is longer and narrower (18 x 5 ) than Fatcat2 (15 x 6 ) and in the optional sailing version has a balanced-lug rig. Might I rightly
                  Message 8 of 22 , Mar 7, 2005
                    John T

                    Jim's Electron is longer and narrower (18' x 5') than Fatcat2 (15' x
                    6') and in the optional sailing version has a balanced-lug rig.
                    Might I rightly assume, then, that Electron could take chop better
                    than Fatcat?

                    John E.



                    --- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, "John B. Trussell"
                    <John.Trussell@w...> wrote:
                    > Short, beamy, shallow boats tend to stop when they hit a wave.
                    The center of effort on gaff rigged catboats moves forward when
                    reefed and this can lead to a lee helm. My guess is that Fatcat,
                    with its beam and "over the water" hull would be slow and wet in
                    rough water. I seriously considered building a Fatcat, but opted
                    for a longer narrower boat with an easier to rig mast. As a trailer
                    sailer, sailing primarily on inland lakes, rough water capabilities
                    are not high on my list of priorities.
                    >
                    > John T
                    >
                  • John B. Trussell
                    John E. In general, long narrow boats deal with chop better than short wide boats and your assumption that Electron with a 3.6 to 1 length /beam ratio would
                    Message 9 of 22 , Mar 8, 2005
                      John E. In general, long narrow boats deal with chop better than short wide boats and your assumption that Electron with a 3.6 to 1 length /beam ratio would handle chop better than Fatcat with a 2.5 ratio is probably correct. Jim designs boats which he describes as " over the water" and boats which he describes as " through the water". Over the water boats have a waterline which resembles a scow; through the water boats have a waterline which is pointed at the bow. Jim rates his boats in regard to handling chop as "through the water" best; over the water-multichine--next best; and flat bottomed boats as least best. Using this as a benchmark, the two Michalak designs best able to deal with rough water are Frolic (sail) and dorado (power--check the pictures!)

                      John T
                      ----- Original Message -----
                      From: vicskiff
                      To: Michalak@yahoogroups.com
                      Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2005 12:45 AM
                      Subject: [Michalak] Re: Rough chop capable?



                      John T

                      Jim's Electron is longer and narrower (18' x 5') than Fatcat2 (15' x
                      6') and in the optional sailing version has a balanced-lug rig.
                      Might I rightly assume, then, that Electron could take chop better
                      than Fatcat?

                      John E.



                      --- In Michalak@yahoogroups.com, "John B. Trussell"
                      <John.Trussell@w...> wrote:
                      > Short, beamy, shallow boats tend to stop when they hit a wave.
                      The center of effort on gaff rigged catboats moves forward when
                      reefed and this can lead to a lee helm. My guess is that Fatcat,
                      with its beam and "over the water" hull would be slow and wet in
                      rough water. I seriously considered building a Fatcat, but opted
                      for a longer narrower boat with an easier to rig mast. As a trailer
                      sailer, sailing primarily on inland lakes, rough water capabilities
                      are not high on my list of priorities.
                      >
                      > John T
                      >




                      Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                      ADVERTISEMENT





                      ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      Yahoo! Groups Links

                      a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
                      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Michalak/

                      b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                      Michalak-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                      c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.




                      ------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                      Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
                      Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
                      Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 266.5.7 - Release Date: 3/1/2005

                      ----------

                      Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
                      Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
                      Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 266.5.7 - Release Date: 3/1/2005


                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • Chuck Leinweber
                      I d have to say that the Through the Water group should include Caprice, Cormorant and several others. Chuck Leinweber
                      Message 10 of 22 , Mar 8, 2005
                        I'd have to say that the "Through the Water" group should include Caprice,
                        Cormorant and several others.

                        Chuck Leinweber
                        ________________________________________

                        John E.  In general, long narrow boats deal with  chop better than short
                        wide boats and your assumption that Electron with a 3.6 to 1 length /beam
                        ratio would handle chop better than Fatcat with a 2.5 ratio is probably
                        correct.  Jim designs boats which he describes as " over the water" and
                        boats which he describes as " through the water".  Over the water boats have
                        a waterline which resembles a scow; through the water boats have a waterline
                        which is pointed at the bow.  Jim rates his boats in regard to handling chop
                        as "through the water" best; over the water-multichine--next best; and flat
                        bottomed boats as least best.  Using this as a benchmark, the two Michalak
                        designs best able to deal with rough water are Frolic (sail) and dorado
                        (power--check the pictures!)

                        John T
                      • vexatious2001
                        ...boats which he describes as over the water and boats which he describes as through the water . In the past, I have owned boats best described as under
                        Message 11 of 22 , Mar 8, 2005
                          ...boats which he describes as "over the water" and boats which he
                          describes as "through the water".



                          In the past, I have owned boats best described as
                          "under the water" boats.



                          Max
                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.