# Flat chines vs rounded chines



## Brett (Jul 16, 2008)

Hard chine produces greater stability.


----------



## topnative2 (Feb 22, 2009)

hard chine is drier and more stable
round chine is a softer ride but wetter and mo tippppy


----------



## lemaymiami (Feb 9, 2007)

The drier riding a skiff is (hard chines) the noisier it will be when you're poling in even the slightest chop. Round chine hulls are generally a bit quieter (while also a bit wetter when you're running).

There's one definite advantage to round chine setups that's not talked about much anymore and that is the ability to lay the hull all the way over on its side for a spinning start. That's something you just can't do on a hard chine boat and particularly with a any kind of pocket or tunnel type hull. The ability to lay a skiff almost on its side allows you to power up with your prop as far off the bottom as possible (while still catching water...). That little trick allowed guys with Challengers or similar hulls to jump up on plane in areas where other boats couldn't do the same at all...


----------



## Brett (Jul 16, 2008)

Hard chine floats shallower than the same hull with a round chine.


----------



## Andrewp (Jul 23, 2010)

Hard chine is easier to build out of plywood. But you knew that already, and I'm guessing you are planning to strip-build, right? 

Question to Capt. Bob, re: hard chines noisier when poling -- why? I can see where a flat bottom would be noisy, but what if you sank the bow down past the hard chines to where only the sides are above the water. Still noisier?

And to Brett -- hard chines produce greater _initial_ stability, but don't round-sides "harden up" the more they are pushed over (secondary stability)?

Finally, are "lifting strakes" another way of getting a bit of a hard chine on a round bottomed boat (also cutting down on spray)?


----------



## topnative2 (Feb 22, 2009)

not all hard chines have to be flat bottom----so one can still do the "turn onto plane "
heck use to do it w/ an i/o in the keys

never mind long sweeping turns w/ a single screw to stay off the bottom [smiley=1-mmm.gif]


----------



## lemaymiami (Feb 9, 2007)

Since I run a skiff with "hard chines", an old Maverick 17' (almost, actually 16'10") I've been living with that for many years (mine's an '88 that I talked Scott into selling direct, un-rigged, so I could set it up the way I wanted). Those same hard chines and dry riding features that you'll appreciate on a sloppy day are a bit noisy in a chop when you're poling because of the part that's not in the water (the first third of my hull where the chine edges are above the water). The chop hits the side of the hull with no effect except when it hits the hard edges above the water then it's not very quiet at all. The tactic that everyone soon learns with that kind of rig is to pole directly into or with the wind and you're dead silent - it's when you're going across the wind that things aren't very quiet. The other tactic that's very useful is to look for situations and places where a slightly noisy hull isn't a handicap at all. That means not fishing open water bonefish in heavily pressured areas and that's why you'll find me most days back in the 'Glades.

Funny thing, years and years ago a slightly noisy poling skiff was never a problem. As the years went by and more and more folks began fishing really shallow areas the fish actually changed how they behaved. It was common years ago to find reds tailing in 18" of water in front of Flamingo - can't recall the last time I saw them behaving that way....

For those that want the quietest poling skiff possible there are some definite trade-offs. A good friend (and skilled guide) fishes a high-end technical poling skiff in Biscayne Bay. On one of those good choppy days (and with seven miles of open bay to cross back towards Homestead....) I asked him how his little skiff performed. He grinned and quietly said, "I feel like I swam across".....

Like I said, trade-offs...


----------



## cutrunner (Jun 8, 2010)

Whoaa!! Youve been guiding that boat for 23 years!!! Bet that thing can tell some stories


----------



## Brett (Jul 16, 2008)

Alright AP, you brought up a good question.
Which has greater initial and secondary stability?
Hard chine or round chine?

I'm going to go to the extreme here...I'm good at that... 

And offer you two examples and you decide,
which has greater stability, round chine or hard chine?


Here's the ultimate round chine hull...look stable to you?












And below is the ultimate hard chine hull, difficult decision, eh? [smiley=happy.gif]


----------



## Andrewp (Jul 23, 2010)

Two can play the extreme game .....   


Round chine:










Square chine:












Which is more stable?


----------



## Brett (Jul 16, 2008)

Hmmmm....
Do you think the sub would stay upright with the crane on top?

                           :-?

Or would it be like the biggest log rolling competition ever?
Put those tracks at 90° to the centerline of the hull and engage!

                                  

Are we having fun yet? ;D


----------



## Charlie (Apr 5, 2010)

I know in kayaks that the stability isn't really different, it's how it stabilizes that's different. Round chines would roll over as far as you wanted them to as long as you keeped you're head above the center of gravity. Because of this you actually tilt the kayak a good +45 degrees before falling in. Hard chimes preffered to be flat, or resting dirrectly on the chine. Once you went past the chime it was eskimo roll time ;D


----------



## jboriol (Jan 2, 2010)

I have a rounded chine hull, Banana River Skiff and a hard chine Pathfinder (obviously not the best comparison). Though I am not poling the pathfinder I do notice a HUGE difference in hull slap and stealth when I am running with trolling motor on the Pathfinder vs poling in the skiff. I have been running bay boats for quite a few years and was really surprised at how quite the skiff was when poling around. 

As far as rolling the skiff on its side, the handling differences freaked me out the first couple of times I ran the boat. I can definitely lay it sideways and get out in some shallow water whereas the Pathfinder squats. 

My hull has a wide flared bow, so it is generally dry except in a quartering sea with strong winds. I tend to avoid those conditions when possible. Also I would suspect the round chine design is more complex to build for the home built rig. My $.02!


----------



## lemaymiami (Feb 9, 2007)

Cut Runner, I've only been using my skiff as workboat since 1996... It was originally going to be my "weekend warrior" boat and it was set up to do just about everything (I learned my small boat fishing skills while with the old Tropical Anglers Club from '76 to '83). You won't find many flats boats that have a pair of flush mounted rodholders (fully plumbed into the forward hatch drains...) on either side up in the bow.....

Club members then (and still today) competed against each other and other clubs in six different tackle categories (my best catches, an 11lb permit on 4lb spin (lure only), a 29lb 'cuda on 6lb, a 12lb snook on fly, just to mention a few. I never managed to set any records but other club members did - regularly.... It was a great place to learn. I'm pretty sure the Club still has monthly outings that range from Key West all the way up to Stuart and across to Naples. Since the Miami Beach Rod & Reel Club folded a year or two ago I think the TAC and Miami Sportfishing are the only two long time clubs still remaining in that area.


----------



## firecat1981 (Nov 27, 2007)

Every hull as always is a compramise. However in an apples to apples comparission I'm sure the hard chine would be little more stable and perform a little better, as well as float a bit shallower given the same hull specs. It all depends on what you want out of it, to me stability is worth it.
As far as round chines being quieter, well I wonder how that really stacks up in todays world? I mean if the boat is designed well enough, has anyone ever heard of a noisy copperhead or inshore16?

Also around here if you are shallow enough that you have to lean your boat over to get her going then you are usually in a NMZ, or on a grass flat. Either way you will have to pole or troll out of there to be legal and not cause damage. In places with mud flats and sandy bottoms there may be some advantage to that though.


----------



## oysterbreath (Jan 13, 2009)

Disclaimer: 
1.) I have NO clue what I'm talking about!
2.) I'm drinking cheap vodka and cranberry juice
3.) I'll probably end up just buying a dang boat but this stuff is too fun not to do in the mean time!


Brett Brett Brett...you are indeed taking that one to the extreme with that little straw man argument that you've concocted. I dare not entangle myself into that one! lol
Anyway, let me start from the beginning of this post. Lemaymiami made some good points. I do believe a round chine vessel will be quieter. I'm not sure of the technical definition of the dynamic forces in action but I think that when a small wave/ chop strikes a flat or angled surface the mass of the wave easily overcomes the surface tension created by the column of water on the hull. That action causes the energy dispersion of the wave to create sound. Where as a curved surface disperses the column of water in such a way that the meniscus that is formed between the column of water and the hull allows the energy of the wave to be dispersed in a much quieter means. That would define the action on a SMALL broad side wave. However, there are other sound creating elements at play here that are more common on a hard chine vessels than a round chin vessles. More specifically "Flat Iron" type hulls. Without trying to define it, you will not get that "sucking/ popping/ slapping" sound from the bow of a rounded out hull that you would get...from Brett's beautiful skiff. lol Someone kinda hinted on that earlier

As for the greater draft of a round chine skiff compared to a nearly identical square stern skiff. Yeah, there is some merit to that. lets take a look. Start with a square chimed barge that drafts 6". If we put a 1 foot diameter chamfer on it to turn it into a round chine barge we have effectively decreased its buoyant mass by ((1)-(3.14*.5*.5))/4=.0536 square foot per linear foot of each submerged edge. So a 16'x5' BARGE with a displacement of 40 cubic feet at 6" of submersion now only has 38.28 cubic feet of displacement at a submerged....ahhhhhhh screw this... vodka v-v-v-brain is kicking in!Time to talk with pictures.



























The red lines in the image above are my control lines, they are not the actual hull lines.


The layout is not modeled yet but the quickly edited images below will give you an idea. Don't laugh at my crude line work. I haven't installed all of my software yet! lol Anyway, there is a forward casting deck that is foam filled with a few cat hatches in the vertical face (tip I learned from you Brett). There will be a rear foam filled bench. I might add a passenger bench in the center between two bunks The bunks will act as "boaring steps" The bench will be two 1" aluminum tube steel beams spaced 12" apart with a starboard seat running across them. 




















So, YES AP I have been playing with a quick strip boat building method. It's not the pretty cedar strip stuff you are used to seeing. The reason I've become so interested in this form of boat building is that It can be utilized to build more complex hull forms and minimizes the need for added structure. These hulls are pound for pound many times stronger than Stitch and glue hulls. S&G hulls need extra structure JUST to hold there shape! A strip hull, if designed and sheathed correctly can make do with little more than a keel stringer. These can be built with square chines (ala Bowdidge) or with rounded chines. The rounded chine skiff intrigues most of all. As you know hard chines become points of concentrated stress Whereas a rounded chine dissipates the load better providing the radius is not too tight. How tight...I don't know so I played it safe...I think. So it's possible to build an extremely simple skiff this way. This falls nicely into my ideal home built boat philosophy which I will have to explain some other time. Anyway, here is a bit of technical info on this design.


Length over all           :     16.300 ft
Design beam              :      5.000 ft
Beam over all             :      4.354 ft
Design draft                :      0.333 ft
Midship location          :      9.000 ft
Water density             :     63.989 lbs/ft^3
Appendage coefficient :     1.0000
Volume properties:
    Displaced volume                            :        11.678 ft^3
    Displacement                                :         0.334 tons
    Total length of submerged body              :        15.177 ft
    Total beam of submerged body                :         4.088 ft
    Block coefficient                           :        0.5648
    Prismatic coefficient                       :        0.9176
    Vert. prismatic coefficient                 :        0.6684
    Wetted surface area                         :        55.058 ft^2
    Longitudinal center of buoyancy             :         6.355 ft
    Longitudinal center of buoyancy             :        -9.426 %
    Transverse center of buoyancy               :         0.000 ft
    Vertical center of buoyancy                 :         0.207 ft
Midship properties:
    Midship section area                        :         0.839 ft^2
    Midship coefficient                         :        0.6155
Waterplane properties:
    Length on waterline                         :        15.177 ft
    Beam on waterline                           :         4.088 ft
    Waterplane area                             :        52.420 ft^2
    Waterplane coefficient                      :        0.8450
    Waterplane center of floatation             :         6.875 ft
    Y coordinate of DWL area CoG                :         0.000 ft
    Half entrance angle of DWL                  :        35.960 degr
    Transverse moment of inertia                :        61.896 ft^4
    Longitudinal moment of inertia              :        813.11 ft^4
Initial stability:
    Vertical of transverse metacenter           :         5.507 ft
    Transverse metacentric radius               :         5.300 ft
    Longitudinal transverse metacenter          :        69.835 ft
    Longitudinal metacentric radius             :        69.628 ft
Lateral plane:
    Lateral area                                :         4.786 ft^2
    Longitudinal center of effort               :         7.432 ft
    Vertical center of effort                   :         0.171 ft
Hull characteristics above waterline:
    Lateral wind area                           :        15.476 ft^2
    Z coordinate of wind area CoG               :         0.830 ft
    X coordinate of wind area CoG               :         8.166 ft
    Distance from wind area CoG to DWL          :         0.496 ft
    Distance from bow (FP) to wind area CoG     :         7.208 ft
    Minimal board height over DWL               :         0.917 ft
    Minimal board height over DWL               :         5.624 %Lmax
Stability characteristics:
    Test stability coefficient                  :         3.723 if >= 0,8 then OK




The following layer properties are calculated for both sides of the ship:
+-------------------------+---------+-----------+----------+---------+---------+---------+
|          Layer          | Area    | Thickness | Weight   |  COG X  |  COG Y  |  COG Z  |
|                         |  ft^2   |    in     |   tons   |   ft    |   ft    |   ft    |
+-------------------------+---------+-----------+----------+---------+---------+---------+
| Hull                    |  93.499 |     0.250 |    0.000 |   7.280 |   0.000 |   0.397 |
+-------------------------+---------+-----------+----------+---------+---------+---------+
  
Attention: Weight of a ship and displacement are difference more then 10% !
  
    

Sectional areas:

+-----------+----------+
| Location  | Area     |
|    ft     |   ft^2   |
+-----------+----------+
|     0.197 |    0.000 | 
|     1.333 |    0.996 | 
|     2.667 |    1.006 | 
|     4.000 |    1.009 | 
|     5.333 |    0.999 | 
|     6.667 |    0.965 | 
|     8.000 |    0.903 | 
|     9.333 |    0.814 | 
|    10.667 |    0.702 | 
|    12.000 |    0.567 | 
|    13.333 |    0.398 | 
|    14.667 |    0.100 | 
|    15.374 |    0.000 | 
+-----------+----------+

NOTE 1: Draft (and all other vertical heights) is measured above the lowest point of the hull! (Z= 0.000)
NOTE 2: All calculated coefficients based on actual dimensions of submerged body.
Note 3: The bulb characteristics is calcs right, if F.P. is through point of intersection
forward line with DWL.



If you look closely at the bow of the hull I tried to maximize the wetted surface of the hull by NOT designing a pointy bow like you see done so often. I think it's a waist of material to do that and it creates a weak highly stressed spot in the hull since someone is very likely to stand RIGHT THERE on the tip. 
This skiff is 16'-4" long and 15'-2" of that contributes to the wetted surface so standing at the very tip of the bow doesn't create a stressful cantilever. I also think this will help curb the "sensation" that some boats have of feeling more tippy on the bow than in other places. I was careful with the bow design. I wanted it to part water well but not create that tippy feeling in the bow. I may never know if I did it right! lol

My thought on the poling platform is to mount the rear legs to the transom (which will require major reinforcing). And mount the forward legs to the back vertical face of the bench. There will be an aluminum shelve angle mounted there...blah blah blah...let's just say I have those details worked out. Ummm, I think that's all for now...

Oh yeah, I still have to do my scantlings to figure out plank size and lamination schedule but I'm thinking 6oz mat on the exterior and (2)layers of 10oz biax each side. Oddly enough Raka also has dang good prices on 5k kevlar...Hmmmm


----------



## firecat1981 (Nov 27, 2007)

I'd love to see you build it, but aluminum pipe benches and starboard I'm not digging, why not build it like the rest of the hull since you are going through all that work?

Really I believe the whole quieter issue is pretty moot. It's been argued many times and there are plenty of guys who catch big fish in aluminum jon boats with trolling motors, and tons of guys in high dollor poling skiffs who don't in the same waters. 

As far as the pointed bow, I actually tried to point mine a little more this time. I found it is the strongest part of the hull besides the transom since everything has curvature, and with a decent sized deck you won't be standing anywhere near the tip. Construction meathods can be argued in many directions, but if you've built a boat you will find out quickly that nothing works out as designed the first time and you will change things 100 times before you are done. Stitch and glue makes things easier, and can easily be adapted to different shapes including rounded chines (check out the fs18). Many hull designs have come and gone over the years, many different theories have failed and some succeeded. The only way to really know is to build it and see how it performs. So quit drawin lines and get to work!


----------



## topnative2 (Feb 22, 2009)

So, what can u do with good vodka? [smiley=1-thumbsup2.gif]


----------



## Brett (Jul 16, 2008)

Cold molded round chine, sounds familiar, like I've seen it somewhere before.... :-?


Oh yeah, knew the lines looked familiar... 

http://www.microskiff.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1238092421/14#14


----------



## oysterbreath (Jan 13, 2009)

> Cold molded round chine, sounds familiar, like I've seen it somewhere before.... :-?
> 
> 
> Oh yeah, knew the lines looked familiar...
> ...


Brett, Oh my God! That link...that link is FRACKING AWESOME! Dude, you ARE the man!

You said the first skiff was cold molded...are you sure?
I don't see ANY signs of side stringers which are/were common and even necessary on plywood cold molded hulls. When I first saw it I thought aluminum but these eyes are easily fooled by black and white photos.

That lil skiff is awesome dude!








Some slight modifications could bring that baby right back!


----------



## Brett (Jul 16, 2008)

There is an entire series of images with those hulls.
Some with tarpon, others with bonefish. There's a closeup
taken from a nearby hull that shows the cold molding lines
reflecting through the topside paint. Look at the quarter knees
bow storage, breasthook and sheer strake. Looks to be all wood.
Nice thing about cold molding, over the course of several layers
The concentric radii of the wood laminates provides tensile rigidity.
That's the basis of monocoque construction.
The ability to use the skin of the structure to create strength.


----------



## oysterbreath (Jan 13, 2009)

> I'd love to see you build it, but aluminum pipe benches and starboard I'm not digging, why not build it like the rest of the hull since you are going through all that work?


 Because I want it to be removable. The rear bench is permanent but the ONLY time I'd have the center bench in the boat is when I'm fishing with someone. I figure I will be solo alot. I STOLE the bench idea from ECC.









I've done a little upholstery work in the past so I would of course "wrap" the starboard in something soft on the hind quarters! As for building, a few days ago my wife made ANOTHER comment about her needing a new car. That's puts pressure on my timeline since I KNOW she'll want to park in the garage! Ugggggg


----------



## WhiteDog70810 (May 6, 2008)

That is a neat concept. You should definitely jump into it. "Build supplies" will keep your garage from being wasted on a car just as well as a boat. Who keeps a car in a place as useful as a garage?

The peanut gallery, et al, has been waiting for a strip built micro for a while now. I'd like to see a pretty strip built micro, but a beater as proof of concept would be acceptable.
;D

Nate


----------



## Brett (Jul 16, 2008)

Tee-hee, I keep forgetting I'm much older than you oyster.
And suffering from a ny-quill buzz to boot.



> I don't see ANY signs of side stringers which are/were common and even necessary on plywood cold molded hulls.


You and I made a mistake there when looking at the photo. It's not cold molded plywood.
But that's ok in your case, as you've been fixated on the Smith designs which are built that way.
What you see in a late 1940's built hull is cold molded veneers.
A method of construction that eliminates the need for integral framing and ribs
Actually stronger than cold molded plywood as the veneers bend in multiple directions
and glues up much more smoothly. Done properly, there's almost no fairing required.

Here's a better explanation...

http://www.macnaughtongroup.com/scantlingscm.htm


----------



## Frank_Sebastian (Oct 15, 2007)

I worked on two PT boats docked at pier 5 in Miami shortly after WWII. Those boats were cold molded mahogany veneer and not plywood. I don't doubt some were made of plywood though. Hull shape has a lot to do with size as well as design type. I know from experience that round chines are more quite. It is especially important in the keys. I grew up in a fishing family and we spent half of each year living on Big Pine Key. In 1953 I guided for a while taking the over flow of some guides that worked out of the area. The only boat I had was too noisy in the chop common to the area from the Content Keys back to Annette and Porpoise Key. (my normal haunt) As a last resort I carried some mats made of old carpets that I would hang on the windward side of the boat.

Leymaymiami has it figured out. It is a good discussion and I have enjoyed reading it.

Best regards,
Frank_S


----------



## oysterbreath (Jan 13, 2009)

Hey Brett...Well not really the Smith designs but you are correct. I only know about plywood cold molding. If you have any links to "the old ways" I'd be all over it! Actually, the link you posted in your last message; I already have that info. I bought that stuff about a month ago only to realize I could have gotten it free through Epoxyworks. Ohwell!



> I worked on two PT boats docked at pier 5 in Miami shortly after WWII.
> Frank_S


 WOW, PT boats! Love um!


----------



## DuckNut (Apr 3, 2009)

I apologize in advance for the segway. Frank, I have a buddy in Key West that had the last privately owend PT until he sold it a few years ago. When onboard you could almost hear the action it saw.


----------



## eakelly (Feb 10, 2011)

My round chine Challenger. Definitely preferred over a hard chine one. Soft ride, poles super quiet and the ability to plane off in a ft of water. The hard chine Challengers were flat and tended to skid out easily when turning sharp at planing speeds.


----------



## oysterbreath (Jan 13, 2009)

Twobits, you have a sweet skiff indeed.
Do you get any noise where your lifting strakes exit the water?




I just did a few design modifications. Made it a bit longer.
I wanted to post this image real quick for comparison. I think my skiff has a wee bit more dead rise than the challenger at the moment. I've been thinking about reducing it a bit but can't figure out how to detect any calculatable benefit to doing so.


----------



## Brett (Jul 16, 2008)

C'mon now oyster, you can find just as many results as I did using google.
Cold molded veneer, used for everything from boats to planes to furniture.
I realized it wasn't plywood when I saw the date again on the old photos.
Had to be veneer construction, probably using resorcinol glue. (invented in the early 40's)
The Gougeon brothers cover the construction technique in their book.


----------



## eakelly (Feb 10, 2011)

> Twobits, you have a sweet skiff indeed.
> Do you get any noise where your lifting strakes exit the water?


I get a little slapping from the rails but it is still a lot quiter than a maverick or a hewes. If I removed the rails, then it would be a LOT more wet of a ride.


----------



## Andrewp (Jul 23, 2010)

re: hull slap

I'm really interested in what we as homebuilders can do to reduce hull slap. I agree with OB about the #1 issue that generates hull slap is a near-horizontal surface (ie bottom panel or stringer) that is in and out of the water, essentially "pounding" in the water.

But I'm thinking that even if all near-horizontal surfaces were kept under water, you still have the situation of the water (waves) hitting the side of the boat. What can be done about that? Does it matter what angle the sides are in relation to the water? Assuming water (waves) are coming at the boat anywhere from straight on the bow to, say 45 degrees off the bow, what type of bow profile keeps hull slap to a minimum?

Pretend you had a flat-bottom boat that has next to no rocker in the bow. Your bow is near vertical. The sides are vertical (90 degree) to the bottom. You're 3-4" deep, so the bottom does not come out of the water. How much "slap" is generated?


----------



## Brett (Jul 16, 2008)

> Are "lifting strakes" another way of getting a bit of a hard chine on a round bottomed boat?


No, it's a way of increasing lift without decreasing vee.
Need the vee to cut the water for comfort and control.
The smaller flat areas of the lifting strakes raise the hull up
to decrease wetted surface at higher planing speeds.

Hull slap is not a worry in 6 inches of water AP,
nor is it a problem in the marshes and oyster creeks I play in.
There have to be waves in order to have slap, no waves, no slap.
In these waters, a flat bottom hard chine plywood crab skiff is as quiet
as any custom carbon/kevlar brand name poling skiff out there.
Keep the chines below water level and you can sneak up on anything.
But I wouldn't want to have to operate a flattie in open water.
I like my kidneys where they are now. Not fun seeing blood in your urine!


----------



## WhiteDog70810 (May 6, 2008)

My experience is that flat surfaces are only loud when they are above the water level.  The front rocker of my hull is 2.5" and I expect the hull to draw 4+" depending on load, so if everything works right, the bottom won't ever be in the position to be beat by the water.  I have poled boats like mine into the wind when the bottom of the bow was exposed and they are very loud.  Once you move load forward, they get very quiet. Of course I've gone through all this forethought, but I will end up poling the boat from the bow 75% of the time.  I bet a transom is real quiet when you push it into the wind.

;D

Oyster,

Are you talking about strip built or cold molded or something else?  I am getting confused.

Nate


----------



## oysterbreath (Jan 13, 2009)

Nate, my prospective construction method is strip. Using paulowania wood (kiri).



> I bet a transom is real quiet when you push it into the wind.
> ;D


 Sorry buddy, this thread is only for hypothetical B.S. discussions...we'll have NONE on that "real world" experience here unless it proves my presumed notions! ;D


----------



## WhiteDog70810 (May 6, 2008)

Don't worry. I promise that everything about my boat's performance is hypothetical right now... now maybe if I submerged my transom it would pole quieter...

:-?

Cool. That is what I thought, but I wanted to check because cold molding kept being mentioned. I want to follow a strip build that isn't a canoe and isn't cedar. Paulowania wood (kiri) is a new one to me. How is it better than other options? I liked the idea of a cypress strip hull, but I've heard good things about using basswood for strip built hulls.

Nate


----------



## oysterbreath (Jan 13, 2009)

> Don't worry.  I promise that everything about my boat's performance is hypothetical right now... now maybe if I submerged my transom it would pole quieter...
> 
> :-?
> 
> ...


Here is the States Paulowania still isn't very popular YET. It currently on par or a little more expensive than cedar but it is lighter and a little bit stronger than cedar. For you "greenies" it is a very fast growing tree and is very renewable. It is very workable. The grain is very light. The first time I saw a piece I thought it was piece of basswood until I handled it. Bass wood is fine for super light canoes but I don't think I would try it on a boat. The only boat builder I know of that uses paulowania AND the strip built technique I'm basing this design on is Mark Bowdidge. He's got some good videos on his site. If you google paulowania you'll get all sorts of info on this wood. There is a mill up in SC that has really good prices on this stuff.

Back to my design thought...I read somewhere that the ECC caimen has a waterline width of 49" and over all width of 60". Well, this little boat has a waterline width of 49" and overall width of 52". I can't make any design stability comparisons thought due too the differences in overall hull design.


----------

