"Armond Perretta" wrote in message
...
However depending on boat size, having a canoe stern gives up a few
positive
aspects of transom stern boats without necessarily offering compensation.
I
want to suggest (at the risk of drawing ire) that there has never been any
real evidence that these designs are any better or worse than transom
boats
in rough going. We hear things about "parting breaking waves and seas"
and
so on, but I don't believe there is any quantifiable evidence that
double-enders do any better than any other designs. Not that they do any
worse either, but there's a suggestion of superiority out there that is
not
supported by any real evidence.

It seems like the design would simply *have* to be easier in a following
sea. I spent a lot of time running these boats
http://www.boatshow.com/POWER/CustomDivePro42.html which are rudderless
jets, and they were horrid in a following sea. But I admit that comparing a
300hp non-displacement hull to a 35-40 sailboat is an apples-and-oranges
thing. My experiences may well be a hindrance here... I am not committed
to a double-ender.

Next, and again depending on boat size, for a given length you definitely
_do_ lose some room, both on deck (in and around the cockpit) and below
(stowage-wise). This isn't much of a problem for a single-hander in a 40
foot boat, if a 40 foot boat is what you want. But single-handing a 40
footer is not necessarily what it's cracked up to be. I cannot tell for
sure after re-reading your initial post, but you seem to suggest that this
is a goal.

Not the be-all and end-all goal. I'm not antisocial Being single, I
simply expect there would be times when I would sail alone. I may be best
served by something smaller, but 37' is attractive. The Pacific Seacraft at
32' would be fine, I think.

This is going to be an involved (and entertaining) process. I know about
ten times as much about sailboats today than I did yesterday, and I still
don't know very much at all!

Wendy

Wendy wrote:
"Armond Perretta" wrote

... there has never been any real evidence that these
designs are any better or worse than transom boats in rough going.
We hear things about "parting breaking waves and seas" ...
but I don't believe there is any quantifiable evidence that
double-enders do any better than any other designs. Not that they
do any worse either, but there's a suggestion of superiority out
there that is not supported by [the] evidence.

It seems like the design would simply *have* to be easier in a
following sea.

Yes, it does seem so, and for that reason I suggested that what _seems_ to
be the case is not, to my knowledge, supported by verifiable evidence. I
don't really think there is a problem here, but making a purchase decision
on this basis is probably unsound. They still are pretty though, doncha
think?

... single-handing a 40 footer is not necessarily what
it's cracked up to be. I cannot tell for sure after re-reading
your initial post, but you seem to suggest that this is a goal.

Not the be-all and end-all goal. I'm not antisocial

If you equate "anti-social" with single-handing you are looking for an
argument (that _does_ sound a bit anti-social, doesn't it?). There are
plenty of reasons to sail alone, but in my experience an anti-social
personality is rarely one of them.

... I know
about ten times as much about sailboats today than I did yesterday,
and I still don't know very much at all!

This admission puts you ahead of about 90 percent of the fleet.

--
Good luck and good sailing.
s/v Kerry Deare of Barnegat
http://kerrydeare.home.comcast.net/

Wendy wrote:
"Armond Perretta" wrote

... there has never been any real evidence that these
designs are any better or worse than transom boats in rough going.
We hear things about "parting breaking waves and seas" ...
but I don't believe there is any quantifiable evidence that
double-enders do any better than any other designs. Not that they
do any worse either, but there's a suggestion of superiority out
there that is not supported by [the] evidence.

It seems like the design would simply *have* to be easier in a
following sea.

Yes, it does seem so, and for that reason I suggested that what _seems_ to
be the case is not, to my knowledge, supported by verifiable evidence. I
don't really think there is a problem here, but making a purchase decision
on this basis is probably unsound. They still are pretty though, doncha
think?

... single-handing a 40 footer is not necessarily what
it's cracked up to be. I cannot tell for sure after re-reading
your initial post, but you seem to suggest that this is a goal.

Not the be-all and end-all goal. I'm not antisocial

If you equate "anti-social" with single-handing you are looking for an
argument (that _does_ sound a bit anti-social, doesn't it?). There are
plenty of reasons to sail alone, but in my experience an anti-social
personality is rarely one of them.

... I know
about ten times as much about sailboats today than I did yesterday,
and I still don't know very much at all!

This admission puts you ahead of about 90 percent of the fleet.

--
Good luck and good sailing.
s/v Kerry Deare of Barnegat
http://kerrydeare.home.comcast.net/

suggested that what _seems_ to
be the case is not, to my knowledge, supported by verifiable evidence

there is _some_ evidence to show that canoe sterns fare less well in following
seas, though the evidence doesn't seem to be all that strong one way or the
other.

Much stronger evidence to show canoe stern boats are something slower in
sailing than transom sterns. There seems to be no real arguement about this.

Also seems little arguement that canoe stern boats are more squirrely under
power.

All that said, me personally I most definitely do like the looks of a canon
stern boat.

suggested that what _seems_ to
be the case is not, to my knowledge, supported by verifiable evidence

there is _some_ evidence to show that canoe sterns fare less well in following
seas, though the evidence doesn't seem to be all that strong one way or the
other.

Much stronger evidence to show canoe stern boats are something slower in
sailing than transom sterns. There seems to be no real arguement about this.

Also seems little arguement that canoe stern boats are more squirrely under
power.

All that said, me personally I most definitely do like the looks of a canon
stern boat.

Steve wrote:

Interesting how these Tiawan boats are still around and enjoy a good
reputation. There was much skepticism when they started competing with the
Cheoy Lee and US made boats.

Well, there are yards and then there are yards, if you know what
I mean. As we looked for our boat we saw a lot of asian built
boats that were terribly constructed. Of course we also saw a
couple of North American boats that were victims of poor
construction (Valiant 32?) As I said, we've been very happy with
the construction on our Baba. Ta Shing builds a nice boat. If we
ever move to a bigger boat, we'll probably consider a Panda or a
Tashiba.

Cindy

--
the return email is a spam trap
send legit emails to cindy_at_ballreich_dot_net

Steve wrote:

Interesting how these Tiawan boats are still around and enjoy a good
reputation. There was much skepticism when they started competing with the
Cheoy Lee and US made boats.

Well, there are yards and then there are yards, if you know what
I mean. As we looked for our boat we saw a lot of asian built
boats that were terribly constructed. Of course we also saw a
couple of North American boats that were victims of poor
construction (Valiant 32?) As I said, we've been very happy with
the construction on our Baba. Ta Shing builds a nice boat. If we
ever move to a bigger boat, we'll probably consider a Panda or a
Tashiba.

Cindy

--
the return email is a spam trap
send legit emails to cindy_at_ballreich_dot_net

as a "general rule" boats built in Taiwan have a terrible repuation for
quality, with certain specific boats excepted. You need to ask around.

generally, all the hulls were good, but a lot of them were built with
inappropriate materials (interior grade plywood, screws hammered in, screws
instead od bolts, no backing plates, wooden masts that fell apart, wrong
strainless steel used, etc.) You need to ask around, for some -- not as many
as you might hope -- Taiwanese boats were excellent. Most were not.

Interesting how these Tiawan boats are still around and enjoy a good
reputation. There was much skepticism when they started competing with the
Cheoy Lee and US made boats.

Well, there are yards and then there are yards, if you know what
I mean. As we looked for our boat we saw a lot of asian built
boats that were terribly constructed. Of course we also saw a
couple of North American boats that were victims of poor
construction (Valiant 32?) As I said, we've been very happy with
the construction on our Baba. Ta Shing builds a nice boat. If we
ever move to a bigger boat, we'll probably consider a Panda or a
Tashiba.

Cindy

--
the return email is a spam trap
send legit emails to cindy_at_ballreich_dot_net

as a "general rule" boats built in Taiwan have a terrible repuation for
quality, with certain specific boats excepted. You need to ask around.

generally, all the hulls were good, but a lot of them were built with
inappropriate materials (interior grade plywood, screws hammered in, screws
instead od bolts, no backing plates, wooden masts that fell apart, wrong
strainless steel used, etc.) You need to ask around, for some -- not as many
as you might hope -- Taiwanese boats were excellent. Most were not.

Interesting how these Tiawan boats are still around and enjoy a good
reputation. There was much skepticism when they started competing with the
Cheoy Lee and US made boats.

Well, there are yards and then there are yards, if you know what
I mean. As we looked for our boat we saw a lot of asian built
boats that were terribly constructed. Of course we also saw a
couple of North American boats that were victims of poor
construction (Valiant 32?) As I said, we've been very happy with
the construction on our Baba. Ta Shing builds a nice boat. If we
ever move to a bigger boat, we'll probably consider a Panda or a
Tashiba.

Cindy

--
the return email is a spam trap
send legit emails to cindy_at_ballreich_dot_net

Pacific Seacraft builds their boats completely at their facility in Southern
California, from molds through to the to finish work. It's a great shop,
but since I had them build me my PSC44 (hull #16) a couple of years ago, I'm
kinda biased. I sail out of Sausalito (San Francisco Bay), took her to
Hawaii and back last summer, and love the boat.

-Paul
(s/v VALIS)

"Steve" wrote in message
...

Thanks for the correction Cindy.

The Bruce Bingham Fantasia was also built by the Ta Yang yard.

Interesting how these Tiawan boats are still around and enjoy a good
reputation. There was much skepticism when they started competing with the
Cheoy Lee and US made boats.

If I'm not mistaken, Pacific Seacraft is now having their boats built in
Tiawan. I was told that they build the plug, mold and the first hull in
the
US and then turn over production to the Off Shore yard.

Steve
s/v Good Intentions