# Measurements Please - HB Glades Skiff Beam



## deerfly (Mar 10, 2007)

the guy in the lower picture looks like he has a 48" waist. I know thats circumference but maybe we could interpolate and come up with a close estimation, which is good to know in case the mfr specs are misleading.

From the pic this guy's waist line looks to be occupying roughly 1/2 of the open cockpit, which also means a passenger could not easily get past him without leaving the boat first. Anyway, a few quick calculations and we'll know the cockpit measurement from gunwhale to gunwhale.

30.56" = 2 * (48" / 3.14159)

Since we all know, the gunwhales are way too narrow to walk on, like most real skiffs, we can deduce they are 6" or less, but we'll err on the high side and use 7". 

expanding our original calculation we get:

44.56" = (2 * 7") + ( 2 * (48" / 3.14159))

Based on this I would say the mfr is stretching the truth on actual displacement. ;D


----------



## tom_in_orl (Dec 9, 2006)

Stretching the truth. Thats funny. 

I have all ready talked to one very knowledgable person in the business who has put a tape measure on a Glades Skiff and the waterline was a 48" beam. The top of the gunnel was I think 56" but I would like someone with a Glades Skiff to post a picture with the tape measure on top of the boat.


----------



## deerfly (Mar 10, 2007)

yeah, I was just funnin' around thinking that was our favorite captron, but looking closer I don't thinks thats him. :-? oops, sorry. :-[


----------



## Guest (Sep 10, 2007)

> .... one very knowledgable person in the business who has put a tape measure on a Glades Skiff and the waterline was a 48" beam. The top of the gunnel was I think 56" but ...


I can make it anything you want. What number would you like to see. 

Does it really matter? :-/ :-/ I would be more interested in the dimensions at the bottom of the boat myself. Why would I care what the top of the gunnel measures except for consideration of spray but it would still be relative to the bottom dimension wouldn't it?. [smiley=1-mmm.gif]


----------



## tom_in_orl (Dec 9, 2006)

> I can make it anything you want. What number would you like to see.


I want to see the real numbers. You can post them now or I will measure it myself on Saturday ;D


----------



## iMacattack (Dec 11, 2006)

> > I can make it anything you want. What number would you like to see.
> 
> 
> I want to see the real numbers. You can post them now or I will measure it myself on Saturday ;D


No matter which... Ron is going to saw the water was cold and thus there was shrinkage... ;D


----------



## Guest (Sep 11, 2007)

> The top of the gunnel was I think 56" ...... Glades Skiff ...


Close.


----------



## tom_in_orl (Dec 9, 2006)

TY


----------



## Bob (Feb 2, 2007)

Not that anyone cares...

FS18 gunwale width at max = 54"

At Transom= 43-1/2"

At DWL (4") Transom = 36 -3/4" (@1110 lbs displacement)

At DWL (4") Max. beam = ~ 46"


----------



## Guest (Sep 11, 2007)

> Not that anyone cares...
> 
> FS18 gunwale width at max = 54"
> 
> ...



I'm anyone and I care. 

Tks.


----------



## Guest (Sep 13, 2007)

> Since we all know, the gunwhales are way too narrow to walk on, like most real skiffs, we can deduce they are 6" or less, but we'll err on the high side and use 7".


I was asked if I could walk the gunnels of this boat and the answer is yes. It's not for the timid but I can get my FA around them just fine. I prefer to walk the port side because starboard has the push pole but is still walkable. Has to be more than 7" :-/ :-/ but I'll have to measure to be sure.


----------



## deerfly (Mar 10, 2007)

are you phishing for a retort? 

As I said above, I was mostly kidding about those statements knowing you'd be in here before too long. That said though, at a rugged and chiseled 200lbs or so , if the GS is stable enough for you to walk those gunwhales, then that is indeed a very stable skiff for its beam.


----------



## Guest (Sep 13, 2007)

> are you phishing for a retort?
> 
> As I said above, I was mostly kidding about those statements knowing you'd be in here before too long. That said though, at a rugged and chiseled 200lbs or so , if the GS is stable enough for you to walk those gunwhales, then that is indeed a very stable skiff for its beam.


Negative. And I think you are pretty close but someone asked if I could walk the gunnels so I replied and referenced to this thread.  Maybe this weekend we can measure them and walk for bheers till we fall off.  Winner gets a bheer. ;D ;D


----------



## deerfly (Mar 10, 2007)

> > are you phishing for a retort?
> >
> > As I said above, I was mostly kidding about those statements knowing you'd be in here before too long. That said though, at a rugged and chiseled 200lbs or so , if the GS is stable enough for you to walk those gunwhales, then that is indeed a very stable skiff for its beam.
> 
> ...


sounds like my kinda' contest.  

Give me a holler when you get a minute though, might be a wrinkle or two in the original plans...


----------

