Dougherty Era - Moderated Discussion Areas

  ContinuousWave
  Whaler
  Moderated Discussion Areas
  ContinuousWave: Post-Classic Whalers
  Dougherty Era

search | FAQ | profile | register | author help

Author Topic:   Dougherty Era

RFK posted 05-17-2001 06:38 AM ET (US)
I read a posting mentioning Robert Dougherty, and his leadership of BW under Reebok.I understand he started EdgeWater Boats, after his BW stint. Out of curiosity I looked at the EdgeWater model lineup and lo and behold their 155 CC hull is a dead ringer for my BW 16SL hull,which Dougherty introduced in '91. I was pleased to see that the hull design was seen as competitive and worth continuing.
It seems the 16SL was overbuilt for its niche, and was not competitive because of its price. The boat was $12000 in '91, and that for a 15'6" product. It is amazing how these things occur.
where2 posted 05-18-2001 10:56 AM ET (US)
If I ever had to buy another boat, it would probably be an Edgewater. My father has a '97 20' CC Edgewater with a 200Hp yahmaha. They seem to hold their value as well or better than a BW. They're built using alot of stuff pioneered during Dougherty's days at BW, but further refined. Nice boats with every bit as loyal a following as the die-hard BW fans. The Edgewater company sends out literature every year on the annual get together for owners.
"Where2"?
RFK posted 05-20-2001 07:56 AM ET (US)
Thank you, Where2, I appreciate your comments. It appears that one way or another Dick Fisher's ideas will keep moving on.
Dick K
lhg posted 05-23-2001 12:46 PM ET (US)
RFK - I think your information on the "Reebock" ownership era of Whaler is incorrect, or the post you are referring to might have been incorrect.
I believe Dougherty never designed Whalers under the Reebock ownership. He had left by then (late '89 I think), and they brought in Peter VanLanker, previously of Black Watch boats, to function as Chief Designer. The 16SL was one of Van Lancker's boats. I believe the last Whaler designed by Dougherty was the 1991 17 Outrage, but don't hold me to that. If you compare the 1991-95 17 Outrage to the 16 SL, you'll see they are by different designers.
Dougherty started the "Marlin" boat line immediately on leaving BW, but the name was soon changed to "Edgewater". There was another line of "Marlin" boats, in
the 35' range, and there might have been a trademark conflict. Considering BW is also in the town of Edgewater FL, choice of the Edgewater name was quite quite clever marketing.
I have been told that Dougherty has now sold Edgewater, and supposedly has another new venture underway.
I recently had a chance to inspect an Edgewater 20, and it looks more like a Whaler than a new Whaler! The fellow that owned it said it was a nice boat, but had little knowledge of the Classic Outrages.
RFK posted 05-23-2001 04:56 PM ET (US)
Ihg,
Thank you. You are accurate. I went back to some articles written in '91 and they credit Van Lancker with the design.
The history you give on Dougherty is interesting. The resemblance between Edgewater's 155CC and the 16SL hull is remarkable.
Dick K.
whalernut posted 05-24-2001 08:26 PM ET (US)
Larry, those 18-20 Edgewaters look alot like the Classic Outrages, and I hope Daugherty goes on to make more Classic designs! I do wonder why he sold Edgewater, and I already see design changes on some of the new Edgewater. Regards-Jack Graner.
boatdesigner posted 05-31-2001 03:08 PM ET (US)
Bob's Edgewaters have similar parabolic deadrise hulls as his Boston Whalers did, but due to costs and patent restrictions are built with a fiberglass grid system which is foam filled, rather than the Whaler hull/liner system which is injected with foam while the parts are in their molds. Bob is still on the board at Edgewater but has his own thriving business.
Ed Stone posted 06-03-2001 10:55 PM ET (US)
Hey boatdesigner,
Whats your opinion on the current accutrac
hulls?I've noticed the v-hull is not very
sharp compared to the competions hulls.
What is Dougherty building other than
Edgewater boats?
Ed Stone
boatdesigner posted 06-04-2001 09:14 AM ET (US)
Ed,
Bob patented a process he calls RAM CAP in which he builds two halves of a part in separate molds. Think of them as the shells of a clam. Molded foam and reinforements are placed inside the frp molds which are mated with the parts still wet. Then a vacuum is pulled on the molds until cured to bond the whole system.
The process won the IMTEC innovation award the last year the show was held. He uses Ram Cap to build the Edgewater 140, hard tops, arches and other large boat parts for various companies.
As concerns the accutrac hulls, I feel they follow established rules for the design of v-hull with one exception. Whaler is obliged to perpetuate the "Whaler Smirk" chine line in new models which, I feel, does nothing for performance but does distinguish the brand from a distance.
B Bear posted 06-04-2001 09:28 AM ET (US)
I have to agree that the reverse chine does nothing for performace. What it does do is deflect the bow wake spray down and away providing a dry ride. That has been my experience with it as well as other owners and guests that have riden in my boat. This is also what has been relayed to me by the dealer.
Bear
Dan posted 06-04-2001 11:02 AM ET (US)
I've seen quite a few Edgewater boats. The owners all say, "Edgewaters are better than Whalers." But when you own a Whaler, you recognize wishful thinking when you hear it. I owned a Montauk, and currently own a newish 17 Outrage. Each boat is amazing. The fit, the finish, the functionality -- all top rate. Someday, I hope to own a 25 classic Outrage with twin outboards on a Whaler drive bracket. As for Edgewater -- they aren't even my second choice of boat manufacturer -- I'd rather have a Mako.
lhg posted 06-04-2001 02:55 PM ET (US)
I'm not a Marine Architect, and I've had little experience in the "Accutrac" Outrage and Dauntless models, but I can say that the broad "smirk" bow design of the Classic Whalers and Outrages 18-25, adds a LOT to the performance of the hull. I am continually impressed how these boats keep their nose high in heavy seas, with the broad bow design and it's smirk making the difference, and giving an incredible dry ride besides. I've been in some deeper V "offshore fishing boats", and have seen them go THROUGH the waves rather than over them, getting soaked at the same time!
The "smirk" on the newer models is just an affectation, as mentioned, but on the older models it's an integral part of the hull design.
Dan posted 06-04-2001 07:18 PM ET (US)
My post-classic Whaler's smirk is not an affectation, it's just happy to be among the finest boats ever built -- Whaler. (either that or it's laughing at other boats, like Edgewaters - lol)
Ed Stone posted 06-04-2001 10:46 PM ET (US)
I'm very pleased with the dry ride of my
23 Outrage.Until this past week I could count
on one hand how many times I had gotten wet
on the 23.
We were returning from a offshore fishing
trip some 30 miles or so out in the gulf.
There was some small clouds building between
us and the mainland.The wind was coming out
of the southwest so it was fairly nice ride.
I believe the wind was blowing close
to 15kts.We were cruising about 30 to 35mph.
As we approached shore the wind turned and
started coming out of the NW.The clouds had
become dark,dark blue almost black.With the
wind hitting us on the port side the sea
spray had that side of me wet.The friend on
my right was laughing as he was hiding
behind the center console.Our buddy holding
on behind the leaning post was soaked.
As the wind started blowing all the tops
off the waves and rain began coming down in
buckets it wasn't long before we were all
soaked to the bone.
Other than getting soaked in my dry riding
23 it performed flawless.
Not all lost we did have some nice grouper
in the fishbox.
All wet in Fl.!
Ed Stone
B Bear posted 06-04-2001 11:24 PM ET (US)
lhg I have a deep respect for your knowledge and experience yet I am dissapointed that you have made that conclusion without the experience required to determine the value and function of the reverse chine on the newer whalers.
I disagree with statement that it is just an affectation, the reverse chine on the accutrack is functional and not for show. It serves the same purpose as it always have, the chine is in fact is carried from the broad bow all the way through to the stern so it is intergal with the hull. It has proven itself in the past and today when riding through a chop.If this is considered part of the hull's performance, then I was wrong in my earlier post. Form follows function and it seems this puts an end to the sentiment that the new whalers look like all other boats.
Of course it does not help when it is raining and your going so fast the drops seem to be falling horzontally.
Bear
lhg posted 06-05-2001 01:13 AM ET (US)
Bear, I was only responding to the comment by "boatdesigner" above. He seems, incidentally, to know more about Whalers than he is letting on!
I would agree that the new Whalers have the anti-spray chines on them, as do most boats nowadays. I was not considering that feature a "performance" characteristic, as "boatdesigner" was also not doing. The new boats now tend to have more conventional "pointy" bows, and do not have the distinct "spray deflecting" lip of the older hulls and broader shape to lift the hull over an oncoming wave. That I do consider a performance feature. The overall bow design of the new ones is not the same as the "squarer" older ones. Most of the new Whaler "smirk" look is purely cosmetic, except for the spray rails, which are also used to make a deeper V boat a little more laterally stable.
See the cetacea section on the 23 Walkaround, first introduced in 1991 without a smirk. Compare it to the 24 Outrage, which is the same hull, but they did some cosmetic work on it in 1994 to add a minor smirk because people were not used to the plain looking hull. They were trying to re-capture the old Whaler look, without actually using a Dougherty hull. They're still trying to do this. But I am suspecting that changes may be in the works for yet another series of newer hull designs. We'll have to see. The newer 22 Dauntless has a different bow design from the earlier 14, 16 and 18 Dauntless models. It looks a little more traditional.
lhg posted 06-05-2001 01:34 AM ET (US)
I just took a close look at some of the newer hulls, and I think they do have a very substantial anti spray hull shape in the bow, maybe even more so than the classics.
Guess I need to look more carefully at the new shapes, or not visit this section! Sorry
for the mis-information.

Whaletosh posted 06-05-2001 09:10 AM ET (US)
Larry,
I think you should continue to visit this section of the forum. Your knowledge and input is invaluable. I based my Dauntless 14 purchase on some of your input. Without your input I would still be thinking about getting a Montauk or Outrage 18. Both of which would have been the wrong boat for me. It was through your input on the "offshore" capabilities that I was able to determine that I wasn't defining my needs well enough. I know that you probably think I wasn't listening to you, but in reality I was. I just came to the conclusion based on my own soul searching coupled with your input and the input of BigZ, Tsuriki BW. B Bear, and others that I needed the boat that I got. If I hadn't gone through this process I would have ended up with a boat that wasn't a good fit for me and my wife.
So please keep posting in this area. Perhaps what you might consider is going fo a good long ride in some of these post classics if the oppurtunity presents itself. Experience is the best way to make a judgement. Don't let the early Brunswick era Dauntless/Outrage/Cross Tackle designs be the only point of referrence. As you stated the Dauntless 22 is different than the 18s and 16s.
If you are ever in the West Michigan area let me know. You are welcome on my 14 anytime. I wouldn't object to ride on you 25 Outrage either. Specifically, I will be on vacation the last week of August and the first week of September. Most of the time fishing at St. Joe, maybe South Haven, Holland, or Grand Haven.
Sean.
B Bear posted 06-05-2001 10:36 PM ET (US)
lhg don't limit yourself on where you post, your input is important and I enjoy reading the perspective you bring into a thread. And most of all I feel you must be good soul to be able to see another's view point. Thank you for being a part of this forum.
Bear
By the way I believe the reverse chine on the new whalers is not as pronounced as with the classic hull design, maybe due to the higher freeboard.
boatdesigner posted 06-13-2001 11:13 AM ET (US)
This conversation seems to have run up on the rocks. Let's see if we can get something going.
Let me mention some things concerning terminology. Although terms vary from place to place, "reverse chine" usually refers to a design where the outboard edge of a chine is lower than the inboard edge. The obvious effect of this is to knock spray down and therefore out of the boat. The width of the chine also important for this purpose. Some newer Whalers have a very wide reverse chine forward. The challenge in this design is to know when enough is enough. Knock the spray down, but not all the way to the ocean floor. When the hull is knocking the water down, the water is pushing the boat up, which creates an uncomfortable ride.
On this page I've seen the term "reverse chine" used to describe what many call the "Whaler smirk". The smirk is the laid over lazy S shaped chine line. This feature, I believe, is for brand recognition and family resemblance.
One other tidbit of food for thought on something lgh mentioned. Imagine two boats running side by side in moderate seas. Boat A cuts through the waves. Boat B rides over the waves. Consider the path taken and the forces acting on the passengers. Boat A's path through the waves is a much straighter path and more comfortable. Would you agree?
triblet posted 06-13-2001 11:40 AM ET (US)
But B is probably getting better gas mileage
and will be more stable at rest. Everything
about boats is a tradeoff.
Chuck
lhg posted 06-13-2001 01:52 PM ET (US)
The experience I was referring to was in an OMC 26' Statos offshore center console fishing boat, with a pointed bow. Lets call that Boat A. Let's call my 25' BW Outrage boat B. If there is any crosswind blowing at all, you get soaked in Boat A. In 6' seas in Lake Michigan, which by definition would have 25 knot winds blowing, the deep v Stratos was a nightmare in stability and wetness. We had the bow go right thru several waves at 15 mph. This would never happen in my Whaler. Absolutely horrible, heavy boat (weighed 7500 lbs). No wonder they stopped making them.
Boatdesigner - your professional input here is appreciated. Since you are in Sarasota, do you work for Genmar/Wellcraft, or Chris Craft?
boatdesigner posted 06-13-2001 02:37 PM ET (US)
Now with Genmar.
Formerly Whaler
Formerly Edgewater
Formerly US Marine
Formerly............
Peter posted 06-13-2001 03:14 PM ET (US)
I think "comfort" must be defined in this debate.
Just a week ago I was returning to home port in 3 foot seas with 15-20mph cross wind from port in my 22 Revenge (Boat B). A 22 ft Grady-White Seafarer (Boat A) made the same approach returning to the same home port under the same conditions just several minutes later. All of the passengers in Boat B were dry as a bone. All of the passengers in Boat A looked like they took a shower with their clothes on. Is being bounced a little more (assuming that the Whaler bounces more on the same tack) but being totally dry or being bounced a little less but nearly soaked to the bone more comfortable? For me, I'll take dry with a little more bounce anyday.
Not only does my old Smirk show character, it keeps me dry. Thank you Smirk.
bigz posted 06-13-2001 03:17 PM ET (US)
Interesting topic actually thought this post had been answered and the thread rested, but I see we have moved on ---
Larry, "moderate seas" are not a 25 knot wind with 6' waves! :)

Hey buddy our 27's in the conditions you mentioned would pound the heck out of you at any decent speed and probably get wet to boot (actually happened out at the Charleston SC harbor entrance as we came across last year about this time (when that "little" storm was just starting to brew its wick-ness and then hit full bore around Memorial Day), the gust were approaching 35 knots and a steady breeze around 25 knots directly abeam, the seas thankfully were only in the 4 to 5 foot range though the frequency was in the area of 10 seconds or less and steep, the bow went under a couple of times -- we got pounded and wet, running at about 20 knots!

In speaking in general terms "Boatdesigner", since he didn't define specifically "deep V", is correct. Mr. Hunt proved this out with his deep V hulls time and time again. Still being modified and proven out today.

One forgets it was Dougherty who pushed the window from the original semi-trihull Whaler to the deep V and in the process the first 20 deep V produced in the late 70's had it's problems. As we know eventually the design was changed, subsequent "deep" modified V hulls in the Outrage and 27 were designed with the knowledge gained from this first deep V "mistake" (though BW did blow it with that tub,the 31 offshore). The newer hulls are just an evolution trying to incorporate some of the better features of the older designs coupled with the trade off for a more comfortable and easier handling ride.

Even the Edgewaters are nothing like the hulls of the older generations of Whalers.

I degrees, the fact remains as Chuck T so aptly pointed out their is always a trade off involved. I have driven and ridden in 13's, Montuaks, Outrages and 27's and frankly all in one sense or another leave something to be desired and I am sure that is the case with the newer Whalers and probably any and every boat on the market --- I believe the principle of form follows function, for the most part, still holds true in the design area. Some may execute it better than others.
I have been trying to get another ex-designer from Whaler to join in the forum so some ideas can be dispelled and others enlightened up on, so far no luck ( you hear me "T"). It is certainly nice to have input from professionals.

Tom
ledfoot posted 06-22-2001 11:23 AM ET (US)
Boatdesigner, do I know you; my name is Jeff Angeleri, I worked as a designer for Wellcraft in 1996 as an intern from Art Center- I worked for Rod Gerrard, with Greg Haldeman (now with Baja) and Mark Smith. I grew up in Sarasota (I'm now in Detroit designing Chevy trucks)
RFK posted 06-25-2001 02:17 PM ET (US)
Admitedly I started this discussion with mistaken facts, but it has turned out so rich. I wonder if Boatdesigner and Ledfoot would care to apply some of their thoughts to pictures in the Cetacea forum. The information you have shared on design is really interesting. It would be great to see applied to various models of Whalers.

Hop to:

Contact Us | RETURN to ContinuousWave Top Page

Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Freeware Version 2000
Purchase our Licensed Version- which adds many more features!
© Infopop Corporation (formerly Madrona Park, Inc.), 1998 - 2000.

Author	Topic: Dougherty Era
RFK	posted 05-17-2001 06:38 AM ET (US) I read a posting mentioning Robert Dougherty, and his leadership of BW under Reebok.I understand he started EdgeWater Boats, after his BW stint. Out of curiosity I looked at the EdgeWater model lineup and lo and behold their 155 CC hull is a dead ringer for my BW 16SL hull,which Dougherty introduced in '91. I was pleased to see that the hull design was seen as competitive and worth continuing. It seems the 16SL was overbuilt for its niche, and was not competitive because of its price. The boat was $12000 in '91, and that for a 15'6" product. It is amazing how these things occur.
where2	posted 05-18-2001 10:56 AM ET (US) If I ever had to buy another boat, it would probably be an Edgewater. My father has a '97 20' CC Edgewater with a 200Hp yahmaha. They seem to hold their value as well or better than a BW. They're built using alot of stuff pioneered during Dougherty's days at BW, but further refined. Nice boats with every bit as loyal a following as the die-hard BW fans. The Edgewater company sends out literature every year on the annual get together for owners. "Where2"?
RFK	posted 05-20-2001 07:56 AM ET (US) Thank you, Where2, I appreciate your comments. It appears that one way or another Dick Fisher's ideas will keep moving on. Dick K
lhg	posted 05-23-2001 12:46 PM ET (US) RFK - I think your information on the "Reebock" ownership era of Whaler is incorrect, or the post you are referring to might have been incorrect. I believe Dougherty never designed Whalers under the Reebock ownership. He had left by then (late '89 I think), and they brought in Peter VanLanker, previously of Black Watch boats, to function as Chief Designer. The 16SL was one of Van Lancker's boats. I believe the last Whaler designed by Dougherty was the 1991 17 Outrage, but don't hold me to that. If you compare the 1991-95 17 Outrage to the 16 SL, you'll see they are by different designers. Dougherty started the "Marlin" boat line immediately on leaving BW, but the name was soon changed to "Edgewater". There was another line of "Marlin" boats, in the 35' range, and there might have been a trademark conflict. Considering BW is also in the town of Edgewater FL, choice of the Edgewater name was quite quite clever marketing. I have been told that Dougherty has now sold Edgewater, and supposedly has another new venture underway. I recently had a chance to inspect an Edgewater 20, and it looks more like a Whaler than a new Whaler! The fellow that owned it said it was a nice boat, but had little knowledge of the Classic Outrages.
RFK	posted 05-23-2001 04:56 PM ET (US) Ihg, Thank you. You are accurate. I went back to some articles written in '91 and they credit Van Lancker with the design. The history you give on Dougherty is interesting. The resemblance between Edgewater's 155CC and the 16SL hull is remarkable. Dick K.
whalernut	posted 05-24-2001 08:26 PM ET (US) Larry, those 18-20 Edgewaters look alot like the Classic Outrages, and I hope Daugherty goes on to make more Classic designs! I do wonder why he sold Edgewater, and I already see design changes on some of the new Edgewater. Regards-Jack Graner.
boatdesigner	posted 05-31-2001 03:08 PM ET (US) Bob's Edgewaters have similar parabolic deadrise hulls as his Boston Whalers did, but due to costs and patent restrictions are built with a fiberglass grid system which is foam filled, rather than the Whaler hull/liner system which is injected with foam while the parts are in their molds. Bob is still on the board at Edgewater but has his own thriving business.
Ed Stone	posted 06-03-2001 10:55 PM ET (US) Hey boatdesigner, Whats your opinion on the current accutrac hulls?I've noticed the v-hull is not very sharp compared to the competions hulls. What is Dougherty building other than Edgewater boats? Ed Stone
boatdesigner	posted 06-04-2001 09:14 AM ET (US) Ed, Bob patented a process he calls RAM CAP in which he builds two halves of a part in separate molds. Think of them as the shells of a clam. Molded foam and reinforements are placed inside the frp molds which are mated with the parts still wet. Then a vacuum is pulled on the molds until cured to bond the whole system. The process won the IMTEC innovation award the last year the show was held. He uses Ram Cap to build the Edgewater 140, hard tops, arches and other large boat parts for various companies. As concerns the accutrac hulls, I feel they follow established rules for the design of v-hull with one exception. Whaler is obliged to perpetuate the "Whaler Smirk" chine line in new models which, I feel, does nothing for performance but does distinguish the brand from a distance.
B Bear	posted 06-04-2001 09:28 AM ET (US) I have to agree that the reverse chine does nothing for performace. What it does do is deflect the bow wake spray down and away providing a dry ride. That has been my experience with it as well as other owners and guests that have riden in my boat. This is also what has been relayed to me by the dealer. Bear
Dan	posted 06-04-2001 11:02 AM ET (US) I've seen quite a few Edgewater boats. The owners all say, "Edgewaters are better than Whalers." But when you own a Whaler, you recognize wishful thinking when you hear it. I owned a Montauk, and currently own a newish 17 Outrage. Each boat is amazing. The fit, the finish, the functionality -- all top rate. Someday, I hope to own a 25 classic Outrage with twin outboards on a Whaler drive bracket. As for Edgewater -- they aren't even my second choice of boat manufacturer -- I'd rather have a Mako.
lhg	posted 06-04-2001 02:55 PM ET (US) I'm not a Marine Architect, and I've had little experience in the "Accutrac" Outrage and Dauntless models, but I can say that the broad "smirk" bow design of the Classic Whalers and Outrages 18-25, adds a LOT to the performance of the hull. I am continually impressed how these boats keep their nose high in heavy seas, with the broad bow design and it's smirk making the difference, and giving an incredible dry ride besides. I've been in some deeper V "offshore fishing boats", and have seen them go THROUGH the waves rather than over them, getting soaked at the same time! The "smirk" on the newer models is just an affectation, as mentioned, but on the older models it's an integral part of the hull design.
Dan	posted 06-04-2001 07:18 PM ET (US) My post-classic Whaler's smirk is not an affectation, it's just happy to be among the finest boats ever built -- Whaler. (either that or it's laughing at other boats, like Edgewaters - lol)
Ed Stone	posted 06-04-2001 10:46 PM ET (US) I'm very pleased with the dry ride of my 23 Outrage.Until this past week I could count on one hand how many times I had gotten wet on the 23. We were returning from a offshore fishing trip some 30 miles or so out in the gulf. There was some small clouds building between us and the mainland.The wind was coming out of the southwest so it was fairly nice ride. I believe the wind was blowing close to 15kts.We were cruising about 30 to 35mph. As we approached shore the wind turned and started coming out of the NW.The clouds had become dark,dark blue almost black.With the wind hitting us on the port side the sea spray had that side of me wet.The friend on my right was laughing as he was hiding behind the center console.Our buddy holding on behind the leaning post was soaked. As the wind started blowing all the tops off the waves and rain began coming down in buckets it wasn't long before we were all soaked to the bone. Other than getting soaked in my dry riding 23 it performed flawless. Not all lost we did have some nice grouper in the fishbox. All wet in Fl.! Ed Stone
B Bear	posted 06-04-2001 11:24 PM ET (US) lhg I have a deep respect for your knowledge and experience yet I am dissapointed that you have made that conclusion without the experience required to determine the value and function of the reverse chine on the newer whalers. I disagree with statement that it is just an affectation, the reverse chine on the accutrack is functional and not for show. It serves the same purpose as it always have, the chine is in fact is carried from the broad bow all the way through to the stern so it is intergal with the hull. It has proven itself in the past and today when riding through a chop.If this is considered part of the hull's performance, then I was wrong in my earlier post. Form follows function and it seems this puts an end to the sentiment that the new whalers look like all other boats. Of course it does not help when it is raining and your going so fast the drops seem to be falling horzontally. Bear
lhg	posted 06-05-2001 01:13 AM ET (US) Bear, I was only responding to the comment by "boatdesigner" above. He seems, incidentally, to know more about Whalers than he is letting on! I would agree that the new Whalers have the anti-spray chines on them, as do most boats nowadays. I was not considering that feature a "performance" characteristic, as "boatdesigner" was also not doing. The new boats now tend to have more conventional "pointy" bows, and do not have the distinct "spray deflecting" lip of the older hulls and broader shape to lift the hull over an oncoming wave. That I do consider a performance feature. The overall bow design of the new ones is not the same as the "squarer" older ones. Most of the new Whaler "smirk" look is purely cosmetic, except for the spray rails, which are also used to make a deeper V boat a little more laterally stable. See the cetacea section on the 23 Walkaround, first introduced in 1991 without a smirk. Compare it to the 24 Outrage, which is the same hull, but they did some cosmetic work on it in 1994 to add a minor smirk because people were not used to the plain looking hull. They were trying to re-capture the old Whaler look, without actually using a Dougherty hull. They're still trying to do this. But I am suspecting that changes may be in the works for yet another series of newer hull designs. We'll have to see. The newer 22 Dauntless has a different bow design from the earlier 14, 16 and 18 Dauntless models. It looks a little more traditional.
lhg	posted 06-05-2001 01:34 AM ET (US) I just took a close look at some of the newer hulls, and I think they do have a very substantial anti spray hull shape in the bow, maybe even more so than the classics. Guess I need to look more carefully at the new shapes, or not visit this section! Sorry for the mis-information.
Whaletosh	posted 06-05-2001 09:10 AM ET (US) Larry, I think you should continue to visit this section of the forum. Your knowledge and input is invaluable. I based my Dauntless 14 purchase on some of your input. Without your input I would still be thinking about getting a Montauk or Outrage 18. Both of which would have been the wrong boat for me. It was through your input on the "offshore" capabilities that I was able to determine that I wasn't defining my needs well enough. I know that you probably think I wasn't listening to you, but in reality I was. I just came to the conclusion based on my own soul searching coupled with your input and the input of BigZ, Tsuriki BW. B Bear, and others that I needed the boat that I got. If I hadn't gone through this process I would have ended up with a boat that wasn't a good fit for me and my wife. So please keep posting in this area. Perhaps what you might consider is going fo a good long ride in some of these post classics if the oppurtunity presents itself. Experience is the best way to make a judgement. Don't let the early Brunswick era Dauntless/Outrage/Cross Tackle designs be the only point of referrence. As you stated the Dauntless 22 is different than the 18s and 16s. If you are ever in the West Michigan area let me know. You are welcome on my 14 anytime. I wouldn't object to ride on you 25 Outrage either. Specifically, I will be on vacation the last week of August and the first week of September. Most of the time fishing at St. Joe, maybe South Haven, Holland, or Grand Haven. Sean.
B Bear	posted 06-05-2001 10:36 PM ET (US) lhg don't limit yourself on where you post, your input is important and I enjoy reading the perspective you bring into a thread. And most of all I feel you must be good soul to be able to see another's view point. Thank you for being a part of this forum. Bear By the way I believe the reverse chine on the new whalers is not as pronounced as with the classic hull design, maybe due to the higher freeboard.
boatdesigner	posted 06-13-2001 11:13 AM ET (US) This conversation seems to have run up on the rocks. Let's see if we can get something going. Let me mention some things concerning terminology. Although terms vary from place to place, "reverse chine" usually refers to a design where the outboard edge of a chine is lower than the inboard edge. The obvious effect of this is to knock spray down and therefore out of the boat. The width of the chine also important for this purpose. Some newer Whalers have a very wide reverse chine forward. The challenge in this design is to know when enough is enough. Knock the spray down, but not all the way to the ocean floor. When the hull is knocking the water down, the water is pushing the boat up, which creates an uncomfortable ride. On this page I've seen the term "reverse chine" used to describe what many call the "Whaler smirk". The smirk is the laid over lazy S shaped chine line. This feature, I believe, is for brand recognition and family resemblance. One other tidbit of food for thought on something lgh mentioned. Imagine two boats running side by side in moderate seas. Boat A cuts through the waves. Boat B rides over the waves. Consider the path taken and the forces acting on the passengers. Boat A's path through the waves is a much straighter path and more comfortable. Would you agree?
triblet	posted 06-13-2001 11:40 AM ET (US) But B is probably getting better gas mileage and will be more stable at rest. Everything about boats is a tradeoff. Chuck
lhg	posted 06-13-2001 01:52 PM ET (US) The experience I was referring to was in an OMC 26' Statos offshore center console fishing boat, with a pointed bow. Lets call that Boat A. Let's call my 25' BW Outrage boat B. If there is any crosswind blowing at all, you get soaked in Boat A. In 6' seas in Lake Michigan, which by definition would have 25 knot winds blowing, the deep v Stratos was a nightmare in stability and wetness. We had the bow go right thru several waves at 15 mph. This would never happen in my Whaler. Absolutely horrible, heavy boat (weighed 7500 lbs). No wonder they stopped making them. Boatdesigner - your professional input here is appreciated. Since you are in Sarasota, do you work for Genmar/Wellcraft, or Chris Craft?
boatdesigner	posted 06-13-2001 02:37 PM ET (US) Now with Genmar. Formerly Whaler Formerly Edgewater Formerly US Marine Formerly............
Peter	posted 06-13-2001 03:14 PM ET (US) I think "comfort" must be defined in this debate. Just a week ago I was returning to home port in 3 foot seas with 15-20mph cross wind from port in my 22 Revenge (Boat B). A 22 ft Grady-White Seafarer (Boat A) made the same approach returning to the same home port under the same conditions just several minutes later. All of the passengers in Boat B were dry as a bone. All of the passengers in Boat A looked like they took a shower with their clothes on. Is being bounced a little more (assuming that the Whaler bounces more on the same tack) but being totally dry or being bounced a little less but nearly soaked to the bone more comfortable? For me, I'll take dry with a little more bounce anyday. Not only does my old Smirk show character, it keeps me dry. Thank you Smirk.
bigz	posted 06-13-2001 03:17 PM ET (US) Interesting topic actually thought this post had been answered and the thread rested, but I see we have moved on --- Larry, "moderate seas" are not a 25 knot wind with 6' waves! :) Hey buddy our 27's in the conditions you mentioned would pound the heck out of you at any decent speed and probably get wet to boot (actually happened out at the Charleston SC harbor entrance as we came across last year about this time (when that "little" storm was just starting to brew its wick-ness and then hit full bore around Memorial Day), the gust were approaching 35 knots and a steady breeze around 25 knots directly abeam, the seas thankfully were only in the 4 to 5 foot range though the frequency was in the area of 10 seconds or less and steep, the bow went under a couple of times -- we got pounded and wet, running at about 20 knots! In speaking in general terms "Boatdesigner", since he didn't define specifically "deep V", is correct. Mr. Hunt proved this out with his deep V hulls time and time again. Still being modified and proven out today. One forgets it was Dougherty who pushed the window from the original semi-trihull Whaler to the deep V and in the process the first 20 deep V produced in the late 70's had it's problems. As we know eventually the design was changed, subsequent "deep" modified V hulls in the Outrage and 27 were designed with the knowledge gained from this first deep V "mistake" (though BW did blow it with that tub,the 31 offshore). The newer hulls are just an evolution trying to incorporate some of the better features of the older designs coupled with the trade off for a more comfortable and easier handling ride. Even the Edgewaters are nothing like the hulls of the older generations of Whalers. I degrees, the fact remains as Chuck T so aptly pointed out their is always a trade off involved. I have driven and ridden in 13's, Montuaks, Outrages and 27's and frankly all in one sense or another leave something to be desired and I am sure that is the case with the newer Whalers and probably any and every boat on the market --- I believe the principle of form follows function, for the most part, still holds true in the design area. Some may execute it better than others. I have been trying to get another ex-designer from Whaler to join in the forum so some ideas can be dispelled and others enlightened up on, so far no luck ( you hear me "T"). It is certainly nice to have input from professionals. Tom
ledfoot	posted 06-22-2001 11:23 AM ET (US) Boatdesigner, do I know you; my name is Jeff Angeleri, I worked as a designer for Wellcraft in 1996 as an intern from Art Center- I worked for Rod Gerrard, with Greg Haldeman (now with Baja) and Mark Smith. I grew up in Sarasota (I'm now in Detroit designing Chevy trucks)
RFK	posted 06-25-2001 02:17 PM ET (US) Admitedly I started this discussion with mistaken facts, but it has turned out so rich. I wonder if Boatdesigner and Ledfoot would care to apply some of their thoughts to pictures in the Cetacea forum. The information you have shared on design is really interesting. It would be great to see applied to various models of Whalers.