Thread: Lapstrake vs Carvel

Carvel?
I thought carvel was solid planks fastened to frames with screws & the gaps caulked to keep the briney out.
Hoop pine veneers sounds more like cold-moulding.
Or perhaps you are thinking strip planking using trips of ply rather than straight timber ?

In any case, no idea on which would sell better.
Good luck with it, whichever you do.

Hi - By carvel I mean that the outside is smooth not lapped. The construction will be cold moulded by laminating 1.5mm hoop pine in a mould under vacuum. Effectively making plywood in the correct hull shape. Thanks for the comment Peter S

A molded kit wouldn't be especially popular, unless the hulls where completed. Rough cut planking, for trimming by the would be builder, isn't what most expect from a kit. Most will expect a CNC cut kit, to be quite precise and other then some minor filing and bevel tuning, to be very close to "hangable", right out of the box.

Your business model would have shown what the market will accept, so the choice of carvel(?) or lapstrake would be predetermined, I would think. As a rule, smooth hulls predominate the market, as the perception of build difficulty in lapstrake, usually holds back the novice builder. Marketing can eliminate some of this preconception, especially if the planks are beveled and precision cut in the kit, but not all of it.

Originally Posted by PAR

A molded kit wouldn't be especially popular, unless the hulls where completed. Rough cut planking, for trimming by the would be builder, isn't what most expect from a kit. Most will expect a CNC cut kit, to be quite precise and other then some minor filing and bevel tuning, to be very close to "hangable", right out of the box.

Your business model would have shown what the market will accept, so the choice of carvel(?) or lapstrake would be predetermined, I would think. As a rule, smooth hulls predominate the market, as the perception of build difficulty in lapstrake, usually holds back the novice builder. Marketing can eliminate some of this preconception, especially if the planks are beveled and precision cut in the kit, but not all of it.

Hello Par - The intent is for the hulls to be complete to reduce the time to build. The hulls will either be one piece or two pieces (ie split down the keel line) All major elements will be near complete just need trimming and fitting. Lets say "cold moulded" rather than carvel to make it clear. This is part of the research to decide if it is to be lapped or not. As the hull shape and various features are modern lapped is not neccessary as it will not look traditional. Plus the sliding seat is not trad or classic either. The vacuum process is easier if smooth not lapped so from a production viewpoint smooth is best. Thanks for the input Peter S

Originally Posted by PAR

A molded kit wouldn't be especially popular, unless the hulls where completed. Rough cut planking, for trimming by the would be builder, isn't what most expect from a kit. Most will expect a CNC cut kit, to be quite precise and other then some minor filing and bevel tuning, to be very close to "hangable", right out of the box.

Your business model would have shown what the market will accept, so the choice of carvel(?) or lapstrake would be predetermined, I would think. As a rule, smooth hulls predominate the market, as the perception of build difficulty in lapstrake, usually holds back the novice builder. Marketing can eliminate some of this preconception, especially if the planks are beveled and precision cut in the kit, but not all of it.

The kit hulls are complete or some models may be in halves. The idea is remove the construction of a building frame and saving the builder time. There would be no planking only major & small bits to trim, fit & bond together. We looked at fibreglass hulls and timber trim and small parts but this seemed to be aesthetically wrong. The hulls are modern in design so lapped construction seems to be out as they are not classic or trad in nature. Thanks for the feedback. Peter S

Raw hull kits aren't as popular among builders as full CNC kits, that require assembly. This may simply be just that small craft typically are full kits, because of size, while raw hulls typically are larger, therefor in less demand. Also, those looking at raw hull kits will tend for 'glass hulls. At least this is the historical perspective for sales. Raw hull kits with CNC precision would be fairly unique, which could open the market a bit, though wooden hulls might be best marketed as composite (wood core with sheathings) as most still have issues with maintance requirements and the word wood in the hull material choice.

I have a friend that is cutting complete foam hull blanks, ready for delivery to a builder, where they just apply 'glass and move onto the next phase of the project. The foam is CNC cut, full size, faired, braced and shipped by truck. Some like the idea of a fully assembled and faired hull, though this is relitive to the novice, who will spend countless additional hours after sheathing, with more fairing.

I think that flat pack CNC kits are "popular" because they are easy to manufacture and a logical next step up from, "from scratch" construction. I don't think that prebuilt hull kits are less popular they are just not done as they require more work for the manufacturer. The line has to be drawn between how much time does the manufacturer put in (100% build or 10% build) to how much can they get for their effort. In my case I want to pick a middle ground and supply somehing that would be difficult/costly for the customer to build so the customer has to trade off $$$ vs time. If the product is very good ie nearly trimmed full parts that require joining. Then assembly time is short and the builder can put time into finishing to their std. Could be considered the IKEA of the boat business. Cheers Peter S

Originally Posted by Peter Eng

. . . I think that flat pack CNC kits are "popular" because they are easy to manufacture . . .

The popularity of a CNC kit, has absolutely nothing to do with how easy it might or might not be on a the kit supplier. The purchaser doesn't care how much trouble the manufacture might have.

Originally Posted by Peter Eng

. . . I don't think that prebuilt hull kits are less popular they are just not done as they require more work for the manufacturer. . . .

Historical sales figures are available, at least in this country and they clearly show few raw hull sales comparative to kits. In fact, 'glass raw hulls where popular back in the 60's and 70's, but has dropped off a cliff since.

Originally Posted by Peter Eng

. . . The line has to be drawn between how much time does the manufacturer put in (100% build or 10% build) to how much can they get for their effort . . .

Agreed, but the raw hull, depending on design, will range between 15% to 25% of the total project effort, so some savings, but typically and historicly, not enough to make the "bridge" with novice builders. Most purchasers of raw hulls are experienced outfitters or builders, that can see the advantage. Marketing can over come some of this.