In our discussion of how boats are framed, and the search for photos, there is a website
http://divineenergies.org/morgan_30 that shows an early 1970's design Morgan 30 IOR race boat being rebuilt. In this case, there was minimal framing in this boat, but what there was was glassed into the hull. It is interesting to note that race boats of that era had far more comprehensive hull framing than similar sized cruising boats of that same era. By any modern standard, the Morgans of that era lack adequate framing.
That said rebuild photos clearly reflect some of the better thinking of the day. You can see how the face of the bunks and transverse bulkheads were glassed in to distribute loads both transversely and longitudinally. The bunk faces were used to transmit shroud loads to the hull over an enlarged area.
To compare this to a modern frame design, the transverse frames (floor timbers) would have been much deeper and carried much further up the hull. There would have been longinal framing closer to the centerline of the boat than would have been provided by the bulkhead with the shrouds and a second or third stringer placed somewhere between the rail and longitudinal that would exist near the keel. I would have expected to see extended length transverse frames in the area of the keel and some number of transverse frames or glassed in bulkheads to occur forward of the main bulkhead and aft through the run of the boat. These transverse framing elements would ideally have extended up onto the topside to the upper most longitudinal member.
Without that kind of framing, flexure and the resultant fatique can be a serious strength sapping problem over time.
In any event, back to the original discussion, that mix of longitudinal framing can be achieved with glassed in components, force grids, and pan systems. I still contend that using the term 'stick built' is a misnomer.
Jeff