Originally Posted by PCP
Humm, Oceanis are on the low end of ballast ratio. As I said, with a bigger rig, a boat that would be fast in all conditions except upwind with weather where the ballast ratio is fundamental to give power to the boat to go against waves, specially a fat one like the new 38.
Also a tricky boat to sail (with a bigger rig), with that huge form stability giving power to the boat...but on a gust, with the boat lying down, not much RM to bring it back.
That is not by mistake that the boat has that rig and sail area. A substantially bigger one would increase the possibility of knock down... and the boat with a not famous final stability (low B/D ratio) would not be properly brilliant recovering from one of those figures.
Check it out the B/D ratio in relation with draft from the Pogo or the Opium (same kind of hull) and you will see the difference.
Hanse that is also using that king of hulls has a much more substantial B/D ratio, at least on the 40fter.
29% is not that bad comparing to others in that price range, and with additional support from hull beam and shape and control from double rudders. I think it could have a bigger rig. On my old Oceanis 40 I lowered the boom with 20 cm and made new, maximized sails. Did not notice any bigger problems with that, and I sailed the boat in conditions that the typical Oceanis customer do not go out in, except too wide stern for a single rudder. And it had from the start a similar ballast ratio, 1,2 m higher mast, lower draft and narrower beam without chines. And 12 sqm more sail area (and I had even more).