Originally Posted by hannah2
I read that on the Bluejacket website. I'm not saying you can't cross oceans in this boat because it is a nice boat and seaworthy. But I believe that Island Packet used accurate words describing their boat. The Bluejacket 40 would be a great boat for taking the family down to the caribbean from the southern USA for the winter. But with only 40 gallons of fuel making full ocean passages seems not all that practical to me. After many ocean passages over forty years I like the idea now of being able to motor if needed for at least 800 miles. Tonga to NZ is a good example where there are some passages where a stationary high pressure was right in the middle of the passage. Everyone no matter how romantic about sailing would like to be able to get to NZ as fast as possible before the next nasty weather shows up. I have done it with 10 gallons of fuel and did not mind because that is what we had on board. But I'm wiser now and if you are lucky enough to be able to have a cruising boat with lots of fuel you should. I would own the Bluejacket if we decided to stay in Mexico and sail the Sea of Cortez where distance for fuel is not a problem.
I always wanted a Hinckley SWester but now I realize they were made with the New Englander in mind for two week cruises and trips down south, little fuel and water for trips across the Pacific and the Indian Ocean, but they could do it, that's for sure.
Well, some would think that regarding what you say this is the better boat for offshore cruising or to circumnavigate:
I knew once a guy that circumnavigated solo without any problem on a 33ft sailboat without any engine. That was back in the first years of the 80's and the boat was heavy and not particularly fast (the Bluejacket is much faster and sail with much less wind). He was not a poor guy, he was a sailing instructor, a great sailor and didn't need or want any engine.
Almost 10 years ago I remember a member of this forum that sailed from US to Australia on a 40ft fast J boat with much less fuel tankage than the one the Bluejacket has. At the time that make me some confusion and I asked how mach fuel he had wasted. I don't remember the right numbers but it was ridiculously little, less than half the tankage that if I remember rightly was 90L. He used that mostly for charging the batteries....and its average speed was awesome too (I don't remember the number but I know I was impressed and I am not easily impressed).
The type of boat you favor is a better sailer than the Nordhaven, by a large margin but also by a large margin is a worse sailer than the Bluejacket. I am not referring to seaworthiness or storage but simply to speed and most of all the amount of wind needed to sail. While the Bluejacket will probably make with a Geenaker 4K speed with 4K wind your boat would be almost dead on the water. That makes for a lot of fuel
Note that I don't defend on this thread any type of boat over another. There are sailors for all of them. Neither I try to impose my personal tastes to other sailors, but describing a boat like the Bluejacket 40 has a boat for "over night getaways
" is ridiculous and inappropriate. That would be a description that would fit in another beautiful american sailing boat, the Morris 36 classic:
Regarding circumnavigating and the boat different kind of sailors would chose to do it, we are following the circumnavigation of a French Young couple, both very experienced sailors, that have chosen a boat with even less storage or tankage than the Bluejacket. They are having a great time, have not any problem and love their boat, a Fox 10.20: a small and fast performance cruiser