Free Credit Report

Whatever Happened To "Cathedral" Hulls?

When I was a kid in the late Sixties and my family was just getting into boating, "cathedral" hulls were all the rage. In case anybody doesn't know what I'm talking about, that's the term for that pseudo-trimaran hull design like the boat the father character drove in the TV show "Flipper."

That particular boat was a 22-foot Thunderbird Iroquis. Thunderbird, the precursor to Formula, was one of the biggest users of the design. Both Johnson and Evinrude sold cathedral-hull boats under their own names in those days.

I go to my share of boat shows, and I haven't seen a boat with that hull design in decades. It obviously had some advantage over a conventional hull, but what was it? And why did the design fall out of favor with manufacturers?

Geoff

-- "The future stretches before us, brown and sticky, like the broad smile of a mongoloid eating peanut butter off a spoon."   -- snide

geoffm
May 8
Loogie, The best thing you can do with Harry is ignore him, he sent you the email, because he knew it would stir up a new string of posts about him. Don't play into his games, and lets improve the posts and eliminate the inflammatory posts in rec.boats. Reginald
May 15
I agree that I should ignore him, but my post was in no way inflammatory, he's made those accusations about the trans atlantic trip! But, I will ignore him from now on! LoogyPicker
May 15
Ernest Scribbler <replies@newsgroup.only.please> writes: geoffm
May 15
It's the other way around, the stainless is faster. I believe it's primarily because the blades of the aluminum prop are much thicker (in order to get sufficient strength from the weaker material) and this reduces its efficiency. Ernest
May 16
_NCnbDVnZ2dnUVZ_rTinZ2d@posted.lavanet:

> http://blizzard.zmm.com/thunderbird/starboard.jpg

The note says the aluminum prop is the slower prop. It is normal for a steel prop to have faster top speed than aluminum, all other numbers being equal, because steel allows for thinner blades and thus less drag. The steel prop may have slight efficiencies due to shape as well, such as rake and cupping, which are easier to do with steel and seldom seen with aluminum.

Reno
May 16
Aluminum is easy to machine, not true of stainless steel. Bronze is easy to work with, and has long been a favorite material for props. Stainless is quite good, aluminum is cheap. Casady richardcasady
May 16
I have one - it's a 16 foot 1969 Vanguard made in Canada with a 85hp.Evinrude. It has a stepped hull like the Regal fast-trac. It is quick to plane and goes 41mph with a 17" pitch prop. I wonder how fast it would go with a 19" or 21" prop.

I think the shape and the steps help get air under the hull and boost speed. It pounds like crazy in even small waves. I once made a sharp turn at full speed and the inside corner dug in and it cornered like an F1 car - scared the hell out of me because I figured if it let go part way through it would have flipped. If I would have had a passenger they would have been thrown out, the turn was that sharp. I guess that's neat but I haven't tried it again.

It goes and handles well with just 2 passengers but when I have a total of 5 people aboard it uses over twice the gas and handling is very sluggish, more so than other boats. Maybe that hull is more sensitive to load then deep-V's.

Reno
May 13
Hence the previous replies to your post.

My 77 Thunderbird rode no rougher than any equivalent conventional hull: http://blizzard.zmm.com/thunderbird/starboard.jpg

Ernest
May 14
Well of course!!!! That's probably what your dad took on his trans- Atlantic trip and got a fireboat welcome for, huh, liar? LoogyPicker
May 15
We had a 70 bowrider with one of these. 'BeachCraft" was the maunfacture. I beleive they were suppose to be more stable. At speed it was ok, but going for a slow cruise waves that came in from the bow would "thump and spit" water foward from the boat due to the pockets that were formed in the hull.

Some of the deck boats appear to have a modified version of it.

Capt Jack R..

Jack
May 11
They beat the snot out of you in choppy water but I still see some bow riders using that design gfretwell
May 8
Side to side stability was noticeably better. It also gives you much more room forward than a standard hull which creates numerous design layout options for storage, casting deck, larger cuddy, etc. Most were relatively flat bottomed aft so were able to operate in thinner water. As to ride, the original idea was that the upward spray created by the center hull would be trapped under the outer sponsons which would then cushion the ride a bit. That theory held water (ugh... sorry) in some of the Thunderbird models but most manufacturers modified the design to a great extent and wasted that advantage. Becasue of that, eventually, the stereotype reputation of "rough ride" developed because most people simply don't realize that all cathedrals do NOT ride alike. Fact is, even though the oldest Thunderbirds were rough, they were very strong, safe and seaworthy in rough weather but you just had to slow them down quite a bit. Before their demise (or sale rather), Thunderbird was building cathedrals with a deeper center hull with much smaller sponsons. Those boats rode as well as any of their deep V counterparts. But it was too late. The market had already concluded that cathedral = rough ride, and even the easiest riding Thunderbirds didn't sell well. My first Thunderbird was a 1964 (+/-) model which served its purpose well. I was very young and could take a beating without much thought. I later ordered a 1971 T'bird Commanche. That boat rides like a deep V and still has the advantages of the cathedral. Since then, I've bought and sold more boats than I can track but I've never found one as versatile all around or one I like better than that 1971 Thunderbird.

Rick

PhantMan
May 9
They beat the hell out of you and they were heavy. You needed a good size engine to push them around. Capt
May 9
I remember when they first came out. My father carried a few from one of his fiberglass boat lines. Don't remember the brand name. I do remember that we both thought they rode hard and sometimes had an incredible amount of bow rise in certain head seas.

Most of the outboard runabout boats in those days were not deep vee, but had rounded chines, like the Lymans, Cruisers, Inc., and Wolverines, and many other brand news. These boats rode pretty well. The Wolverines had "clipper" bows and rode drier than the Lymans.

harry
May 9
   

Disclaimer: This is a computer-generated and formatted feed of current postings to a public
Internet forum. We do not control the information delivered, nor do we endorse or monitor its
content. Internet forums may carry offensive, harmful, inaccurate, and otherwise inappropriate material.
Click to see the RSS XML version of this page   Click to see the Atom XML version of this page