C-Dory Handling

S

Swampthing

New member
I recently acquired a 1985 22 Angler with a same year 70hp Johnson. Motor runs Ok and the boat is very well off in calm waters, but when we hit a cross wind or a little chop (2 feet or so), we have a very hard time keeping the boat tracking along a straight line. Not always to the left or right, but wherever the wind or waves want us to go.

Has anyone ever put a keel or system of small keels on the hull to keep the boat tracking straight? I hear that people like putting trim tabs on, but I have serious doubts as to whether this will help at our working speeds of 4-6 knots.

Sean
San Francisco Bay
 
flapbreaker-

The "Classic" or original CD-22 (1979-1986) had an Angler (smaller) sized cabin with a simpler interior, and the hull bottom was absolutely flat from a little bit below and behind the bow entry to the stern. It looks like a clothes iron's bottom surface. Absolutely flat with a nice curved border on the sides starting at the front on both sides and symmetrically ending at the perpendicular transom. It was cored with marine plywood instead of the small balsa blocks that are required for the compound curves in the 1987 and later models.

During the period from 1979-1986, they apparently added keel strips to aid in tracking, as described in the link above. It would appear also that an evolution of different configurations took place.

Someone with that model of boat and an interest in the subject could probably contact a number of different owners of these models and definitively trace the step by step changes, although what really matters is that if you have one and you don't like the way it tracks, you can get several ideas on how to change it, including the last, and even improve upon it if you like.

Adding keel strips, might, however, affect how the boat loads and rides on the trailer and may therefore require changes to that vehicle. The original trailers on these Classic models usually have a single large full beam width roller at the rear of the trailer for entry and support.

The transom in these boats is also different in that the engine well is small and centered, with open space along the sides and a shelf/brace part way down that braces the well to the sides of the boat. I think these boats will only accommodate a single large engine, not twins. A kicker will work with the big engine just fine, however, if mounted outboard to one side or the other.

Red Fox has a "Classic" CD-22, although it's been modified about as much as an ex-Greyhound bus turned into a motorhome. Maybe some of our other members can suggest a few photo albums that will best illustrate the original classic hull, deck, cockpit, transom, and interior.

Joe.
 
Swampthing":uw8ch073 said:
I recently acquired a 1985 22 Angler with a same year 70hp Johnson. Motor runs Ok and the boat is very well off in calm waters, but when we hit a cross wind or a little chop (2 feet or so), we have a very hard time keeping the boat tracking along a straight line. Not always to the left or right, but wherever the wind or waves want us to go.
Click to expand...

Sounds to me like your too bow-heavy :idea: :!: matter-a-fact, I know you are.

Given the old 70 horses lite-weight, and the boats ability to accommodate a toon-of-crap in the cabin and v-berth area... you need some more weight in the stern :!: :!: to get the old Classic behavin' like she should :!: :!:

I find the more weight, the better the over-all-handling in most any condition. The weight must be biased towards the stern :!:

Trim-tabs are wonderful, but complicate the handling; making it more like flying than operating a simple boat :o I would not be without them however.

I like very much how the old Classic handles in rough-water.... I believe they are absolutely fabulous for it :love just gota slow'r-down is all. Most times I can keep my hull on-plane and chugin-through very rough-water at even 9-knots :thup Would not want to go any faster even in a v-bottom :idea:

Enjoy the old girl! they don't make'm like they used to :xtongue
 
Thanks to all who replied. Although my CD is stated as an '85, I don't think it has a keel at all (i.e., it is a totally flat bottom). And upon thinking about the trailer, if it did have a couple small keels, they'd be ripped off the first time I put it on the trailer. If I get a chance to change the trailer I'll probably try to put a couple small and long keels on as the link provided earlier suggests (http://www.c-brats.com/viewtopic.php?t= ... light=keel ). I wonder if there is a premade stainless keel available?

In the mean time I wondering if there's a way I can mount removable 'over-the side' keels for motoring at slow speeds (< 6 knots) only. I'd definitely have to make them a breakaway item as I don't want to rip the gunnel off the boat, to which it'll be attached. By the way, I've had great sucess making removable mounts for other over-the-side applications that clamp to the gunnels. Very sturdy and easy. If I could post a picture I would, but I'm at a loss to figure out how.

I'll also experiment with more weight in the back. We had about 300 pounds stored back there. I wonder how much more to add?

I'm not worried about the seawothyness of the vessel as she feels and sounds stable, but try to keep her on a straight line with the GPS and it's a bear. And it seems the slower we go, the worse the handling is. 2-3 knots is worse than 5-6. And the worst situation is having the chop or small swell hit the stern corner of the boat. It just swings her around again and again - I almost think the boat is too light.
 
I was kind of wondering if you could do something more like one sees on sea kyaks - e.g. a real keel (or in your case two) that is hinged and can be lowered/pushed down with a cable. I'm imagining two keels that would be mounted on the transom that would be lowered a good bit into the water. That would allow you to pull them up for trailiering. This might help with the tracking issues.

However at realy low speed, I'm not sure too much can be done about the problems you're describing. There's a lot of boat above the waterline and not much below it and the wind will push it around pretty quickly.
 
Could not spot a kicker on her, and that 'over-the-side' contraption is funny!! :xnaughty I think almost any "flat-bottomed" boat, needs a lot of weight on the transom, to help off-set what you may add in the cabin (peep and gear mostly---lots of goodys to! :smilep )
For me, one of the best reasons for twin-engine, or a big bad four-stoke is the fact the weight is a much needed thing :idea Myself; I have big-bad-Yamaha F-115, and the 8hp Yami' kicker (extra-long-shaft with tiller and the whole nine-yards that weighs (on my scale) 118 pounds :xseek just what the old girl needs---permanent part-of-the-boat weight, where it's needed... should you want to carry weight forward. I don't see how you can avoid this, if your equipping for any length of time out there :love
If you can't re-fit her with nice heavy engines... at least try to get a kicker on there (minimum-weight --- about 80-pounds) add another battery back there. Far as fuel for weight... fuel does not count, it has a way of disappearing :roll:

"keel" personally; I think the one on the main-engine is a hell-of-a-keel :idea:
If there is any "tracking problem" apparent in the old Classic; I am thankful for it :idea personally, I believe there needs to be some amount of "slippage" or "give" when your beam-to in some big waves :smilep

Many trips sluggin-it-out to get home in RedFox, reveals the bow-down attitude, only lets the bow get pushed-around by the waves :crook

~~~hope all my "advice" didn't make-ya-mad ... :xlol :xnaughty
 
Swampthing-

Greg's (Red Fox) analysis of the lack of stern weight being a major contributor to your handling problems would be the easiest thing to check by simply adding some temporary ballast to see if it changes your handling problem. It may well be that your stern is setting to high in the water to dig the chines in properly to the rear to balance the immedrsed bow's tracking effect up front.

In a similar manner, some fast dinghy catamaran sailboats don't even have keels, but rely on sharp chine corners to provide resistance to sideslip, some even having asymmetrical hulls.

If you want to go further, the easiest next step would be to get a Permatrim hydrofoil to mount on the cavitation (anti-ventilation ) plate.
The Permatrim has downturned side edges and would be an assist in tracking.

One could easily build an exaggerated foil of this time to increase the effect, although at high speeds, too much side foil and you might induce other handling problems.

This would certainly be an easier solution that trying to modify the hull or build an elaborate set of side boards, drop keels, centerboards, etc.

Any serious modifications to the boat or hull that could not be removed would negatively affect your potential resale value from most prospective buyers, who are cautious by nature as they shop.

Keep in touch! Joe.
 
Sea Wolf":1fprzjqv said:
resale value from most prospective buyers, who are cautious by nature as they shop.

Keep in touch! Joe.
Click to expand...

~~~~ :thdown BOOOO :thdown C-Dory's are not meant to be pawned-off or sold-off :sad :disgust :moon

:lol:
 
As the owner of an 81 Angler in Alaska, I can vouch that RedFox is spot on about the weight towards the stern affecting handling. My wife an I use our boat as a "movable cabin" and we sometimes carry a lot of stuff.

We have a new 4 stroke 90hp Suzuki and a 9.9 Johnson kicker and I usually carry about 74 gallons of fuel when full. We boat in all types of weather and it is almost always windy here and we have had no trouble at all with tracking.

Do you have the beaching strakes on the bottom of your hull? If not I suspect that could be part of your problem. I have owned sail boats up to 33 feet, power cruisers, a diesel trawler, and various skiffs and this is by far the best boat I have ever had. Small on the outside, big on the inside, and a simple bulletproof design.
 
Salmon Slayer":14ws3411 said:
As the owner of an 81 Angler in Alaska, I can vouch that RedFox is spot on about the weight towards the stern affecting handling.

Do you have the beaching strakes on the bottom of your hull? If not I suspect that could be part of your problem. I have owned sail boats up to 33 feet, power cruisers, a diesel trawler, and various skiffs and this is by far the best boat I have ever had. Small on the outside, big on the inside, and a simple bulletproof design.
Click to expand...

Wow! hell-of-a testimony for the Classic my friend :thup

The 85, and I think the 84 also; have molded-in (glassed-in) strakes.
 
My 83 has the molded in strakes on the bottom
three of them,one down the middle and one on each side about a foot in from the edges
 
My strakes are wooden and not glassed in. They are attached with epoxy and have stainless steel posts embeded into the strakes (I know because I have the start of a small split in the leading edge of the starboard strake I need to fix as a result of an errant rock while beaching!!@#$#@!!).

This looks like a factory installation and not an add on but if anyone knows I would be interested.
 
Salmon Slayer":3h9s8ihk said:
This looks like a factory installation and not an add on but if anyone knows I would be interested.
Click to expand...

All the very early 80's ones I've seen were all bonded to the bottom... I believe this was how the factory did them back then (year---?) If Rogers 83 has the glassed-in ones, then I bet all the pre-82s have the ones like you... :|
 
Yet once again you guys sent me packing on the internet highway...

I learned that a 'strake' is defined as: A single continuous line of planking or metal plating extending on a vessel's hull from stem to stern."

I'm gonna nail me a 2 by heavy on both sides of the keel so I can have some too! :smilep
 
k3nlind":2ajw9q75 said:

I learned that a 'strake' is defined as: A single continuous line of planking or metal plating extending on a vessel's hull from stem to stern."

I'm gonna nail me a 2 by heavy on both sides of the keel so I can have some too! :smilep
Click to expand...

I thought of this :!: - our good-old Classic's were built for rough-landings out there :thup :wink: - not sure if glassin them stakes in was a good idea or not; I'd almost rather have them bonded-on, so I can replace or extend them with a hard-wood, and not have to do any glass-work at all this way :!:
Now; with mine, and it's glassed-in "landers" (aka- "strakes") it might be OK to bond-on some oak ersumpin :? should i ever need extra protection down there :thup ... then again; I think every little extension on a hull is going to cause drag :( maybe it's not a concern for a hull thats doing under 24-kts most the time :)
 
Back
Top