Hmmmm... it looks grim For Christensen. But a restructure would be good. Great workers, very poor designers and engineers. Coupled with the worst hull in yachting, this was bound to happen. I hope that the deadwood gets removed and they get enough financing to build a new hull mould. then start over.
they have used the same hull mould forever.. all the boats are based on the same adjustable mould. Some additional bow shapes are added to change the look of the boat but the underwater profile is the same. ( except for the bulb which is added afterwards)
Its not a great shape as its adjustable. I think for a 100-120 footer it would be ok, but on a 160 its stretched to the max and almost barge shape.
Christensen uses only one variable geometry plug mold in thier builds . It can be made longer and beamier but from 140' to 165' same mold. They don't build anything under 140' in the custom series. I agree that they need to re-tool mold wise AND forget the aft engine room concept on 165' yachts , A midship engine room is the preferred balance point and deepest part of the hull for machinery installations.
They were also building Ocean Alexander's 120 and in the past have built some of their own in that range. I was just curious as to why he labelled them the worst hull in yachting. It does at least float upright and one of their former neighbors to the North seemed to have a problem with that concept.
I have done allot of miles on the christensen hull and its not good.. sad as the carpentry department is freaking amazing.
Hull.. Head sea. Slams allot, throws unbelievable amount of spray. The bow is quite shallow and full so you end up slamming (not panting). and as its very full, at speed the bulb comes out of the water. The bulb is very very flat on the bottom this also slams. Its not comfortable going it head seas as compared to any of the others that I have been on. Following sea. Again as the hull is very shallow there is not allot of keel or directional stability. The boat has a difficult time holding course and tends to broach easily. Beam seas. Ok for the most part but again the hull is very shallow and almost a box shape. Very fast snap roll as any hard chine boat will give. But the flat section will occasionally get slammed by a wave. Efficiency. These are incredibly fuel hungry hulls at anything over 12 kts. So I ask you... whats good about it? We should move this from news to technical forum.. I dont know how to do that. Cheesey
I didn't say anything was good about it, was just asking why you said it was bad. Now you've answered my question. Thank you.
We will all keep in mind this is a pretty cheesey post. Your bio says you're a cheesemaker, but your IP address says you're at a yard in the Netherlands. Your hull assessment reads like swiss cheese. It's full of holes. Of course the hull is fuel hungry over 12 knots. It's a displacement hull! This is more smoked Gouda. The flat section is on top of the bulb! Hardly a point that would cause slamming when reentering the water. Personally I think Christensen's bulb is a work of art. It's an inverted semi-symmetrical wing shape that creates a higher negative pressure area above the bulb, drawing water lower along the waterline at the bow, substantially canceling the bow wave. The flat section on top of the bulb actually helps reduce pitch and heave. Look like plenty of keel to me, not to mention a hard chine adds directional stability.
Funny stuff. Im ROTFL. Yachtforums. I really dont think you have done that many miles on one of these hulls. The fact that they are a major sponsor would not be clouding your judgment. I am crew on a yacht.. so my Ip should read like I am in the netherlands.
But im not here to fight with you.. Christensen has a amazing carpentry department, second to none. The paint and finish is also amazing. I am calling a spade a spade, the hull needs a rework. If you dont like it fine. delete my posts.
My judgement is hardly clouded. I see quite clearly when discussing subsurface dynamics. I sea trialed a Christensen in 2008, running in 4-6 footers and it was uneventful. If you put any boat in big enough seas, something is going to slam.
Cool I did 20,000 Nm on one. Yes boats slam. But its a comparative thing. And its very very hard to quantify as every boat handles differently in every sea and even running within sight of another you can be in a totally diffrent sea state. My point was that the hull has been holding the yard back. But really this in not for the NEWS FORUM.. We should have a hull forum. Can you move and make? Thanks
I've had more than one Christensen Captain tell me they were "scary" in a big sea. And these are from guys that have more than just a sea trial under their belt.
Not looking good. http://www.columbian.com/news/2015/feb/09/gates-closed-christensen-shipyards-vancouver-wa/
Certainly doesn't look like any of their magical solutions of reorganization took place. Probably those involved found out how much debt they really had and it scared them away. Interesting to note that "Missing Link" is being worked on elsewhere and that two Ocean Alexander boats are apparently in progress and stopped by all this.
