Altering a Vega

Messing with a classic design is fraught with potholes. The Vega is a classic and deserves considerable respect, but it has a shortcoming. Bill Garden wrote that, "Every boat can be improved with hindsight."

While her low profile looks great and is undoubtedly salty, visibility forward is somewhat restricted. I had an inquiry as to what to do? My suggestion is to raise the windshield, helm, and helm seat about 18", shortening the flying bridge but leaving it at the same height. There could now be a pilot house door on the port side, otherwise the saloon area remains as built. I'm working with the original arrangement drawing.

Any alteration has to be approached with sympathy for the original intent. The "A" revised profile uses a windshield taken straight from Garden designs of the 1960's, a smaller version of Nisku, Sonia, and Tiger Bay. The second "B" version is of a more current style, and will be roomier and brighter with larger windows.

I agree TAD.

I would probably have one if it weren't for the poor visibility from the helm fwd.

Your center drawing is by far more to my liking. And w a new boat it would be a great time to get rid of that round port. Looks rather out of place and has no similar lines near to support it.

It's sort of a fat beefy boat and I generally prefer narrower and lighter boats like your Yellow Cedar but other than the visibility problem it's such a perfect boat. I think it should live on in some way. Would be pleased to see an add for a new boat based on the W36 hull.

Is your client looking for a one-off new build?

manyboats said:

Is your client looking for a one-off new build?

Click to expand...

No, we're exploring ideas for "fixing" an existing (well used) boat.

Oh and I think the variety of window shapes is a Garden "trademark" and to be respected. The original design included a "day head" in the aft corner of the deckhouse. That port was probably the only ventilation for that space.

Nicely updated Tad! I could go with either windshield treatment though- sorry Eric. The one thing that jumped out at me though is that there seems to be a lot of cockpit space at the expense of saloon space. Is there latitude for that or does the hull narrow too quickly? And I would extend the hardtop to cover the cockpit completely unless fishing from the vessel is part of the plan. I guess that's two things.
Nicely done Tad.

The third drawing increases the volume of the pilothouse: a good thing. See the additional space provided by forward-sloping windows (besides providing more shade):



There's got to be practical/functional reasons for forward-leaning windows. It's not for aesthetics.

Conrad,

Now, now....don't get greedy. I agree the cockpit is huge compared to what many modern boats offer. But that big space (the sole is over 7' long and full width) is also a key to her versitility. There is plenty of space out there for a decent table and four chairs, all under cover. And almost all Vega's now have full side curtains so the cockpit is an extension of the saloon.

Again I think the arrangement reflects the designer's experience and is a result of the times. Today we're told that interior space is king, but how much do you really need?

Hey Tad....I sent my note before seeing your comment that someone was looking to update on an existing hull. But I am gratified to see you call it a saloon vs salon. I like to drink in that space, not get my hair done. So I guess the only reason for expanding the saloon is to ensure that you have enough room to pass out...

Conrad I agree w you completely about the salon space.

As to the window slant it's not a big deal for me. Look what Willard did. They had a slant back design w the last W30 (the pilothouse) built and basically the same thing on the W40 Pilothouse. My W30 Nomad is vertical and may look best of all ??? Not much so but the fwd slant windows look a little stupid like ther'e trying to make a pleasure boat look like a commercial boat. Kinda like dressing up a Dingo to look like a Poodle. Willard never made a fwd slant pilothouse window so I think TAD should show respect for Willard. The W36 is first a Willard.

As for the round port I had one on my aft salon door and took it out. The rectangular window in it's place looks much better .... And I can see lots more through it.

I love the look and practicality of both. I'd also have to give the edge to the third sketch but more for practical reasons than pure appearance. More roof line for solar and other stuff, greater feeling of interior space at the helm, shade over the helm area and instruments. Respecting Willard with an upright windscreen but not with the original style port.....six of one, half dozen of the other. They both still look like Willards. Wish I would have thought of it and Photoshopped such a re-style. Thanks for posting your insightful ideas, Tad.

A. Although I would be intrigued to see what it would look like with a vertical wind screen.

I believe the windows that slant forward at the top are to help cut down on glare from the sun. But I wonder if there are other practical reasons.

The window slant isn't the main thing I don't like about the 3rd option. It's mostly the up-sloped roof line. Makes it look like a tug boat in a child's book called "Little Toot". The tug in the book is a child that is a tug and he wears a baseball cap w the bill turned up. Looks cute but really stupid. The Victory Tug is extreme in this regard. I assume that the floor is ramped up like the roof and wouldn't like that either. I like nearly flat floors and roofs. Multiple floor and roof heights is the answer.

The slant fwd windows don't cut down glare. It's the extended roof that does that. See my boat in the avatar. Slanted windows add weight and aren't as strong but it's fly stuff. It's just a style thing.

Good discussion, thanks to all

Here are the thoughts for today. Per Many's concern the B roofline is flatter and as suggested by NS, C is an old-time tug style with vertical windows and visor. The door has disappeared from the starboard side.

I don't think C fits at all. I really like the exterior look of A but fear the top of the windows will be right on your nose, feeling claustrophobic. I grew up in pilothouses with windows raked forward and I really like the practical aspects of the B version. Besides reducing glare, the forward rake is much better at night, and it provides lots of room above the windows for radios, etc.

For some reason the sketches are very faint at the small size, click on them to see it properly.

Aesthetically I just can't get my head around forward sloping windows regardless of functionality. I prefer both your B drawings with a slight preference to the last B. Very nice improvements Tad.

Tad, what are the thoughts of the original inquirer?

Not a vega but one of my favorite Garden designs .

I really really like C except for the undercut below the windows.

Here's a fishing boat in Alaska w a hull very much like the Garden design PM posted. The garden design is a bit shallow by comparison.

Pack Mule said:

Not a vega but one of my favorite Garden designs .

Click to expand...

Although it shares a lot of design cues a la Garden, this is actually a Kokanee 43 design by Sam Devlin. I agree though that it is a beautiful design!

Conrad said:

Although it shares a lot of design cues a la Garden, this is actually a Kokanee 43 design by Sam Devlin. I agree though that it is a beautiful design!

Click to expand...

My bad , I really thought it was a Garden .I like the c version .

LaBomba said:

Aesthetically I just can't get my head around forward sloping windows regardless of functionality.

Click to expand...

Yep! We are all victims of our experience and prejudice. But that's a good thing because it would be a boring old world if everybody drove the same boat....not to mention putting me out of business.....

The prospective purchaser has not yet expressed an opinion, other than some enthusiasm for the concept in general. Another issue is how any of these work in 3D. It's one thing to look at profiles, but when I model this in three dimensions it may not work. We used to have to guess at proportions, and there were occasional horrible surprises. If this goes forward the modeling will be interesting.

I have to pick "B" as my favorite look, but with the fly-bridge creeping into the back of the pilothouse, this is going to be a small space. If I had to lay out the bucks for such a modification, I'd take "C" for the additional sense of space it would add in front of the forehead, even if it was only 8". I'd be fairly safe to assume that the guy looking at the mod isn't a Willard purist, otherwise he wouldn't be considering it to begin with.

Lose the flying bridge and I really like C; but it doesn't work with it. I could go with the B or B revised but the angle of the venturi has to be complementary to the wind screen. That and the scallop curve of the bridge side has to reflect Mr. Garden's original curve.

Either way, my eye is drawn to the sweet sheer, which makes it a fine looking boat.

Yes, lose the flying bridge. The savings will be many thousands of $$. Haven't seen the need for one either.

Well, I know I got chided for suggesting extending the saloon, but if it were extended I think you could make the flybridge work on the B design. I would want to see the starboard pilot house door reinstated as well. But as Tad mentioned, a 3D rendering could nullify all of our thoughts.

Conrad wrote;
"I know I got chided for suggesting extending the saloon"
I agree w you Conrad and think TAD is completely wrong about this. Trawlers are all about space and comfort. Look at all the sundeck boats here and "3 story" boats. Most all are wide and use most any trick to get more cabin space. A very significant exception to this is the relatively high popularity of walk around decks. Having said that the amount of aft cockpit is a decision for TAD and his client but if this "new Willard" was headed for the trawler market TAD's boat would need to shed deck space for more cabin. And the W36 is very full aft so space there for more salon is definitely not lacking. So IMO extending the salon would be a must as a trawler in the marketplace but this boat is going to an individual and he may be more inclined to a boat more like a sport fisherman.

As to FB more trawler people like them than not (sorry Mark) so as a marketplace trawler it should be there. But for guys like Mark and myself it would be nice if it were an option. The abbreviated FB as delineated in TAD's drawings is IMO an EXCELENT compromise FB. Eagle used the AFB nicely on their 32 and Willard had a similar configuration on the W30 Horizon.

manyboats said:

Trawlers are all about space and comfort. Look at all the sundeck boats here and "3 story" boats. Most all are wide and use most any trick to get more cabin space.

Click to expand...

I hate to admit that, at least from a marketing perspective, you're right. A lot of old fuddys like myself retiring (and Admirals especially) want keel/condo space. Biminis turned into oxygen tents and oxygen tents have given way to hot-houses, all to create controlled, weather resistant spaces. I'd bet I haven't seen a half dozen styles of boats that were complemented by their canvas treatment. Making it a "hard" alteration is more pleasing IMHO.

Regarding Tad's proposed alterations, if I were looking at the purchase of that size of trawler and such a modified Vega were on the market, I'd likely be eager to view it, even more, I'd probably pay more for it after assurance from a qualified Naval Architect that the vessel's stability was intact. It is the weight distribution and CG that concern me the most about these kinds of mods.

Doing the mods on my own boat, I've accounted for every pound of weight taken off and put on... along with it's distance from the CG. I've got more to put on right now and part of the plan is what I'll be taking off. Todays materials give you some pretty good flexibility. Building a pilothouse or fly-bridge could be half the weight and twice the strength of the old ones (for a price).

manyboats said:

...

As to FB more trawler people like them than not (sorry Mark) so as a marketplace trawler it should be there. But for guys like Mark and myself it would be nice if it were an option. ...

Click to expand...

I agree people should have a choice of flying bridge or no flying bridge. Lots of cost savings, reduced windage, and avoidance of increased boat motion if one doesn't purchase a flying bridge.

markpierce said:

. Lots of cost savings and reduced windage if one doesn't purchase a flying bridge.

Click to expand...

Even more if you don't purchase a boat at all.

I raised my helmseat way up so my hair is brushing the overhead but although that seems fine on the open water, I still want to head for the bridge when in traffic. The curved windows look nice but you can't run a wiper on them and the mar resistant Lexan can't be bent anyway.