Both boats are pointing to the Transquadra mainly and IRC racing as a second option but in what regards cruising it seems to me that, as usual, the JPK would have a better interior and not only in quality but by design, specially in what regards the galley and also in what regards storage. Not a question of space but while that storage space on the Sunfast near the bow can be great for head sails, it is not practical for cruising. The space on the cockpit floor seems bigger but the interior aft cabin of the JPK as storage space seems a better overall option to me.
Both look like very nice designs indeed, Paulo.
They are relatively lightweight and infused sandwich constructions with a comparable and quite high B/D ratio, but the JPK carries 10% more sail for exactly the same hull length.
JPK uses vinylester as resin, resulting in better stiffness and resistance to osmosis (somewhere between the cheaper polyester and the much more expensive epoxy).
I can’t find any information about the keel shape of the Sun Fast, which I find very strange because this is an essential feature for clearly performance oriented boats such as these. So I suppose it will have the same bulb shape the 3200 has?
JPK announces a mixed cast iron/lead keel, straight or with a bulb (option).
Neither builder foresees a retractable or swinging keel, probably because of their racing ambitions. But for cruising the fixed 2.20m draft of both yachts can be quite restrictive for a 36 footer.
I much prefer the retractable bowsprit on the JPK because it is much longer and thus more efficient to carry asymmetric or code sails than the fixed version on the Sun Fast. The latter is cheaper to build but makes boarding when moored bow-to almost impossible without a catway and adds to berthing costs.
The forward storing space on the Sun Fast is probably dictated by the much larger cockpit, bringing the saloon a little forward and leaving insufficient space for a livable front cabin. Apart from the saloon, sleeping is therefore restricted to two aft cabins, with probably very cramped space above the berths because of the very short cockpit seating’s on both designs. Racing crews don’t like cockpit seating’s at all but cruisers certainly do and they also give air and volume to the underlying cabin(s), which is an important feature regarding actual comfort, not only visually
So in my opinion only the JPK is offering a sufficiently comfortable and dedicated sleeping cabin.
Although I must admit carrying all the extra sails far outside of the keel line disturbs the lateral weight balance, especially on light boats (that’s why I only use the port water tank on our Pogo
) and transporting them through the heads, cabin, cockpit and then all the way to the front deck every time is much, much more laborious than through a deck hatch right up front. But also there you don’t want to carry much weight
At the drawing stage I already very much like the coach roof design of the JPK. It gives headroom where it is most needed (cabin entry, galley and nav station, hopefully with frontal view!), makes for easy circulation on deck (outboard chainplates mean you must pass below the lowers) and allows a transversal solent rail for better upwind performance.
So at this stage I personally also prefer the design of the JPK from a cruiser/racer point of view, but certainly await the tests and reviews on the water before making an educated judgment. “The proof of the pudding is in the eating” and as we all know, personal tastes can be very, very different