New-York tribune., 1901-08-18

was and the extreme hneness of the run in this
boat may have a wholly contrary effect Ihe same
thing may be remarked in the Constitution. which
with her beam carried further aft than in the
Columbia looks much wider boat, though there
seems to be chapter and verse for the statement
that there is only fourteen inches difference Inc
excess of overall length in the second Shamrock
the boat being here 137 feet long-takes away, no
doubt from the impression received as TO her
beam. and if, in truth, she does measure eighteen
inches more than the Columbia in width, the eye
does corroborate the tape
LIKE GARDNER BOAT.
With the exception of those valuable experiments
in the scow type as exhibited in the Rochelle. the
Cartoon. the Independence and the Huguenot, 1t
may be admitted that the latest racers of to-day
have a deal of general family likeness. and in the
grace of sheer and fine drawn oyerhangs there will
be found reminder of the Columbia in the model
of the Shamrock but not any more than between
the Herreshoff Sis and the Crowninsheld jolly
toned in many papers in the last few days that
VA HaisGn On , mas Peeh coPglng ferrtSnoH M @
but the fact is that Watson comes much nearer
the new Shamrock's TIin and in the general ease
of line she much more resembles Gardner,s cham
plpn, the Mira and his later craft the IoorWlne ma
fort which as Herreshoff is reported to have said
contains his last and best possible design.
ends Of beauty that We're lyins round. one ought
no entirely new IDEAS Pegard3g ar Ships elegance
to sgggest on the contrary there is deal of
in se1Way the ENTRANCE r Of thf
than the Columbia. the lines being stTaighter
and deeper. 1t must be admitted, after watch
Columbia sometimes hits water pretty hard. and
there is no doubt that Mr.. Watson has endeavored
Whether he may not lose other valuable qualities
any knd Of sloppy szy and i Gmpy wateT Temans 9 m
Tor the month of SePtember 10 reveal
where sht trails out to a sternhoard only about
seven feet wide, atson has secured a finer run
than that of the Columbia but whether he has done
this at the expense OF supporting power for his
ber. Judged solely by the boat and not at all by
anything that the silent Mr.; Watson has said it
Is pretty certain that he thinks a fine
run than anything else about the boat-that he
able buoyancy to the convex lined spoon bow that
was first made fashionable by the Herreshons in
prefers that the beam Of the boat shall be carried
further forward proportionaely than it was in the
columbia Thus. with her over all length OF l37
TO lie down on in spt o. the fact that she begins
to taper 10 her narrow sternboard at point further
forward than the Columbia
of M the 9s ody o Tn he chSSgr @
seems 70 have Stacker biIges and straighter lines
on the way from the deck TO the foot of the keel
ment in any kind Of disturbed water. The fin
seems to he considerably longer than the Column
not look So Il IS bea9tifuiiy @ f desigDeG n WITH
the bulk Of the weight forward and taperng aft
The fin. like the whole boat has aggressive
t is not so hck 1hroash from
sid9 10 side in the Columbia and will disturb
less water and d. IL more gradually. The rudder,
although going all the way TO the foot Of the keel
seems narrow compared with those Of the
Herreshof boats. but with finely balanced craft
any further fora and aft area would no doubt be
unnecessary
HARD TO MAKE COMPARISONS.
As TO any comparison between the Constitution
and the challenger. It must be said at the start
that they In effect totally different boats built
on different ideas and 10 work out different prin-
cples. The principal d!nertnce is this. that Mr..
Herreshof has relied chiefly hull power and
beam to carry sail. He has extended his beam aft
in way that brings the boats poles apart In de-
signing idea. Mr. Watson has gone to the limit 70
avoid drag Of water aft. and IL may be that he
has sacrificed power IN this aim. Mr. HerreshoH
has worked for power. and may have sacrificed
scientific and steering quality TO carry his
better.
At present II looks II the coming duel wOuld.
II the Constitution be chosen. go or chiefly this
main difference. There seems to be no reason why
the Constitution should beat the Shamrock
when the water Is perfectly fiat, and when the wind
IS 10 match. The challenger seems 10 suggest eK-
traordinary activity and Fenstiveness in wtndwbTd
work The sails not yet bent. and nothing can
yet be said 10 her rig but with sail plans and
rigging IN equally good conditions this boat ought
to beat the first Shamrock every day IN the week,
and especially In windward work