SM Hudson open day

[luctor et emergo]

On the contrary. I am certain that SMH is a competent enough engineer to design and build such a hull.

 

However, SMH is also a competent businessman and he knows what his customers will pay for and that is not fancy bits underwater where no-one will see them.

 

George ex nb Alton retired

Edited August 25, 2014 by luctor et emergo

[alan_fincher]

The important bit is under the stern, where good boats including some modern ones have double curvred swims to allow more water to the prop.

Something SMH hasn't mastered yet

 

 

On the contrary. I am certain that SMH is a competent enough engineer to design and build such a hull.

 

However, SMH is also a competent businessman and he knows what his customers will pay for and that is not fancy bits underwater where no-one will see them.

 

George ex nb Alton retired

 

Even RW Davies, who make this exorbitant claim for their Northwich Trader

 

All external lines to Yarwoods of Northwich 1930's design. Entrance and exit swims built to exact dimensions giving positive handling and absence of excess wash.

 

appear to only provide a single curvature swim of two sides pulled into a point, with no "top to bottom shaping".

 

SMH and RWD boats are no better shaped under the back end that any standard "Clonecraft", other than the swims might be a bit longer.

 

I find R W Davies' claims preposterous, and whilst Northwich Trader undoubtedly swims very well, to suggest it has swims that in any way mimic any 1930's build Northwich boat should frankly be something you can challenge under the Trade Descriptions Act!

[nicknorman]

So is there any hard evidence as to the advantages of double curved swims, other than a general feeling that they look better, plus some generous presumption?

[Guest]

So is there any hard evidence as to the advantages of double curved swims, other than a general feeling that they look better, plus some generous presumption?

I think criticisms of Hudson hulls can only carry any sort of validity if made in ever so slightly 'nasal' tones, whilst looking over the top of someone's flat topped reading glasses. Add in an air of utter disdain and it's job done.

[Sabcat]

So is there any hard evidence as to the advantages of double curved swims, other than a general feeling that they look better, plus some generous presumption?

 

That's a bloody good question. I imagine the answer is "yes" but that's just presumption on my part.

[alan_fincher]

So is there any hard evidence as to the advantages of double curved swims, other than a general feeling that they look better, plus some generous presumption?

"Looking better" doesn't really come into it, as they are underwater, so can only be seen if the boat is docked.

 

If you handle a full length working boat, from (say) the 1930s, even unloaded, it generally just feels more "right" and sweeter than modern boats.

 

I can't imagine that, given the increased complexity and cost of building a shaped hull, it was done just for the sake of it. When BW attempted to produce "modern" replacements to more traditional craft in the 1950s and 1960s that allowed a much faster and cheaper build, it is widely reported the resulting boats were often highly unpopular with boatmen because of their inferior handling.

[dave moore]

Boatmen called them " Dustbins " as a result. I steered a couple years ago, Admiralty classes, back in the 60s, but I didn't have the experience then to compare them to others, I was just thrilled to be on the footboard steering real working boats. Even then, they were ugly buggers compared to Joshers or Grand Unions.

 

Cheers

 

Dave

[nicknorman]

"Looking better" doesn't really come into it, as they are underwater, so can only be seen if the boat is docked.

 

If you handle a full length working boat, from (say) the 1930s, even unloaded, it generally just feels more "right" and sweeter than modern boats.

 

I can't imagine that, given the increased complexity and cost of building a shaped hull, it was done just for the sake of it. When BW attempted to produce "modern" replacements to more traditional craft in the 1950s and 1960s that allowed a much faster and cheaper build, it is widely reported the resulting boats were often highly unpopular with boatmen because of their inferior handling.

So anecdotally "better handling". I know what that means for a motorbike, I'm just not quite sure what it means for a boat! Although I suppose I do a bit, since our boat "handles" much better than the one we used to have the use of (the Chalice equivalent). That does seem a rather nebulous reason to spend more money on the build (I'm thinking of commercial usage 100 yrs ago) and I wonder if rather, the primary benefit is less drag. This would be a useful attribute for early motor boats which might have limited hp and directly affect the return on capital (faster cruise speed or less fuel) thus creating a good "business case" for the increased capital outlay. With the advent of the large commercial carriers (and I mean well before the 1950s) it would seem unlikely that a significant extra cost was expended just to make the boat, being steered by someone else, "handle" better.

[mark99]

I'm sure Fmc did some work on hulls re reduction of fuel cost. Currently away from my ref source.

Edited August 26, 2014 by mark99

[Redeye]

I was hoping other forum members who were at the Hudson owners event would have contributed to this thread. I do wonder if they are put off by Nicks' anti-Hudsonophobic comments. I know there's nothing like getting your retaliation in first, it's become a very tired joke now

 

Richard

 

I'm a recovering Hudson owner.....Does that count?

[FadeToScarlet]

Even RW Davies, who make this exorbitant claim for their Northwich Trader

 

 

 

appear to only provide a single curvature swim of two sides pulled into a point, with no "top to bottom shaping".

 

SMH and RWD boats are no better shaped under the back end that any standard "Clonecraft", other than the swims might be a bit longer.

I find R W Davies' claims preposterous, and whilst Northwich Trader undoubtedly swims very well, to suggest it has swims that in any way mimic any 1930's build Northwich boat should frankly be something you can challenge under the Trade Descriptions Act!

Cunningly, the RW Davies blurb claims the swims are built to "exact dimensions"- but not Yarwood's exact dimensions! A crucial difference in how it's worded!