Ribcraft 6.4

[Navman]

Hi, does anyone have any experience of a post 2019 RC 6.4? Apparently it got a new hull shape in 2019. I’d read on here that the 6.4 wasn’t quite as favoured as the 585 but I’d like something a little bigger… but not if it handles worse in a chop. It seems to have been dropped from their website… which maybe tells a story.
Cheers

[beamishken]

Originally Posted by Navman

Hi, does anyone have any experience of a post 2019 RC 6.4? Apparently it got a new hull shape in 2019. I’d read on here that the 6.4 wasn’t quite as favoured as the 585 but I’d like something a little bigger… but not if it handles worse in a chop. It seems to have been dropped from their website… which maybe tells a story.

Cheers

I've got a 6.5 & had it next to a 585 & the 585 is exactly the same hull only shorter. Ive seen the comments that the 585 is the better boat but honestly dont believe it. It's almost universally accepted that with boats that bigger is better so I fail to see how in this instance the shorter hull length can be better. My thoughts are its one of those internet myths where someone makes a statement that something is better & it gets repeated so many times that folk start to believe it. I'd only be convinced if I tried the two side by side. Performance aside the 6.5 has more internal room in it & I'd imagine in most use you'd never think 'this hulls a dog' we had ours out running next to a similar sized northcraft & the 6.5 ribcraft was night & day better than the similarly powered northcraft.

[Pikey Dave]

Originally Posted by Navman

Hi, does anyone have any experience of a post 2019 RC 6.4? Apparently it got a new hull shape in 2019. I’d read on here that the 6.4 wasn’t quite as favoured as the 585 but I’d like something a little bigger… but not if it handles worse in a chop. It seems to have been dropped from their website… which maybe tells a story.

Cheers

I had an old style 6.4, not a bad boat but not as comfortable as a 585. They stretched a 585 to make the 6.4 & added a longer section after the “V” flatted off to the planing pad. It could be a bit harsh in certain seas if you landed on the flatter stern section. I certainly wouldn’t cross it off my list. But if I had the choice between a Redbay 6.5 & a Ribcraft 6.4, all things considered, I’d take the Redbay.
I’ve no experience of the post 2019 hull, but I suspect it’s a completely different beast.

[beamishken]

Originally Posted by Pikey Dave

I had an old style 6.4, not a bad boat but not as comfortable as a 585. They stretched a 585 to make the 6.4 & added a longer section after the “V” flatted off to the planing pad. It could be a bit harsh in certain seas if you landed on the flatter stern section. I certainly wouldn’t cross it off my list. But if I had the choice between a Redbay 6.5 & a Ribcraft 6.4, all things considered, I’d take the Redbay.
I’ve no experience of the post 2019 hull, but I suspect it’s a completely different beast.

To be fair pd your boat wasnt a 'normal' 6.4 it was presumably a factory special build given it had more power than most 6.4/5's are rated to, my very early 6.5 is rated 150hp & every other I've seen was 200hp max & you were also carrying two 115hp engines which is a massive weight penalty over a single engine boat. Which is probably more the reason you are of the opinion the hull was compromised.
I've also heard the 'they stretched the hull' statement which i also find very strange. Many builders build several size boats from the same mould & the two clearly come from the same mould but they start with the larger hull & insert false transom blocks in to it to shorten the hull length. Stretching a hull is far more difficult as it requires them to make a complete new plug & cast an entire new mould in which case its just as easy to manufacture a complete new hull design from scratch with an appropriate sized delta pad. Maybe they just £ucked up the 6.4/5 hull design but I find that hard to believe too. Without speaking to someone who worked in the factory 20 years ago to explain the process I'll never be convinced they stretched a boat. If they had a 585 in the range & a 6.8 in the range & wanted an in between it would have been far easier to shorten a 6.8 than stretch a 585.
Happy to apologise if I'm wrong but without evidence of the factory process I'm not believing the 'stretched' myth.

[Pikey Dave]

Originally Posted by beamishken

To be fair pd your boat wasnt a 'normal' 6.4 it was presumably a factory special build given it had more power than most 6.4/5's are rated to, my very early 6.5 is rated 150hp & every other I've seen was 200hp max & you were also carrying two 115hp engines which is a massive weight penalty over a single engine boat. Which is probably more the reason you are of the opinion the hull was compromised.
I've also heard the 'they stretched the hull' statement which i also find very strange. Many builders build several size boats from the same mould & the two clearly come from the same mould but they start with the larger hull & insert false transom blocks in to it to shorten the hull length. Stretching a hull is far more difficult as it requires them to make a complete new plug & cast an entire new mould in which case its just as easy to manufacture a complete new hull design from scratch with an appropriate sized delta pad. Maybe they just £ucked up the 6.4/5 hull design but I find that hard to believe too. Without speaking to someone who worked in the factory 20 years ago to explain the process I'll never be convinced they stretched a boat. If they had a 585 in the range & a 6.8 in the range & wanted an in between it would have been far easier to shorten a 6.8 than stretch a 585.
Happy to apologise if I'm wrong but without evidence of the factory process I'm not believing the 'stretched' myth.

I’m just going on what I was told during my extensive pre-sale discussions with Ribcraft, & factory visits to view the build & hull layup.🤷*♂️

[CJL]

We've got a 585 and a 6.4 Ribcraft.

The 6.4 is an old style or "narrow beam" based on the 585 hull. It is narrow and the newer, wider beam 6.4 hull is much nicer. I understand this is a "cut down" 6.8 hull nowadays.

That said the 585 we have is an older boat with old style tubes which I think (and I'm biased!) look nicer than the newer 585 with the new tube profile.

Between the two, the 585 is the nicer boat overall but the bigger and much heavier 6.4 is nicer in rough stuff.

Chris

[Navman]

I see what you mean about the new tube shape...and tend to agree. Is that your 6.4 beside the orange lifeboat? Looks not dissimilar at the bow for what it's worth.

[Pikey Dave]

Originally Posted by Navman

I see what you mean about the new tube shape...and tend to agree. Is that your 6.4 beside the orange lifeboat? Looks not dissimilar at the bow for what it's worth.

Unless things have changed under the new owners, you used to have the choice over which tube style you went for. The new style were called “J” type to differentiate them from the traditional sectional tubes. The J type were made from fewer pieces of Hypalon, so fewer joints. Theoretically this made the tube more durable and also cheaper to make. My 6.4 had the J type tubes, I went back to the sectional traditional type for my current RIB. I prefer the chunkier, more industrial look.
This is the 6.4 with the J tubes

[Orwell boy]

Originally Posted by Pikey Dave

Unless things have changed under the new owners, you used to have the choice over which tube style you went for. The new style were called “J” type to differentiate them from the traditional sectional tubes. The J type were made from fewer pieces of Hypalon, so fewer joints. Theoretically this made the tube more durable and also cheaper to make. My 6.4 had the J type tubes, I went back to the sectional traditional type for my current RIB. I prefer the chunkier, more industrial look.
This is the 6.4 with the J tubes
Attachment 143861

What are the two beam widths we are refering too ?
less waste with chunkier tube build as every section is across the hypalon roll ,where as j style may leave 4 metres at the end of the roll usable for not alot
j tubes much easier on the eye for me ,but then thats just the commercial /leisure choice i suspect ,front of j tube on your photo looks same profile as my 5.3 ,but it must have been wider than 2.35?

[Pikey Dave]

Originally Posted by Orwell boy

What are the two beam widths we are refering too ?

less waste with chunkier tube build as every section is across the hypalon roll ,where as j style may leave 4 metres at the end of the roll usable for not alot

j tubes much easier on the eye for me ,but then thats just the commercial /leisure choice i suspect ,front of j tube on your photo looks same profile as my 5.3 ,but it must have been wider than 2.35?

Iirc mine was 2.4m beam

[Navman]

Originally Posted by Pikey Dave

Unless things have changed under the new owners, you used to have the choice over which tube style you went for. The new style were called “J” type to differentiate them from the traditional sectional tubes. The J type were made from fewer pieces of Hypalon, so fewer joints. Theoretically this made the tube more durable and also cheaper to make. My 6.4 had the J type tubes, I went back to the sectional traditional type for my current RIB. I prefer the chunkier, more industrial look.
This is the 6.4 with the J tubes
Attachment 143861

That 6.4 hull looks like a winner from that angle. Guess you can’t properly tell just visually though. Why did you get rid of her?

[Pikey Dave]

Originally Posted by Navman

That 6.4 hull looks like a winner from that angle. Guess you can’t properly tell just visually though. Why did you get rid of her?

I stopped doing the deep diving & it was too big for just me & the missus to launch. It also only had a single seat due to the “Diving Taxi” layout. We downsized to a 545 with side by side Ullmans.

[Orwell boy]

Originally Posted by Pikey Dave

Iirc mine was 2.4m beam

Thats about max for comfortable towing on uk coastal roads imo ,
can anybody suggest what the new post 2019 6.4 beam is please ?

[Navman]

Well their website says 2.4m beam for the 6.4 so similar to the 585 (although website actually says 2.45m for the 585). Chatting to Ribcraft the 6.4 is a narrow beam model. The 6.8 is down as 2.7m beam.

[woodyofarabia]

Hey lads, would you know if my Ribtec 6.5m is likely fibreglass or aluminium? Just about to apply anti foul and wanted to double check, pretty sure its fibreglass myself!


Cheers
Andy

[Pikey Dave]

Originally Posted by woodyofarabia

Hey lads, would you know if my Ribtec 6.5m is likely fibreglass or aluminium? Just about to apply anti foul and wanted to double check, pretty sure its fibreglass myself!


Cheers
Andy

The difference between a GRP hull & an ally hull is pretty obvious tbh.

[paulbrown22]

I wasn't aware Ribtec made anything in aluminium? Ribcraft have produced a few in alu over the years, but I haven't (yet) seen an alu Ribtec.