Thread: Wherry style rowing boat

Hi Arron,
I've done a couple of stitch and glue kayaks and while very happy with the result, I was never happy with the slight lack of precision. If you don't get the planks joined right, there can be bumps and hollows.

The skiff mould takes the guesswork out of the equation. Expensive maybe, but I hope to build a couple more yet. The planks are planed to "lap" over each other as they are fitted. This is only troublesome for the bow and stern where "gains" need to be cut.

The clc lapstitch enables more precision with the s&g by providing edge alignment.

btw, I was also attracted by the Wherry, but didn't want the expense of importing the kit.

Enjoy the search - it's a journey in itself.

Arron,the Witt design seems to be trying to make it as simple and foolproof as possible to get a fair hull-it's glued clinker (lapstrake) rather than the stitch and glue construction you described.Apart from some stitch and glue designs,most vessels are built off a stongback and molds although not eveyone bothers with the stringers.I'm about to start on a s&g sea kayak(if I ever get my Yellowtail painted and on a trailer,but that's another story-see my 'Yellowtail woes' post),and it the plans call for it to be built on a simple frame for the reasons Wood Wombat mentioned.It shoudn't cost much to make one off the plans-typically you contruct a ladder of say 2x4 beams premarked with the mold stations,with 6 legs,all diagonally braced,and cheap ply or whatever molds screwed to timber uprights screwed to the beams.
Cheers,
Dave.

Yes, Wombat, I can understand what you mean by the potential for a slight misalignment ruining the effect. The more I study it the more I see that the only sane choice for the Anapolis wherry is to buy the kit. $1800 from a supplier in Wollongong. Without plans accurate to the millimetre I can imagine something lumpy and bumpy all over the place.

I should make an arrangement to go down and look at the kit and check out its quality.

My problem is that I still see it as an exercise in making something aesthetic first with usability a far distant second. Hence I keep coming back to the Anapolis wherry. I love those lines.

Arron

Aaron, don't be put off by the effort required to build a properly planked hull over frames. Stitch and Glue isn't all that easier than lapstrake - the main benefit comes from fewer planks and cost (no frames or strongback to make). I've built both and an unfortunate combination of the two and to be honest, although lapstrake is 'fiddlier', it's a bloody sight more satisfying to build and you get a better hull (the uneveness in Redback's hulls is just ugly). Save stitch and glue for low plank counts or deliberatiely 'simple' boats like Mik's designs.

The other thing to consider is that in any boat, building the hull is less than 25% of the job and any 'savings' from using s&g form only a small part of that. Although buying a kit means that someone else has cut the bits ... and you're assuming the plans the bits were cut from is accurate. If things don't go together perfectly, those bits still won't fit. If you're building a planked boat over frames, you get to cut each plank to fit where it lands. Redback is a mix of lapstrake and s&g - the plans were rubbish and I wound having to loft every plank to get it to fit the boat.

I'm not advising against the kit - it'll save you a bit of time, a bit of effort and mean that you won't have to learn a few skills. However, those gains won't be huge in the overall build and you'll lose the satisfaction of learning how to loft planks, one of the more satisfying aspects of the craft (getting a two dimensional bit of timber to fit a complex three dimensional place).

What I will advise is that you look at the options for buying plans for the Wherry and for building it from the plans up, THEN make your decision. You may still buy the kit but at least you'll never have that nagging 'what if' question.

As for the Wherry itself, I fully understand and applaude your choice, that's a lovely craft.

Richard

Originally Posted by Daddles

...
What I will advise is that you look at the options for buying plans for the Wherry and for building it from the plans up, THEN make your decision. You may still buy the kit but at least you'll never have that nagging 'what if' question.

As for the Wherry itself, I fully understand and applaude your choice, that's a lovely craft.

Richard

thanks for the reality-check perspective, Richard. I will look at planked-over-frame (dont know the right term) designs differently from now on.

On your comment about getting the plans and building from scratch - well I have tried to get the plans for the Anapolis Wherry from CLCBoats but apparently they dont exist as it was designed as CNC-cut kit boat from the start. This is disappointing, as I would like to build from scratch and get all the knowledge/satisfaction that comes with that. I have looked at several other plans which I suspect are just as nice such as the windrush skiff but the problem is that there seems to be very little takeup of these designs - whilst with the Anapolis wherry the takeup is huge so I can be confident I am dealing with something with the bugs ironed out. In the case of some of the plans being offered (and I would have to tentatively include the windrush in this) I'm not even sure if they have ever been built - which is a real worry.

For now, I'll keep researching and asking questions.

cheers
Arron

Don't be trapped by the name either. 'Wherry' is simply a name given to a type of boat. Annapolis Wherry is just one particular design within a range. There are plenty of rowing skiffs around - here are David Payne's offerings then there's Ougthred and Selway Fisher - the Selway Fisher designs can nearly all be built as lapstrake (planked) even if not shown that way on the website, all you have to do is ask.You know the basic style you're after, you've possibly worked out what you're going to do with the thing once you've built it, there are other options. Yeah, I know, I'm confusing the issue by throwing in choices.

Don't get tied to a 'name' like Annapolis Wherry - that's just one option within a wide field.
Decide whether you want a kit or whether you want to scratch build.
If you want a kit, the Annapolis Wherry is a good move. If you want to build from plans, there are a lot of options that will give you pretty much the same boat.

I'd strongly reccomend you think about plans. Kits are nice but they always feel like a short cut to me. I took the short cut with Sixpence (bought a hull I'd help build at TAFE) and despite all the work I've put into it, I'm still aware of that short cut. On the other hand, buying a kit may NOT feel like a short cut to you, only you can answer that and when the thing hits the water, that probably won't matter much anyway.

Richard
yes yes, I need to dust off my own project and do some more damage to it

Yes, I understand that there are many competing plans and designs. I have already investigated the ones you mentioned. In fact I like this one as choice number 2 - http://www.oarsport.co.uk/products/alden_wherry.php . Same problem though - only available in kit - and in this case needing to be imported.

Arron

Actually, the perceivable fairness of a hull doesn't depend on the building method at all.

It depends on the builder using their eyes.

After seeing many, many lapstrake boats built from excellent plans put together in classes it is very rare to see something perfectly executed so that there is no wobbliness that would concern a perfectionist.

However, most just want to get a boat done and improve their skills. This happens regardless of building methods.

So I don't think fairness comes down to building method at all. Comes down to the eye and experience of the builder and how nicely done the plans are - no good if they have lurking mistakes that have not been corrected.

I wouldn't consider this a deal breaker for any construction method.

I think a more realistic decision choice is to ask if the point is
a/ to get on the water quickly - go ply sheet or stitch and glue
b/ to develop woodworking skills - go for clinker

Between these extremes there are many shades of course

Good luck with your decision

Best wishes
Michael

Boatmik,
I agree entirely.
The kit suited me coz I was impatient. Didn't need to be, but that's the way it was.

After the s&g kayaks, I loved the kit and the precision of the mould. There was comfort in knowing that it was going to be difficult to produce a lemon - because I could see the mould I'd assembled was fair - and had a wonderful shape.

The nibbed scarfs on the 3 part planks were great because again, I'd have to work hard to make it wrong. Allan's structured the build so the planks can be attached piece by piece and so reduce the stress of getting an 18' plank in place. Because I wasn't yet a believer in this pre-production precision I just had to pre-assemble the planks.

I'm contemplating a Newfoundland Trap Skiff next. And then I count the planks and think of all the gains to be cut and the left/right symmetry - urk! The derwent skiff only has 3 per side.

And then there's the requirement of going to the next level - so I know I have to go there.

Several years ago Wooden Boat mag published offsets for a thames skiff. Now there would be an exercise for an up and coming builder - maybe one or two after the NTS. Or something else.

It's all good.

You sure are choosing some interesting historical boats, Wombat.

Just great!

It is always amazing to me how people gravitate in quite different ways. Do you have any pics of your past projects ... on the water or in the build?

MIK

Originally Posted by Arron

Is this correct ???? If its so, what advantage does using a mould have? What is preferable about this style of construction, as the mold seems to be either quite costly to buy ($770) or time consuming to make.

thanks again
Arron

G'day Arron
The big advantage of the mould is that when your mates & significant other start
drooling & making noises like "I want one too", you can bang out a second and a third
& a fourth a heck of a lot quicker.
Add a token amount to the materials cost because they're your mates, & you'll have
covered the mould costs. I get the impression too, that Witts are helping mould
owners rent them to other builders. You'd need to check that with them of course.

But again, I suggest building the boat that turns on your lights rather than settling for
second or third best to use a certain method of build. You'll be happier with the boat,
and are unlikely to regret the method.
cheers
AJ

The 'ease of building' is such a minor part of the experience as to be of significance only to marketing men. Seriously. The build method has emotional importance only if you have a connection with a certain method. One question to be asked is: how important is the journey compared to the destination? If all you're interested in is a boat that works really well really quickly, Mik's designs are ideal. That's not putting down Mik's work because he also designs elegant craft within that 'quick and good' ideal and not many designers manage that - who wouldn't be proud to have a GIS in the fleet? However, if the building process is important to you (as it seems to be to me dammit), building from plans provides more satisfaction than having a heartless machine cut all the bits for you to glue together - this is why seemingly sensible people design their own boats and others mess about with huge sheets of ply and thousands of planks. And in between are a myriad of permutations and combinations.

The ONLY things that matter are whether you were happy with the process and whether you were happy with the end result. Hawk has listened to me talk about his often enough with model aeroplanes (I'm a designer at heart).

NEVER dimish the journey to achieve an end result. I did that with Sixpence and you'll all note that she's not going anywhere - there are a lot of reasons for that but one of them relates to how that hull came into my care in the first place. We aren't in this game to make money from our boats, that's for people like PAR, Mik and Ted from Duck Flats, the professionals. Us amateurs need to work out what we value and what desires we need to satisfy. For some of us, building a Storer PDR might be the pinnacle of boat building achievement and a source of huge satisfaction in itself (my son felt that way with his Mouseboat) while for others, it might just be a quick way of getting onto the water. The decision is so personal that the only advice that I believe is relevant is: Do what your heart dictates.

Why do you think they invented the moaning chair?

Richard

Originally Posted by Boatmik

You sure are choosing some interesting historical boats, Wombat.

Just great!

It is always amazing to me how people gravitate in quite different ways. Do you have any pics of your past projects ... on the water or in the build?

MIK

I see CLC have released a new dory which looks interesting - row or sail, plans or kit.
http://www.clcboats.com/shop/boats/s...C-NE-DORY.html

Took youngest and friend for a paddle today - they have no interest at all.
So I'll just have to work on the new granddaughter - she can row, I can fish. Needs to hurry up and grow tho.

I first built a CLC 14' for marriage bust up therapy, and the kids grew out of it just as it was finished. I did the 18' as pictured (it gets used) and another semi-open 18' with a white cedar stripped deck. It doesn't get used and now that I think about it - I'm not sure why. It would actually be perfect for quiet water fishing. It's got sealed bouyancy front and back, room for the fishbox and little esky and just needs a seat and tiedowns. I might just attend to that and report back ....

Well after searching the web for plans for a wherry or similar, I found nothing which met my requirements (ie something pretty, plans available, significant uptake), so I have been working on designing one myself. This is 45% scale model number three. Its loosely based on the Anapolis wherry but is shorter (storage issues), less beamy (realising it will probably never carry two people) and has more freeboard (probably want to take it onto lower Hawkesbury on a quiet day). This prototype has a very crudely done interior fitout in the same style as the A. w. which is held in place with hot melt glue. I will be modifying it as I want it specialised for sliding seat and with ultra-waterproof storage for my camera gear. The hull is suitably fair, though in this photo it is distorted by the crude job done with the gunwhale.

I cant really fault the hull though that might be just my inexperience talking. One more 45% scale model to iron out a couple of nits, then a life size prototype and some on-water tests, then I'll decide whether to build it or not.

Any comments welcome, though I realise not much can be seen from these photos.

cheers
Arron