"I think Rob cares not a whit about style. (I mean look at them! Sorry Rob. Its all about the funny) I think the HP's have changed looks in the pursuit of cheap, light, and fast."
There are those of us, me included, who want cheap, light, and VOLUME. Volume to store more than a couple of carry-on luggage for 3 weeks worth of clothes,brought off the plane (or motorcycle) to store in the WW hull.
You can have fast, but you also want to balance out the design profile to reflect your desires.
I look at it this way. Do I want a multihull? Yes, I find their characteristics desirable. A faster hull speed, and somewhat pleasant motion on an anchorage, to name but a few. Are they cheaper to build than a monohull? I don't know. Is their hullform easier to build than a mono? You bet, going by what I've seen on the web. But I also want volume too for extended cruising. Capacity for additional water storage, food storage, and to stretch out inside, but have my own space within the confines of the overall cabin by a berth separate from the salon. I'll sacrifice the utmost in speed for those creature comforts and extended stay on a mooring or at anchorages outside the clutches of an expensive marina. And it must be a boat that's transportable at 12' demounted. I can achieve that with a monohull, but not a catamaran, unless I limit myself to a powercat. But then there's the HP! I've got that 12' demountable sailing multihull I've always dreamed of and it'll get me from the backyard build site to the crane, can be stored on the hard, or reluctantly, demounted and returned to my backyard for extended storage.
There's my design profile, in a nutshell.
__._,_.___
Posted by: bobg3723@yahoo.com
| Reply via web post | • | Reply to sender | • | Reply to group | • | Start a new topic | • | Messages in this topic (20) |
.