Still I would be sceptical about the numbers. From the catamaran world I have learned that especially some small (new) builders tend to present displacement numbers which are far too optimistic (so too low).
I like to have the true measured weight of such a ship...
And: Who says that the specified payload still guarantees higher speen by planing?
Ulf, this boat is much lighter than the RM. Has to be, the building technique is much more high-tech and lighter:
" To guarantee your safety the solidity of the epoxy composite hull , watertight bulkheads at the bow and stern to prevent sinking in case of collisions.
The construction of the hull is in sandwich with epoxy resin. Inner skin is 10 mm okumè marine grade plywood ; the soul is a closed cell PVC vacuum glued with epoxy resin and the outer skin consists of quadriaxial e-glass fibre laminated with epoxy resin.
The sandwich obtained has 35 mm thickness and in addition to providing great robustness has an excellent thermal and acoustic insulation.
The deckhouse is made of sandwich composed for the internal skin of tissues of biaxial e-glass laminated with epoxy, PVC foam bonded under vacuum with epoxy, and for the outer skin quadriaxial e-glass laminated with epoxy resin under vacuum over male model to get an elegant and self-supporting form .
A technology and quality of materials to ensure solidity and light displacement.
Unlike the tipical production boats the deck isn't bolted and glued to the hull, but laminated to it so you get a monolithic structure that guarantees maximum resistance to the enormous efforts torsional induced by ocean navigation.
Carbon fibre chainplates laminate on the hull for a maximum resistance with excellent uniformity of materials.
Frame of structural reinforcements in laminated plywood at the bottom of the hull to distribute the efforts of the keel.
These are building techniques used in some racing boats.
David Read, the designer is a French with lots of experience in using these techniques, in designing fast boats and in following their building. The Bepox series are famous by their qualities among the French.
david reard architecture navale
The walkabout is only slighter heavier than a same sized Pogo, not by the way it's built, but because has an interior heavier and one more adapted to cruising.
The 40ft (that is comparable to the Pogo 12.50) weights a bit more: 6 120kg to 5.500kg. The difference is a lot less than 620kg because the Walkabout has a better Ballast/displacement ratio.
But I guess that you have misunderstood me. I was comparing the Pogo 12.50 with the Walkabout 43. A very naked Pogo costs (fixed keel) 176 000 euros, a walkabout 43 costs 250 000€ (I don't know the level of finish) so there are 70 000€ of difference in price.
What I was saying is that is the size this type of boat should have for extended cruising on far away places, unless is cruised solo or eventually in duo.
Regarding loading capacity what I was saying is that it is very easy to reach the Pogo 12.50 max load and that with its max load the Pogo will have difficulty in planning, but with the same load, the Walkabout 43 is only at half load and will sail and plan better.
That's why they are making a Pogo 50, for the ones that really want to sail to far away places and circumnavigate with some comfort and load.
Voiles et Voiliers : Chantier - Nouveauté : Pogo 50 : Croisière «No limit» !