Sounds like an option, Jack. I'll have to put in some hard hours testing (fishing?) to see how it handles without a keel. Keels add directional stability and drag. It's a balancing act.
Not tiny house..........tiny boat
- Thread starter jdupre'
- Start date
Tough duty, Joey. But some poor soul has to do it. What kind of fish will this boat bring in? (Thinking of Spencer Tracy here, in "The Old Man And The Sea"). Chinkapin? Salmon? Rainbow trout? Northern pike?
Pulling in a 12" bluegill is like pulling in a large, dish pan. ROUND and ROUND and ROUND and. . . . .
I went for a short fishing/test run this morning. No fish.........it's been raining for a week straight. The boat rides in the truck bed with about one inch sticking out past the open tailgate. Brought it down to the water with one hand. Was able to get in from the sloping bank without getting my feet wet. I like that. It was s easy and stable to get in and get situated sitting on my temporary bucket seat.
Paddling is not bad. I slid my hands more towards the center of the double paddle to give me a better reach. The boat obviously doesn't glide like a 16' sleek kayak. It responds well to the paddle but you just can't muscle through the water. I just came to grips with the fact that for the same amount of effort as I use in my 16' Swamper, I get about 1 1/2 to 2 mph less speed ........... a comfortable walking speed. I went a quarter mile from the landing and it was no problem to come back upwind to the truck.
The new finish seems to be working out OK. Water beads up on it and mud hoses off fairly easily. There may be some surface stains due to the grain being exposed, but I don't see a problem with that.
I'd have to give the whole project a B+ to an A-. For $60, this simple boat could get a lot more "bank fishermen" out on the river or the lake.
Paddling is not bad. I slid my hands more towards the center of the double paddle to give me a better reach. The boat obviously doesn't glide like a 16' sleek kayak. It responds well to the paddle but you just can't muscle through the water. I just came to grips with the fact that for the same amount of effort as I use in my 16' Swamper, I get about 1 1/2 to 2 mph less speed ........... a comfortable walking speed. I went a quarter mile from the landing and it was no problem to come back upwind to the truck.
The new finish seems to be working out OK. Water beads up on it and mud hoses off fairly easily. There may be some surface stains due to the grain being exposed, but I don't see a problem with that.
I'd have to give the whole project a B+ to an A-. For $60, this simple boat could get a lot more "bank fishermen" out on the river or the lake.
One other thought. This design, tweaked a bit and using the stitch and glue method, would make a very credible down-river boat that would haul a ton of stuff and weigh maybe a bit more than 30 lbs. Just glassing the seams and epoxy saturating the rest, would give a tough, long lasting boat for maybe $100.
There is something to be said about a boat that is easy to make and does what it is intended to do. Might be one reason why that design has been around and used for such a long time.
I like the boat and it's concept. Try turning your seat around and paddle with the stern forward. This would reduce the rocker in the front of the boat and increase it the rear. You may need to slide the seat back to get the (new) bow above the water. The (new) stern would probably be raised (in the water colum) some, maybe creating less turbalance.
It seems to me boats with square sterns produce more turbalance, the deeper they set in the water. I think my Ogeechee boat would benafit with more rocker.
beekeeper
I'll give that a try, Bee. It feels to me that the most resistance is coming from the bow instead of the stern. The smoothest paddling is when the the bow just clears the water which causes the stern to rise almost out of the water...........almost the same effect as paddling it stern first. 8 feet is not much length to work with. Trying to get a smooth entry, a smooth exit and as long a waterline as possible is quite a feat!
Bee, turning the boat around would make less turbulence at the stern, but would expose a wider surface at the front. Six of one...................
I know, but it won't cost much to try it backwards. Perhaps the reduction in turbulence and directional stability may overcome the added resistance of the wider beam. I suspect that as long as the front end is trimmed out of the water there will be little "noticeable" resistance detected. How much difference in the beam of the bow vs. the stern?
bee
bee
Yeah, I know. Did I mention a mortar box?
In your quiet waters, that is a handy boat. Will hold a lot of fish. Maybe a frog and a crawdad or two?
In your quiet waters, that is a handy boat. Will hold a lot of fish. Maybe a frog and a crawdad or two?
Bee, I'll definitely try it backwards. There's 5 and 1/2" of difference. I can't see that being better, but I'll give it a go. I've read that water is 1000 times denser than air. Diverting over 5 more inches of water around the boat would seem to cause a lot more resistance.
It's really not a bad paddler, once you accept the fact that it will only go so fast. I just want to emphasize that it's no harder to paddle this boat than my 16' kayak, it just goes slower with the same amount of effort. On a river with a 1 mph current, it would chug right along with not a lot of effort.
It's really not a bad paddler, once you accept the fact that it will only go so fast. I just want to emphasize that it's no harder to paddle this boat than my 16' kayak, it just goes slower with the same amount of effort. On a river with a 1 mph current, it would chug right along with not a lot of effort.
If the front of the boat was down and you were plowing into the water that much added surface would be significant. If you keep the bottom above the water line the boat is not pushing as much as it is trying to ride up.
When we first took the Ogeechee boat out, we were seated too far forward and the boat was "barging" through the water. Moved to the rear and raised the front out of the water maybe 1/2" to 1" and made a world of difference. The next trip I modified the stern seat so I could slide back more. Keeping the front trimmed about the same and with the stern lower in the water, the boat "seemed" to not do as well. May need more rocker at the stern .
Since our boats don't have points perhaps they will benifit from more rocker. Most short and fat designs appear to have plenty. Some even have keels to help with tracking.
In this build video it appears the rocker is much more than what I did.
bee
When we first took the Ogeechee boat out, we were seated too far forward and the boat was "barging" through the water. Moved to the rear and raised the front out of the water maybe 1/2" to 1" and made a world of difference. The next trip I modified the stern seat so I could slide back more. Keeping the front trimmed about the same and with the stern lower in the water, the boat "seemed" to not do as well. May need more rocker at the stern .
Since our boats don't have points perhaps they will benifit from more rocker. Most short and fat designs appear to have plenty. Some even have keels to help with tracking.
bee
Bee, that's comparing apples to oranges. That boat looks to be about twice as long as mine. The rake is one big arc from front to back and one end is one third the size of the other. Different boat entirely.
If mine would be turned backwards with the bottom out of the water, it would maybe try to ride up, but it couldn't. It would still have to move an extra 5" width of water aside to go forward. Added to that, sitting that far back might just put the new stern into the water, defeating the whole purpose. I'll try it and report back with the results.
That Ogeechee River boat must be a really narrow-range purpose built boat. I've looked at hundreds or maybe thousands of pictures of boats from all over the world and have never seen one even close to that shape. No doubt it makes perfect sense to the people who built and used them.
If mine would be turned backwards with the bottom out of the water, it would maybe try to ride up, but it couldn't. It would still have to move an extra 5" width of water aside to go forward. Added to that, sitting that far back might just put the new stern into the water, defeating the whole purpose. I'll try it and report back with the results.
That Ogeechee River boat must be a really narrow-range purpose built boat. I've looked at hundreds or maybe thousands of pictures of boats from all over the world and have never seen one even close to that shape. No doubt it makes perfect sense to the people who built and used them.
Most of those short, fat designs of boats are normally tenders or dinghies..............made to go from a boat at anchor to the dock or beach with a payload of supplies and people. I haven't seen a really short design used as any kind of work or fishing boat. You give up a lot of performance when you trade it for light weight and size. I went for the latter. No free lunch.