Passagemaker Plans Build vs. Eastport Pram Plans Build - Hours Comparison

I was just referencing my own blog about building my EP 4 years ago and I noticed something I think is very interesting.  I'm currently at 110 hours into my PM build.  Plus or minus a few tasks, I am at roughly the equivalent of the same stage as my EP blog documented at 60 hours.

I know I'm tackling tasks in a slightly different order, but I find it very interesting that a boat that's approximately 50% longer takes approximately 100% longer to build at roughly similar stages.  

That's even taking into consideration that this is my second boat build, which I would assume would mean that I'm building a little faster/more efficiently.  Hmmm...



2 replies:

« Previous Post       List of Posts       Next Post »

RE: Passagemaker Plans Build vs. Eastport Pram Plans Build - Hours Comparison

Well, maybe you ain't doin' as bad as you might think....

The first thing which comes to mind is that the all the planks in the Passagemaker have to be scarfed to make up the length.  Not so with the sub-eight-foot Eastport Pram, right?  So that would account for some of the difference.

The other thing comes to mind is that surface area goes up pretty much by the square of the length, given similar proportions, though maybe the Passagemaker ain't quite 2.25 times (1.5 squared) the footprint of an Eastport Pram.  Well, heck, lets just take length times beam:

EP 7'9" x 48" = 4,464 sq. in.

PMD 11'7" x 56" = 7,784 sq. in.

4,464 / 7,784 = 57%

60 hours EP / 110 hours PMD = 55%

Allowing for the extra work of the scarfs (and the extra bulkhead if you're building a take-apart version) and the longer pieces bein' a bit more trouble to move around, I'd say you are doin' pretty good!

PMD is a lot of boat for a twelve-footer.


RE: Passagemaker Plans Build vs. Eastport Pram Plans Build - Hours Comparison

That anonymous post was me.  Login must've timed out while I was musing before I clicked the Post button.

We didn't keep track of our time on our Passagemaker Dinghy build.  I'm sure we took way longer than anybody would guess, so we just really didn't want to know.  The solo work time was good occupational therapy for me at the time, and the family work gang sessions were good fun for all involved.  Our build started in earnest in summer of 2014, and we set a modest goal of having her ready for rowing-only sea trials by Mother's Day 2015 (the boat was given the name Winkle, my mother's familial nickname).  We were just happy that we were able to meet that slack schedule.  Sailing parts were completed at a leisurly pace the next off-season, though I had to scramble a bit at the finish in order to meet the modest goal of having her ready for sailing sea trials on Father's Day (2016), which we were just able to manage.

Enjoy the build.  A slow pace isn't necessarily a bad thing, as long as you can keep the project moving along well enough to maintain momentum so that it doesn't stall out and deprive you of the ultimate joy of playing with her afloat!

.....Michael, a.k.a. Gramps

« Previous Post     List of Posts     Next Post »

Please login or register to post a reply.