Many people continue think that the Marinaut is a flat bottom boat, despite what Les Lampman had stated a few month's ago. Looking at pictures is not really going to help anyone. I think what leads people to this conclusion is not seeing the line drawings. So I went to Dave's Tolland Marine website, made copies, and posted them in the below album. One can clearly see that this is not a flat bottom boat.
Marinaut 215 Design
- Thread starter C-Nile
- Start date
We have the 2nd generation toland boats a 23 cape cruiser venture as they were called by cape cruiser before c-dory took them over and named them 23 venture's . When looking at the stern of our boat we have about a 6 degree deadrise pretty flat compared to other boat lines most range from 15-21 degree from deck boats to runabouts .There are others that can reach 24 1/2 degree but that would not be a cruising boat
With the Toland boats one must lower the nose (front) of the boat with engine trim( perma trim) or trim tabs or have a hook built into the boat (not recomended) . With that said your drawings clearly show a deeper vee front for cutting the waves . By using the front deeper vee and keeping the whole boat in the water the ride is usually very good .With the deeper vees one can raise the front of the boat and ride on the last 1/2 of the boat going faster and not taking a beating like searays go fast boats .These boats need much bigger engines more gas and when it really gets sloppy these same deep vee boats must slow down to displacement speeds .When we go out in the gulf of Mexico and it is a confused sea 3-4 ft waves we must use trim tabs down and engine trimmed down then our Toland boats ride with the best of them . I can usually keep up with most of our boat club by keeping speed down to 18-20 knots
With the Toland boats one must lower the nose (front) of the boat with engine trim( perma trim) or trim tabs or have a hook built into the boat (not recomended) . With that said your drawings clearly show a deeper vee front for cutting the waves . By using the front deeper vee and keeping the whole boat in the water the ride is usually very good .With the deeper vees one can raise the front of the boat and ride on the last 1/2 of the boat going faster and not taking a beating like searays go fast boats .These boats need much bigger engines more gas and when it really gets sloppy these same deep vee boats must slow down to displacement speeds .When we go out in the gulf of Mexico and it is a confused sea 3-4 ft waves we must use trim tabs down and engine trimmed down then our Toland boats ride with the best of them . I can usually keep up with most of our boat club by keeping speed down to 18-20 knots
jennykatz":32b40at8 said:
Your Cape Cruiser Venture 23' is a beautiful boat; we were on the My Lee when we were in the PNW. On Dave's website, he lists his Marinaut (it is heavier due to the way it was constructed) at 2,200 pounds. The new design is significantly under 2,000 pounds. It must be a great asset to have an extra 1,000 pounds of weight and an extra 1.5 feet in length when conditions get rough, because we don't have anywhere near that performance in head or confused seas of that significant wave height. That's why we have come to avoid those conditions. In your cruising grounds, in my opinion, your boat is better suited for the surprise thunderstorms and big fetch of the Gulf. When those sometimes unavoidable conditions occur, we would prefer being in your boat than ours. Our boat, on the other hand, is ideally suited for our NE protected waters. We do most of our cruising within a 25 mile radius of our home port, and when we cross the Sound, we only have to contend with rough conditions for as little as 7 miles. The ample usable space, shorter length, and high efficiency (4.7 mpg) of the Marinaut help to keep our operating costs down over the course of the year. Length and efficiency matters. An extra two feet would add $500 per year to our home port marina costs, $150 to transient overnight charges, and our annual fuel costs would increase by $500. Yet with respect to usable space, the differences between our two boats is insignificant.
Rich
Rich
Les Lampman wrote in his Facebook account on October 31, 2012: "I thought I'd share this photo again. In viewing the boat on the trailer, and especially viewing it from the stern, folks think the Marinaut 215 is a "flat bottom" boat. That just isn't the case. There's a lot of "V" forward and that flares out to a moderate "V" that runs about 75% the length of the bottom; the stern flattens out to support the weight of a modern 4-stroke engine and to allow for low planning speeds. It's still gives a very nice ride in rougher conditions."
So I included his picture, with pictures of basic hull shapes, in my line drawings photo folder to contrast the Marinaut with basic planing hull shapes. As you can see, she is of such a sophisticated design that it is hard to nail her down. She is unique. And she is actually closer to a modified V design then one would think. She needs to have her bow kept down in order to take waves like a modified, or even deep-V. Where she runs into difficulty in moving more than 4 knots is in HEAD or CONFUSED seas with significant wave height of 3.5 feet or greater, because we can't run fast enough for the trim tabs and engine trim to keep the bow down.
Les is correct in saying that she gives a nice ride in rougher conditions. I'm being honest with the group in letting people know of its limitations.
So I included his picture, with pictures of basic hull shapes, in my line drawings photo folder to contrast the Marinaut with basic planing hull shapes. As you can see, she is of such a sophisticated design that it is hard to nail her down. She is unique. And she is actually closer to a modified V design then one would think. She needs to have her bow kept down in order to take waves like a modified, or even deep-V. Where she runs into difficulty in moving more than 4 knots is in HEAD or CONFUSED seas with significant wave height of 3.5 feet or greater, because we can't run fast enough for the trim tabs and engine trim to keep the bow down.
Les is correct in saying that she gives a nice ride in rougher conditions. I'm being honest with the group in letting people know of its limitations.
Home Features Construction Arrangement Options Pricing Build it Your Way History Photos & Videos FAQ Contact us
Here's from the Marinaut Home Page. The sharp entry and flat run aft are designed in features. It's a great boat. Lots of cool ideas. The more vee a boat has means the more power required. I don't know who did the web page but they think it's pretty flat. There is good vee forward much like the cd 22 etc then flatter as we move back for low powered planing.
George
Start copy
There are two kinds of features we want to tell you about: features built into the boat and features we've added.
Built in features are things like:
- One piece hand laid vinylester foam cored hull/cabin for strength and no water intrusion
- Sharp entry to handle running into chop
- Nice flat run aft for easy planning and economy (due to low horsepower requirement)
- One piece molded sole (the whole "floor" from transom to bow) for rigidity and to avoid leaks into the hull
- Deep motorwell with full height forward splash panel which keeps the water out of the boat
- Large flat cockpit deck for secure footing, space to relax or fish (or crab or shrimp), and space for a cooler and chairs
- Wide cockpit side decks for security, downrigger mounting, and comfortable seating surfaces
- Large storage area under rear deck (around motorwell)
- Forward slanting front windows which reduces glare from instrument panel and dash, provides more overhead space, and gives a feeling of a larger space.
- Crowned cabin top and trunk cabin deck to shed water
- Flat surface on cabin top for ease of electronics installation and/or dinghy storage
- Excellent access foward with nice side decks and good non-skid
- Removable rear bulkhead so you have your choice of hard back, soft back, or open back cabin
Added features are things like:
- High quality Motion Windows (most with screens) with tinting (forward windows are non-tinted) and mechanically fastened pulls
End copy
Here's from the Marinaut Home Page. The sharp entry and flat run aft are designed in features. It's a great boat. Lots of cool ideas. The more vee a boat has means the more power required. I don't know who did the web page but they think it's pretty flat. There is good vee forward much like the cd 22 etc then flatter as we move back for low powered planing.
George
Start copy
There are two kinds of features we want to tell you about: features built into the boat and features we've added.
Built in features are things like:
- One piece hand laid vinylester foam cored hull/cabin for strength and no water intrusion
- Sharp entry to handle running into chop
- Nice flat run aft for easy planning and economy (due to low horsepower requirement)
- One piece molded sole (the whole "floor" from transom to bow) for rigidity and to avoid leaks into the hull
- Deep motorwell with full height forward splash panel which keeps the water out of the boat
- Large flat cockpit deck for secure footing, space to relax or fish (or crab or shrimp), and space for a cooler and chairs
- Wide cockpit side decks for security, downrigger mounting, and comfortable seating surfaces
- Large storage area under rear deck (around motorwell)
- Forward slanting front windows which reduces glare from instrument panel and dash, provides more overhead space, and gives a feeling of a larger space.
- Crowned cabin top and trunk cabin deck to shed water
- Flat surface on cabin top for ease of electronics installation and/or dinghy storage
- Excellent access foward with nice side decks and good non-skid
- Removable rear bulkhead so you have your choice of hard back, soft back, or open back cabin
Added features are things like:
- High quality Motion Windows (most with screens) with tinting (forward windows are non-tinted) and mechanically fastened pulls
End copy
For comparison, "deep-V" hulls typically have dead rise at the transom of around 24 degrees while typical multi-purpose V-hulls are more like 15 degrees. So, by comparison, a C-Dory, a Venture/Cape Cruiser or a Marinaut are all relatively "flat" and all have the same problems AND benefits of this relatively flat hull.
I'm incredulous that some of you examined the line drawings, read Les Lampman's statement, and still think that the Marinaut 215 hull is flat. Please don't get offended by this statement, but you are looking at this with black vs. white logic. While our technological society is based upon binary code, binary thinking is not a valid way to look at the Marinaut. I admit that she has very little deadrise at the stern, but at her bow and extending well toward the center of the boat is a pronounced V. So what is it -- flat or a modified-V? I think everyone is missing the obvious fact that when her bow is held down in the water, she very much acts like a modified-V configuration, and as you would expect, in this attitude, she consumes a lot of horsepower while slicing through waves 3 feet or less (or even more -- it all depends...) like a hot knife through butter. However, when with the bow trimmed properly to promote the most efficient trim angle for planing, she is mostly planing on the last quarter of the hull at the stern, and because that portion of the hull is relatively flat with very little dead rise, she is extremely efficient, needing very little horsepower.
I stated this in the C-Dory forum: I don't exaggerate. She gets 4.7 MPG at around 20 knots (approx. 3500 RPM) in varied conditions. She probably is one of the most efficient boats on the market for her size, and has to be Ben Toland's most brilliant hull design to date.
To those of you who think the boat is flat, take another closer look at the line drawings and particularly Les Lampman's photo of the underside of one of his Marinauts. Keep an open mind. Don't think in terms of all or nothing, but rather think in terms of its dual nature.
Rich
I stated this in the C-Dory forum: I don't exaggerate. She gets 4.7 MPG at around 20 knots (approx. 3500 RPM) in varied conditions. She probably is one of the most efficient boats on the market for her size, and has to be Ben Toland's most brilliant hull design to date.
To those of you who think the boat is flat, take another closer look at the line drawings and particularly Les Lampman's photo of the underside of one of his Marinauts. Keep an open mind. Don't think in terms of all or nothing, but rather think in terms of its dual nature.
Rich
Hi Rich. The definition of "what it is" may be best left to the designer and marketers. To those of us who have built a few boats, I for one would tend toward calling it "flat". Just like the C dory and Venture, and Cape Cruiser all 4 boats have a vee'd bow and some "twist". Many panel style boats like Devlin's stitch and glue use similar shapes. This was figured out pretty early on that some vee forward was necessary or at plane in chop you'd pound the crew and boat too much. But some twist and a bit of vee doesn't make a modified vee hull. You'll see in 2007 history of the Marinaut a couple pictures that scream flat aft and twist forward. But moderate vee it a ain't. You need more like 10-12 degrees for moderate carried right aft. Load carrying boats need a flattish run. Deep vee and mod vee at rest are rocky, uncomfortable boats. They want power and speed Hence these 4 great boats, which aren't much different underwater have been developed.
Just my view.
George
Just my view.
George
Bob, George, Et. Al.:
The question of whether or not a hull is flat or a modified-V should not be left up to the designer, or to beliefs, but rather be defined in a common body of knowledge for this field of study. I can't find that information anywhere. I would love for someone to provide me with an empirical reason why we should categorize the Marinaut's hull as flat, but thus far, there has only been conjecture and subjective opinions.
So what does the word flat mean? The definition of "flat" according to Bing online dictionary is "level and horizontal, without any slope." 3 degrees of deadrise at the stern is not flat by any objective way one looks at it. What probably would be more appropriate would be to call her design a low deadrise modified-V.
This is not a question of who is right or wrong, because frankly, we all are making good arguments. It really has me frustrated that we can't come up with a consensus. And incidentally, the CD 22 has the same issue. It may have a little less deadrise as Bob stated, but it is similar in many ways to the Marinaut. Unless someone actually knows what her hull form is, I suggest we table it's categorization until one of us in the group can find the answer.
Rich
The question of whether or not a hull is flat or a modified-V should not be left up to the designer, or to beliefs, but rather be defined in a common body of knowledge for this field of study. I can't find that information anywhere. I would love for someone to provide me with an empirical reason why we should categorize the Marinaut's hull as flat, but thus far, there has only been conjecture and subjective opinions.
So what does the word flat mean? The definition of "flat" according to Bing online dictionary is "level and horizontal, without any slope." 3 degrees of deadrise at the stern is not flat by any objective way one looks at it. What probably would be more appropriate would be to call her design a low deadrise modified-V.
This is not a question of who is right or wrong, because frankly, we all are making good arguments. It really has me frustrated that we can't come up with a consensus. And incidentally, the CD 22 has the same issue. It may have a little less deadrise as Bob stated, but it is similar in many ways to the Marinaut. Unless someone actually knows what her hull form is, I suggest we table it's categorization until one of us in the group can find the answer.
Rich
Hi Rich that's one of the great things about boats. If there was one formula that worked boats would look alike. Great designers and builders are mostly artists who work with angles and curves. Some have it and others don't. Toland has it. Bill Garden, Ray Hunt, Ted Hood, William Fife, Bob Perry, Phil Bolger, Dynamite Payson, Rhodes, Hand and many others had it. George Calkins Bartenders definitely had it The hulls work for the desired duty. Bad boats don't last. The planes and curves especially sheer lines are moveable according to desire and fancy sometimes. The angle of the chine makes a wet boat or a dry boat at times Ask a Ranger owner about how much spray his Ranger tug 25 throws. The spray knocker is too small or wrong angle. Great boat, just a bit spray tosser
some boats are major wins. Bolger's light dory design is suitable for hanging as art in a large space. And it's made of flat panels! The curves Bill Garden got out of wood are amazing. Dynamite Payson built small gorgeous ordinary boats. Yards like Gammon and Benjamin and others to this day do not draw their designs. They carve them in wood first. Only when satisfied....then the lines are taken off. It will be interesting if Mr Toland and Les could weigh in with some of their opinion on what was done. As we know your boat works great and is good looking. There's the answer. Break through designs are rare. George
some boats are major wins. Bolger's light dory design is suitable for hanging as art in a large space. And it's made of flat panels! The curves Bill Garden got out of wood are amazing. Dynamite Payson built small gorgeous ordinary boats. Yards like Gammon and Benjamin and others to this day do not draw their designs. They carve them in wood first. Only when satisfied....then the lines are taken off. It will be interesting if Mr Toland and Les could weigh in with some of their opinion on what was done. As we know your boat works great and is good looking. There's the answer. Break through designs are rare. George
Well, this line of thought is interesting to me. So, I opened up my Chapman's 66th edition to see what it had to say about the subject.
All of these quotes came directly out of Chapter 1: Nautical Terms. So, it seems that even those 'in-the-know' about such matters have a hard time defining bottom types, particularly when they are of compound or varying design.
How about describing the Marinaut hull as a Complex Variable-Deadrise Planing Hull? Of course... I'm not sure anybody would know what that meant. :crook
All of these quotes came directly out of Chapter 1: Nautical Terms. So, it seems that even those 'in-the-know' about such matters have a hard time defining bottom types, particularly when they are of compound or varying design.
How about describing the Marinaut hull as a Complex Variable-Deadrise Planing Hull? Of course... I'm not sure anybody would know what that meant. :crook
ghone":ggsyuf1d said:
You are right, George, on all points. I have been thinking empirically, when designing boats and its end result is as much art as it is hydrodynamics. And ultimately you are correct: a rigid body of knowledge would severely constrain creativity. Perhaps there is no right answer, and that is a good thing.
We do have a consensus after all!
Rich
It's been four years, and people continue to be fascinated by our boat when we visit marinas. There are basically two people who make comments: 1) the bigger is better crowd, and 2) those people who really understand boats. As to the former, it seems the most prevalent comment is, "what a cute, little boat!" These people are surprised when we either show or explain to them how much space is available in the Marinaut. As to the latter, they appreciate the rugged design, sharp deadrise in the bow, and realize that it is a very seaworthy and well-equipped boat. I have said this before and it bears restating: bigger is not better -- only bigger, as was stated in The Small Boat Journal. Having a smaller boat that is easy to handle by one person, and which is easily trailerable is a tremendous advantage. Not having cabin space restricted by the high degree of deadrise in a deep-V boat, the Marinaut's very low dead rise hull allows for a very large interior space comparable to boats of much larger size. There are nooks, cranny's, draws, shelves and cabinets everywhere to store our stuff that makes cruising so pleasant. The nice thing about the Marinaut's interior, as it is for C-Dory's, is the ample windows affording a view to the outside, as opposed to sitting in the hull of a large, deep-V production boat with tiny windows and poor circulation.
I don't know what it is about the Northeast, but pilothouse cruiser boats are not popular here, with the exception of the Parker's, which are fine fishing boats, but can't hold a candle to the Marinaut and C-Dory's in cruising comfort and accommodations. We do see a lot of trawlers in the Notheast -- many Ranger and Nordic Tugs with an occasional Rosoborough, which are wonderful alternatives, but at a significantly higher price. Ironically, our boat, due to its color scheme, is occasionally mistakenly categorized as a Ranger Tug by those not familiar with its design.
It has been four seasons now we have owned our boat, and we continue to feel that the design and performance of this boat is well suited for our needs, and we don't see anything that will change our mind save for a sudden turn of our health that would preclude us from enjoying boating.
Rich
I don't know what it is about the Northeast, but pilothouse cruiser boats are not popular here, with the exception of the Parker's, which are fine fishing boats, but can't hold a candle to the Marinaut and C-Dory's in cruising comfort and accommodations. We do see a lot of trawlers in the Notheast -- many Ranger and Nordic Tugs with an occasional Rosoborough, which are wonderful alternatives, but at a significantly higher price. Ironically, our boat, due to its color scheme, is occasionally mistakenly categorized as a Ranger Tug by those not familiar with its design.
It has been four seasons now we have owned our boat, and we continue to feel that the design and performance of this boat is well suited for our needs, and we don't see anything that will change our mind save for a sudden turn of our health that would preclude us from enjoying boating.
Rich
Most of your comments about the utility of your Marinaut are the same reasons that we bought our CD22. Athough from a distance it does look small and "cute", most people who come aboard have been surprised by the usable interior room and amount of furnishings.
It is nice to sit in the cabin and be able to see all around through the relatively large windows as opposed to being in a cave with slits like most common cruisers.
However, it would be nice if the CD22 had a bit more headroom in the berth area.
It is nice to sit in the cabin and be able to see all around through the relatively large windows as opposed to being in a cave with slits like most common cruisers.
However, it would be nice if the CD22 had a bit more headroom in the berth area.
ssobol":2ohvndsd said:
The C-Dory 22 is a beautiful boat as well, and you have good reason to be proud of her. I agree with you that both boats have a great deal in common with respect to interior design, function and exterior beauty. With respect to the berth, my wife and I are rather large people, and we would be uncomfortable in a standard CD berth. Ironically, we used to enjoy resting in our open CD 16 berth in a head towards the bow position. The Marinaut was perfect for us. We both sleep with our heads toward the bow in comfort. Initially, we used both dinette cushions to extend the berth, but now we only use the back cushion and place it to the extreme port side, allowing easier access into the berth from the middle. Some C-Brats have knocked out their bulkheads in their CD 22's. If the Marinaut was not available, we would have gotten a CD 22, and knocked out the bulkhead. My suggestion is to contact those C-Brats who have made this change in their CD 22's to see if it is feasible for you. It is amazing how much bigger the berth feels when there is no bulkhead in place.
We like the enclosed berth. This keeps the berth more separate from the cabin and makes it quite cozy. While we have the reversible forward dinette seat we always keep it in the aft facing position. Cutting the berth open would not make much difference because of the seat. I just wish the berth had more head room so it would be possible to sit up in other places than the center area (i.e. to be able to sit up in bed and read, be able to get up with less chance of hitting one's head).