CK17 compared to CS17

[smacrae]

G'day everyone.

My choice is between Mertens CK17 and the CS17. Can anyone help me decide! Naturally enough, I realise all advice will be totally unbiased!

Could anyone who has actually weighed a finished CS17 tell me its weight?

I noticed in another thread some issues with rowing a CS20. How does the CS17 rate in the rowing department? How about sculling; you only need one oar for that.

With thanks

Steve

[Designer]

I first heard of the CK17 when someone wrote to me and said " look someone has plagerized your Bay River Skiff". I followed the link and the resemblance was astonishing, but on closer inspection there were strange changes like, flat bottom and daggerboard instead a centerboard. How do you sail to windward in shoaling water?

The Core Sound 17 was designed after a lot of years sailing the BRS, I wanted a boat that had all of her qualities but be better suited for open water sailing. I wanted a side deck so that she could heel over a lot further before shipping water. I brought the foredeck back past the forward bulkhead so that I would be able to use the forward area under the foredeck for navigation, dry gear etc... With a small dodger, there is complete sleeping accomodation there too.

For the hull shape, I wanted to keep the BRS V-bottom aft, but bring it up to a bow more accomodating to rough water. After haaving run the Everglades Challenge twice, I am really appreciative of her rough water qualities.

Looking at the material list for the CK 17 the weights are similar for both boats. When rowing my CS 17, I can make 3 knots in flat water and long periods I can maintain 2 1/2 knots. The very things that make her such a good sailor, also are detrimental to her in rowing in strong winds. But, why would you even be rowing in the wind?

I notice also in the post that was complianing abou the rowing, that he was using home made oars that were "very floppy," not the suggested set up.

[mustangermatt]

I too made this comparison and eventually wound up building the CS 17.

Living the PNW I wind up rowing, alot. I have made 18 miles on a good day, and average 10.

As far as sailing I can't speak for the CK but you will be hard pressed to find a better sailing boat than the CS.

In the same vein finding a boat of this size and performance that is as safe in a blow is going to be hard to find.

I wouldn't choose the CK based on "easier" construction because the flat bottom is only slightly simpler to build, and putting the ply hull together is not really the major building task compared to taping, finishing and rigging.

When all is said and done, pride of ownership has alot of sway with me and the CS has a professionaly finished look that the CK lacks.

[smacrae]

Thanks for your replies - my mind is made up.

When all is said and done, pride of ownership has alot of sway with me ......

Says it all really.

I notice also in the post that was complianing abou the rowing, that he was using home made oars that were "very floppy," not the suggested set up.

What is "the suggested setup"? Presumably it's in the plans?

But, why would you even be rowing in the wind?

Let's hope one never finds out!!!

With thanks

Steve

[Tom Lathrop]

I've not sailed or seen a CK17 up close but have some experince with the CS17 as well as othe B&B boats.

In looking at the web info on the CK17 when it first appeared, it did look very much like the Bay River Skiff in plan and profile. The differences I noted were all in favor of the BRS which is an all round boat for sailing, powering and rowing. In being designed for all these uses, its performance as a sailboat is slightly compromised. Specifically, it can be a bit wet in waves, and has no side decks. The CK17 is even more compromised as a sailboat with a flat bottom and a daggerboard which can be a nuisance in shallow water. The BRS is still able as a serious sailing beach cruiser though, as evidenced by the couple who bought my BRS15 "Loon" and have done extensive cruises along some difficult Baja coasts in the Sea of Cortez. There are articles in MAIB and on the B&B website about these cruises.

The CS series was designed to correct these sailing issues by optimizing performance as a sailing boat. As a result, it will not handle powering by motors as large as the BRS will accept. The higher sides, side decks, higher interior volume, easier bow entry sections and aft bottom design all enhance its performance as a sailing boat. Since I think the BRS is better boat than the CK17, the comparison to the CS17 is almost unfair. The CS is the better boat by a large margin.

[JeffM]

A quick word from the guy with the floppy oars: I have no rowing experience, and wanted oars long enough to work well, but collapsible for storage. I may rethink that... As far as rowing when there's wind, I could think of no other way to get the last few hundred feet into a narrow, ocean-front ramp on a rugged shore with the ramp dead upwind. It might be worth mentioning that I had the mizzen in the reefing step and 10+ knots and had a little difficulty getting it to point well.

[JeffM]

Oh, I almost forgot to mention that I also came across the ck17, also did the side-by-side, and also came to the right conclusion!

[Charlie Jones]

Hey- with Laura steering I can get a good turn of speed from our Sharpie with a single paddle from up in the bow.

I outran a guy in a Bolger Bobcat using an electric motor doing that one time

[mustangermatt]

I fit a pair of 8' lolid oars in the bilge on the starboard side of the cb trunk with the blades forward. There isn't as much floor space on that side anyway.

But my long rowing days may be over, I am hours away from winning a british segull on ebay (of course its always in the last 5 minutes I loose) :-)

[Pippo]

I'm a long time admirer of the CS17 and I'm probably going to buy a set of plans soon. However, I also have a set of CK17 plans and would like to briefly comment on this topic.

Actually there are many similar boat designs around: John's Sharpie from CLC, Ohio Sharpie from Reuel Parker, and others.

I remember that the CK17 was being discussed in Jacques Mertens' forum while he was designing it, and he explained why he choosed the flat bottom as opposed to the V-bottom (essentially to get the simplest possible construction scheme).

I also remember that a sort of poll was done between the forum contributors and many liked the CS17 better than the CK17 because it looked more "salty".

For completeness, it should be said that the CK17 daggerboard has a "kick-up" feature, and that the plans include a pivoting centerboard as an option.

Finally, there have been several very favorable reports on the CK17 sailing qualities.

[Charlie Jones]

There is NO real comparison between a John's Sharpie and a CS17. I just finished a 17 for a customer and own a John's Sharpie. VERY different boats

The sharpie is a light, high powered fun boat. It can get to be a real handful in any kind of wind if you don't have some crew weight aboard. We added a floatation tank in the bow as we found that the boat COULD NOT be self rescued if it capsized- water comes in over the fine, low floating bow faster than it can be bailed. I'm also adding a third mast step so we can sail with only one sail when the winds are in the high teens. We aren't heavy enough to hold the boat down even with two reefed sails up- need to be able to go to just one sail.

CS 17 is also a fast light fun type boat, but would be far more forgiving in any kind of wind.

I have no knowledge of the CK 17 so can't comment

[Pippo]

The similarity is with the CK17 more than with the CS17. My intention was to demonstrate that the CK17 is not that "strange" or uncommon.

In my opinion those boats are remarkably similar, the CK17 being somehow beamier than John's sharpie. The sail area looks more or less the same, both sport a daggerboard, both are flat bottomed.

And in the same ballpark is also CMD's Catbird 16...

[Designer]

Here is my Bay River Skiff 17 superimposed over the Ck17 and I think that you will see more than a passing resemblance.

[Tom Lathrop]

Not pertinent to the CS-CK discussion but John Harris has been a long time racing Windmill sailor. I suspect that much of the heritage of his sharpie is based on his experiences with a fast narrow beam (and somewhat tippy) boat like the Windmill. Not for the inatentive skipper and he confirmed that thought some years ago. Since I am a long time Windmill sailor and have built 3 of them, I think his sharpie is a very nice boat for the intended audience.

[Charlie Jones]

Oh don't misunderstand Tom- We enjoy the sharpie- love sailing it and in light air it's a real ghoster. But I only weigh 165 and Laura is about 105, so in winds over about 12-14 we start having to REALLY pay attention. And we get a lot of winds like that or stronger. It's a quick boat. Just DON"T cleat the sheets

[smacrae]

Now let me get this straight. So far we have established

1. The CS17 can be rowed by an old bloke in flat water at 2 1/2 knots for long periods with bursts of up to 3. Ah, that Aussie heritage just can't be denied!

2. BUT, not with floppy, experimental, collapsible oars that the inventor confesses needs a rethink. However, from reading his post, any red blooded real sailor would consider him a bit of a shiela. I rest my case with the following quote: "I could think of no other way to get the last few hundred feet into a narrow, ocean-front ramp on a rugged shore with the ramp dead upwind. It might be worth mentioning that I had the mizzen in the reefing step and 10+ knots and had a little difficulty getting it to point well." We have here an obvious wuss.

3. Then we have 8' oars floating around in the bilge. Yeah, rightho, but can you row the bloody boat with them? Of course, we are dealing here with a bloke whose "long rowing days may be over" and actually wants to own a British Seagull? Stone the flamin' crows , mate; break it down!

4. So one question still remains: what is the best oar length for the CS17; just what is the holding power of a British Seagull in muddy bottom and is an all rope rode acceptable?

[Tom Lathrop]

4. So one question still remains: what is the best oar length for the CS17; just what is the holding power of a British Seagull in muddy bottom and is an all rope rode acceptable?

Should be pretty good. There are a lot of odd shaped bits sticking out to grab things or stick in the bottom. Besides, he said that he always loses the auction in the last minute. Should realize that the gods are really favoring him. "Not that there is anything wrong with it."

[smacrae]

G'day Tom,

I notice you are a Windmill sailor.

Have you seen this site?

http://www.totallyabsurd.com/windmillboat.htm

Steve

[Tom Lathrop]

Nope, had not seen that particular Windmill but do think mine could outrun it. The site did inform me that I was the one millionth visitor and have won an absolutely free plasma TV so thanks for alerting me.

PS, you are welcome to come over and watch it.

[mustangermatt]

Thems fighten words :-)

First, I did lose the auction so I am still rowing.

Second, using popular oar length formulas (I don't remember what they were :-) 8.5' is about right for a coresound. My 8' oars are only a slight compromise.

Third, and probably most important, be careful about bragging on "Aussie heritage" when the place was originally peopled by my Irish ancestors :-)

g'day mate? Nil, sliante gra mo croi! :-)