Passport42/canoe stern boats - SailNet Community

   Search Sailnet:

 forums  store  


Quick Menu
Forums           
Articles          
Galleries        
Boat Reviews  
Classifieds     
Search SailNet 
Boat Search (new)

Shop the
SailNet Store
Anchor Locker
Boatbuilding & Repair
Charts
Clothing
Electrical
Electronics
Engine
Hatches and Portlights
Interior And Galley
Maintenance
Marine Electronics
Navigation
Other Items
Plumbing and Pumps
Rigging
Safety
Sailing Hardware
Trailer & Watersports
Clearance Items

Advertise Here






Go Back   SailNet Community > On Board > Boat Review and Purchase Forum
 Not a Member? 


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #1  
Old 03-22-2005
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 9
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rep Power: 0
GreggRuch is on a distinguished road
Passport42/canoe stern boats

I am considering the purchase of a passport 42. While there is a great deal of information on the passport 40, there dosn''t seem to be much on the 42. Does anyone know anything/have experience with these boats?
On a Related topic, any opinions on canoe sterns in general? I have heard a couple of people make negetive remarks about them, but I notice that Crealock designs still have them, and they are a feature of many of the boats I like (Valiant40,Tayana37,etc). Comments? Thanks.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message Share with Facebook
  #2  
Old 03-22-2005
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,120
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Rep Power: 13
WHOOSH is on a distinguished road
Passport42/canoe stern boats

Gregg, you''ll also notice that the shape of those sterns (''bottoms you want to pat'' said one reviewer about Perry''s sterns...) varies quite a bit. In general and with notable dissent - from a cruising perspective - most of us hate to give up the reserve buoyancy and storage (or cabin volume) that a conventional stern offers. And that''s before we look at the pinched cockpit, which is more noticeable on some of the smaller designs (e.g. PS 34).

Jack
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message Share with Facebook
  #3  
Old 03-23-2005
Jeff_H's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
Posts: 6,636
Thanks: 5
Thanked 101 Times in 77 Posts
Rep Power: 10
Jeff_H has a spectacular aura about Jeff_H has a spectacular aura about Jeff_H has a spectacular aura about
Passport42/canoe stern boats

Passports in general have a very good reputation in terms of build quality. I am not familiar with the 42.

With regards to canoe sterns the following is a draft version of an article that I wrote for a different venue but it may prove helpful, but a bit lengthy:

"When you look at really old double enders (Egyptian passenger barges, Viking ship, canoes, Skerry traders) you see some things in common. These vessels all tended to be quite light and fast for their era and intended to be propelled at pretty high speeds with comparatively little power. The traditional (up until the late 19th century) double ender actually had very fine ends and a mildly burdensome mid-section. This shape was evolved for speed and seaworthiness in low powered-low volume vessels.

This fine-ended double ender was a great shape for rough sea conditions. In theory when a boat is running before breaking waves, its own wake can disturb the waves astern and cause them to break prematurely. These fine-ended double enders threw smaller wakes and so were less likely to cause waves to break on them from astern. And even in a situation where the vessel was hit by a braking wave, the fine ends meant that the wave did not collide with the flat surface of a transom. (It has been speculated that is also the same reason that the transoms on traditional boats had as much rake as they did.)

That all works well for light weight working craft with minimal sources of power. As double ended working craft became more burdensome they began to have a different set of problems. One of the key problems with the more heavily loaded, fine ended double enders were that they did not have as much reserve buoyancy as transom sterned boats of that era. So while waves might not be induced to break in their wake, they could they would and did get pooped (flooded from astern by overtaking wave).

The Roman and medieval cargo ships, which we know a lot about, were all double enders below and just above the waterline and they most certainly were not light weight or fine ended- the cogs, shuyts and fluyts of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance were capacious, slow, cargo carriers.

The reasons that these ships, and most European fishing boats to this day, be they Norwegian, Scottish, Danish, Dutch, Spanish, Maltese or Greek, are double enders are two-fold- the first being is that a double end is generally easier and less expensive to build in wood than a counter-stern.

Another often cited reason for the earliest of double enders is that these vessels had/have to lie alongside each other in close proximity in artificial harbors. The double ender is less likely to suffer damage from boats alongside. In venues where this is previlant you would more typically find double enders. Elsewhere, like the Breton coast of France or the East Coast of England, where the sea conditions are just as bad, but there are natural harbors, estuaries, etc. you will more frequently find transom sterns and counter sterns. In a pooping, a transom stern without a counter gives more buoyancy aft and so is better suited to a high displacement hull, while being almost equally cheap to build. The counter stern gives a drier after deck (important in sailing ships, which were conned from the poop) and more space for handling sails (and nets, on fishing boats)

The next big development in heavy displacement double enders comes with Colin Archer. Archer was searching for a way to make boats that would not cause waves to break that would also have sufficient reserve buoyancy in the ends. When you study the lines of a Colin Archer design they were really amazing. These were not delicate boats by any stretch of the imagination. Yet they had beautiflully modeled lines at almost any angle of heel. These were truly beefy. They had to be. They were rescue boats and pilot boats that had to be able to stand station in the worst the North Seas had to offer and still make a rendezvous. They had to be able to lie against a stranded ship and take the pounding while rescuing people and property. They earned a reputation for their seaworthiness and ability to withstand the worst that nature had to offer.

Archer was a theorist and was looking for a way to design powerful boats with powerful rigs that would still remain balanced. Archer also had a tremendous ability to model the lines of these heavy boats so that they had a fairness of line and fineness of water line that is not readily apparent at first glance. They are deceptive boats in many ways. For all of their weight they were reasonably easily driven boats. They were capable of spreading really huge sail plans or being snugged down to a handkerchief

By all descriptions that I have ever read these were not easy boats to sail. These were not the “sailed by a man and a boy” fine ended double ender that might be epitomized by Tancock Whalers that popularized in the late 19th century fisheries off of Nova Scotia. The Colin Archers took large crews and a lot of brute strength to sail and to some extent they also survived on the iron wills and good seamanship of their crew.

Then along comes Atkins, who takes the Colin Archer rescue boats and adapts them into yachts. Atkins like Archer is a master of the carefully modeled hull forms and in many ways his “Ingrid” is the definitive Colin Archer type yacht. Comparatively fine, yet buoyant and burdensome the ''Ingrid''s are a masterful example of the art of yacht design with the emphasis on art. I keep hearing people refer to these boats as fast. They are fast for what they are but in a relative sense, even in heavy going, they are not fast when compared to more modern designs.

They also reputedly have very comfortable motions in a seaway. I suspect that that is more a product of their round bottomish wine glass sections more than their double ends. It was the image of the ''Ingrid''s and ''Eric''s that did wonders for placing the idea that double ended yachts are some kind of ideal for distance cruising. This was an idea that was further embedded in the cruisers pysche by the ubiquitous Hanna Tahiti and Gulfweed Ketches.

By the late 1960’s double enders began to be viewed as relics of the past. Well-modeled double enders are not easy to model in fiberglass since there was often some tumblehome in the stern. It probably would have stayed like that if the character boat craze had not gotten started in the early 1970’s. At the time the whole character boat thing was hard to fathom. After decades of being eschewed by knowledgeable sailors, suddenly bowsprits and molded in plank seams were getting popular. (If you actually owned a wooden boat during those days, you went to great lengths to conceal the seams and make the topsides look “just like fiberglass”.)

Emerging into the scene during the early days of that period of looking backwards, the Westsail 32 became the poster child for the heavy duty traditional offshore cruiser. The Westsail 32 is a fiberglass version of the Atkins ‘Eric’ altered to supply more room down below and be easier to mold in glass. The Westsail (like the Tahidi ketches of a generation before) pretty quickly became an icon for the “serious blue water cruising boat”. Derided as heavy, slow and wet, with many being bought by posers and wannabes, in reality the Westsails have proven to be enduring boats with an admirable cruising record. (Needless to say, they’re not my kind of boats)

What the Westsails and boats like them did was to bring a focus on the growing gap between “cruiser-racers” and purpose built offshore boats. It was about that time that a young Bob Perry happened on the scene. I have always believed that Bob’s goal in designing the Valiant 40 was to design a boat that bridged this gap. Seen today the Valiant 40 seems very solid and conservative but in its day the Valiant 40 was revolutionary. If you look at the sections and underbody waterlines of the Valiant, they were remarkably similar to the early Sparkman and Stephens designed IOR boats (like the Tartan 41) rather than to anything that Colin Archer designed. Obviously a bit more burdensome than an out and out IOR racer, the Valiant 40 dared to be a moderate displacement (for the time) boat with a fin keel/ spade rudder intended for serious offshore cruising.

I also suspect from articles that I have seen over the years that the trunk cabin and canoe stern were chosen not for some inherent sailing or seakeeping advantage but as a clear statement that the Valiant 40 was and is intended as a serious offshore boat. If you look carefully at the stern of a Valiant 40 it in no way really resembles the traditional canoe stern chosen for low wave making and low drag. This is a very powerful stern consistent with the Valiant''s more modern lines and underbody.

Of course for every brilliant design idea there are a bunch of bone-headed copies. Having drawn a few double enders in my day, I really think that they take more skill than any other hull form to get right. Poorly done they are awkward in appearance and offer few if any of the traditional double-ender advantages, but still come complet with all of the disadvantages of a double ender. Perry got it right, (to my eye, perhaps more so on the 37 foot Esprit), but a lot of designers never did. Designers like Garden, Benford, and Crealock have designed many a fine double ender, but I think Bob Perry was there at the right time with a design that really understood the problem and looked good doing it.

So back to the original question, “What are the advantages and disadvantages of a double ender?”

If the stern is not carefully modeled and matched to the other properties of the design, there are not any inherent advantages to a double ender; none at all. Properly designed in the fine-ended model, they offer a lower resistance, less wave making and a cleaner wake less likely to cause waves to break astern. Properly modeled in canoe stern model, they can offer a lot of reserve buoyancy in the ends with a minimum stern overhang for reduced hobby horsing. They also offer less corners for lines to foul on which was far more important in the days of Gaff Rigs with booms that over hung the transom than it is today.

The disadvantage is that a double enders have quite a bit less room aft for their length than a transom stern boat. This means a more cramped cockpit (or aft cabin). In terms of sailing performance, with modern rigs and underbodies it is harder to get a canoe stern boat to work with modern underbodies which are designed to surf and sometimes plane. This means that they are not suitable to today’s lighter faster design principles. Its not an issue if your interest is in a heavier, more burdensome, long range cruiser but if your goal is coastal cruising where speed becomes more important than carrying a lot of ‘stuff’ then a canoe stern might not make sense. Canoe stern boats can be a bit more expensive to manufacture in glass as they often require special molds to handle the tumblehome in the stern. It is much harder to install the kinds of equipment popular with modern cruisers such as davits and radar masts, or to carry the weight of a heavy hard bottom dinghy.

At this point I view the current crop of double enders mostly as a fashion statement. Most of us sail boats that we bought because we like them. We like them for all kinds of reasons, not the least of which may simply be that we like the way they look. I think that today’s double enders often carry with them a variety of features that attract a certain kind of sailor (or someone who wants to be that type of sailor). To that type of sailor the double-ender is an attractive piece of the equation that draws them to their dreamboat."

Respectfully
Jeff
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message Share with Facebook
  #4  
Old 03-23-2005
RichH's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 2,932
Thanks: 9
Thanked 80 Times in 73 Posts
Rep Power: 15
RichH will become famous soon enough
Passport42/canoe stern boats

Perry will freely admit that his pinched stern designs are simply ''stylistic''. But, If you carefully compare Perrys designs with others who have designed a canoe stern you will find that there is plenty of ''bustle'' or enlargement of the stern shape hence reserve bouyancy. When you imaginarily cut a line (plane) across a Perry stern and divorce the ''protrusion'' you wll see that the stern is very adequate for volume/bouyancy - so, if you took a chain-saw and completely removed the pinched end by just 2 feet you will find a stern with quite broad dimensions. To some like me who owns one, I think it just "looks nice". I dont think of that stern as a reduction of reserve bouyancy but rather an increase! If you have the opportunity to look at hull drawing with lofting lines and have a ''smidgen'' of solid geometry in your background you will see exactly what Im explaining. Certainly these boats dont have the fat-ass of todays commmon charter fleet designs with forced volumes but when you ''really'' analyse the design you might be well pleased. Just consider that pinched stern as a small stylistic ''appendage''. Although these Perry designs are now a bit dated by todays ''tastes'', no one can deny that more Perry designs are out there actually ''doing it'' including circumnavigations .... than probably *any* other single designer.

There are advantages in this shape ....you cant cram in lots of mass or heavy junk into such a stern .... hence you automatically keep the one end of the boat ''light'' which promotes less hobby-horseing. The steering gear dominates the stern end ... so that you CANT stuff it full of needless crap.

BTW - if you are serious about a Perry design, Bob Perry offers a (for a fee) consulting service to help in your evaluation and choice. http://www.perryboat.com/page/consult
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message Share with Facebook
  #5  
Old 03-23-2005
RichH's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 2,932
Thanks: 9
Thanked 80 Times in 73 Posts
Rep Power: 15
RichH will become famous soon enough
Passport42/canoe stern boats

Thats a REALLY nice reply Jeff !!!!!

The real problem with double enders and cutter rigs is that those who sail them hardly ever arrive at the finess of knowledge needed to make them .... go. If you have prior experience in racing or in unstable dinghy sailing, etc. , then you can translate that knowledge into making such a ''complicated'' boat work to the higher range of its potential. Otherwise, they easily become Winnebagos with sails ... and with prematurely worn out engines.

Such boats do have a slow roll period. I power-puke from fast rolling so such a boat is ''match'' for me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message Share with Facebook
  #6  
Old 04-17-2005
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 223
Thanks: 0
Thanked 6 Times in 6 Posts
Rep Power: 14
sidney777 is on a distinguished road
Passport42/canoe stern boats

I have been looking at few boats for sailng accross the Gulf or accross Lake Michigan. Sometimes I run into storms.
It just so happened that three are Double enders, or Canoe sterns.(I do not know if they are the same thing). I have been looking at boats that I have been told are offshore boats. Vancouver 25 ft.Double ender, Ocean Voyager 26ft Double ender, 28ft Southern Cross Double E. ---
Not D.E.Yankee 26,Mercator 30 ,Cape dory 28.And *Caliber 28 which is different than all previous,it has 10''10" beam.
It would be great if you comment, because I have not considered or have seen these boats before.
John
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message Share with Facebook
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

By choosing to post the reply above you agree to the rules you agreed to when joining Sailnet.
Click Here to view those rules.

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the SailNet Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
Please note: After entering 3 characters a list of Usernames already in use will appear and the list will disappear once a valid Username is entered.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

 
Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may post attachments
You may edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
First time sail boat buyer martinojon Boat Review and Purchase Forum 20 05-26-2014 10:16 PM
What would you buy for $100,000? swo104 Boat Review and Purchase Forum 130 08-30-2013 12:51 PM
Cruising Boats KPBaker Boat Review and Purchase Forum 12 12-01-2012 07:35 PM
IOR...CCA... help! sherbet Boat Review and Purchase Forum 7 05-22-2006 10:38 PM
buying first boat jerrycooper14 Boat Review and Purchase Forum 21 04-23-2002 03:15 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:47 PM.

Add to My Yahoo!         
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1
(c) Marine.com LLC 2000-2012

The SailNet.com store is owned and operated by a company independent of the SailNet.com forum. You are now leaving the SailNet forum. Click OK to continue or Cancel to return to the SailNet forum.