Hi, Jerry: Interesting questions, exciting idea! I know nothing about the sailboat market, but I'd guess that a smooth-hulled boat would appeal more to the average buyer, considering the sales of Hunters, Catalinas and the like. But that isn't what I'd like to see in the boat you're discussing. I do think there's a solid niche of folks who are attracted to the distinctive look of a lapstrake hull -- or at least a more traditional design that both goes fast and can stay out in a blow. I may be mistaken, but I also think buyers in this niche will pay more for a well-designed, good-looking, well-built sailboat. I guess the question is, are there enough such buyers to make the venture viable? What is it that makes Potters sell so well? If the boat were to be a 16-foot version of the 15, I'd prefer to see the extra foot of length put into the cabin interior. That would make a nice little cruiser. Like another poster, I'd love to see a Montgomery style boat offered in a length between 17 and 23 feet (20 seems about right), since our M-17 is a bit tight for me and my wife (OK, a bit tight for my wife, who probably wouldn't want to go any more in a 20-footer than our 17, so maybe I should just stay small). Let us know how it goes! Gordon On May 13, 2009, at 2:25 PM, jerry wrote:
Something more pleasant! I've been in a dialog with a builder to design a "Montgomery style" boat; probably 16', and I'd like to ask you for some opinions and comments.
Lapstrake: How do you think the average buyer, looking for a boat in this size range, would look at a lapstrake hull as opposed to a smooth hull? You and I are probably prejudiced so we don't count. People can see that a lapstrake hull is dryer (but not much, really) and they can see that it's stiffer- again, not much. A lapstrake hull is a bit heavier but weight in a hull doesn't really slow the boat down enough to matter even to me. There is a cost factor, partly because of taking longer to lay up, a little more material, and because it takes a bit better molder, but not much, and really, the deck has more man hours in it than a hull so cost is a small factor. I don;'t believe there is a performance factor of any import. Maybe I'm saying too much; and the simple question is: which would sell best to the average buyer?
I'm thinking the interior would be a roomier version of the 15, with a little more storage, and more comfortable sitting headroom. Also, the 15 cockpit is about 5.5' long, and when i'd take a 15 cruising I'd cleat the drop hatches to bridge the cockpit benches and sleep at a diagonal. This worked fine for me but would not work for most couples, especially if they fight a lot. The 17 cockpit, being over 6', was much better for sleeping in the cockpit. Here's the question : where would you like to see the extra foot of length- in the cockpit or the interior, or what combination of both?
Any other comments would be welcome. My ex-wife used to call me a know-it-all but we all know I'm not! I think these subjects would be good for the list, but if you don't like speaking to a crowd feel free to email me directly at jerry@jerrymontgomery.org.
jerry _______________________________________________ http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/montgomery_boats
Remember, there is no privacy on the Internet!