question about the Fisher range

[kalbahnov]

I’ve been trying to understand the market for Fishers (30,31,32,34,37,46). One thing that jumps out at me is that the 31 foot boats appear to have been written out of official Fisher history. Does anyone know why, or more about these boats in general?

These unloved 31s happen to be configured quite a bit like the much more sought after 34 foot sloops. Remarkably similar boats (both sloops, both have a quarter berth/cabin, both have a starboard side galley along the length of the boat in the 90s era models); yet one is a bastard and the other a star. Can the sailing performance really be that different?

Before you answer, please consider that if google can find it, I’ve already read it. Looking for first hand knowledge specifically of the 31. TIA.

 

[Sinbad1951]

I understand that the 31 was not a commercial success and only a limited number were built. I think the F34 wheelhouse was put on it and the wheelhouse doors were doubled to allow them to fold back and allow wide open access to the cockpit. Personally I really like them as they provide much more room for the boat length altho they are not easy to acquire due to the limited numbers.
I have never heard any comments on the ability of the 31 to sail. The 34 has a good sailing reputation altho it must always be remembered that the rather full bow on any Fisher limits the wave piercing that it will do whilst thrashing to windward.
For a definitive history on the Fisher you can read David Skellorns article under 'Fisher Yachts'. Mr Google will show you the way.

 

[kalbahnov]

Ah well. I did at least figure out what makes Fishers so attractive. It's definitely a foot fetish, as the wheelhouse makes the boat look like a comfortable old boot.

 

[Sinbad1951]

They are a joy to be on. Very forgiving at sea tho close quarters handling is an acquired art. That bow thruster will be useful. Looks like someone went a bit mad with a saw and cut the teak off the scuppers. Timber usually runs along the full length. Pretty colour. In mast furling and copper coated too...hmmm

 

[E39mad]

The 31 is an extended and widened Fisher 30 with (as mentioned by Sinbad) a Fisher 34 wheelhouse. The 31 replaced the 30. About 35 Fisher 31's were built if I remember correctly - they were all sloop rigged. It is not well proportioned in comparison to other's in the range and did not sell well for this reason. The 34 is most modern of all the hull designs and sails well especially in sloop rigged form. The mark III interior of the 34 had a decent sized heads (a moulding from a Vancouver 34) and a smaller saloon with linear galley and much larger forward cabin as the heads went aft. The thinking was when you have a wheelhouse as well the lower saloon does not need to be enormous.

The Fisher 32 was built in Australia under license - none were built in the UK although I believe one or two were imported.

 

[dancrane]

The 31 is an extended Fisher 30 with a Fisher 34 wheelhouse...not well-proportioned in comparison to others in the range and did not sell well for this reason.

Whilst recognising your close knowledge of Northshore, E39mad, I find that reason unlikely. The wheelhouses of the Fishers 25 and 30 really missed an opportunity in terms of accommodation - they don't attempt to be any more than the name suggests - enclosed wheel shelters giving good working visibility...

...whereas, dropping the F34 wheelhouse onto the 31 hull, provided versatile well-lit interior space without the bigger hull beneath.

Maybe sales-figures during the F31's period of availability might indicate it was tempting potential F34 buyers to go smaller? The F31 is differently proportioned from the others, but I doubt the big wheelhouse would have turned anyone off.

That may or mayn't be possible to determine. Anyway, it isn't the reason I woke this thread up...but since contributors here know about the Fisher models, I'll be glad to pick their brains on the separate subject of modification to the Fisher 25 hull.

Somebody somewhere addressed the problem of the F25 not drying out upright, by fixing bilge-plates to the hull. Is that likely to be a huge operation requiring wholesale reinforcement of the hull where one or other plate takes the weight and presses against it, and a lot of big watertight-integrity-compromising bolt-holes? Or is the work likely to be a quick fit-and-forget?

There's a good photo of the retro-fitted bilge plates, amongst the many pics here: https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=f...0ahUKEwibkNzEp7DSAhWJD8AKHZUcDUkQsAQIGQ&dpr=1

I realise it's a marginal-interest enquiry, otherwise there'd be more instances of it having been done...and perhaps Northshore themselves might have offered it, in the yard.

 

[jac]

Whilst recognising your close knowledge of Northshore, E39mad, I find that reason unlikely. The wheelhouses of the Fishers 25 and 30 really missed an opportunity in terms of accommodation - they don't attempt to be any more than the name suggests - enclosed wheel shelters giving good working visibility...

...whereas, dropping the F34 wheelhouse onto the 31 hull, provided versatile well-lit interior space without the bigger hull beneath.

Maybe sales-figures during the F31's period of availability might indicate it was tempting potential F34 buyers to go smaller? The F31 is differently proportioned from the others, but I doubt the big wheelhouse would have turned anyone off.

That may or mayn't be possible to determine. Anyway, it isn't the reason I woke this thread up...but since contributors here know about the Fisher models, I'll be glad to pick their brains on the separate subject of modification to the Fisher 25 hull.

Somebody somewhere addressed the problem of the F25 not drying out upright, by fixing bilge-plates to the hull. Is that likely to be a huge operation requiring wholesale reinforcement of the hull where one or other plate takes the weight and presses against it, and a lot of big watertight-integrity-compromising bolt-holes? Or is the work likely to be a quick fit-and-forget?

There's a good photo of the retro-fitted bilge plates, amongst the many pics here: https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=f...0ahUKEwibkNzEp7DSAhWJD8AKHZUcDUkQsAQIGQ&dpr=1

I realise it's a marginal-interest enquiry, otherwise there'd be more instances of it having been done...and perhaps Northshore themselves might have offered it, in the yard.

Not done it but bear in mind that a fair proportion of the boats weight could be supported on that bilge plate, especially if she dried out at an angle where you could get pretty much all her weight if the angle was right ( or wrong)

Throw in some pounding as she settles and the risk of damage if something should suddenly give way and i'm sure you could see the wisdom of having someone with naval architecture skills and able to count up a bit to run some calculations and design an appropriate set up.

 

[James_Calvert]

By chance I just came across the YM 'sailing review' of the Fisher 31 in the Oct 80 edition.

They were rude about the too big dinette and the utility of a quarterberth where the occupant would have to climb over the dinette and anyone using it at the time.

Anyone wanting this review send me a PM but be quick because I'm in the process of reviewing/dumping old mags in advance of a house move.