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

Re: Micro - double-ender?

Expand Messages
  • mat_man22
    This link shows a Micro that had is bow built up with foam to prevent pounding at ancor. This should make a good crash absorbing zone.
    Message 1 of 11 , Aug 2, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      This link shows a Micro that had is bow built up with foam
      to prevent pounding at ancor. This should make a good crash
      absorbing zone.

      http://www.duckworksmagazine.com/articles/oink2/index.htm

      Mat
    • John Bell
      There has been at least one Micro built with a pointy bow. The question is why? If the boat is properly trimmed, there is no reason at all for the forefoot to
      Message 2 of 11 , Aug 2, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        There has been at least one Micro built with a pointy bow. The question is
        why? If the boat is properly trimmed, there is no reason at all for the
        forefoot to ever get in the water. All the pointy end adds is a bit more
        material and work for no performance benefit.




        ----- Original Message -----
        From: "proaconstrictor" <proaconstrictor@...>
        To: <bolger@yahoogroups.com>
        Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2002 1:29 PM
        Subject: [bolger] Re: Micro - double-ender?


        | --- In bolger@y..., "brisfan2002" <frtom@m...> wrote:
        | > Does anyone know if it would be possible to build Mirco as a double-
        | > ender (using the bow thrice)? Also using either twin keels or
        | > leeboards and junk rig. Thanks.
        |
        | Some of us are still looking for the first end on a micro.
        |
        | More seriously, one of the reasons one cuts the second end off a boat
        | in order to create a transom, is to save the length of the second
        | end. Phil took this logic to the front of the boat also, thinking it
        | was particularly useful in the case of the lines of a heeled
        | sharpie. But one might ask, if one is adding stuff on, would it be
        | most appropriate to add the fine bow, rather than extending the
        | transom
        |
        |
        | Bolger rules!!!
        | - no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
        | - stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred' posts
        | - add your comments at the TOP and SIGN your posts and <snip> away
        | - To order plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box 1209, Gloucester, MA,
        01930, Fax: (978) 282-1349
        | - Unsubscribe: bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        | - Open discussion: bolger_coffee_lounge-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
        |
        | Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        |
        |
      • proaconstrictor
        ... question is ... the ... more ... There is a difference between Bolger s general attempt to do cool stuff like provide the most boat in 16 , or two sheets
        Message 3 of 11 , Aug 2, 2002
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In bolger@y..., "John Bell" <jmbell@m...> wrote:
          > There has been at least one Micro built with a pointy bow. The
          question is
          > why? If the boat is properly trimmed, there is no reason at all for
          the
          > forefoot to ever get in the water. All the pointy end adds is a bit
          more
          > material and work for no performance benefit.
          >

          There is a difference between Bolger's general attempt to do cool
          stuff like provide the most boat in 16', or two sheets length etc...,
          and saying it can't be improved with more of something. Micro isn't
          the best candidate for enhancement, because you wouldn't gain
          anything in WLL, unless you go wild with the bondo. Still I believe
          there is a wave out there somewhere that could break over the bow,
          and I would prefer it wasn't flat when it happened. Also, it isn't a
          wind friendly end, something rounded would be a moderate improvement
          on both counts. I don't think anyone has built a Melted Micro, but
          it would have to be faster. It might be cheaper.
        • ghartc
          My micro, now given away, once did 10 knots with 4 adults in the cockpit; obviously surfing (http://www.carlsondesign.com/projects.html) off the wind. On that
          Message 4 of 11 , Aug 2, 2002
          • 0 Attachment
            My micro, now given away, once did 10 knots with 4 adults in the
            cockpit; obviously surfing
            (http://www.carlsondesign.com/projects.html) off the wind. On that
            occasion, she creaked a little but seemed in control.

            On another reach on another day, with kids up front in the cabin, we
            had water pile up on the bow transom and pour in the lower step. We
            were on the lake, so we kept it up to see what would happen. The bow
            well filled until the second step began to pour in. When the water
            reached the plexiglass port to the cabin (4' of water?), we eased
            off. I really can't remember whether the small reacher we rigged was
            up or not, but it's something we could duplicate on the right day.

            Obviously, we could have reefed down or sailed up, but it was
            certainly interesting enough that I thought I would remove the steps
            at some point.

            By the way, has anyone gotten their foot in the first step and
            climbed on up? I'm a wrestler and I couldn't. Cute but unusable
            feature.

            So, the pointy micro is an interesting idea, the rationale of the
            double-ender escapes me. My Rozinante, a 28' canoe, is smaller than
            a Catalina 22 below. So, a double-ended Micro would be like, oh, a 9
            footer? While Rozinante is certainly beautiful, I hate to imagine
            the 15' double ender micro, 6 foot wide. Ouch.

            Gregg Carlson


            >> There has been at least one Micro built with a pointy bow. The
            >question is why? If the boat is properly trimmed, there is no reason
            at all for the forefoot to ever get in the water. All the pointy end
            adds is a bit more material and work for no performance benefit.
            > >
            >
            > There is a difference between Bolger's general attempt to do cool
            > stuff like provide the most boat in 16', or two sheets length
            etc...,
            > and saying it can't be improved with more of something. Micro
            isn't
            > the best candidate for enhancement, because you wouldn't gain
            > anything in WLL, unless you go wild with the bondo. Still I
            believe
            > there is a wave out there somewhere that could break over the bow,
            > and I would prefer it wasn't flat when it happened. Also, it isn't
            a
            > wind friendly end, something rounded would be a moderate
            improvement
            > on both counts. I don't think anyone has built a Melted Micro, but
            > it would have to be faster. It might be cheaper.
          • dbaldnz
            I only tried to once Gregg. I think because it s so narrow at the bow, your arms can t spread sideways enough to stop you pivoting sideways, unless maybe you
            Message 5 of 11 , Aug 2, 2002
            • 0 Attachment
              I only tried to once Gregg. I think because it's so narrow at the
              bow, your arms can't spread sideways enough to stop you pivoting
              sideways, unless maybe you threw yourself forward.
              Either way, it felt so silly I never tried again.
              DonB

              > By the way, has anyone gotten their foot in the first step and
              > climbed on up? I'm a wrestler and I couldn't. Cute but unusable
              > feature.

              >
              > Gregg Carlson
            • proaconstrictor
              ... What about if you were bow to beach? Would there ever be the reason to climb up and on that way. I imagine not. The steps do act as big scuppers. To
              Message 6 of 11 , Aug 3, 2002
              • 0 Attachment
                --- In bolger@y..., "dbaldnz" <oink@p...> wrote:
                > I only tried to once Gregg. I think because it's so narrow at the
                > bow, your arms can't spread sideways enough to stop you pivoting
                > sideways, unless maybe you threw yourself forward.
                > Either way, it felt so silly I never tried again.
                > DonB
                >

                What about if you were bow to beach? Would there ever be the reason
                to climb up and on that way. I imagine not. The steps do act as big
                scuppers. To eliminate that feature but allow the mast to step, one
                would have to close some stuff off, and then where do you want your
                anchor and so forth (I am not sure I want it over there anyway). The
                whole detail have never struck me as a winner.

                I must say, I was just babling on as though the double ender would be
                longer/extended. Of course I think the question actualy is two front
                ends, which I think would have a bad effect on stability, and load
                carrying.
              • rnlocnil
                Ah, but then you wouldn t have to argue with the canal fascists about OAL under the limit. (See Mr. Lenihan s account some time back about his trip to the
                Message 7 of 11 , Aug 3, 2002
                • 0 Attachment
                  Ah, but then you wouldn't have to argue with the canal fascists about
                  OAL under the limit. (See Mr. Lenihan's account some time back about
                  his trip to the first Champlain messabout, at least I think it's in
                  there.)
                  --- In bolger@y..., "proaconstrictor" <proaconstrictor@y...> wrote:
                  snip
                  > I must say, I was just babling on as though the double ender would
                  be
                  > longer/extended. Of course I think the question actualy is two
                  front
                  > ends, which I think would have a bad effect on stability, and load
                  > carrying.
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.