mccaffertee

I have noticed several different approaches to bottom design (both cats and v's).

One being the longer running length, where the bottom seems to run straight forward and further forward before turning up to the bow (seems most US boats are copied from earlier designs, so most have the same characteristics).

Then, there is what appears to be another idea where the bottom (the straight area) starts sloping up to the bow way far back (seen this more on European style boats.

I believe T2x indicated that they tried this on the Conquests? And too me, the Conqust has the best style of any boat to date (see Jesse James Conquest/Chris Craft).

In other words, if you placed a 32 Conquest on the pavement, and sat a 32 Skater next to it, the Skater will have more contact to the pavement.

I understand that a "knee-jerk" reaction would think that more contact, better rough water ability. But then, as a cat uses a lot of air in the design, I can see the increased drag factor as well.

So, does anyone have any real hands-on experience with these 2 different concepts? Not looking for personal opinions as much as the theories and experience.

Thanks

Interceptor

Not trying to go in another direction with your question but isn't it similar to what a boats waterline length is ?
Everyone here always beats up on boat manufacturers and their susposed overall lenght with or without platforms and other appendages but no one ever discusses waterline length.
ed

mccaffertee

Not sure the waterline would be a strong factor in my question as it is the actual keel length before moving up to the bow that I am interested in. Obviously, if the slope up going forward is radical enough, it would affect the waterline some what.

FeverMike

I have always looked at this keel line on boats and wondered the same thing. Hopefully this will turn into a great thread and we all can learn something.

Anyone on this forum a naval architect and into hydrodynamics?

T2x

Somehow I believe you have misquoted me and I am not sure from what thread. In fact the more abrupt the bow entry section the better the anti stuff and recover ability in rough water. So you have quoted me backwards. The 35' Jesse James had a fine entry section (more gradual taper, similar to the early Skaters). The Shadows, Chris Cats and later Conquests had a more abrupt bow entry as we eventually went back to the earlier Shadow Cat bow angle with a longer straight bottom section. We found that this was more effective in preventing stuffs at speed and created a "basketball" effect as the bow tended to rebound quicker upon contact with steeper waves.

Photos below show the later, long constant section and more agressive bow angle on the 32' Conquest "Captain America" as compared to the more gradual entry section on the older 32' Rolling Thunder, which tapered upward starting almost immediately forward of the front step.

Peter Hledin followed in pretty much the same vein as his designs incorporated a more abrupt entry after his original "classic" 32. If you look at every Skater designed after the original 40 footer (the next boat he designed after the classic 32) you will note that all of them have a much fuller bow and forward entry.

Hope this clears up any misunderstandings.

T2x

mccaffertee

I didn't think i was "quoting" you (T2x)...i was only referencing that somewhere I read that the more gradual taper was used on the Conquests. Sorry for any misunderstanding - I value your information and you have now answer my question, thanks!

I do have another question.

In your opinion, was the Conquest brand a success? The basis for this question is "why" are they not around today? In my opinion, the styling was very aggressive and they looked faster than anything else - even today.

T2x

After Mark Lavin was killed in the 35' Jesse James, we simply finished two boats that we had on order. After that I wanted to quit, because I was deeply hurt by the loss. Marce Lavin convinced us to build the 48' JJ as a tribute to his son....in spite of my reluctance at that point. After that I did in fact walk away for good. Since I did all of the selling and management and owned the company it was strictly my decision.

Ken Adams went back to building tunnel boats and various plugs..with one exception, The Linder designed Flying Tiger about 5 years later...After that he worked for Reggie for a number of years. George went on to market safety canopies and act as Technical Chairman for APBA and the early OSS.

I continued with the TV gig until 2001..... when I had a parting of the ways with the APBA. After 20 years.....I think I did enough of that as well.

In recent years I regretted closing Conquest a bit. At the time I was feeling like the accident was a reason to quit, and I walked away from what amounts to the biggest passion in my life.... Boat racing......

Now I think that Mark would have wanted us to continue.

But Cest La Vie.......

T2x

Chris Sunkin

If you watch this video, you'll see in action alot of what's being discussed.

http://media.boatmad.com/gallery/v/m...che_2.wmv.html

The Apache hull is designed with a substantial "forward buoyancy". At the end of the video, you'll see the second boat semi-stuff. It's that significant buoyancy up fron that prevents that, and most likely reduced possibility of serious damage that can occur with a total stuff.

At the same time, looking at the second boat, you'll notice that the actual water contact surface of the boat is quite small when running. Of course, this is a raceboat with substantial power running at top speed. In a pleasure boat/cruising scenario, a boat with less running surface is going to offer less hydrodynamic resistance- equalling less power usage at midrange speeds.

Like everything in boating, there's a compromise to be made.

If you were to, as in the description, set an Apache 41, a Cig Tiger and a Fountain 42 side-by-side on concrete, you'd see much more daylight from the second two.

P.S. The narrator in that vid is the guy right above me.

BROWNIE

It REALLY hurts when your friends get killed in something that you built..........................

T2x

Amen to that. and it hurts just as badly....22 years later.