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

Decapitating a Micro

Expand Messages
  • brianincorv
    So, I ve been thinking for a long time about replacing my Micro with a home-built daysailor. I ll leave out the book-length story of my deliberations and
    Message 1 of 5 , May 9, 2014
    • 0 Attachment

      So, I've been thinking for a long time about replacing my Micro with a home-built daysailor.  I'll leave out the book-length story of my deliberations and analysis of various types and designs (waffle is my middle name!). One idea I'm playing with, just for fun, is to decapitate the Micro and turn it into a larger version of Oldshoe.

       

      Here's what I've thought of so far:

       

      1. Cut above the wales that run the full length of the hull.  This would be the new sheer.  Reinforce the existing wales with another layer of 1X2, as many of Jim Michalak's designs show.

       

      2. The mainmast would be in a tabernacle, much like some other Bolger designs, and the lower front face of the mast would form the bow transom.  There would be no bow anchor well.  I know many people like them, but I'm not that attached to them, so there would be a bulkhead right abaft the mast.

       

      3. The interior would be similar to many Michalak designs: forward watertight compartment with flush deck above, then a cockpit with bench seats, and then an aft watertight compartment like the forward one. Finally a motorwell similar to Oldshoe.  I've just started playing with dimensions, but the cockpit will be between eight and nine feet, and probably have two feet of aisle width. 

       

      The result would not be much lighter (50lbs, maybe?) than the standard Micro, but would sit lower on the trailer and be easier to rig.  Because of other people involved, I need to make capsizing an almost impossible event.  I think it would be a good camp cruiser with a tent.  It would certainly trim better with a full-length cockpit.  It's an interesting alternative to selling the boat and starting over.

       

      What do you think?

    • John Trussell
      It should work. One thing you might want to look at is the possibility of cutting down the bottom of your masts by the same amount youcut down the hull. I also
      Message 2 of 5 , May 10, 2014
      • 0 Attachment

        It should work. One thing you might want to look at is the possibility of cutting down the bottom of your masts by the same amount youcut down the hull. I also think your estimate of weight loss may be low as you are eliminating the upper sides, cabin top/companion way hatch, the current cockpit decking, and a chunk of the main bulkhead. You may also want to consider boxing in the full lengthe thwarts which would create two box beams and stiffen the hull dramatically’

         

        Have fun and let us know how it turns out.

         

        JohnT

         


        From: bolger@yahoogroups.com [mailto: bolger@yahoogroups.com ]
        Sent: Friday, May 09, 2014 9:51 PM
        To: bolger@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: [bolger] Decapitating a Micro

         

         

        So, I've been thinking for a long time about replacing my Micro with a home-built daysailor.  I'll leave out the book-length story of my deliberations and analysis of various types and designs (waffle is my middle name!). One idea I'm playing with, just for fun, is to decapitate the Micro and turn it into a larger version of Oldshoe.

         

        Here's what I've thought of so far:

         

        1. Cut above the wales that run the full length of the hull.  This would be the new sheer.  Reinforce the existing wales with another layer of 1X2, as many of Jim Michalak's designs show.

         

        2. The mainmast would be in a tabernacle, much like some other Bolger designs, and the lower front face of the mast would form the bow transom.  There would be no bow anchor well.  I know many people like them, but I'm not that attached to them, so there would be a bulkhead right abaft the mast.

         

        3. The interior would be similar to many Michalak designs: forward watertight compartment with flush deck above, then a cockpit with bench seats, and then an aft watertight compartment like the forward one. Finally a motorwell similar to Oldshoe.  I've just started playing with dimensions, but the cockpit will be between eight and nine feet, and probably have two feet of aisle width. 

         

        The result would not be much lighter (50lbs, maybe?) than the standard Micro, but would sit lower on the trailer and be easier to rig.  Because of other people involved, I need to make capsizing an almost impossible event.  I think it would be a good camp cruiser with a tent.  It would certainly trim better with a full-length cockpit.  It's an interesting alternative to selling the boat and starting over.

         

        What do you think?

      • brianincorv
        Thanks, John. The more I looked at it, the more I think it s not worth it for me to try, although I think it would work quite well. I certainly think it would
        Message 3 of 5 , May 12, 2014
        • 0 Attachment

          Thanks, John. The more I looked at it, the more I think it's not worth it for me to try, although I think it would work quite well. I certainly think it would be a viable option for a builder contemplating a new build of either an Oldshoe or Micro. I was fairly conservative on my weight estimate, because nearly every piece of wood removed in the "surgery" is replaced lower down in the new interior in the form of the watertight compartments and the bench seating. The gain is in the loss of the upper sides and the cabin hatch structure and cargo hatch structure. My idea of the mast being part of the forward transom wouldn't work. I forgot that the placement is a bit further aft, but that's easily taken care of with a transom gate. A tabernacle on any Micro would be a great improvement (I think some have them), as I find that climbing over the cabin top with the mast when the boat is on the trailer is the worst part of rigging and de-rigging.

           

          I'm hoping to get Dreadnought in the water for a sail next week.  I really believe the Micro is a brilliant design as a very small cruiser; it's just not the best casual daysailer, especially for more than two people.

        • Mason Smith
          I’ve been sitting in my Micro and looking at the plans, thinking about your open Micro idea. My first thought was, why cut down the bulwarks—they’ll make
          Message 4 of 5 , May 12, 2014
          • 0 Attachment

            I’ve been sitting in my Micro and looking at the plans, thinking about your open Micro idea. My first thought was, why cut down the bulwarks—they’ll make nice back rests. Why not leave the cockpit decks on both sides as part of your bench seats. Maybe leave the bridge deck and lower part of the bulkhead (thinking that that bulkhead is a very important member in the structure). Use the tabernacle design from Micro II and Navigator, if you must (ugly) or make a tabernacle in the original location and open out the bow like Martha Jane for the swing.  

            Basically, it seems that all you’d need to do to test the idea would be to take off the cabin top and companionway and upper part of the main bulkhead, and put in benches in the former cabin, and a level sole.

            Or, do a Micro Navigator without the house and windows.

            But heck, we daysail our Micro with pleasure. Not with six, but with 2-3 people usually.

            I’ve just done two things to my Micro that I think I’ll like: put level cedar floorboards in the stern well, and split the hatch cover in two, for easier stowage I am going to mount the halves fore and aft on take-apart hinges and provide an overlapping closure that keeps out rain, I hope. I’ll see if the halves can become slanting backrests, leaned against the bulwarks either side, held in place by cleats or more take-apart hinges.

                       And I am thinking of making some sort of arrangement for a movable galley, that will live under the bridge deck and move aft to the hatch to be lifted up into the cockpit for use, or come forward into the cabin, and maybe go all the way forward in the cabin for use in bad weather---the problem being making meals in the cabin when there are two of you in there, one no longer loose-jointed. Oh, it never ends: I also want to take out the slatted berths, and divvy up the space under them into dry compartments for clothes and stuff. Bookcase on fwd bulkhead. Battery and lighting system.  Never ends.

            Still, I always come back to the same place: mess with Phil’s designs at your peril. So it’s easy to neglect all these ambitions, and besides the boat is always for sale and might disappear at any time.

            --Mason

             

            Sent: Monday, May 12, 2014 5:23 AM
            To: bolger@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: RE: [bolger] Decapitating a Micro

             

             

            Thanks, John. The more I looked at it, the more I think it's not worth it for me to try, although I think it would work quite well. I certainly think it would be a viable option for a builder contemplating a new build of either an Oldshoe or Micro. I was fairly conservative on my weight estimate, because nearly every piece of wood removed in the "surgery" is replaced lower down in the new interior in the form of the watertight compartments and the bench seating. The gain is in the loss of the upper sides and the cabin hatch structure and cargo hatch structure. My idea of the mast being part of the forward transom wouldn't work. I forgot that the placement is a bit further aft, but that's easily taken care of with a transom gate. A tabernacle on any Micro would be a great improvement (I think some have them), as I find that climbing over the cabin top with the mast when the boat is on the trailer is the worst part of rigging and de-rigging.

             

            I'm hoping to get Dreadnought in the water for a sail next week.  I really believe the Micro is a brilliant design as a very small cruiser; it's just not the best casual daysailer, especially for more than two people.

          • mkriley48
            hi, 2 feet is much too wide the asle width needs to be short enough so you can brace yourself with your feet on the opposite seat and your back against the
            Message 5 of 5 , May 13, 2014
            • 0 Attachment
              hi, 2 feet is much too wide the asle width needs to be short enough so
              you can brace yourself with your feet on the opposite seat and your back against the backrest, otherwise you will be clutching things to keep from sliding off the seat when heeled.
              mike
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.