Craig, As you know, I have both an M15 and a Flicka, and would not willingly give up either! I know that your query was M17 vs. Flicka, but perhaps some extrapolation would apply. As for speed, I would say that, subject to conditions, my M-15 is generally faster than the Flicka--especially in light air. The M15 (and I would assume the M17) tend to defy the rule of theoretical hull speed (1.34 x square root of waterline length) on account of light weight, a relatively flat bottom, and slight wetted area. In other words, they can (and do) act as a planing or semi-planing hull when pushed. Bert Felton and I would regularly hit M15 speeds well in excess of six knots on San Francisco Bay (sometimes with white knuckles). The Flicka will regularly and reliably obtain 5 to 5.5 knots in the right conditions, but that is about the limit. The M15 and M17, like most Hess designs (or Hess derived designs), have fine entries that slice through the water with minimum bow wave. The Flicka, on the other hand, has a fairly bluff bow, and pushes quite a bit of water. In short/steep chop, the Flicka will suffer some loss of speed as a result. A look at the relative sail area to displacement numbers for the M15 vs. the Flicka is telling. The M15 has 122 sq. ft. of working sail area for 750 lb. of displacement. The Flicka has 250 sq. ft. or working sail area for 6000lbs. (5500-6000lbs depending on year/configuration). Looking only at these numbers, you would think that the Flicka would be, to use the vernacular, a real dog. In fact, the Flicka can do reasonably well in light air, but not without a good/large light-air headsail such as a drifter. In very light conditions, the Flicka's momentum (AKA 6000#) will sometimes allow it to carry some way between puffs when lighter boats stop. My M15, on the other hand, seems to love light air. I am still amazed at how well this boat does with just the standard working sails. In heavier air, the M15 continues to perform well provided that sail area is shortened commensurately. We have sailed in 30-35 knots under double reefed main and storm jib in relative comfort and safety. The Flicka really comes into her own at wind above 15 knots. At anything above 35 knots, I think I would rather be on the Flicka, though I suspect the M15 is capable of more abuse than I am. I guess I would summarize as follows: The Flicka is a heavy, quality, purpose-built small trailerable cruiser intended for, and capable of, offshore cruising for one or two people. It has a short, stout rig, and is relatively undercanvassed for its displacement. It has a full keel and slack bilges (translates to a lot of wetted area), and a bluff bow. That it performs as well as it does is something of a miracle, and it continues to amaze me. I would, however, take stories of Flicka's beating J-24's around the marks with a very large grain of salt. It does very well indeed for its hull and sail area, but it is no racing machine. The M15 is, well, the best small boat I have ever sailed! I am sure I would feel similarly about the M17. I don't think you can find a better combination of performance, ease of transport, accommodations (relative to size), aesthetics, and build quality. How is that for an evasive answer? Scott M15 #478 'bebe' PSC Flicka In a message dated 8/3/04 4:04:33 AM, montgomery_boats-request@mailman.xmission.com writes:
No one wants to field this one?
The M17 has an L.W.L. of 15' 10" . . .
The M17 displaces 1,550 lbs . . .
The Flicka 20' has an L.W.L. of 18' 2" . . .
The Flicka 20' displaces 6,000 lbs . . .
I know the Flicka has the L.W.L. advantage, speed-wise, but that WEIGHT . . .
And it's reported that M17's can outrun Catalina 22's . . .