For anyone's amusement: a new "cat"

[thataway]

The MC 30 has been around for several years--and the MC 29 is more recent. My understanding is that they are built in the Eastern Europe; Rumania, I believe and imported. The MC 30 is a more "conventional" appearing cat--but the foredeck drops down to form a ramp to go aboard.
As I recollect neither boat is less than 8' 6" wide.

I believe that the boats are vacuum bagged in construction. This may help to account for some of the decreased weight--if it is true. I think that the top speeds are what we are seeing--the Tom Cat is a much faster,and I suspect effecient boat.

These boats are both in production and available. I considered them--but did not go to the point of a sea trial.

Bob Austin

[Alasgun]

Thanks Mark thats all I need, another project, heck them downriggers will take until spring, can you imagine an entire boat.
However you did get the old creative juices flowing and what came squirting out just might fly.
Aside from the projected $500K price my only other objection to the Maine Cat is lack of trailerability so lets make it fit our trailers and our pocketbook!
Diesel gensets running DC drive motors give them quiet efficient power, we could start with a bare Tom Cat and axe those Armstrong brackets. This would let us gain some length if wanted and still be reasonable to haul on a trailer. Next we build in a horizontal 160HP Lycoming running a hydraulic pump and route hoses to the twin orbit motors that would be used for our final drives. We could run twin 37 inch props to further boost efficiency and control them with twin flow controllers. NO Wheel! Just 2 little joy sticks, kind of like a Bobcat skid steer loader. Think how impressive it would be to dock! Think how impressive it would be to lean on these the wrong way while going forward WOT! Heck with this much steerability we wouldn't even need rudders! My performance guestimation would go like this. 40 knots top speed and the ability to troll at 2 knots all with out changing engine RPM. That's the hydraulic advantage! I assume this engine would consume 2 gal per Hr and last forever. With this much torque bad weather would never pose a problem due to the tremendous grab of those big props. You would just chew up that chop and spit er out the rear!
IF any of you doubt these figures you can go ask Alice, I think she will know. I just had one of the men on the chess board come tell me I have to go. Gee, left field ain't so bad!
Mike on Huda Thunkit

[Chester]

For some reason I think the MC29 is aa Graham Shannon design. The guy has drawn some decent boats, though this one dosen't interest me. Now while the Maine Cat is an attractive design and has a good wheelhouse layout, I agree that it has some optimistic expectations. In it's favor the builder isn't new to cats.

[JamesTXSD]

I have to agree with Joel - that MC, in my opinion, looks like it fell out of the ugly tree and hit every branch on the way down. The Maine Cat, on the other hand, looks to be a beautiful boat. Had we not bought this C-Dory, the Maine Cat 30 sailboat is likely what we would be sailing right now. They build a great product, and it will be interesting to see how their new powercat is accepted. If trailerability wasn't an important consideration...

Best wishes,
Jim B.

[thataway]

I have to say that the Maine Cat 38 is one of the most striking and well laid out power cats I have seen yet. One of my peeves of most of the cats up to 40 (and some larger) is the "crawl over the partner" bunks.
This boat has a true "walk around--or maybe crawl around" bunk--much better! Plus a great layout in the upper saloon and pilot house area.

But--I'll bet that this boat will come in at the $400,000 price range--maybe more. As I understand it, the PDQ 41 are in the $500,000 to $600,000 range when equipt.

With the very fine lines and a true displacement hull, it will be interesting to see both what the actual fuel economy, top speed and performance (especially down and cross seas in heavy weather) will be. A most interesting boat...But as noted--not trailerable!

[F4180]

As a prospective tomcat owner , I have some questions maybe you guys
can help with. ( I presently own a different make cat).
I saw posted here somewhere that with 3 people in the back corner of the cockpit that water backed up into the cockpit from the self bailing drains, is that the case?/ or has it been corrected?
To me the top of the tunnel seemed too close to the water line

I saw the boat for the first time at the NY boat show (hull #70)
and while I really like the concept and the styling I had some reservations regarding the seating /helm ergonomics. I was disappointed by the helm seat , not enough room to stand and no adjustment. and the backrest of the port side rear dinette seat provided no support and was too short. Just some observations, hopefully things are improving as the hull numbers go up.
Regards,
Frank
NJ

[thataway]

Frank,
I agree with your observations. The tunnel is closed at displacement speeds. The hulls should have been made 6" higher when they went from the 24 to the 255. (This would have allowed 4" of air and much better ride into a chop. This would also give more effecient operation at lower speeds). I think that this is a design mistake--and have even considered at some point cutting the hulls and adding the increased height. It won't happen yet--but is possiable. Not a project for the faint of heart--and the biggest problem will be blending the addition, especially at the bow--maybe a bulbous bow added....--probably do the cut low--and then paint the bottom. The boat will be heavier--but probably not enough to be significant in performance.

The back dinette seat back is too low, and the seat is too wide front to back. We had a cushion made which can be used between the foreward seat and the bunk, so I can sleep for and aft if necessary--I put this cushion in front of the cushion of the back seat and it fills the area nicely and gives adequate back support.

As for the helm seat--I am used to boats with flip up bolsters or a leaning post, so it took some getting used to. I sit in the seat most of the time.
There are a few times when I semi sit/use the seat as a leaning post. I am 6' 2" and about 185 lbs (Waist 35") and find that I can get between the wheel and the seat and be reasonably comfortable. A person with a larger waste might have a problem. We have considered other helm seats, including bolsters--but since we are sitting most of the time--live with it.

As you know all boats are a trade off. With the closed tunnel/less tunnel clearance, there is some saccrifice at low speeds. However the hull form handles better down and cross seas than Glacier Bay (which I thought was the best of that size boat going into the chop). The cabin layout is far superior to any of the other boats I have seen in this size--and that is worth the trade--for us.

Bob Austin

[drjohn71a]

Frank, NJ,

I concur with Bob of Thataway on the hull height, except that, in the trade-off for having shallower side hulls, I think the slow and medium stability is increased over the other cats I've been in in the past.

Twin Vee has increased their hull heights on the 29 footer, but not the 26 footer (that I know of) and that 29 footer is a quite tall rig. I think that the taller you make those, the more displacement action you'll be getting.

I absolutely love the feeling of the TomCat on a plane. It seems kind of like a hovercraft to me. I think that low center area provides that effect. The trade-off is, as Dr.Bob mentions, more wetted hull at slow speeds, and some slapping if you head more directly into taller waves. I did not notice the 'slapping' as bad in huge seas when tacking upwind.

As for the steering station, I can stand there if I tilt the wheel up and I am currently significantly over Bob's 35 inch waist. My habit for years, though, has been to stand directly in front of the middle opening window and steer from there, since my old boats allowed that too. I was kind of disappointed that the folding seat does not fold all the way to allow extra galley space, though. As yet, I have just under 300 nmiles on the TomCat, so have not strong enough feelings so dive in and make a change on the helm at this point.

John

[drjohn71a]

Frank NJ,

Also, 'forgot to comment on the thread with water coming in scuppers when loaded aft. Several things have been done to eliminate that problem, unless severe overloading is done. Either they never had 150 gallon fuel capacity, or they changed back to 130 gal fuel capacity. I know fishbox drains and bilge pump outlets were raised. I think scupper outlets were raised, or better valved - no problems on my boat with that.

Some of these boats were equipped with heavy diving compressors, water makers, and a host of other heavy specialized equipment. Any boat, if loaded enough, could submerge the scuppers. Some of the smaller craft report this effect when raising heavy crab traps onto a heavily loaded boat.

John

[Not For Hire]

That Maine Cat 38 is a bold idea at any rate, electric motors, etc. But Mike you don't have to build a new boat. At 17 foot beam that rascal is exactly two 8 1/2 footers. You just have to split her down the middle and reassemble at the ramp - a double wide.

Mark

[Alasgun]

Kind of a trailer trash tuna trawler?
Mike