Best Yacht Designer in the GRP Era

[JumbleDuck]

If the GT35 was £200k cheaper it would have sold. But the actual design wouldn't have changed.

The model could be a commercial failure, but that doesn't make the design a failure. Likewise a bad design could sell lots but that doesn't improve the design.

If a boat cannot be built at a price which people are willing to pay, it's a bad design, regardless of how good the construction, handling and performance. The same goes for any other consumer product.

When Rustler had asked Stephen Jones to design the Rustler 42, if they then built it out of chipboard and 6in nails it isn't going to sell. That is no fault of the designer.

If he specified chipboard and nails (surely yacht designers do more than sketch lines and say "build something looking like that") then it would be his fault. of course that's taking it to extremes, but I think its important to see "design" as a holistic concept, towards which client, designer and builder (some or all of these people may be the same) contribute.

In the case of the GT35 the USP was the quality of construction, but the quality of construction in turn meant that it couldn't be made at a viable price, In that case it was the builder's contribution to the design which let it down.

For the record I think the GT35 is a good boat.

That's what everyone says, gripes about the poor sails on the demonstrator aside, and although I though the overall appearance was old fashioned and clunky, the hull itself was very sweet indeed.

 

[E39mad]

Apart from poor sales staff, all those are aspects of the design.



The GT35 was build (beautifully, by all accounts) by a well established yard and designed by an acknowledged master. And yet the whole package failed miserably.

You appear to believe that a yacht designer is integral in every aspect of the production and marketing of a yacht. That could not be further from the truth in my experience of selling new yachts to order, 5 different names with various sizes in each.

 

[Seajet]

If a boat cannot be built at a price which people are willing to pay, it's a bad design, regardless of how good the construction, handling and performance. The same goes for any other consumer product.

No, the design could be excellent; if it doesn't sell that's down to poor marketing and someone has either cocked up the advertising or misjudged the market place.

I wonder how many Contessa 32's would sell now, even if they were at a more normal bog standard ' 32' grp job ' price ?



If he specified chipboard and nails (surely yacht designers do more than sketch lines and say "build something looking like that") then it would be his fault. of course that's taking it to extremes, but I think its important to see "design" as a holistic concept, towards which client, designer and builder (some or all of these people may be the same) contribute.

In the case of the GT35 the USP was the quality of construction, but the quality of construction in turn meant that it couldn't be made at a viable price, In that case it was the builder's contribution to the design which let it down.



That's what everyone says, gripes about the poor sails on the demonstrator aside, and although I though the overall appearance was old fashioned and clunky, the hull itself was very sweet indeed.

No, if a boat doesn't sell that is down to marketing, not the designer.

Any new job could be the best boat in the world but if it's advertised wrongly or pitched at the wrong market, it will be seen as a relative lemon for its intended place.

I wonder how many Contessa 32's or She 36's would sell now if they were offered at bog standard prices for ' just another 32 - 36' grp job ' ?!

The Mystery 35 gained the sort of reviews which had me and my chums chatting and drooling, but I don't remember even seeing a real live one; that doesn't stop it being a lovely design.

 

[AndrewfromFal]

On the basis that the fundamental job of a yacht designer is to design yachts that people will buy, it would be hard to beat Roger MacGregor. While in business he sold 38,000 yachts, and although I can't find how many of these were the MacGregor 26, I suspect that they outsold the next biggest seller (Catalina 27?) by a factor of ten or so.

Lines, handling and performance are all very well, but if a yacht doesn't sell the designer has failed. GT35, anyone?

I may have mentioned here before that I worked for a MacGregor dealer for a bit. If your sole criteria for success is units sold then I'd have to agree with you, but if you take into account how many were actually used sailing, then perhaps not. The 'market' for MacGregors appeared to be 3 discrete groups:
- People who bought it because it was cheap 'luxury' item within their budget, but had no specific interest in boating. - The sort of people who at boat shows would never normally get beyond the 'tyre kicker' stage.
- People who thought they'd like to give sailing a try
- People downsizing to a smaller boat, so they could spend less time / money on a boat

The first group were by far the largest, and generally their boats seemed to stay in their driveways, which at least meant there were no warrantee claims. In some cases they seemed to be used as Caravans, which was appropriate for the 26x, given its looks.

The second group generally did a bit of sailing, but soon lost interest and so their boats typically ended up in boatyards / driveways, or in a few cases were sold on so the owners could buy something a bit more purposeful.

The third group (by far the smallest) took delivery of their boats, and generally took one look at the build quality, before finding someone of type one to sell them onto.

So whilst he was very good at shifting 'Units', I'm not sure that there were that many purchasers who rejoiced to be at the helm of one his boats, one a gentle fetch in the summer sunshine.

 

[sailorman]

No, if a boat doesn't sell that is down to marketing, not the designer.

Any new job could be the best boat in the world but if it's advertised wrongly or pitched at the wrong market, it will be seen as a relative lemon for its intended place.

I wonder how many Contessa 32's or She 36's would sell now if they were offered at bog standard prices for ' just another 32 - 36' grp job ' ?!

They are far too labour intensive to fit out compared to today`s boats that are by design moulded & assembled fast with modular units akin to kitchen unit construction & very little skill required either apart from knowing how to apply a bead of mastic cleanly

 

[Judders]

A great working example to support this argument is the Feeling 720 from Joubert & Nivelt. I was fortunate and unfortunate enough to own one.

The design is fantastic. With an inboard engine, a great layout and fin keel the boat planes easily and is a joy to sail yet has remarkable accommodation for its size.

Unfortunately the builders decided to offer an aft cabin version necessitating an outboard well. Both versions were built with the cheapest materials available and bodged together on the cheap, backing plates were glassed in to make maintenance and repair a nightmare. Then a completely useless lifting keel mechanism was bolted on.

The boat was a joy to sail but a pain in the arse to own.

I'd love to get the plans or maybe even take an existing fin keel version and get it built properly.

 

[JumbleDuck]

You appear to believe that a yacht designer is integral in every aspect of the production and marketing of a yacht. That could not be further from the truth in my experience of selling new yachts to order, 5 different names with various sizes in each.

I'm going in part by Tranona's description of how much Bruce Farr does for Bavaria. Even with less comprehensive contracts, I'd be jolly surprised if the designer didn't specify materials and thicknesses.

No, if a boat doesn't sell that is down to marketing, not the designer.

So your plan to relaunch the A22 failed solely because you didn't think you could market it well enough?

The Mystery 35 gained the sort of reviews which had me and my chums chatting and drooling, but I don't remember even seeing a real live one; that doesn't stop it being a lovely design.

Good designs can fail.

 

[snooks]

Good designs can fail.

So does that mean that although they are good designs, the design magically changes if they don't sell?

Sales have little to do with how good a design is.

The Rustler 42 might sell only 60 boats (pulling numbers out of the air) the Legend 31 might sell 500. It doesn't make the Legend prettier, more capable on the water or a better design than the Rustler.

How many Bugatti Veyrons will be sold Compared to transit vans, however which pushes the boundaries of design more?

So which is a better design?

 

[Tranona]

As I tried to explain earlier there are all sorts of relationships between designers and builders. The Bavaria/J&J and now Farr designs is only really possible if you see boats as a consumer product that has to be built cheaply and efficiently. In this case the factory just makes boats and a dealer sells them - although to be fair in recent years Bavaria has increased its involvement in design activities. This kind of relationship works well in building up "families" of boats, but can still lead to flops as in the case of the first Farr effort the 55, but that was due more to misreading the market than being a fundamentally bad boat.

You find similar relationships at the other end of the market, for example with Oyster and Rob Humphreys or Discovery and Ron Holland. However other small volume builders tend to flit around a bit as E39mad says with Northshore having 5 different designers, some only doing one design and very few of each being built. Such arrangements cannot justify the same degree of involvement by the designer except perhaps in the true "custom" end of the market where the buyer tends to pay the designer's fees.

The boating industry is littered with failed companies, particularly builders and few survive in the same format or under the same ownership for more than a few years. Part of this is down to new boat buyers who are very fickle and unpredictable as this thread shows with individuals championing their own designer and boat, illustrating the huge variety on offer to choose from. On the other hand some of the most successful (in terms of volume and stability) are builders who address the "commercial" market, that is charter operators who use perhaps different criteria when choosing designs and therefore defining success.

 

[JumbleDuck]

So does that mean that although they are good designs, the design magically changes if they don't sell?

No. It means, as I wrote, that good designs can fail for reasons which are nothing to do with the design. If the failure is a result of design features, then it wasn't a good design.

Sales have little to do with how good a design is.

It has everything to do with it when the design is for a commercial product.

The Rustler 42 might sell only 60 boats (pulling numbers out of the air) the Legend 31 might sell 500. It doesn't make the Legend prettier, more capable on the water or a better design than the Rustler.

If it sells better and makes more money for its maker then it's a better design, snobbery aside.

How many Bugatti Veyrons will be sold Compared to transit vans, however which pushes the boundaries of design more? So which is a better design?

The Transit van, obviously. Designing a vehicle which sells by the million for £15k a pop is far harder than designing a two seater sports car which sells for a million and loses twice that in each sale. The only real technical interest in the Veyron was in fitting the cooling required into a body shell styling which was fixed far too early. The Tesla Roadster is a far far more technically innovative car.

 

[Alan ashore]

This is thread drift, but picking up on a few posts regarding the relationship between Designer, Builder and end product, I once fell very foul of a builder who thought he knew better than the designer.

Sadly I doubt I'll ever be in a position to buy a new-built boat again, but if I were then I would commission a surveyor to verify that every aspect of the boat complied with the designer's drawings and specifications, and that any proposed deviation was taken back to the designer for him to consider and incorporate into an approved design revision before being put into practice.

 

[PotatoNavigator]

P Jouet

 

[AndrewfromFal]

If it sells better and makes more money for its maker then it's a better design, snobbery aside.

That's rather a one dimensional view of the purpose of yacht design. Fine if you're a shareholder in the company, but not at all relevant if you're caught out on lee-shore in a F7.

The truth is somewhere between.

 

[AndrewfromFal]

This is thread drift, but picking up on a few posts regarding the relationship between Designer, Builder and end product, I once fell very foul of a builder who thought he knew better than the designer.

'Builder as designer' is always a catastrophe in waiting IMHO.

Two of the most hideous, godawful can't sail for toffee boats I ever saw were designed by their builders, and in both cases were primarily a show case for their 'craftsmanship'.

Thousands of hours (many of them unnecessary) went into these aberrations, - they are probably rotting up a creek somewhere, either still in their original ownership or passed onto someone who, in process, narrowed the gap between their money and their sense.

Before anyone mentions Charles E Nicholson, Fife or indeed Nat Herreshoff, I'd respectfully point out they were designers who also built boats, not the other way round.

 

[flaming]

That's rather a one dimensional view of the purpose of yacht design. Fine if you're a shareholder in the company, but not at all relevant if you're caught out on lee-shore in a F7.

That assumes that the purchaser has no responsibility for choosing the boat that most fits what they are going to do with it...

If I bought one of the most highly regarded racing designs of the day, a Ker40, and then set off across the Atlantic shothanded, I might say "this boat is terrible!" But it isn't a bad design, just a bad choice of boat. By the same token, if I bought a Contessa 32, then used it purely as a socializing hub in a marina, it's not a good design for that purpose at all.

Plenty of "good designs" would fail your test. But then plenty would pass that test, but fail other tests that you might equally impose to be "good designs".

 

[Wansworth]

P Jouet

Exactly...... the French understood what could be done with fierglass before the Brits,imho

 

[michael_w]

What you really have to do is work out what task the boat is to perform and find the best one to suit, with the minimum of compromises. What suits hacking round the Channel is not so good for pottering in the Med. Neither are any cop at a circumnaviagation via the great capes, which will be dreadful at cutting up Sir Flogger-Roundcourse on the start line.

Sticking to this philosophy is why I've owned a fair number of boats.

 

[JumbleDuck]

That's rather a one dimensional view of the purpose of yacht design. Fine if you're a shareholder in the company, but not at all relevant if you're caught out on lee-shore in a F7.

Of course, which is why I keep saying "industrial design" and "industrial product". Perhaps Snooks should be forced to review boats by being towed 1/2 nm off a lee shore in F7 and then seeing how they do ...

 

[Concerto]

Unless "best" designer can be defined. Best at sailabilty or racing ability or accomodation or innovation or build quality or construction methods or...........................

Probably the most innovative designer in early GRP use must be Van de Stat. He also used the fin and balanced rudder when long keels were the norm.

My favoutite designer is probably Stephen Jones. A very talented designer who covers a wide range of sizes and styles in both racing and cruising.

Other important designers that made a difference over the past 50 years is very long. I doubt if many on the forum were sailing in the early days of GRP (I started in 1965), just experience sailing older boats that are not in prime condition compared to modern offerings.

A lot has been said about low production expensive GRP yachts and mass produced factory yachts. What I fear in the coming 25 years is an increasing failure in construction of mass produced yachts engineered to "just" be strong enough. This may be delamination of a keel rib, delamination of foam cored hulls, fatigue of flexing on the hull structure, or the ultra thin gel coat wearing away and exposing the underlying GRP. Construction of many yachts is now looked upon as having a finite life as repairs will be too expensive to carry out as the low cost build mens it will be cheaper to buy a new one.

Designs over the GRP period have improved the accomodation of yachts, but at the expense of many sailing qualities. Many designers are required to work from the accomodation outward, so yachts have increased their beam and carried it further aft but this has caused a single rudder to stall frequently so twin rudders are necessary. The increased beam has added form stability, so the ballast ratio can be reduced and therefore saves money and reduces build cost and selling price. Reduction in hull layup by careful engineered stiffening also has the same effect on costs and selling price as less materials are being used. The increase in marina charges has resulted in the truncated bow and stern to save berthing cost, but at the cost of sailing comfort. Most mass produced yachts do not sail in stronger winds as the light weight makes them skittish to handle under power. The traditional shaft driven engine has stopped being used as the sail drive is faster to fit with less alignment problems, but causes poorer handling under power and requires a new hull seal every 7 years, but overtime this will cost the owner more than a shaft based system. The keel rib also allows for furniture units to be dropped into place due to the tightly controlled dimensions, this means it can be mass produced by woodworking companies as a cost saving. Finishing of timber takes time, so timber arrives prefinished, some with look like wood surface coverings, again to save money. All of these things have not been directly due to the designer, but the manufacturer trying to save money and offer increased benefits for buyers.

Returning the the OP's original question, it really have been too loosely phrased for a definite answer. Just what the forum loves.

 

[Sybarite]

I particularly appreciate - in no particular order :

German Frers
Chuck Paine
Michel Joubert
Philippe Harlé (the late)
Gerard Dijkstra
Laurent Giles