Author Topic: New Herreshoff 12 1/2 owner  (Read 19855 times)

raygaulke

  • Registered Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
New Herreshoff 12 1/2 owner
« on: January 17, 2016, 06:20:43 PM »
I just purchased a Herreshoff 12 from an owner is MA.

 The builders plate has number 2008, any idea what year she was built.

Her name is SKOOKUM.

How do I add her to the registry?

Ray Gaulke, Old Saybrook, CT

Steve

  • Administrator
  • Registered Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 804
    • View Profile
Re: New Herreshoff 12 1/2 owner
« Reply #1 on: January 19, 2016, 03:09:59 PM »
Number 2008 indicates that she was built by Quincy Adams Shipyard of Quincy, Mass in about 1944.

Adam

  • Administrator
  • Registered Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1378
    • View Profile
Re: New Herreshoff 12 1/2 owner
« Reply #2 on: January 19, 2016, 09:03:31 PM »
Hi Ray - To add a bit more info to what Steve noted - The registry currently only documents original Herreshoff Manufacturing company (HMCo.) boats. During the WWII era HMCo. contracted out (under licence)  some 51 boats between 1943 and 1948 to Quincy Adam's boats yard. These boats were given Herreshoff hull plates - but their hull #'s started in the 2000's; specifically 2000-2050. Other than some slight differences in materials used - the boats are the same.

We've struggled with this "issue" of documenting these boats - should we or shouldn't we (as well as by other builders of wood hulls - such as the early hulls built by Cape Cod shipbuilding when they bought the rights to the 12 1/2). It would be nice to document them, if for nothing else to just separate them quickly from the originals - as we come across them often in research. The difficulty is that little if any of the records for these boats exist has precluded it.

Here are a couple of documents that helps separate original vs copy  -
http://www.herreshoffregistry.org/doc/H12_Identification.pdf
http://www.herreshoffregistry.org/doc/Class_Description_12-footer.pdf

« Last Edit: January 19, 2016, 09:18:05 PM by Adam »

raygaulke

  • Registered Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
Re: New Herreshoff 12 1/2 owner
« Reply #3 on: January 22, 2016, 05:35:49 PM »
Thank you very helpful

Ray

raygaulke

  • Registered Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
Re: New Herreshoff 12 1/2 owner
« Reply #4 on: January 22, 2016, 08:55:57 PM »
As I thought about your reply.... my question is...

 is my boat a Herreshoff or not?

I went to the Quincy Adams Shipbuilding history website and the boats built about 1944 are all listed as ALDEN ONE DESIGNS

I bought my boat thr Artisan Boatworks and it was advertised as a Herreshoff and my bill of sale calls it a Herreshoff.

So it is a Herreshoff?

Thanks

Ray

Ray

Adam

  • Administrator
  • Registered Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1378
    • View Profile
Re: New Herreshoff 12 1/2 owner
« Reply #5 on: January 23, 2016, 07:40:59 PM »
Hi Ray - you most likely own a Herreshoff DESIGNED 12 1/2 but not a Herreshoff BUILT boat. Up until the early 1940's (1943 I believe) all 12's were built by HMCo. - then due to the
 War and the fact that the Herreshoff yard was closing down yacht production they licensed out the last of their contracts to Quincy Adams. When Herreshoff shut down for good (1946) - the sold the rights to the WOOD built boats (and some other "small boat designs") to Cape Cod Shipbuilding. Interestingly CCSB switched over to Fiberglass builds around 1948 which continues to this day.

So do you own a Herreshoff - from a sailing class perspective yes - she would be accepted as a 12 for racing - just as the fiberglass ones are. But would she be considered an "original" - no - those would only be those BUILT by Herreshoff - which is what the registry documents.

None of this of course takes away from the fact you have a wonderful sailing boat - and quality built boat as well.
« Last Edit: January 23, 2016, 09:50:17 PM by Adam »

Charles Barclay

  • Administrator
  • Registered Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 127
    • View Profile
Re: New Herreshoff 12 1/2 owner
« Reply #6 on: January 24, 2016, 12:42:21 AM »
Good snowy afternoon Adam, Ray;

I have a different take on whether Ray's Quincy Adam built 12 1/2 is a true Herreshoff. 

I believe the boat is a true Herreshoff for the following reasons:

1.  The boat was designed by Herreshoff Manufacturing Company (HMCo) designers in 1914 and refined at various times by Herreshoff designers.

2. In 1943 it was a standard business practice to license the manufacture of a good or product.  Alden, LFH, and other designers without a manufacturing capability contracted boats for build by various yards.  No one would look at a Sound Interclub for example and call it anything other than a Sound Interclub based on where it was built. 

3. HMCo benefitted by receipt of a license fee from the build and sale of boats by the QA Yard. 

4. Ray's boat has an HMCo builder's plate on the transom.  If HMCo authorized a builder's plate, it was indeed a Herreshoff.

Somewhere in the MIT files is evidence of HMCo sending personnel from Bristol to Quincy to verify the build process met Herreshoff standards. 

A contemporary example would be Coach, Inc. the maker of fine leather goods, founded in 1941.  It made most but not all of its products in the 1940's, today it designs, promotes, advertises, distributes, and sells---but produces nearly all its products today under contract by firms not owned by Coach.  No one disputes they are Coach. 

To summarize:  HMCo authorized and licensed the build of Ray's boat.  HMCo benefitted from the build.  HMCo likely took action to verify as-built standards.  HMCo allowed it to be stamped a "Herreshoff".  Therefore it's a Herreshoff.

This begs the questions about the non-HMCo built S-Boats from Lawley and US Navy.  I believe the 7 Lawley built boats were built under license, but the USN boats were not.  Yet the USN boats raced against the Herreshoff boats as one-design class as did the Lawley boats.  For the sailors, they were all Herreshoffs.   

Respectfully,


Charles

Adam

  • Administrator
  • Registered Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1378
    • View Profile
Re: New Herreshoff 12 1/2 owner
« Reply #7 on: January 24, 2016, 02:02:53 AM »
Hey Charles - I agree with much of your assessments however there are a couple of items I'm not sure I agree with. First one of the things that made Herreshoff unique was the fact that they both designed and built their boats. Other Designers designs were built of course but they are a rarety. In the reverse Nat would never had allowed licensing his designs while he was the owner - in fact the two times it was done - as you mentioned - the Lawley built S Class of the 1920's and the 12's of the 1940's - are both times that HMCo essentially was going out of business. Licensing was certainly not a common practice in the HMCo business model.

As for evidence of some "oversight" by HMCo by visiting Quincy Adams - not sure I buy this argument either. They would certainly have been built to Herreshoff standards (may be even better than Herreshoff built in the war years) - but they were still NOT built by Herreshoff. Would we consider the fifth Marlin built just after HMCo. closed by the actual build staff (warren) a true original?

With the 12's specifically there are noted differences in the build. Laminated stems, Mahogany planking, and if I remember the ribs were different as well ( if I remember correctly Waldo Howland makes note of these ribs as issues in his auto bio) and a slight difference in shear. A while ago I spoke with Wendy Goodwin to see what if any documentation her Grandfather may have on these as well as the builds they did in wood - they had nothing.

None of this takes away from the 12s or S's built by Lawleys or Quincy Adems/CCSB - they are both well built by very good builders. And as you stated from a sailors perspective a 12 is a 12(even in fiberglass), an S is an S...but I hesitate to document them as original Herreshoffs.

This is a good debate though and certainly can go ether way. I always wished we documented these boats just so we could keep track of them.


Steve

  • Administrator
  • Registered Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 804
    • View Profile
Re: New Herreshoff 12 1/2 owner
« Reply #8 on: January 26, 2016, 01:59:31 PM »
QA built their 12s under license to HMCo using HMCo molds.  They are Herreshoff designed but not Herreshoff constructed.  There were some construction differences, most notably the planking.  HMCo used cedar and QA used mahogany.

raygaulke

  • Registered Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
Re: New Herreshoff 12 1/2 owner
« Reply #9 on: January 26, 2016, 10:43:16 PM »
Since I am a member of the Herreshoff Museum,  maybe I will get an opinion from them.

Not recognising these versions with Herreshoff builders plates sounds a bit "purist" to me

Ray

Charles Barclay

  • Administrator
  • Registered Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 127
    • View Profile
Re: New Herreshoff 12 1/2 owner
« Reply #10 on: January 31, 2016, 11:29:48 PM »
Hi Ray,

The industry standard is, regardless of builder, the designer pedigree takes precedence.  For example, all J24's are considered J24's regardless of who builds them.  From Wikipedia:

The J24 designed by History[edit]
In the summer of 1975 Rodney Johnstone designed and built hull number 1 in his garage in Stonington, Connecticut. "Ragtime" would serve as the master mould for the subsequent hulls. This design allowed him to start the very successful J-Boat company with his brother Bob Johnstone. By 1978 the class was popular enough to hold a one-design regatta in Key West with twenty boats on the line.[citation needed]
Early boats (hull numbers up to 3000) need a lot of work to rebuild their keel shape (move material forward) to make them point and sail fast in light wind. These older boats can be modified if one wants a competitive J/24. New boat manufacturing is done by multiple companies around the world in France, USA, Italy and Argentina.[9] In the US, J/24's are built by US Watercraft.
As of January 2009, approximately 5,475[10] J/24s have been produced. Approximately 20 new boats were produced in 2008. The average price of a complete, new boat without sails was approximately 20,000. (31,370 USD)[10]


No one would dispute a J24 built by US Watercraft is less of a J Boat than an original.

Interestingly, HMCo developed a reputation as a builder so that many boats designed by others and built at Herreshoff today, are lazily called a Herreshoff rather than an Alden built by Herreshoff or Herreshoff-built Burgess.  Some like the MIT dinghies, designed by Owen, are now just "Tech's".   

Wouldn't worry about it too much.  The boats with the builder's plates are real Herreshoff. 

Far less fortunate in providing provenance of origin are those with boat's whose builder plate has been removed.

-Charles