Builders' Forum Archives
Re: 12.5 - 11 = 0.6
Posted by LeeG on Oct 8, 2004
some foot comfort can be from the ability to move ones feet around, changing the freeboard for footroom affects hull displacement, windage and handling to a larger degree than does the deck center height. One of the reasons the Chesapeake is so much larger than the Cape Charles is to provide more footroom, that's also why the deck beam is tighter on the Chesapeake than the Cape Charles. The reason why the LT series was developed was because a lot of local paddlers were remarking how unnecessarily large the Ch17 is for the average person day paddling. There was a Northbay made at CLC with a 10.5" radius deck beam instead of a 16" radius deck beam. The actual foot room at the footpegs wasn't that much greater as the hull was the same, there was maybe 1/4" more footroom at ones big toe, but the ability to move ones feet around freely to the centerline occasioanly made a HUGE difference that most folks who paddled it said "this is how it should be".
I built a 21" wide s&g with a 14" radius deck beam,,it worked out well. There's no reason a deck beam for a 24.5" Ch18 is the best one for a 21" WR18. This isn't to say it's not,,just that it's possible to design a hull around a deck beam and not around the paddler. If you want foot room changing the deck beam is as worthwhile an option as changing the sheer.
In Response to: Re: 12.5 - 11 = 0.6 by Lloyd on Oct 7, 2004