When the site opened in 2004, this first photograph was a mystery. The boats pictured were of interest because they clearly used the same hull as the SeaHawk. Now we know they are Pedros.
The superstructure moulding is very different from the SeaHawk. From the bows the larger windows are obvious, made possible by the higher cabin roof. The cockpit too is different, with no seating or lockers in the area beneath the sweep of the tiller, leaving it completely clear. The rig is significantly smaller as well.
Since the first pictures arrived more information has trickled in. The oldest information, received so far, comes from a 1975 Sales Brochure (illustrated above - The link opens a 1Mb PDF file containing the brochure and price list for a part-built boat) and from "Bristow's book of sailing cruisers 1975", seen below. It seems Bristows had old information, as the price they quote for a fully finished boat is some £60 cheaper than that shown in that year's brochure.
A little later is an advert, taken from a copy of "Yachts and Yachting" magazine, dated 6 January 1978. This shows that not only was this boat, built using the SeaHawk hull sold as a Pedro, but it was also available in a deep keel variant, known as a Señorita. Although sold under a different name, the sail emblems and number series suggest that they count as a single design.
It had been known that the Pedro did not have the SeaHawk's drop keel, and the information obtained later confirmed that with the figure of 18" draft. More interesting, however, is the deep keel version, as this ties in with the information from the 1971 Yachting World article, which show that the SeaHawk may have also been offered with a fixed keel at some point, especially where an inboard engine was supplied.
Ted Crawford, who used to own a Pedro, confirmed this saying, "I rebuilt a Pedro but did not keep it very long as she did not sail very well." The two pictures below are of his boat. It appears that Ted's Pedro had a rebuilt cockpit which must require a non-standard tiller and rudder.
It's easy to see why Ted felt the Pedro did not sail well. The combination of the significantly smaller sail area, lack of drop keel and the higher cabin roof, with the inevitable greater freeboard, must, indeed make windward performance less good than the SeaHawk. However, that higher cabin roof offers some worthwhile extra headroom and that could be important for some.
The first photos received of a Pedro's cabin showed some distinctly non-nautical wooden roof supports, which are hard to believe were standard equipment. One photograph reveals a central steel pole, an extension to the mast, with the bottom end bolted to the cabin sole. Another has solid floor to ceiling bulkheads that divide the the cabin into two areas.
The 1975 price list refers to a ply bulkhead but the cut-away illustration in the brochure suggests these were low level dividers of similar proportions to the A-Frame arrangement in a SeaHawk, but with a horizontal top, not the full height version seen in the photograph below.Forward of the mast and whatever mast bracing method exists, there is an internal moulding. This has a simpler version of the SeaHawk galley moulding to port and something akin to the SeaHawk four-berth moulding in the rest of the bow. It incorporates space for a small toilet though, unlike the SeaHawk's, the moulding doesn't reach all the way forward. It stops short providing a place to stow an anchor. Most boats then have a small upstand to give this well extra depth.
It would appear from the adverts and brochures that a Pedro's windows are fitted in place with simple rubber mouldings. As several Pedros seem to have replaced the rubber strip with Perspex bolted to the outer surface of the cabin, more like a SeaHawk's, it can be assumed that the original method was prone to leaking.
In the examples above, the cabin floor is hidden. Others suggest there is a large panel in the floor that lifts out to reveal a shallow storage area in the bilges - just as you might expect, if you are familiar with a SeaHawk and know you have a boat without a drop keel.
Looking aft in the cabin you'd be hard pressed to tell whether you were in a SeaHawk or Pedro. There are differences. Without a drop keel the central floor area under the cockpit is more open and there is no need for a threshold step where the keel is supported when raised. None of the examples seen so far have cabin-side shelves under the windows, which provide a backrest when sitting on the berths, but the Pedro does have the same bracing moulded in under the cockpit seat.
The berth mouldings are a little more refined than those found on SeaHawks of this period. (The RCD regulations mean the latest Mistral Craft built ones are different.) Those on the Pedro have smaller openings filled with rectangular boards, similar but larger, to those concealing the keel hinge bolt on a SeaHawk. This tidier finish may reflect the fact that cushions were not standard on the boat. Although not even mentioned as an extra in the 1975 brochure, there are listed in the price list. Indeed there are a number of minor discrepancies between the price list and brochure when it comes to the standard specification.
Another possibility for the differences, in the boats seen here is that, like the SeaHawk, at this time boats were frequently sold part-built, with the buyer completing the boat in ways that suited his intended use. In the Pedro's case, this included the option of wheel steering for a motorised version.