Republished with permission of the author, Mark Nye.
Nimble Boats built the Nimble 25 Arctic from 1988 - 1993. It evolved from the Nimble 24 and was replaced by the Kodiak in 1993. In addition to the two aforementioned boats, the Arctic also shares the same hull with the Nimble Nomad. The second hand story that I heard is that the Arctic was designed as a result of Nimble’s Owner, Jerry Koch, wanting a personal boat for cruising in the Puget Sound. He asked Ted Brewer, the designer of the Nimble 24, to modify the design and give it a pilothouse. Supposedly, he had several customer orders for other Arctics even before he completed his personal boat. Early on, the boat was simply called the Nimble Arctic. This generated some confusion with the Nimble 24 Tropical so they added "25" to the name. The boat shares the same very large transom mounted rudder as the N24. In addition to the cockpit mounted tiller, the Arctic has an inside helm position with hydraulic steering.
The Arctic is built on a double-ended sharpie hull with almost no flare and very little overhang. It measures 26’ LOD with a 24’2" LWL. The beam is 8’3" and the displacement is listed at 2900-3600# depending upon which source you look at. Based upon the measured weight of my Arctic, I believe that an empty Arctic displaces closer to 4500#. Arctic specifications as provided in a Nimble brochure are as follows:
| LOD: | 26’ |
| LWL: | 24’2" |
| Beam: | 8’3" |
| Draft: | (fixed keel) 2’6" (CB up) 16" (CB down) 4’2" |
| Ballast: | 1000 lbs. |
| Sail Area: | (Sloop) 240 sq. ft. Main 135 sq. ft. Jib 105 sq. ft. |
| Mast Height: | 32’ (measured by author - includes 2’ VHF antenna) |
There are three major choices when it comes to the Arctic; 1) Yawl or Sloop rig, 2) Inboard or Outboard Motor and 3) Fixed Keel or Centerboard. With the yawl rig option, a small 30 sq. ft. mizzen is added which sheets to a boomkin extending aft of the hull about three ft. The mizzenmast is free standing from a "hole" in the deck that is also used by the mast crutch when trailering. A review of the Arctic published in the December/January 1990 Small Boat Journal indicates that the main is smaller on a yawl version, but I cannot confirm this. The same review and other owner comments have stated that the standard mizzen is too small to be very effective. For that reason, the first owner of my boat had the mizzen oversized to approximately 70 sq. ft. The main advantage of the yawl rig is that it provides more sail combination alternatives. The negative is that the third sail requires more work when sailing.
The outboard powered version of the Arctic uses the same arrangement as the N24. The motor is mounted in a motor well located on the centerline at the aft end of the cockpit. The lower unit of the outboard extends below the hull aft of the keel and just forward of the rudder. There are no provisions for easily retracting the outboard from the water either dockside or under sail. This arrangement provides excellent protection for the motor both from waves and accidental groundings. Besides cost, a major advantage of the outboard version is that the motor can be removed and taken to a shop for maintenance vice paying a mechanic to travel to the boat. The biggest negative is that if the boat is left in the water, you have to be aggressive with preventative maintenance (zincs and anti-fouling paint). An optional teak table is available to cover both the motor and well. On the outboard version, remote mechanical and electrical controls can be rigged in both the cockpit and in the pilothouse. Engine exhaust in the cockpit has been a common complaint of some N24 and Arctic owners. This is not an issue with my boat because a hose is rigged to carry the engine exhaust and cooling water out a through-hull located on the starboard side of the motor well. I do not know if this through-hull is standard on all boats or was a custom addition.
Initially, an inboard motor was not available on the Arctic. In fact, in the Small Boat Journal Review, Jerry Koch is quoted as saying that "an inboard engine would bring only weight, noise and expense." Evidently, consumer demand eventually changed his mind. On inboard versions, the motor is installed under the companionway, which takes away some interior space. This does however free the unused outboard well for use as an additional cockpit locker. I have no personal experience but am told that the inboard is louder in the pilothouse and quieter in the cockpit compared to the outboard version.
On the centerboard version, the boat has a fixed shoal draft keel with an unballasted centerboard. It also has a rudderboard that gives the rudder greater depth for better control at low speeds. The CB version looses some interior space to the centerboard trunk but this provides mounting for a fixed fold down galley table. I would expect the fixed keel version to be harder to launch/retrieve at the ramp due to greater depth.
This is a "B" Plan layout of the Kodiak, which is nearly identical to the Arctic’s layout.
The interior layout of the Arctic makes it well suited for coastal cruising by a couple or weekend cruises for two adults and two children. The interior is divided between the forward cabin and the pilothouse by a bulkhead. All the way forward is a large V-berth suitable for one adult or two children. Just aft of the V-berth but forward of the bulkhead is a head to port and a small cedar lined hanging locker to starboard. There is just sitting headroom in the V-berth area, which makes standing use of the head by an adult male a bit of a gymnastics evolution. If you are a larger person, you would also find getting into the V-berth to be awkward. Just aft of the bulkhead to port is the galley, which consists of a sink and fair sized counter area. Some Arctics have a 110V/alcohol stove mounted in the counter top. The galley is mounted at a height that requires you to be seated on the quarterberth when cooking. Aft of the bulkhead to starboard is the inside helm position. On each side of the pilothouse, there is a six-foot plus quarterberth that extends from the helm/galley all the way back under the cockpit seats. The forward two feet of these quarter berths can be removed and replaced by the helm seat and matching "co-pilot" seat to starboard. Visibility from both of these seats is exceptional. Storage is located under both quarterberths, the v-berth and the galley. With five portholes, a bow hatch in the V-berth, a small hatch on the pilothouse roof, two large sliding glass windows on the sides of the pilothouse and the companionway door, ventilation inside the Arctic is exceptional.
Early Arctics had a 7/8 fractional rig that was eventually replaced by a masthead rig. The rig is deck stepped and supported by single upper and lower shrouds on each side. Additional support is provided by a mast tabernacle, which makes stepping the mast a relatively easy task. The mizzen is free standing with either a wishbone or standard boom arrangement.
Most performance oriented sailors would not find the Arctic’s sailing abilities exciting. As should be expected of any boat with a SA/D ratio of 17.3 (per the Small Boat Journal review), the ride is quite sedate with wind speeds less than 10 kts. Regardless of wind speed, the Arctic is not the most windward of boats due to the Pilothouse, which presents significant windage and causes wide sheeting angles on the genny. On the other hand, the Arctic is really enjoyable and comfortable to sail when the wind is blowing. Due to the flat bottom, the Arctic’s hull provides a great deal of form stability. This coupled with the boat’s weight and low aspect rig means that the boat heels very little when the winds pipe up. Because of the boat’s ability to stay on her feet, weather helm and not heel angle is the main indication that the boat is overpowered. For that reason, my reefing methodology is aimed entirely at reducing helm forces. As the wind starts increasing, I usually first stow the mizzen at around 15 kts. Even though this is such a small sail, its position so far aft generates a lot of weather helm. Next, I generally take a reef in the main ~20 kts. If the wind increases more, I start roller reefing the 135% genny as needed. In higher winds, I have found that sailing with the full genny and mizzen (no main sail) to be quite comfortable and balanced. Like most boats that I have sailed, reefing the Arctic when it is overpowered does not really hurt boat speed. The fastest that I have had the Arctic under sail was 6.8 kts with full main and genny broad reaching in 20-25 kts wind. Going to windward, it is pretty normal to see 5-5.5 kts if the wind is above ~12 kts. One negative regarding the Arctic is that its flat hull is prone to pounding in steep chop or big wakes. Another is that with following seas, the large transom mounted rudder will give the helmsman quite a work out if he is driving with the tiller. This is not an issue when using the hydraulic steering.
The Arctic is a very well mannered boat when motoring. My boat, which is equipped with a Yamaha High Thrust 9.9 HP (four stroke) outboard, will make about 6-6.5 kts wide open burning about 1 gallon per hour. I prefer to cruise at about 2/3 throttle which results in about 5 kts burning 1/2 gallon per hour. At slow speeds around the dock, the HT Yamaha provides excellent control with very little prop-walk when going into reverse. Since the prop is directly ahead of the rudder, the boat has good steerage any time the motor is in forward. In reverse, the large rudder provides good steerage as long as the boat is moving. Because of the windage created by the pilothouse, the boat tends to weathervane with the bow pointing away from the wind. If the dock has sufficient depth, docking with both the centerboard and rudderboard down enhances control at low speeds.
When discussing the performance of any boat, it is important to look in the context of the boat’s intended usage. In the case of my Arctic, that usage is primarily day sailing and inland/coastal cruising. As a day sailor, the Arctic’s poor light wind/windward performance are of little consequence to me. As long as there is enough wind to make the boat move, I am content even though other boats may be moving a little faster. On the other extreme, the ability of the Arctic to easily and comfortably handle higher winds allows me to sail when many boats the same size stay at the dock. The pilothouse provides excellent protection from both hot and cold weather which also means that I am sailing when many are not.
The Arctic really shines as a coastal/inland cruiser. The extra weight carried while cruising seems to have little effect on boat speed whether motoring or sailing. The combination of pilothouse and comfortable high wind performance makes the Arctic a comfortable cruiser in adverse weather. Since most cruisers motor/motorsail in light air, the Arctic’s lack of light air performance does not matter much. After three seasons of cruising in both the Chesapeake Bay and St. John’s river in Northern Florida, I find that I can pretty much count on averaging five knots regardless of weather.
Another area where the Arctic excels is with its ease of trailering. The mast is mounted on a tabernacle which makes mast stepping very easy for a boat this size. By standing on top of the pilothouse, an average sized male can step the mast into the upright position. Having a second person to clear the shrouds and keep the roller furler drum from beating on the deck when the mast is going up is very helpful. When trailering, the mast is secured to the tabernacle, bow pulpit and a mast crutch that mounts in the mizzenmast hole.
Due to its flat bottom and shallow draft, the Arctic (C/B version) is very easy to get on and off of the trailer. Nearly any ramp will be adequate and the tow vehicle’s tires stay dry even without a tongue extension. Although I have no personal experience, I would expect the fixed keel Arctic to be more difficult at the ramp.
Due to its weight, a significant tow vehicle is required to pull the Arctic. Since my boat trailer and all gear weighed 6500# on certified scale, I believe that anything smaller that a full sized SUV/truck would be inadequate.
Nimble builds a very high quality boat. The cored hulls are very strong but fairly light. All of the gear is adequately sized and mounted with appropriate backing. After ten years, my boat has virtually none of the gelcoat cracking common on more lightly built boats. Installation of both the inside woodwork and electrical wiring were very well done.
One aspect of the Arctic that takes some getting used to is the visibility that you have when sailing from the cockpit. Initially, I preferred to drive with a hiking stick from the rail in order to see around the pilothouse. Now that I am used to the boat, I am much more comfortable driving while setting on the cockpit seat and looking forward through the pilothouse windows. When sailing in tight situations (like the start of a race), it is a good idea to have a crewman in the pilothouse acting as a lookout.
When I bought my boat, I noticed that the hydraulic steering cylinder which drives the rudder had quite a bit of surface corrosion on the housing and rod end. When I contacted the manufacturer to buy a replacement rod end, the service representative told me that the cylinders Nimble uses were not designed for exterior applications. To date, the system has been very reliable but it does take a little work each year to keep the corrosion in check.
Nearly all Nimbles come with a dark green colored hull which tends to oxidize badly after a few years. I initially tried combating this with a good cleaner wax but the oxidation returned after only 3-6 months. I then tried a polymer coating called Vertglass which I found works very well. I find that the hull looks very good with only annual applications.
One thing that was surprisingly difficult with the Arctic was the installation of a tillerpilot. The short story is that all of the items mounted on the stern (mizzen, hydraulic steering cylinder, swim ladder) made it extremely difficult to find a location to mount the tillerpilot. My installation provides for adequate but not ideal autopilot performance. If I had it to do again, I would consider installing a hydraulic vice tiller type autopilot. Although a hydraulic system would cost more, it would probably provide better autopilot performance.
An unexpected issue encountered when we bought our boat was what we have nick-named the "Nimble Effect." At the dock, nearly every body that walks by stops to ask questions and take a look. On the water, many boats intentionally alter course to come by for a closer look.
(This boat came from the other side of the river to take a picture of our boat.)
After using our Arctic for seven seasons, we could not be happier with it. We find that its many strengths match up well with how we use the boat and its weaknesses are in areas that matter little to us. I would highly recommend that Arctic to anybody looking for a high-quality all-weather trailerable cruiser. I would not recommend this boat to anybody who places the highest priority on sailing performance.
Nimble 24 - The boat from which the Arctic evolved. I would expect it to have better performance than the Arctic.
Kodiak - The boat that the Arctic evolved into. Same hull and rig as the Arctic but a larger pilothouse and different deck design. Has two separate interior layout options: Plan A - Sleeps three with standup head in the pilothouse, Plan B - Basically same as the Arctic, sleeps four. I believe that it makes a much better cruiser than the Arctic but I would expect poorer sailing performance due to increased weight/windage. The Kodiak can also be bought in a Trawler version without a rig.
Nomad - Uses same basic hull as the Arctic. They are generally powered by 35-50 HP four-cycle Honda outboards and make a great small cruiser for a couple.
© 2008 Nimble Boat Owner’s Association. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without express written permission from the Nimble Boat Owner’s Association. All other trademarks or servicemarks appearing on this site are the marks of their respective owners.