1
Yes a West Wight Potter 15 or it's bigger sibs are OK boats. [I'd take a Mongomery 15 first]
(http://i259.photobucket.com/albums/hh299/1930fordroadster/Who27sC19.jpg)
Nothing really too shabby about the construction or how well the West Wight potters sail. Several of the West Wight Potters ply the waters of Sturgeon Bay and near shore Lake Michigan.
"Doesn't displacement have some correlation to stability and seaworthiness?" Yes big time! You can sail in a cork and loose your cookies or you can sail in a boat and keep your cookies.
[Reminds me of a joke: "What is the bathing suit of the future for daring females? Two band-aids and a cork".]
I tend to think of these vessels as being a wee bit tender and a tad less stable being faster to heel over. With little doubt I'll bet the Potters sail faster in a light breeze and this make them more 'family orientated' for a fun day on the water. Don't want the kids to be board on a near windless day and the boat just not going...
Small Craft Adviser really publicized the heck out of them and being so exclusive to this mark is one reason why I no longer subscribe to this magazine. Nothing new. SCA did run a story about one sailor sailing his WWP 15 [?] or 19 [?] to Hawaii. One way trip. Back to California on a freighter. So this WWP 15 pictured must be good enough.
15' West Wight Potter
displacement 475#
including a 80# keel -------->(http://i259.photobucket.com/albums/hh299/1930fordroadster/picwwp15113a.jpg)
skip.
To use this calculator, plug in the two boats and compare. In particular look at capsize ratio and motion comfort. Know which one I want to be on in heavy weather.
http://www.image-ination.com/sailcalc.html
Frank
When does a sailboat become a dingy? I feel these boats really cut the line fine. Almost bought one, but got a laser first. Glad I did, but will never go back to a dingy on open water. In the bay or getting to shore- sure, but open water requires a sailboat. The WWP's, particularly the 15, are dingies.
fo48 Good call and found the links very entertaining. Yes why have scuppers in the cockpit and a water fountain inside the cabin via the centerboard trunk. Although with only an 80 pound centerboard perhaps she'll wallow around when flooded but once the body is cold, no amount of hot toddy for the body will help. Good posts guys. All of you. Thanx.
skip.
David, just a thought, if the water level outside of bathtub is the same as inside the tub ,I do not think the tub will drain....probably wrong. Your tub experiment was great science.......Phil
Basically, this is the age old question. Does size really matter? And it brings to mind the best answer I ever heard from that question.
It was at a bar, and the bartender's name was Leeanne. Leeanne is a very pretty blond and built about like Dolly Parton. Anyway, two guys at the bar were having that discussion, does size matter, or does it depend on the motion in the ocean etc...and all the sexual innuendos that you have heard before and can imagine. Finally one of those brave sailors asked Leeanne what she thought and she said...
Well boys, when the storm rolls in I'd rather be on a yacht than a dinghy"
And that pretty much ended that discussion :-D
"By the way, this month's "Small Craft Adviser" magazine has another Potter article very similar to the one about the fellow who went aground in the Texas 200."
There was another a few months before the article about the Texas 200 as well. A 15 was swamped and turtled. Every time it was righted it just kept going and turtled again. It had to be left underwater overnight as it couldn't be rescued on its own. Same problem there that the centerboard trunk opening is below the waterline when swamped so it is very difficult to self rescue.
Shawn
I've never owned a 16 but instead own her big sister, the 23. I don't particulary care for the Potters (personal preference) but, that being said- in last months and this months"Messing About in Boats" there is a continuing story about a skipper who sailed his Potter 19 from Little Egg Harbor, NJ (a few miles from my home port) to the Bahamas. In the latest installement of the story, he is still there...can't wait to read the rest. Apparently this guy didn't focus on the limitations but the opportunities that awaited him. He seemed to know the P19 well and knew what she could and couldn't do. Great story, well written..man am I jealous! I might try to track him down- sounds like a great guy to get to know.
Me,. I like a keel below me for stability. That being said also, Joshua Slocums "Spray" relied more on form stability than ballast for seaworthiness...she was 14 feet wide, if I'm not mistaken. She took him around the world and then some.
Bob23
I can tell you that we once had HideAway, our 23 filled with sea water almost to the settee cushions - all lockers flooded stem to stern. We were loaded for a three day cruise at the time and were a couple of miles off shore. There was no noticeable change in how the boat handled. We pumped her out with a electric bilge pump rerouted through the cockpit in about 45 minutes since it was that through hull that broke.
There is no way in the world I would go off shore in a boat with an open center board! Compacs Rule! Matt
Scupper pipes an inch and a quarter? Times two. That's 1.25" x 32 fpm = That's 40 gallons a minute X 2 = 80 gallons out the scuppers per minute. So the cockpit is L x W x Ht x 7.48 gallons per cubic foot = Gallons in flooded cockpit x 8.33 lb per gallons = weight of water in cockpit, vs weight of boat, or x % of boats weight. Cool. So at 80 gallons a minute how long before the cockpit drains? Or how long before the flooded cockpit gets pooped agin by another wave? This is where GOOD SEAMANSHIP comes in to play.
And she still floats, kind of.... LOL skip.
It should be noted, in all honesty, that a factory spec Compac is not a good bluewater boat, and probably only a marginal coastwise cruiser. I think we all know this. When my CP-23 was turned on her side by a 60 kt gust, she leaked water inside. But I think the difference being talked about here is that once I rolled in the jib all the way and brought down the main, she popped back up on her feet and was ready for action.
BTW, with very little modification, I am making the cabin watertight. Just a little sealent here and there, and replacement of the sink hose (and a thru-hull)
I gasketed but did not hasp 'cause I'm leary of cutting my legs on the hasps. Gaskets are for quiet and no vibration when motoring. I figure if the water rolls to the settee hatch covers I'm in deep do do anyway.
skip.
That is a great idea David- I also like where you put the cooler. Yeah skip- water came into my cockpit from the side when she was blown down, but for some reason the locker hatches did not open. I think we had the cushions on them.
Frank:
I read that article and found it most helpful. In the following issue I was dismayed to find that because of that article, International Marine was pulling thier full page front inside ad. Seems that the article was misconstrued by some folks at IM as an insinuation that the Potter was to blame for the capsizing. Like little babies, they took thier toys and went home.
Now, Roger Crawfords beautiful Melonseed Skiff graces that spot. I love the Melonseed more anyway. And Roger is a great guy.
Newt: My lazarete lockers don't have gaskets on 'em yet but it looks like a great idea. The hasps are a must because not everyone is as honest as us Compactors.
More than that, the lazerettes are not sealed completely from the cabin area! At least not on my 1985. Sticking my head down in one shows that the plywood does not go all the way to the top of the underside of the sidedeck. If a lazerette should flood, water will find it's way to the cabin...not good. I believe, other than that big old iceberg, this is what did the Titanic in. And bad metalurgy. And a too proud captain. And bad navigating. (You get the idea).
Dave Martin, in preparing his second ship for ocean voyaging with his family, sealed off all openings in the cockpit and made it as small as possible, knowing that it would flood eventually. Large drains were installed - 2 inch, me thinks, to get rid of that bad water. It was in an older article in "Good Old Boat". I should really organize these old magazines of mine.
Bob23
"lazerettes are not sealed completely from the cabin area" so says Bob23. And that is a good thing. You see I have those funky spring catches used on expensive vessels on both settee hatch covers that hold them open when rolling. A touch and they fold as the cover is lowered at will.
Side bar: Once when my hatch was open some stink potter came steam boating past and my ship rolled slamming that hatch down onto my flanges...OUCH! Enough.
The best part is these hatch covers can stay open on warm breezy nights when I'm sleeping at anchor below deck.
skip.
Kind of after the discussion here but interesting fact if sailing calculator is factual. CP 16 shows better than WWP19 blue water in motion and capsize categories. Must be why I enjoy my 16 so much when the weather picks up, love that big boat motion in a small boat.
I know our boats are better but will never deride the other skipper in his or her choice of boats. The best boat on the water for each is the boat you can call your own and or dream of having next.
Melvin
Bob, my parents-in-law met this guy with the Potter 19 in the Bahamas earlier this year; he was still cruising there, living simply and having fun. Great for him, but I don't share his view that Potters are the best blue water boats ever built!
Nicolina (I forget your real name)
I'm gonna try and track him down. He can't live more than 10 miles from my house here in NJ. Unless he went south again!
Bob23
I owned a Potter15 for 3 years and hated it. It was pitifully slow in even a strong wind and pitched like crazy on every little wind shift. Okay, I am not the most experienced sailor, but a 15' I had years ago (a MFG Bandit) was much faster and only a bit less stable.
I am looking for a better boat and the Compac 16 is pretty. I was told on another site that it was for old people to sit out on; while it is very stable it is even slower than the P15.
I don't think I could stand anything slower than the P15; should I cross it off my list?
The other boats on my list are the Precision 15K and the Montgomery 15. People "say" they are both faster and stabler than the P15. Any comments or suggestions would be appreciated.
(I would prefer an open boat, but ballasted boats usually seem to have cabins)
Toller, my CP 16 runs between 2 and 4 mph depending on the wind of course. She is not "fast" but not "slow" either. I have always felt she moved well. If speed is all your looking for, I would look for a different boat......Phil (hull speed =1.34 x square root of LWL =knots )(CP 16....1.34 x square root of 14 feet= 5.013 knots)( 1.15 knot =1.00 mph)(5.013 / 1.15= 4.36 mph max. hull speed).....sorry but my heads hurts after all this calulating.......Phil
According to this site: http://www.mail-archive.com/montgomery_boats@mailman.xmission.com/msg03731.html (http://www.mail-archive.com/montgomery_boats@mailman.xmission.com/msg03731.html) the PHRF (Performance Handicap Rating Formula) for the Potter 15 is about 138. According to this site: http://offshore.ussailing.org/Assets/Offshore/PHRF/High+Low+Mean+PHRF+Handicaps.pdf (http://offshore.ussailing.org/Assets/Offshore/PHRF/High+Low+Mean+PHRF+Handicaps.pdf) the PHRF for the Com-Pac 16 is 318. So, if the two boats start at the same point, the potter will reach the 1-mile mark (318-138=) 180 seconds faster than the Com-Pac. Now, I have a hard time believing the potter is actually that fast, but I can't find any other source for their PHRF rating.
The Com-Pac isn't a fast boat. I love the stability and strength of my CP16, but if your looking for something fast to day sail, the CP16 isn't the boat for you.
Quote from: Toller on November 24, 2009, 03:35:25 PM
I owned a Potter15 for 3 years and hated it. It was pitifully slow in even a strong wind and pitched like crazy on every little wind shift. Okay, I am not the most experienced sailor, but a 15' I had years ago (a MFG Bandit) was much faster and only a bit less stable.
I am looking for a better boat and the Compac 16 is pretty. I was told on another site that it was for old people to sit out on; while it is very stable it is even slower than the P15.
I don't think I could stand anything slower than the P15; should I cross it off my list?
The other boats on my list are the Precision 15K and the Montgomery 15. People "say" they are both faster and stabler than the P15. Any comments or suggestions would be appreciated.
(I would prefer an open boat, but ballasted boats usually seem to have cabins)
Quote from: dserrell on November 24, 2009, 04:34:32 PM
http://www.image-ination.com/sailcalc.html Using this sailboat calculator you can compare a West Wight Potter 15 and a Compac 16.
The calculator says that a WWP15 is less likely to capsize than a Catalina 14.2K. They are similar size boats, but the Catalina is a little wider and has 200 pounds of ballast. Wouldn't you expect the Catalina to be significantly more stable?
I am shocked by the low capsize ratio on the WWP15; I just didn't find it all that steady. I entered a boat (Montgomery 15) and found part of the problem. They just use weight, while ignoring the weight distribution. For its size, the P15 is a relatively high boat which makes it less stable than the weight might suggest.
Quote from: NateD on November 24, 2009, 05:02:42 PM
According to this site: http://www.mail-archive.com/montgomery_boats@mailman.xmission.com/msg03731.html (http://www.mail-archive.com/montgomery_boats@mailman.xmission.com/msg03731.html) the PHRF (Performance Handicap Rating Formula) for the Potter 15 is about 138. According to this site: http://offshore.ussailing.org/Assets/Offshore/PHRF/High+Low+Mean+PHRF+Handicaps.pdf (http://offshore.ussailing.org/Assets/Offshore/PHRF/High+Low+Mean+PHRF+Handicaps.pdf) the PHRF for the Com-Pac 16 is 318. So, if the two boats start at the same point, the potter will reach the 1-mile mark (318-138=) 180 seconds faster than the Com-Pac. Now, I have a hard time believing the potter is actually that fast, but I can't find any other source for their PHRF rating.
The Com-Pac isn't a fast boat. I love the stability and strength of my CP16, but if your looking for something fast to day sail, the CP16 isn't the boat for you.
Are you reading the right number for the Potter? I see it as 498.6. Or am I reading the wrong number?
Oops, you're correct. So the Com-Pac would be (498-318=) 180 seconds faster per mile. Wow, the potter really is slow.
Quote from: Toller on November 24, 2009, 05:21:25 PM
Quote from: NateD on November 24, 2009, 05:02:42 PM
According to this site: http://www.mail-archive.com/montgomery_boats@mailman.xmission.com/msg03731.html (http://www.mail-archive.com/montgomery_boats@mailman.xmission.com/msg03731.html) the PHRF (Performance Handicap Rating Formula) for the Potter 15 is about 138. According to this site: http://offshore.ussailing.org/Assets/Offshore/PHRF/High+Low+Mean+PHRF+Handicaps.pdf (http://offshore.ussailing.org/Assets/Offshore/PHRF/High+Low+Mean+PHRF+Handicaps.pdf) the PHRF for the Com-Pac 16 is 318. So, if the two boats start at the same point, the potter will reach the 1-mile mark (318-138=) 180 seconds faster than the Com-Pac. Now, I have a hard time believing the potter is actually that fast, but I can't find any other source for their PHRF rating.
The Com-Pac isn't a fast boat. I love the stability and strength of my CP16, but if your looking for something fast to day sail, the CP16 isn't the boat for you.
Are you reading the right number for the Potter? I see it as 498.6. Or am I reading the wrong number?
Toller
First as far as what people have told you about CP-16, you need to take that with a grain of salt, as with all advice.
For an unbiased opinion try check site suggested by dserrell. Do the side by side comparison and look at info such as capsize ratio (smaller the number better) then speed and comfort at sea ( motion, Larger number better).
Realize speed in a displacement boat is function of length and sail area.
One thing you will find about Cps is that some owners will take them out in conditions when other boats stay at home.
This owner included. When there is little to no wind they are slow, but then so are most sail boats.
To truly get a faster boat for length you will have to look at a planing or semi-displacement hull, IMO.
Good luck in your search and fair sailing to you, Melvin
Quote from: nies on November 24, 2009, 03:52:44 PM
Toller, my CP 16 runs between 2 and 4 mph depending on the wind of course. She is not "fast" but not "slow" either. I have always felt she moved well. If speed is all your looking for, I would look for a different boat......Phil (hull speed =1.34 x square root of LWL =knots )(CP 16....1.34 x square root of 14 feet= 5.013 knots)( 1.15 knot =1.00 mph)(5.013 / 1.15= 4.36 mph max. hull speed).....sorry but my heads hurts after all this calulating.......Phil
Hey your backwards on the Knots to MPH conversion.
1 knots = 1.15077945 mph
Hence the max hull speed should be (5.013*1.15) = 5.76 MPH
Matt003, you are right, your next test will be the conversion tables for nav. miles to stat. miles..............all this time I have been going faster than I thought.......Phil
this whole debate about potters and cps brings a question to mind. i own a very basic cp16-1, no bowsprit no centerboard. i would like to hear from a cp16 sailor who has sailed a newer cp16 with centerboard or a legacy sailor who used to own a cp16-1. is the new design that much superior to the older boat. is it a significant improvement to weather and is it faster. my two cents, ill stay with com-pacs potters look a little flimsy to me.
Quote from: Toller on November 24, 2009, 03:35:25 PM
I owned a Potter15 for 3 years and hated it. It was pitifully slow in even a strong wind and pitched like crazy on every little wind shift. Okay, I am not the most experienced sailor, but a 15' I had years ago (a MFG Bandit) was much faster and only a bit less stable.
I am looking for a better boat and the Compac 16 is pretty. I was told on another site that it was for old people to sit out on; while it is very stable it is even slower than the P15.
I don't think I could stand anything slower than the P15; should I cross it off my list?
The other boats on my list are the Precision 15K and the Montgomery 15. People "say" they are both faster and stabler than the P15. Any comments or suggestions would be appreciated.
(I would prefer an open boat, but ballasted boats usually seem to have cabins)
Every sailboat is a compromise. I know too many people that spend 2 or 3 years searching for "The Right Boat" These are often the people who are at home on the weekends when I am out sailing. :-) In my opinion the right boat is the sailboat that is for sale within a reasonable distance from home, needs only minor repairs and upgrades and is within your price range. Buy it and sail now while you are still shopping for "The Right Boat". The market for used sailboats in the 16-23 foot range is always strong and if you do find another boat that seems better to you it is generally really easy to sell the one you already have.
David, regarding the pics of 'lil Princess Kit' that you posted on 11/24/09:
First off, absolutely beautiful boat. I haven't figured out how to give somebody karma points, but you win for that effort.
Could I get more info on the bimini?
OkieBob,
"I haven't figured out how to give somebody karma points, but you win for that effort." just click on the little blue [good] under the poster's name. I gave you a good Karma point just for mentioning you didn't know. Takes a man!
TG
TG, just gave you a krama point for giving OkieBob one.......Phil
TG,
Regarding Karma points, thanks! I don't see a little blue [good]. Maybe its my user or browser settings?
David,
Thanks of the bimini info.
I'm currently over my boat budget for the year. This year I bought the boat, and paid to have the trailer modified. It will be at least another season or two before I can swing a one item $600 purchase. Mutliply items adding up to $600 are easier to hide from the wife; so that, I can maintain my bargaining position for her $600 purchases.
I maybe learning how to sew by then.
re: Karma - I think you must be logged in to see the device.
tg
OkieBob,
"I haven't figured out how to give somebody karma points, but you win for that effort." just click on the little blue [good] under the poster's name. I gave you a good Karma point just for mentioning you didn't know. Takes a man!
TG
Tim G, karma to you from the cajun, for all your help with both sites!
cap cajun
I think Okie Bob that you need a certain amount of posts before you can give positive or negative. I had the same problem but was patient, and one day the little things just showed up.
One time at the boat ramp a wwp19 had just pulled out as we were rigging to go out, It was a windy day and the wwp19 owner was very interrested in my 16. He stated that it was a perfect day for my boat, after reading these post I guess he was not happy with how the potter felt. btw it looked to be a brand new boat, which made me feel even better about my 34 year old pocket cruiser. BILL