Shallow draft boat choices

[Owly055]

Wharrams are popular. But small inside til you get up above 35 feet. I seriously considered one before I built my cross 35. Talked to cross once, mentioned Wharrams. He said- fine oats if you like living in a sewer pipe. After I visied some folks on a 34 I saw what he meant.

But to the best of my knowledge, one has NEVER been lost at sea. Of course I've been  out of the multihull world since 1985.

I'm not a Wharram fan... they have too many liabilities.   The flexible beam system means you cannot integrate the hulls with a bridge deck cabin, and that is what makes a cat roomy and liveable.   In a large Wharram, your hull spaces are generally deep in the hulls.... so deep that the bridge deck is at chin level instead of being at countertop level as on some other designs where the workspace in the galley and the opposite hull utilizes part of the bridge deck as extended counter or places for appliances or stowage.   It also means more steps to climb up out of the hulls, and it means that the hulls when the hatches are open are exposed to weather.... And that you must pass outside from hull to hull or to the bridge deck cabin.      In addition the double ender design means more hobby horsing, and constricts useable space in the aft ends of the hulls.... transom sterns offer more useable space aft, where berths are best placed, and allow more of the boat to be wider in the living area for the same length.  They also change the fore and aft profile relationship in such a way that they often dampen out pitching / hobbyhorsing.   There are many designs that are far better suited for cruising.   I personally like the work of Richard Woods, Bernd Kohler, and a number of other modern designers.... (home built designs)  Richard Woods on one of his early designs (Mira) , did what James Wharram should have done, which was to design the hulls with a "wing", much like a trimaran, giving a great deal of open space in the hulls, while still retaining the open deck... the "wing" functions as seating on deck, and gives hull space of 8' across in the saloon.... and unlike comparable Wharrams, there  is only about 30" to climb from hull to deck rather than 50+ in a comparable wharram.   These are major livability improvements... the open feel & 2 less steps each time you climb out of a hull, may seem minor, but in reality they hugely impact comfort and fatigue, and mental stress.   I particularly like the simplicity and other benefits Bernd Kohler has incorporated into his 28 foot KD 860, with it's flat bottom hull, which has very shallow draft, and excellent payload for it's size, though it is too small for my purposes, and used forward berths on the bridge deck which I do not like, and which also reduces saloon size, and eliminates forward view.   I also like Richard Woods 30' Sagitta....  He uses and unnecessarily complex round bottom chined cedar strip hull, but the layout in general is far superior, though the shape is not so elegant.... and daggers are a nuisance that could be improved IMHO by placing leeway boards that can kick back on the inboard side of each hull instead.   Personally I would like foam sandwich construction for insulation and sound deadening, and reduced weight.   
     Another designer, for whom I have a great deal of respect and admiration because of his incredibly innovative outside the box thinking is Rob Denny, with his HarryProa designs.  Easy construction, light weight, and his greatest innovation being placing the mast(s) in one longer hull, and the people & cabin in the opposite hull for the most part..... this results in the only truly stable and safe proa layout for voyaging IMHO.  The cabin is always to windward except dead downwind, and it provides a lot of open deck, and good visibility in all the directions that usually matter.   They do lack the space I want, until you get into a truly huge boat.  It shunts rather than tacking, and has multiple rudders that are kick back and also raise and lower, and can double as a leeway device / dagger.     Access to the mast is easy, and the aerorig makes for simple sailing, and the free standing mast(s) eliminate all that troublesome standing rigging to maintain.   There is a lot to like in Rob's thinking.   
      That said, Wharram designs are solidly reliable and seaworthy, and he has refrained from designing with a lot of windage like many of the small cats that will not sail to windward in spite of having daggers due to large bridge deck cabins.   He has also used slatted decks.... which is probably good, and his designs provide a lot of deck area, which is nice in the tropics, but only seasonally comfortable where most of us live.   Wharrams are made for outdoor living in a comfortable climate.   

   There are plenty of other excellent designs.... Roger Simpson did some excellent designs, Schionning, etc.....  Wharrams tend to be inexpensive and plentyful....  Their main virtues.

                                                      H.W.

[Frank]

Wharrams are popular. But small inside til you get up above 35 feet. I seriously considered one before I built my cross 35. Talked to cross once, mentioned Wharrams. He said- fine oats if you like living in a sewer pipe. After I visied some folks on a 34 I saw what he meant.

But to the best of my knowledge, one has NEVER been lost at sea. Of course I've been  out of the multihull world since 1985.

I'm not a Wharram fan... they have too many liabilities.   The flexible beam system means you cannot integrate the hulls with a bridge deck cabin, and that is what makes a cat roomy and liveable.   In a large Wharram, your hull spaces are generally deep in the hulls.... so deep that the bridge deck is at chin level instead of being at countertop level as on some other designs where the workspace in the galley and the opposite hull utilizes part of the bridge deck as extended counter or places for appliances or stowage.   It also means more steps to climb up out of the hulls, and it means that the hulls when the hatches are open are exposed to weather.... And that you must pass outside from hull to hull or to the bridge deck cabin.      In addition the double ender design means more hobby horsing, and constricts useable space in the aft ends of the hulls.... transom sterns offer more useable space aft, where berths are best placed, and allow more of the boat to be wider in the living area for the same length.  They also change the fore and aft profile relationship in such a way that they often dampen out pitching / hobbyhorsing.   There are many designs that are far better suited for cruising.   I personally like the work of Richard Woods, Bernd Kohler, and a number of other modern designers.... (home built designs)  Richard Woods on one of his early designs (Mira) , did what James Wharram should have done, which was to design the hulls with a "wing", much like a trimaran, giving a great deal of open space in the hulls, while still retaining the open deck... the "wing" functions as seating on deck, and gives hull space of 8' across in the saloon.... and unlike comparable Wharrams, there  is only about 30" to climb from hull to deck rather than 50+ in a comparable wharram.   These are major livability improvements... the open feel & 2 less steps each time you climb out of a hull, may seem minor, but in reality they hugely impact comfort and fatigue, and mental stress.   I particularly like the simplicity and other benefits Bernd Kohler has incorporated into his 28 foot KD 860, with it's flat bottom hull, which has very shallow draft, and excellent payload for it's size, though it is too small for my purposes, and used forward berths on the bridge deck which I do not like, and which also reduces saloon size, and eliminates forward view.   I also like Richard Woods 30' Sagitta....  He uses and unnecessarily complex round bottom chined cedar strip hull, but the layout in general is far superior, though the shape is not so elegant.... and daggers are a nuisance that could be improved IMHO by placing leeway boards that can kick back on the inboard side of each hull instead.   Personally I would like foam sandwich construction for insulation and sound deadening, and reduced weight.   
     Another designer, for whom I have a great deal of respect and admiration because of his incredibly innovative outside the box thinking is Rob Denny, with his HarryProa designs.  Easy construction, light weight, and his greatest innovation being placing the mast(s) in one longer hull, and the people & cabin in the opposite hull for the most part..... this results in the only truly stable and safe proa layout for voyaging IMHO.  The cabin is always to windward except dead downwind, and it provides a lot of open deck, and good visibility in all the directions that usually matter.   They do lack the space I want, until you get into a truly huge boat.  It shunts rather than tacking, and has multiple rudders that are kick back and also raise and lower, and can double as a leeway device / dagger.     Access to the mast is easy, and the aerorig makes for simple sailing, and the free standing mast(s) eliminate all that troublesome standing rigging to maintain.   There is a lot to like in Rob's thinking.   
      That said, Wharram designs are solidly reliable and seaworthy, and he has refrained from designing with a lot of windage like many of the small cats that will not sail to windward in spite of having daggers due to large bridge deck cabins.   He has also used slatted decks.... which is probably good, and his designs provide a lot of deck area, which is nice in the tropics, but only seasonally comfortable where most of us live.   Wharrams are made for outdoor living in a comfortable climate.   

   There are plenty of other excellent designs.... Roger Simpson did some excellent designs, Schionning, etc.....  Wharrams tend to be inexpensive and plentyful....  Their main virtues.

                                                      H.W.

CJ
Having actually cruised many miles on them, What do you think of cats in rough water?

[CharlieJ]

I've only sailed aboard one Wharram, but it was pretty neat. The flexible lashing on the cross arms gave a nice motion. His boats have a serious safety record offshore- several smaller ones ( in the 20+ foot range) have circumnavigated single handed. I have personally never heard of a Wharram being lost at sea. Doesn't mean it hasn't happened, I just haven't heard

Look up his first book- "two girls, two catamarans" His tale of crossing the Atlantic with Ruth and Juta. Boat name was Tangaroa. That was a self built boat. They built a larger one in the west Indies and sailed her back- boat was named Rongo . Wharram lived most of his life (still may) with two women- different ones at times. Quite a character

The only reason I chose my tri rather than a Wharram 36 was space for three. I had a young son. and planned to  live aboard- which i did for several years

Single hand? If I were looking today, I'd give serious consideration to a Wharram in the 30 foot range

[CharlieJ]

One point about the lashing on the cross arms- lets you disassemble the bot for travel

[CharlieJ]

More-

I happen to have the study plans for Woods Saggita. Had all intentions of building one when the build site fell through. Spent a very interesting weekend visiting with Richard and his wife in Port Aranasas a few years ago on their power catamaran. Serious sailor- lots of catamaran miles.

I also met Jim Brown back in the  late 90's at the last EYA meeting in St Petersburg. Very knowledgeable guy. Sent some pictures to Joanna of Jim with a Simple Sib mock up hull over his head. Told her many guys  got drunk and put lampshades on, Jim stayed sober and used boat hulls :) She got a kick out of that :)

Nowadays, at my age, I'm very satisfied with my 25 and 21 footers  :)

[Frank]

CJ...
How are multi's out in bigger waves?
Say...10+ fters

[CharlieJ]

Depends on the boat I suppose- I had my tri in 20+ foot seas coming out of Key West, but they weren't breaking- was a pretty smooth ride. Also logged 14 knots for over two hours coming down the Chesapeake running DDW from a storm front-looking for a secure anchorage. Found it too- Mill creek on the Wicomico :)

Other than that, I always tried to stay somewhere nicer- had family aboard remember

In Brown's book "case for the cruising Trimaran" he has some scary pics taken from other boats of his Scrimshaw in BIG seas

The only really bad part of a tri that I found was motoring in a flat calm, with left over chop hitting right on th e beam- the motion then is horrible !!

Picture of my tri, taken from another tri, in the open Atlantic

[CapnK]

I've seen a Stiletto 27 cat with a bimini, which means you could build/have built an enclosure for the deck area aft of the mast and between the hulls - it wouldn't be stand-up tall, but would allow you out of the hull in inclement weather.

9" draft board up, a 15hp outboard motor, and speeds up into the high teens and even 20's under sail...