More market research! The 16 project is well under way; the design has been sent off for approval, and as soon as I get it I'll start on the tooling. In the meantime, there are more things to be considered so that decisions can be made when appropriate. I don't mean to be a pest, but I'd like to lean on your valuable opinions for more market research. Basically what we have so far is a boat of 16'6" and a beam of 6.6', and a tall 7/8 rig. Closer to the 17 in size than it is the 15. We have worked out the sitting headroom below that seems to be the major criticism of the 15. I'm quite happy that the buyer of this design and I see eye-to- eye on pretty much everything (so far), and what we both want is a fast, seaworthy boat (actually, what I want is a fast, seaworthy boat, and what he wants is a seaworthy, fast boat) and that within reason cost is not a major consideration . In manufacturing, we plan to use more exotic materials and better engineering than anything else on the market. As many of you know I've made most of my living for the last 6 or 8 years designing and tooling what is probably the best line of racing kayaks and outrigger canoes in the world, and I've been forced to stay on the leading edge in using up-to-date materials and techniques, as well as design. Huki's (A Hawaiian word meaning GO ; jawsee Huki.com) most popular and successful surfski (offshore racing kayak) is 22' long and weighs under 20 lbs! They are raced inter-island in Hawaii, all over San Francisco Bay, around Catalina Isl, etc, and the boat is NOT the weak link when it comes to survival. They are totally capable of handling 10' and 12' waves with the correct paddler, which is not me ! I just realized that this really sounds like a marketing come-on , but it's really not and is more a reflection of my enthusiasm. Questions: The cabin, which fits in with the forward hatch. I have drawn the boat with a "Montgomery style" house similar to the existing 15 and 17. A problem is that there is not room for a "real" forward hatch unless we go to a trunk house type of cabin , with a traditional, more vertical forward panel. This will give us another 4 or 6" of cabin deck space in front of the mast, enough for a fwd hatch, without encroaching on the foredeck. How do you feel about this? Is the forward hatch worth a Hess style house? The only disadvantage of a trunk house is a bit more windage sailing upwind, which is drag. I can live with it and I wonder if some might prefer it. It also has a bit more headroom sitting on the head. Windows. What percentage of you would like the option of opening ports? All the ones I've seen on the market ( and I really haven't paid much attention for years) are pretty traditional and would go well with a trunk house. If we picked a good opening window we would probably design a non-opening port to go with it as standard equipment. In any case we would need to use two windows per side to leave the middle part of the sides of the house uncut, for strength. Any thoughts on this? Personally I'd opt for no fwd hatch, and use a dorade vent which works for me because of where I sail, but I realize that most of you do not sail in CA and Mexico. Also, the slap slap of anchoring stern-to doesn't really bother me when I sleep. I just pretend it's Mom's heartbeat. This is a subtle thing but an ongoing discussion is just where do we put the line on stability versus speed? I have always preferred the tall rig 17 to the normal one because it has a touch more speed. Yes, it has to reef or downshift the jib a bit earlier, but so what? If you sail in an area where it blows 20 regularly I would expect you to feel differently, but how many of us do? I would rather have a spirited boat in the light stuff, but I realize this is just me. With most any fractional rig it works best to go to a smaller headsail before reefing the main, mostly for the sake of forestay tension, but it's not a big deal unless you want to win a race. You 15 owners- would you rather have a bit more ballast and not have the boat quite as lively in the light stuff, or is it about right? How about the 17? How often do you wish you had a tall rig? Gary O, who is as knowledgeable as I, blew the mast on his 17 and had worn out sails, and he replaced the rig with a tall rig. How many of you would do this if fSaced with the same situation? The 15 and the 17 have earned their reputations in three ways; they are well built, they are seaworthy, and they are remarkably fast for their lengths. I really expect to make the 16 as fast as a 17 because of up-to-date design and technology, but it must also be as stable and seaworthy. I have had the thought before that I'd take a 15 anywhere I would a 17, and the new boat needs to be included in this. Any comments? jerry