So why does the 40ft Cruiser not cut it for me?
http://harryproa.com/?portfolio=harry

Its the right size yet it severely lacks in accommodation.
Im thinking all is not lost

Originally the 40 was designed to be built in strip plank, so I would expect the newer infusion method would reduce building time, costs, and more importantly give back some weight to fund a more generous central cabin..

The design of the weather hull incorporates angled beams to the lee hull, and these beams limit the double berths from being moved outboard to the ends. In order to provide a meaningful central saloon cabin the beams need to be further out. In this way the saloon length can be made to a useful 3.2m, the landing for the windows stretches that to a spacey 3.6m of visual width.

The weight refund used in making the saloon isnt consuming as much as all that until any attempt is made to make it grow in width, and that and the roof is where I expect much of the available weight would be redistributed. In order not to waste that the cabins surround is round as it consumes less materials than a rectangular shape (78%). Much of the 11.3m circumference is around 0.6m high, and what approaches standing head room can only be afforded by a dished end roof of some 10sqm, that also provides some shade and protection for the cockpit outside as the cabin width at the floor only goes 2.2m across.

so is it feasible or a dog?