Steven Weld's THE PERFECT SKIFF?

[Steve Paskey]

There has been lots of discussion here over the years about flat-bottomed skiffs for sailing and rowing, including designs by Atkin and Redmond and Bolger and Stambaugh, but no one ever talks about the PERFECT SKIFF by Steven Weld, the winner of WB's 1991 design contest.

I sprung for the plans and have been very impressed with many of the details. Seems like a handy, well-thought-out little boat.

So am I missing something? Is there some grave defect that isn't apparent from the plans? Do the rest of you know something about this design that I don't know? Thanks!

Oh, by the way: WB #110 has an article on the "sailing trials" after the first boat was built. (Nos. 111 and 112 have a how-to-build article.) I don't have #110 -- can anyone give me the bottom line as to what they thought about her?

[ 11-16-2005, 01:15 PM: Message edited by: Steve Paskey ]

[Christopher Locke]

Thanks for the suggestion. She looks very, very similar to Steve Redmond's Bluegill; 8" longer and 4" narrower, but same rig, sail area, roughly the same weight, design, etc. I'm curious, how much instruction is given for construction in the plans themselves (not counting the Woodenboat articles)?

[ 11-16-2005, 02:11 PM: Message edited by: Christopher Locke ]

[Steve Paskey]

The plans show construction details and include a numbered building key that's a couple of pages long. Beyond that, there are no additional instructions.

As far as construction goes there is one drawback. Weld doesn't show expanded dimensions for the planks, and the plans require construction of a strongback and jig. The same is true for some other skiffs, like Stambaugh's Sailing Skiff 15 and Jordan's Footloose.

On the other hand, Bluegill (like many other skiff designs) gives you the plank dimensions and doesn't require a jig -- the topsides are simply bent around a midships mold, then attached to the stem and transom.

Incidentally, though it isn't apparent from the WB catalog write-up, the Perfect Skiff has two planks on each side with an overlap, as on the Sailing Skiff 15. No bevels, but it does require cutting a gain at the stem. You could build it with one plank per side if you wanted.

[ 11-16-2005, 08:05 PM: Message edited by: Steve Paskey ]

[Tom Lathrop]

The "Perfect Skiff" is, in my opinion, not nearly so well suited for the purposes stated in the competition as most of others that were submitted.

No crew seating. Do you like sitting in the bilge water and with a flat bottom, there will be bilge water from spray?

One big sail with the mast way up in the bow. Not easy to shorten sail and not easy to maintain balance when it is done.

A dagger board that will interfere with the foot of the sail when it is up. Can you say capsize in a jibe if you run aground. Difficult to launch or come in to a shallow shore.

An aft deck in boats this small is a nuisance and dictates an overlong tiller.

I don't particularly like flat bottoms but that is just me.

Look at some of the other entries, most are better.

WB had a contest for a sail trainer also and the winner was just as poor compared to other entries.
There is a reason that we don't hear any more about these boats. I wondered about the judges criteria and/or biases for both these boats.

[Christopher Locke]

Steve, that's the sort of comparison that is really helpful. I've planning on building Bluegill myself some day. I'm working on a Green Island 18 with my brother in law but would like at some point to build something all by myself, and have been searching for the simpliest and easiest design, in that my skills are not great and this would be a project designed to increase them. It sounds like Bluegill is still the simpliest, although the Perfect Skiff being a close second and perhaps better looking given the lapstraking.

[ 11-16-2005, 03:31 PM: Message edited by: Christopher Locke ]

[Steve Paskey]

Thanks for the comments, Tom.

Your point about possible interference between the daggerboard and the foot of the sail is especially well-taken -- I'll have to look more closely at that. As an option, the designer notes that you could use a leeboard instead. Move the mast back 18 inches, and put the board at the widest part of the hull.

Regarding the seating, sitting in bilgewater isn't necessary -- the plans include floorboards. My first boat was a Crawford melonseed, and I'm convinced that sitting on floorboards with cushions and a backrest is a far more comfortable way to sail a small boat than trying to perch on thwarts or narrow side benches. The Perfect Skiff has great lounging room for captain and crew.

As for the sail being far forward -- it's not as far forward as on the melonseed or a small catboat. With no thwarts to crawl over, getting forward to shorten sail should be no harder than on many small boats. Build it with the lug rig, and the C of E won't move far (if at all) when reefed.

Regarding the decked stern, it keeps crew weight out of the stern, and provides storage and bouyancy. No reason why the rear bulkhead can't be moved aft to shorten the tiller (and lengthen the cockpit). One could also do away with it entirely, as the plans include an additional drawing that shows a more conventional interior, with no decking and thwarts to sit on.

I have looked at others -- almost obsessively. I have plans for two other entries (from Stambaugh and Ken Swan) and also for Redmond's Bluegill, Jordan's Footloose, and Storer's Goat Island Skiff. I've looked closely at the entries from Bolger (the Common Sense Skiff) and Michalak (Woobo), and quite a few other skiffs, including designs from Atkin (Alone and Auntie Helen), Michalak, Bolger, Reuel Parker, Pete Culler, John Gardner, and Dave Carnell (the modified Bolger Featherwind, aka the $200 sailboat).

I still like the Perfect Skiff.

[ 11-17-2005, 09:37 AM: Message edited by: Steve Paskey ]

[Steve Paskey]

Chris: One other point about the construction of the Perfect Skiff. If you build it with the decks fore and aft, you'll note that the bulkheads are at an angle. The plans don't give dimensions for this -- you'd have to pick them up from the hull. Not hard, but another step. She's definitely more work than Bluegill.

Bluegill doesn't have much in the way of building instructions -- just notes in the margins of the drawings -- but you don't need much. She's a simple boat to build, and if you want a flat-bottomed skiff there's a lot to like. One downside for me is that she was designed to accommodate a small motor, and her transom's in the water with a load. That creates a lot of drag when rowing.

[almeyer]

Chris, if you're looking for simple and easy, consider the Weekend Skiff. A book on the boat is available from our sponsor. I've only glanced through it, but the instructions seemed well written. Another forumite (Mike DeVour?) built one recently and went all out with a gaff sloop rig, it came out really nice. There were pictures posted on the forum and recently in the "Launchings" section of WB magazine.
Al

[BirchBark]

Can anyone comment on the Herreshoff, Biscayne Bay Sailing Skiff?
It's not exactly a flat bottom skiff. I guess it was close enough to flat for them to call it a skiff.
Could be complicated by that heavy keel. Short of having it cast I was thinking epoxy composite moulded , filled with lead.

Chris

[ 11-17-2005, 09:15 AM: Message edited by: BirchBark ]

[Billy Bones]

Short of having it cast I was thinking epoxy composite moulded , filled with lead. There was a clever improvisation for a weighted cb in Watercraft (UK) a few issues back whereby the fellow made a hollow wooden foil, cast several stackable lead foilshaped ingots and set them in the board in epoxy and sealed the whole shebang. The board was the glassed. It looked good and got a nod from the designer. HTH

[Christopher Locke]

I have a matrix comparing various designs that I'll send to Steve via e-mail. I'd post it but I don't know how. If anyone wants a copy, let me know. I should qualify this by my complete and total inexperience; these are all theoretical comparisons based only on publicly available info.

[Wiley Baggins]

Christopher Locke, I assume that you are wanting a boat for both oar and sail. You might want to consider a couple of plans available from Baker Boat Works (assuming that you aren't already familiar with them).

Here is a link to an Adobe document (.pdf) on skiffs & sharpies (http://www.by-the-sea.com/bakerboatworks/pdf/skiffs&sharpies.pdf). Based on personal experience, I can't vouch for any of these beyond the Westport Skiff, which is not a sailboat. I was pleased with the performance of that boat. I did deviate from the plans in that I built her glued lapstrake fashion with plywood which made for an attractive and able boat.

They also offer some small sailboats. Here is a link to the sailboats (approximately 20') (http://www.by-the-sea.com/bakerboatworks/pdf/sailboats20feet.pdf) .pdf file.

And here, without further rambling, is a link to the Baker Boat Works page (http://www.by-the-sea.com/bakerboatworks/).

[Christopher Locke]

Wiley, thanks for the input.

[ 11-17-2005, 11:52 AM: Message edited by: Christopher Locke ]

[Wiley Baggins]

Christopher, you're quite welcome. There are some really nice boats in the Baker catalog. As a matter of fact, when I posted the link to sailboats from the catalog, I thought I was posting the link for the dinghies .pdf (http://www.by-the-sea.com/bakerboatworks/pdf/dinghies.pdf) file. Good luck with your choice and building the boat.

[MarkC]

Tom wrote:

I wondered about the judges criteria and/or biases for both these boats.
Tsk. Tsk.

Good grief. Why not ask the judges? Hell, start your own magazine.

I don't particularly like flat bottoms but that is just me. Yep. Thanks.

[Tom Lathrop]

Originally posted by MarkC:
Tom wrote:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> I wondered about the judges criteria and/or biases for both these boats.
Tsk. Tsk.

Good grief. Why not ask the judges? Hell, start your own magazine.

I don't particularly like flat bottoms but that is just me. Yep. Thanks.</font>[/QUOTE]I was only offering a personal opinion, which is what makes this forum run. Did you have any critical opinions about the boat or just like critiquing other's opinions?

[Dave Hadfield]

Yeah, I remember those issues and wondering about the judge's choices too. To each his own, I guess.

[MarkC]

Did you have any critical opinions about the boat or just like critiquing other's opinions? Well I'm glad you asked!

But as easy as they are to build, good skiffs can be devilishly hard to design. Everything must be just right to get the best from this type of hull. As the winner of Woodenboat's 1991 Skiff Design Competition, Stephen Weld has sought to combine the best work of many students of the flat-bottomed skiff - Culler, Chapelle, Bolger, and Redmond - into what is indeed a tall order: the Perfect Skiff. The Perfect Skiff would be a good first project for the beginning boatbuilder. She will provide the easiest lofting lesson possible, and her construction is exhaustively detailed in the two part article "Building the Perfect Skiff" Woodenboat issues 111 and 112. I'm not going to second-guess Woodenboat. I'm not going to call the judges of the competition wrong, corrupt or worse. I'm certainly not going to say:

Look at some of the other entries, most are better.
on THEIR web site. I dont think that Woodenboat's editors would recommend a dog.

Steve Pasky answered most of your criticisms. The only thing I will add is that learning to use a dagger or centerboard (sail - and shallow water included) in my 16' Saber did not provide me with any difficulty. (Yes - maybe that was just me). Actually I enjoyed the challenge of remembering the dagger over the tip-up centerboarders I've sailed.

If the choice of this boat as a winner in 1991 irks you so much then why not write to Woodenboat and ask the judges their reasons??? Why dont you ask for a re-trial. Or speak to Stephen Weld or design a better skiff, or have it built to prove it's faults or - do something similarly constructive.

[Tom Lathrop]

Originally posted by MarkC:
[QUOTE I'm not going to second-guess Woodenboat. I'm not going to call the judges of the competition wrong, corrupt or worse. I'm certainly not going to say:

>>>Never even hinted that the judges were anything but honest. I simply disagreed with them.<<<

Look at some of the other entries, most are better.
on THEIR web site. I dont think that Woodenboat's editors would recommend a dog.

>>>My opinion and I never implied that the chosen boat was a dog.<<<

If the choice of this boat as a winner in 1991 irks you so much then why not write to Woodenboat and ask the judges their reasons??? Why dont you ask for a re-trial. Or speak to Stephen Weld or design a better skiff, or have it built to prove it's faults or - do something similarly onstructive.[/QUOTE]

>>The boat did not particularly irk me Mark and I did speak to Jon at a Woodenboat show where the first one was on display. Anyone that calls anything "Perfect" is just laying themselves open for challenge. I never follow a consensus and don't worry about Woodenboat being disturbed about my thoughts. I expect they are not upset if we don't knuckle our forehead when we open an issue. As for the better boat, I'm glad you asked. Take a look at:

http://www.bandbyachtdesigns.com/brs.htm

Loon was built and widely sailed by me and my wife in the US and Canada. After it was sold to buy materials for another boat, it was taken again across country and beach cruised for extended periods in the Sea of Cortez for several years. You can read about this at:

http://www.bandbyachtdesigns.com/Baja/Baja%20adventure.h tm (http://www.bandbyachtdesigns.com/Baja/Baja%20adventure.htm)

Centerboard, kick up rudder for efficiency in deep water and shallow, comfortable and dry seating, large comfortable sleeping area, cat ketch rig for balance and low center of effort plus winning races against larger boats in races up to 80 miles over two days.

As to why I prefer a cat ketch rig over the single sail for a knockabout or beach cruiser, see:

http://www.bandbyachtdesigns.com/catketch.htm

Here is one reason I prefer a centerboard over a daggerboard for a small cruiser. We hit a submerged rock at speed in a lake in Ontario that ripped the outer jacket off the dacron hold down line in a jam cleat. Our home waters are shallow but with a friendly and soft bottom. Afterwards, I rigged a shock cord for this. A daggerboard would have ended our sailing right there. I just replaced the line and carried on.

Finally Mark, I have what I believe are good and sound reasons for my choices. If you don't agree, that is fine with me. What is objectionable is that you seem to take dissenting opinions personally and feel the need to go into an attack mode. This is the sort of thing usually reserved for the bilge. Ranting is accepted as much as you like there and I never visit that area.

Peace smile.gif

[ 11-21-2005, 11:36 PM: Message edited by: Tom Lathrop ]

[MarkC]

Tom, my appologies for the jabs and for not writing clearer - I didnt like your tone. I was simply looking for more constructive action which I didn't see in your first or second post. Your last post was great. Why didn't you post it first? Why couldn't I take you to task?

Steve Paskey didn't ask for a sail trainer, camp-cruiser, docile tacker. Because the 'Perfect Skiff' isnt this - you cant slam it.

Tom wrote:

Look at some of the other entries, most are better.

WB had a contest for a sail trainer also and the winner was just as poor compared to other entries.

There is a reason that we don't hear any more about these boats. I wondered about the judges criteria and/or biases for both these boats. 'just as poor' 'Biases' - what did I mis-interpret here?? What you were implying here is clear.

Seriously all you needed to say was in your experience you don't like flat bottoms, you would prefer larger skiffs with perhaps a split sail plan and a more relaxed style of sailing.

I have what I believe are good and sound reasons for my choices. I like your choices as well!

[Tom Lathrop]

Mark,

I wrote an answer but then deleted it. :rolleyes:

[MarkC]

:D

Yeah my answer was a muddle I was typing in a rush - cant get caught on the net at work!

Seems like a handy, well-thought-out little boat.
It is - with no grave faults.