Quote:
3rdday - My apologies if this has been talked through elsewhere on the site - I've not had the pleasure of seeing a Moesly & Potter era hull "bottoms up" next to each other for comparison...what do you consider the major/most significant design differences? I was under the impression that the 23 was a stretched Moesly 21, at least the underwater VDH portion of the hull. Thanks, Brian
|
.
You won't see the differences standing up looking at the hulls, except for the height of the longitudinal steps, you will see that right away, you won't detect the differences in pictures, you must get low and even underneath the hulls so see what I see.
From what I hear it was based off the 21, I dont think so, there are too many differences and they are not all sublte,however there are dramatic differences; The verticle steps on the 23 are not as tall, they are about 1/2 the height. On the 21 there are no reverses or change in the upward shape of each panel as the panel angle rises up and outboard, on the 23 the angle changes to horizontal and on some panels there is a reverse or return at the transition to the step.(my opinion; this does not make sense)
I also think the v is more agressive on the 21. There are othe nuances that are not as major or obvious, but are surely adventageous to performance. I dove in the keys with a 23 next to me and watched from below the hulls at anchor in the waves, there is a difference. The taller steps on the 21 create larger air pockets, which allow for softer ride and break friction between hull & water= efficiency.
The lack of reverses in the hull shape also allow for softer ride, the hull penetrates the water and isn't slowed by a flat spot or reverse. The 21, even with its agressive V, does not need any lift, so no need for flats or reverses.
I think the 21 hull is a masterpiece. So are the other 1st generation Seacraft hulls.