Marinaut photos

oldgrowth

New member
The following photos are of the Marinaut 215. They will give you an idea of what the boat will look like. The first four are taken in our shop in Olympia and the last in the series is when we moved it to the old C-Dory site in Kent for the Fiberglass work. The cabin mold should be done in a few weeks. What you see for the hull is the mold. The top is the plug from which the mold will be made.

P1020301.jpg

P1020297.jpg

P1020310.jpg

P1020307.jpg

P1020352.jpg

For more on the boat you can go to our web site HERE.
_______
Dave dlt.gif
 
Milehog":1lwor5fl said:
Suddenly my cherished 22' Cruiser seems just a little dated.

You read my mind...

So far, I've only one complaint with the design. Being a single + kicker guy, I dig that the motor well doesn't handle twins, with the benefit of more enclosed storage from the cockpit.

However...I'm also an "orb" guy. I love my big, orange round fenders. Two of them fit perfectly in the motor well on a 22...I'm not seeing anywhere decent to store them on the 215.
 
Dave

Sure good to see this dream boat about to become reality. As much as we love our 22 C-Dory if we were buying now we would be in line for a Marinaut 215.

The built in extra tank option is very near what we try to carry extra in containers on our long cruises. The sleeping area is designed very close to how we sleep without the make do manner we use. Side by side forward seats with foot rest for the First Mate and the list goes on and on along with a great look that should also be equal to or possibly more seaworthy than our 22 C-Dory.

Best Wishes,

Jay
 
Thank all of you guys for your positive comments.

The boat design was inspired from the members of this site. We listened to the members of this site and tried to incorporate as much of their constructive suggestions as we could work into a 21’ 5” boat. There was a lot of feedback on our web site from the C-Brats and it helped immensely in the final design of the boat. There were a lot of good suggestions that we were unable to incorporate into the design but as so many of you have said, “any boat is a compromise” and Ben and I believe this is a good one.

I hope it is a natural progression of the C-Dory design but that does not make the original C-Dory less of a boat. After all, I have one and I love it.

Bill – look at the line drawings HERE. For a larger view of the line drawings click on it. If you leave out one of the optional fuel tanks or the live bait well, I believe you will have room for your big orange round fenders. You may even be able to get one between the batteries. If not, remember the deck is over a foot longer than the 22 C-Dory so you can always add a storage box in it.
_______
Dave dlt.gif
 
Dave-

Aside from everything else utilitarian and positive, the lines are esthetically very much an upgrade, just like was done with the CD-22 in the 1987 re-design of the older "Classic into the Cruiser and Angler.

Kudos to Ben and yourself for the artistic achievement.

Almost anybody can design a knock-off boat from existing designs.

It takes someone with some extra sense of purpose and artistry to come up with a new classic design with that kind of beauty embodied in it.

Joe. :teeth :thup :rainbow
 
I am wanting to see how the ride and handling compare to similiar C-Dorys. While I have no measurements or lines to study I suspect the boat will pound a little less in rough water while still getting excellent fuel milage. The transom treatment makes sense with it's versatile features. Pushing the tankage foreward will yeild real advantages. The interior is inspired with it's out of the box thinking. The flared bows ought to yeild a dryer ride while reducing some volume in the berth though this may be a moot point with the convertable sleeping area.
IMO the boat looks OK with the reverse windshield. Frankly I like the C-Dory's cabin profile better.
 
If I was in the market this boat would be at the top consideration; I hope sea trials go well. Will look forward to owner reviews here as the Marinaut 215 acquirers real time/hands on use out on the water.

At first the sleeping area was a mystery, but now I understand the approach and like it...I made similar modifications to our c-dory so we can be closer by adding an additional segment onto the birth area. :note
 
I like it too. From my C-Dory usage in the past, I would probably add the port side aux tank and use it for the usual trips, leaving the two main tanks empty unless a long cruise is scheduled. Fuel gets old too fast, especially in a craft that is more of a sipper than a gulper. Port side because with my arse behind the helm I have much less of a chance for a major starboard tilt at displacement speeds.

Superb Powell boat or following El & Bill up to Alaska.

Oh, and for Bill's "orbs"? Mooring absolutely parallel to a pier is not a requirement cast in stone. 90% of the time we're perfectly safe and happy with the cockpit gunwale parallel and 6" easily stowable fenders. On the other hand, it's easier to remember to PULL THEM INTO THE BOAT when you leave the pier if they're big and orange.... :roll:

Don
 
Sneaks":38pm561f said:
Oh, and for Bill's "orbs"? Mooring absolutely parallel to a pier is not a requirement cast in stone.

Agreed...but they're without a doubt, the most universal fender I've used. I carry the 6'ers as well, but rarely use them.

With the orbs, you simply drop them so they float, remove slack from the line, and secure. On a 22, one on the aft cleat, one on the cleat outside the cabin slider window...which the orb perfectly fits through. Works at the vast majority of docks.

They also are the best solution I've seen, for rafting two C-Dorys together...place one for and aft between the hulls, and forget about the boats ever touching each other.

Yup...I like my orbs. However, you're wrong that having such obvious and big fenders, somehow prevents one from taking off with them deployed. I've done it a few times. And unlike the 6'ers...when you leave an orb deployed off the aft cleat and hit the throttle, let's just say it's an experience you'll not soon forget. They get drug under the water, causing an immediate and obvious pull to the side they are deployed on. And, when you slap you head with the inevitable "oops" and cut back the throttle, the rebound is equally exciting. The orb returns home, delivering a huge spray of water right into the cockpit.

Which being a Brat, might come in quite handy. I'm hoping to nail an unsuspecting Catman some day.
 
I've liked the look of this new boat ever since the drawings first appeared. It looks to be a refinement of the Cape Cruiser as much as it is a direct descendant of the C-Dory proper. Check the reverse hard chines and the stern cross-section in particular. On the other hand, based on the line drawings it looks like dead rise at the stern may have been flattened out from the 5 degrees of the Cape Cruiser - more like a C-Dory? (Just a thought, but perhaps in addition to their real aesthetic appeal, the raked cabin roof and reverse slope windshield offer some protection from the "look-alike" legal problems of the Cape Cruiser cabin design vis-a-vis the C-Dory cabin design - which is now owned by SS. And maybe the splashwell change and greater stern uplift of the new hull have the same benefits vis-a-vis the Cape Cruiser hull design - now also owned by SS,)

The idea of the "saddlebag" fuel tanks has intrigued me for a long time. It certainly represents a more efficient use of space, and does move weight forward. However, it also moves weight up, and out, potentially altering handling is some unwanted ways. From the line drawings, I'd say the center of mass of the fuel weight is outboard of the chine. Even with both tanks carrying the same load, this weight distribution might be worrisome. Drawing down only one side, for instance to balance passenger or gear loading, might be an especially bad idea. I know some owners have retro-fitted saddlebags on C-Dories. Any comments on handling changes?
 
granted, i only used my boat three times before i put in saddle tanks, i do think the boat handles better with the saddle tanks, less of a tendency to get loose at higher speed, ive run one totally dry before using the other, and never noticed much a difference in the trim of the boat even without tabs, i have no complains with saddle tanks.
 
NORO LIM":1pq99n1o said:
...Just a thought, but perhaps in addition to their real aesthetic appeal, the raked cabin roof and reverse slope windshield offer some protection from the "look-alike" legal problems of the Cape Cruiser cabin design vis-a-vis the C-Dory cabin design ...

I had the same thought.
I'm loking foreward to seeing one. There are many details that make sense. Cleat placement for one, the rear fenders will now stay in place rather than slipping behind the transom as they are prone to on some C-Dorys.
I suspect a portion of the waterline beam is narrower than on the C-D 22'. Dave, is this so?
 
Great looking boat. As a fisherman, the "lost" back 2 feet of the cockpit really hurts, ?cockpit for 2 people? The "classic" still is a better fishing design. My inquiry about an Angler version was a no. But this looks like a great cruiser. Can't wait to check out the real thing.
 
Catch 22":35jvnlqs said:
. . . i do think the boat handles better with the saddle tanks. . .

Very interesting. Thanks for the input.

Not to beat a possibly dead horse, but if, as Milehog conjectures ". . . the waterline beam is narrower than on the C-D 22. . .", I wonder what the implications might be for the even more "outboard" weight of saddle tanks on this hull. Maybe it's just me, but I imagine a 150 pound person "hiking out" over one gunwale or the other. On a boat his size, it just seems like it might be destabilizing.
 
Back
Top