Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
saw one those folding trimarans this morning on the Indian River near the
192 causeway, think it was a F-27. There was barely enough wind to ripple the water but those things are so light the boat was making probably 4-5 kts. He (or she) was definitely going faster than the wind speed on a reach. |
#2
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sat, 24 Oct 2009 17:27:46 -0400, "mmc" wrote:
saw one those folding trimarans this morning on the Indian River near the 192 causeway, think it was a F-27. There was barely enough wind to ripple the water but those things are so light the boat was making probably 4-5 kts. He (or she) was definitely going faster than the wind speed on a reach. Wish I'd seen that. I'm thinking more and more that I'd go for a tri over a Mac 26. Have to get in shape though. There's another tri that's a little slower than the Farriers but has other advantages. Can't remember the brand now. But unless I get off my ass and start exercising, it'll be a Carolina Skiff. If I can get over the gunnels without too much huffing and puffing. --Vic |
#3
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Oct 24, 5:49*pm, Vic Smith wrote:
On Sat, 24 Oct 2009 17:27:46 -0400, "mmc" wrote: saw one those folding trimarans this morning on the Indian River near the 192 causeway, think it was a F-27. There was barely enough wind to ripple the water but those things are so light the boat was making probably 4-5 kts. He (or she) was definitely going faster than the wind speed on a reach. Wish I'd seen that. *I'm thinking more and more that I'd go for a tri over a Mac 26. *Have to get in shape though. *There's another tri that's a little slower than the Farriers but has other advantages. Can't remember the brand now. But unless I get off my ass and start exercising, it'll be a Carolina Skiff. *If I can get over the gunnels without too much huffing and puffing. --Vic There are Dragonfly trimarans that are supposed to be just a bit slower than the Farriers. For just going fast, you might consider a Windrider trimaran. |
#4
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sat, 24 Oct 2009 15:52:54 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
wrote: On Oct 24, 5:49Â*pm, Vic Smith wrote: On Sat, 24 Oct 2009 17:27:46 -0400, "mmc" wrote: saw one those folding trimarans this morning on the Indian River near the 192 causeway, think it was a F-27. There was barely enough wind to ripple the water but those things are so light the boat was making probably 4-5 kts. He (or she) was definitely going faster than the wind speed on a reach. Wish I'd seen that. Â*I'm thinking more and more that I'd go for a tri over a Mac 26. Â*Have to get in shape though. Â*There's another tri that's a little slower than the Farriers but has other advantages. Can't remember the brand now. But unless I get off my ass and start exercising, it'll be a Carolina Skiff. Â*If I can get over the gunnels without too much huffing and puffing. --Vic There are Dragonfly trimarans that are supposed to be just a bit slower than the Farriers. For just going fast, you might consider a Windrider trimaran. I'll have to check out the Dragonfly. The one I couldn't remember is the Telstar 28. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KxRc8...eature=related I like it. --Vic |
#5
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Oct 24, 6:52*pm, Frogwatch wrote:
On Oct 24, 5:49*pm, Vic Smith wrote: On Sat, 24 Oct 2009 17:27:46 -0400, "mmc" wrote: saw one those folding trimarans this morning on the Indian River near the 192 causeway, think it was a F-27. There was barely enough wind to ripple the water but those things are so light the boat was making probably 4-5 kts. He (or she) was definitely going faster than the wind speed on a reach. Wish I'd seen that. *I'm thinking more and more that I'd go for a tri over a Mac 26. *Have to get in shape though. *There's another tri that's a little slower than the Farriers but has other advantages. Can't remember the brand now. But unless I get off my ass and start exercising, it'll be a Carolina Skiff. *If I can get over the gunnels without too much huffing and puffing. --Vic There are Dragonfly trimarans that are supposed to be just a bit slower than the Farriers. *For just going fast, you might consider a Windrider trimaran. Another consideration for trimarans is room below. An F27 has about as much living space below as a Catalina 22 monohull. An F31 Farrier has about much room as an Oday 25 below and my 28' S2 monohull has much more room. However, the tris are trailerable and fast. Before I built my Tolman Skiff, I was serious about building a 32' Tri and considered both the Farrier and Kurt Hughes designs. Both have kits to install the folding structure but Kurt Hughes seemed to suggest what he called "demountable" amas. These do not fold but are carried above the main hull on the trailer and are attached to the support structure at the marina and it was supposed to be fairly easy but i do not remember the drill. One reason the trailer tris are so small inside is because they are made to be less than 8' 6" wide for legal trailering. Both Hughes and Farrier said their boats can be built wider (9' 8") giving much more room but this would require a special oversize trailer permit. I checked into this and you would have to buy such a permit for every state you entered but it is good for a year in FL. The wider version is not available as a production boat. |
#6
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sat, 24 Oct 2009 16:34:56 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
wrote: Another consideration for trimarans is room below. An F27 has about as much living space below as a Catalina 22 monohull. An F31 Farrier has about much room as an Oday 25 below and my 28' S2 monohull has much more room. However, the tris are trailerable and fast. Before I built my Tolman Skiff, I was serious about building a 32' Tri and considered both the Farrier and Kurt Hughes designs. Both have kits to install the folding structure but Kurt Hughes seemed to suggest what he called "demountable" amas. These do not fold but are carried above the main hull on the trailer and are attached to the support structure at the marina and it was supposed to be fairly easy but i do not remember the drill. One reason the trailer tris are so small inside is because they are made to be less than 8' 6" wide for legal trailering. Both Hughes and Farrier said their boats can be built wider (9' 8") giving much more room but this would require a special oversize trailer permit. I checked into this and you would have to buy such a permit for every state you entered but it is good for a year in FL. The wider version is not available as a production boat. Good info. I know the tris are light on below deck space, but don't plan to cruise much beyond a few days. What I like about them is speed under sail, seakeeping ability, and fishing platform. If I end up on the gulf, going 20-30 miles offshore for grouper could be more safely done in the tri than in an open boat. And with a lot less gas! --Vic |
#7
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 10/24/09 7:46 PM, Vic Smith wrote:
On Sat, 24 Oct 2009 16:34:56 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch wrote: Another consideration for trimarans is room below. An F27 has about as much living space below as a Catalina 22 monohull. An F31 Farrier has about much room as an Oday 25 below and my 28' S2 monohull has much more room. However, the tris are trailerable and fast. Before I built my Tolman Skiff, I was serious about building a 32' Tri and considered both the Farrier and Kurt Hughes designs. Both have kits to install the folding structure but Kurt Hughes seemed to suggest what he called "demountable" amas. These do not fold but are carried above the main hull on the trailer and are attached to the support structure at the marina and it was supposed to be fairly easy but i do not remember the drill. One reason the trailer tris are so small inside is because they are made to be less than 8' 6" wide for legal trailering. Both Hughes and Farrier said their boats can be built wider (9' 8") giving much more room but this would require a special oversize trailer permit. I checked into this and you would have to buy such a permit for every state you entered but it is good for a year in FL. The wider version is not available as a production boat. Good info. I know the tris are light on below deck space, but don't plan to cruise much beyond a few days. What I like about them is speed under sail, seakeeping ability, and fishing platform. If I end up on the gulf, going 20-30 miles offshore for grouper could be more safely done in the tri than in an open boat. And with a lot less gas! --Vic Uh... I'd dispute that. Decently powered monohulls properly designed for offshore use tend to go where you point them, e.g., in a straight line towards shore if necessary. Sailboats, all sailboats, are much more dependent upon the vagaries of nature. If I am going fishing 20-30 miles offshore and my choices were a 27' deep vee or power cat, or a sailboat...well...I'd hop on the powerboat, knowing my chances of outrunning an incoming storm were far greater with a boat that can do 30 knots and head straight in. |
#8
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Oct 24, 7:55*pm, H the K wrote:
On 10/24/09 7:46 PM, Vic Smith wrote: On Sat, 24 Oct 2009 16:34:56 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch *wrote: Another consideration for trimarans is room below. *An F27 has about as much living space below as a Catalina 22 monohull. *An F31 Farrier has about much room as an Oday 25 below and my 28' S2 monohull has much more room. *However, the tris are trailerable and fast. Before I built my Tolman Skiff, I was serious about building a 32' Tri and considered both the Farrier and Kurt Hughes designs. *Both have kits to install the folding structure but Kurt Hughes seemed to suggest what he called "demountable" amas. *These do not fold but are carried above the main hull on the trailer and are attached to the support structure at the marina and it was supposed to be fairly easy but i do not remember the drill. One reason the trailer tris are so small inside is because they are made to be less than 8' 6" wide for legal trailering. *Both Hughes and Farrier said their boats can be built wider (9' 8") giving much more room but this would require a special oversize trailer permit. *I checked into this and you would have to buy such a permit for every state you entered but it is good for a year in FL. *The wider version is not available as a production boat. Good info. *I know the tris are light on below deck space, but don't plan to cruise much beyond a few days. What I like about them is speed under sail, seakeeping ability, and fishing platform. If I end up on the gulf, going 20-30 miles offshore for grouper could be more safely done in the tri than in an open boat. And with a lot less gas! --Vic Uh... I'd dispute that. Decently powered monohulls properly designed for offshore use tend to go where you point them, e.g., in a straight line towards shore if necessary. Sailboats, all sailboats, are much more dependent upon the vagaries of nature. If I am going fishing 20-30 miles offshore and my choices were a 27' deep vee or power cat, or a sailboat...well...I'd hop on the powerboat, knowing my chances of outrunning an incoming storm were far greater with a boat that can do 30 knots and head straight in. I have ridden on F31 tris twice and although they are truly fast, they also seemed wet in any chop with the amas throwing spray up onto us. Like most sailboats, they are subject to the vagaries of weather although the normal 15 hp outboard on an F31 will push it at 10 kts. How would it handle in nasty conditions? I dunno although if weather was already bad, I'd rather be on my monohull sailboat with its 2500 lbs of ballast. Once the weather is bad, the tri isn't going to go any faster than a monohull downwind and not much faster into the waves either. HArry is right that the powerboat can outrun the nasty but the Tri should also be able to outrun it. The monohull sailboat (except the Mac26, a special case) cannot outrun the nasty weather and is built to take it. A major advantage of a tri is the beachability where they can be taken right up to a beach or into extremely shallow water where you have safety. I believe that if you integrate safety over the entire use of a sailboat, you would actually find that a trimaran with its ability to outrun weather and go into shallow water is probably safer than a displacement hull sailboat. Likewise, if a Mac 26 is used properly (it is not an offshore boat) it is also safer than a monohull sailboat AND safer than a powerboat. However, neither the F27 nor the F31 strike me as a good fishing platform. Sailing is work and the faster you go the more work it is. Can you really enjoy fishing and tending sails at the same time? Like most sailboats, the cockpits of the Farrier Tris are small for good offshore ability making it difficult to fish from. |
#9
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sat, 24 Oct 2009 19:55:02 -0400, H the K
wrote: Decently powered monohulls properly designed for offshore use tend to go where you point them, e.g., in a straight line towards shore if necessary. Sailboats, all sailboats, are much more dependent upon the vagaries of nature. If I am going fishing 20-30 miles offshore and my choices were a 27' deep vee or power cat, or a sailboat...well...I'd hop on the powerboat, knowing my chances of outrunning an incoming storm were far greater with a boat that can do 30 knots and head straight in. Nah, the tri just quickly floats in on the pressure wave in front of the storm (-: But aside from running from weather, and fishing in uncomfortable conditions you probably don't want to fish in, these tris are better sea boats than any open boat. They just plain don't sink. A 24' DLX Carolina Skiff would do for going out there only when you're pretty sure seas will stay fairly flat. Pretty limiting. These Telstars easily handle 8 foot seas if required. I know which boat I'd rather be aboard should I get caught in that. And they provide a lot of area to fish on if it's not too bumpy. BTW, the Telstar is supposed to power at 15 knots with a 40hp OB. Don't think I'd want to weight it down with one though. Last thing I want is a gas-guzzling 27' power boat. Not in my cards for many reasons. --Vic |
#10
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sat, 24 Oct 2009 17:27:46 -0400, "mmc" wrote:
saw one those folding trimarans this morning on the Indian River near the 192 causeway, think it was a F-27. There was barely enough wind to ripple the water but those things are so light the boat was making probably 4-5 kts. He (or she) was definitely going faster than the wind speed on a reach. Where we were fishing for bass was just south of Cocoa, up from Lake Poinsett. |