Interesting Sailboats - Page 100 - SailNet Community
 1269Likes
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #991 of 6763 Old 05-17-2011
Senior Member
 
JAndersB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Sweden
Posts: 467
Thanks: 6
Thanked 5 Times in 3 Posts
Rep Power: 5
 
Hi everybody,
as I have posted I am very close to signing a deal for a new boat. My old boat (Dehler 43 CWS) is now sold and I have both a Wauquiez Opium 39 available and now also found out that I can get an Azuree 40 pretty quickly. RM 1060 not available before end of september. Pogo 1060 and 1250 where both available in september and december (contrary to long waiting times earlier mentioned) but this option was some weeks ago and have taken them from my short list.

Basically I had made up my mind for the Opium but now when the Azuree came up I wonder what to do.

Opium lighter and has very good test records. Azuree much more luxorius and modern interior design, which of course please others in the family :-).

Azuree cheaper with rather big margin (cruising version) but also feels slightly bigger than what I really would like to have.

Test results for Azuree rather good also but the test have been for the lighter version mainly and some remarks have been made that the boat is standing on it nose when heeled (as can be seen on some videos also).

And then we end up in perhaps Croatia in the autumn and have to truck the boat to Sweden, and that is not for free either.

Another interesting question is of course where to pay the VAT for Europe?

Anybody out there that have test sailed the Azuree, or seen it live?

Regards,
Anders
JAndersB is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #992 of 6763 Old 05-17-2011 Thread Starter
PCP
Senior Member
 
PCP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal, West Coast
Posts: 16,201
Thanks: 21
Thanked 103 Times in 86 Posts
Rep Power: 11
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JAndersB View Post
Hi everybody,
as I have posted I am very close to signing a deal for a new boat. My old boat (Dehler 43 CWS) is now sold and I have both a Wauquiez Opium 39 available and now also found out that I can get an Azuree 40 pretty quickly. ....

Basically I had made up my mind for the Opium but now when the Azuree came up I wonder what to do.

Opium lighter and has very good test records. Azuree much more luxorius and modern interior design, which of course please others in the family :-).

Azuree cheaper with rather big margin (cruising version) but also feels slightly bigger than what I really would like to have.

Test results for Azuree rather good also but the test have been for the lighter version mainly and some remarks have been made that the boat is standing on it nose when heeled (as can be seen on some videos also).
....

Anybody out there that have test sailed the Azuree, or seen it live?

Regards,
Anders
Regarding the Azuree I would point out what I have said to someone in a private message (this part was not private ):


"Apparently there is a big dif. in price between the Std, version and the Fast one and a very small dif. in weight and that would worry me. They are not compensating the difference in RM and AVS that the deep lead keel (2.60) provides regarding the 2.16m steel Keel (they normally do that). They add 50kg to the ballast and that's nothing. I bet they would need about 350kg.

This means that the fast boat is much more stiff and safe than the std boat. If you capsize the std boat I bet you are going to stay capsized for a long time. On limit situations the Fast boat will recover much more quickly (and the std can have even difficulty in recovering from a knock down with the weight of sails and a radar dome).

Ask them the two stability curves for the two boats and you will going to see that the STD one has a bad AVS and a much bigger inverted stability. I would like to have a look.

Regarding the boat it is possible that 50% of that difference in price comes from the carbon mast.

I would chose the STD boat, with a 2,16 keel but with a lead one and with the weight to make the stability curve the same as the one from the fast boat (more weight on the bulb, probably 300kg more or something like that).

I would also have wanted the fast boat hull material, two more winches, the bigger winches they have as option, genaker equipment and a genaker mounted on a fast furler, dynema lines, webasto weating and an aluminum performance mast."


But of course, I like more the Opium.

Regards

Paulo

Last edited by PCP; 05-17-2011 at 01:21 PM.
PCP is offline  
post #993 of 6763 Old 05-18-2011
Senior Member
 
JAndersB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Sweden
Posts: 467
Thanks: 6
Thanked 5 Times in 3 Posts
Rep Power: 5
 
Hi Paulo,
thank you for your thoughts. The Azuree 40 Cruiser has a keel of 2050 kg, Opium 1850. Both with most of the weight in the bulb and similar depth. Both boats same width, Azuree mast slightly higher and main sail 6 sqm bigger, so basically they should be pretty similar in stiffness and AVS. Azuree though much heavier so it will not start planing as fast.
On the other side a very different inside set up and look.

Both are made in full sandwich and with vinylester. Same engine. Same nav equipment. Opium has deck stepped mast (Sparcraft), Azuree kielstepped Soromap.

What is making the decision so hard is that with same equipment, the Azuree is a lot cheaper (appr. €55000), despite beeing bigger. A trade off between planing minimum wind speed, much (much) more modern interior and lower price.

Regards,
Anders

Last edited by JAndersB; 05-18-2011 at 07:21 AM.
JAndersB is offline  
post #994 of 6763 Old 05-18-2011 Thread Starter
PCP
Senior Member
 
PCP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal, West Coast
Posts: 16,201
Thanks: 21
Thanked 103 Times in 86 Posts
Rep Power: 11
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JAndersB View Post
Hi Paulo,
thank you for your thoughts. The Azuree 40 Cruiser has a keel of 2050 kg, Opium 1850. Both with most of the weight in the bulb and similar depth. Both boats same width, Azuree mast slightly higher and main sail 6 sqm bigger, so basically they should be pretty similar in stiffness and AVS. Azuree though much heavier so it will not start planing as fast.
On the other side a very different inside set up and look.
.....
Regards,
Anders
Hei Anders, I don't think you are right in what concerns stability. As i had said I would be concerned about that, regarding the Azuree Standard version. I will explain why:

You say that both boats have a not very different hull, a similar keel and a similar draft with the Opium with a 1850kg ballast and the Azuree with 2050kg and so they would be pretty similar in stifness and AVS. I don't think so.

What matters regarding AVS, reserve stability and also stiffness, all things being equal except the weight of the boat and the weight of the ballast, is the Ballast/Displacement ratio. The Opium 39 has a B/D ratio of 33%, a typical measure among many modern cruiser racers and the Azuree 40 cruiser has a B/D ratio of 28%. This puts it among the Beneteau Oceanis. Even the Dufour cruisers, Bavarias and Hanse have more than that. That is specially bad because the boat has a huge beam and a big form stability and that gives lot's of initial stability but also lot's of inverted stability.

The problem with this boat will not be the stiffness needed to sail (initial stability) but the one at high angles of heel needed to recover from a knock down and at that point the boat will be much less stiffer than the Opium and the AVS will be also lower. If you have the bad luckk to be capsized, this boat will stay inverted much more time than the Opium.

Now take a look at the "Fast" version of Azuree 40. It displaces 7100kg and has a ballast of only 2000kg but in a bulb lower 0.44m than the standard version. Based in what I have seen in other boats that have several drafts and compensate that difference in draft with more weight to have a similar stability curve, I would say that for having a similar stability curve the standard model should have more 350 kg of ballast than the Fast cruiser (it has only more 50kg).

If we assume that I am right and that the Standard boat should have a 2350kg ballast to have the same stability curve as the Fast cruiser (same AVS, same positive and negative stability), that would give to both the standard version and Fast version a B/D of 32%.

I believe that the Azuree fast cruiser and the Opium 39 have a not very different stability curve and similar stiffness but there will be a big difference between the Azuree cruiser (standard boat) and the Opium 39 .

Regarding the Opium 39 and the A fast cruiser, the difference is that the Opium does that with a weight of 5600kg and a 2.13 draft while the Azuree manages that with a 7100 kg and a 2.60 draft and I would say that is a big handicap in what regards cruising.

The stability curve I am talking about is a GZ curve. On a RM curve the bigger weight of the Azuree will give it more stability but no more stiffness because to compensate that extra weight the Azuree will have to carry a lot more sail and needs stability to compensate that.

Bottom point: I would not buy a Azuree cruiser with that final stability. I would ask them to put the needed ballast to have the same reserve stability and AVS as the Fast cruiser version. I don't know if the standard hull is capable of supporting the extra efforts that implies and to make sure I would have also the hull built to the "Fast" specifications.

I would not buy a Fast cruiser because 2.60m of draft is much for my cruising grounds, but it can be okay to you. If that is the case, the Azuree fast cruiser is a true option regarding the Opium 39 even if probably slower and I am only refering to stability, seaworthiness and sailing, not to the interior.

Regards

Paulo

Last edited by PCP; 05-18-2011 at 01:07 PM.
PCP is offline  
post #995 of 6763 Old 05-18-2011 Thread Starter
PCP
Senior Member
 
PCP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal, West Coast
Posts: 16,201
Thanks: 21
Thanked 103 Times in 86 Posts
Rep Power: 11
 
First photos from the Dehler 41.

It looks sharp and fast. A nice looking boat









PCP is offline  
post #996 of 6763 Old 05-18-2011
Senior Member
 
JAndersB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Sweden
Posts: 467
Thanks: 6
Thanked 5 Times in 3 Posts
Rep Power: 5
 
Hi Paulo,
the question of ballast ratio, AVS and stiffness is a complicated one and need careful calculations of among other things center of gravity. I do not intend to go into that. I have also traditionally been an advocate of high ballast ratios.

These new boats are bult on form stability as you know, as is a trimaran or a catamaran. They do not score high on ballast ratios either. I already had a boat like that, my Beneteau Oceanis 40. Compared to my last boat, the Dehler 43 CWS the difference could not be bigger. Dehler with 43% B/D and Beneteau clearly under 30%, Beneteau wide stern, Dehler narrow. Same maximum width.

Still, the Beneteau was funnier to sail and the Dehler heeled as much as the Benetau, partly due to bigger sail area to compensate for the doubled keel weight. The big difference was the tendency to broach, where the Beneteau was wothless and the Dehler almost impossible to get to broach. Speed similar but Dehler could point higher and more tolerant to gusts and waves.

So how can we get into the wider stern, lighter boat more fun cirkel without broaching. As I have been saying for some years now, through double rudders (unless trimaran/catamaran is to ones taste). No broaching anymore.

Shure, a knock down might be more fatal but as have been discussed in other threads, we spend 99% of our time in not knock down conditions so...

So basically, how much is the ballast ratio really worth for these kind of boats or should we look at other aspects, if we are takling about performance, not flipping around? I am not sure but I think we have to reason slightly different than for more normal single rudder narrower shaped performance cruisers.

I am also a little bit pussled that Opium can be so much lighter than all other similar boats with similar interiors. Opium is built very similar to my old Dehler if I compare hull cut outs, even if the Dehler is built without vacuum and basically Opium hull is built as Azuree (balsa instead of pvc sandwich). Pogo is understandable if you look inside but I have a hard time understanding why an Azuree should be 1800 kg (200more in the keel) heavier, you get a lot of interior material for 1800 kg.

Regards,
Anders
JAndersB is offline  
post #997 of 6763 Old 05-18-2011
Aac
Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 72
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rep Power: 8
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anders
I am also a little bit pussled that Opium can be so
much lighter than all other similar boats with similar
interiors.

Good point.

By my calculations the Opium minus ballast weights 3800Kg
The Azuree 40 minus ballast weights 5100Kg

Thats a wopping 1300Kg difference in fiberglass and furniture.


Even more puzzling is the Azuree site claims that some of it is carbon fiber:

Quote:
Azuree With its hull made of 50% carbon fibre - 50% GRP, which offers the lightest solution without compromising the structural integrity
Aac is offline  
post #998 of 6763 Old 05-18-2011
Senior Member
 
JAndersB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Sweden
Posts: 467
Thanks: 6
Thanked 5 Times in 3 Posts
Rep Power: 5
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aac View Post
Good point.

By my calculations the Opium minus ballast weights 3800Kg
The Azuree 40 minus ballast weights 5100Kg

Thats a wopping 1300Kg difference in fiberglass and furniture.


Even more puzzling is the Azuree site claims that some of it is carbon fiber:
There are several different weight numbers floating around for both the Opium and the Azuree. As usual, a boat starts is career as very light weight but when reality catches up the numbers get adjusted. I have seen the numbers for the Opium going up from 4800 to 5000 and now 5600 kg. Similar for the Azuree. Especially the difference between the Azuree fast Cruiser and Cruiser is interesting to observe. It has been getting smaller and smaller and by now it is only 200 kg. I assume the mast is not incuded in these calculations since it is a carbon mast on the Fast Cruiser and an aluminium on the Cruiser.

The Azuree Fast Cruiser is the one built with 50% carbon in the cloth, the Cruiser has only carbon in some areas so basically the weight difference should be bigger.

But still, as you said, the difference is strange. Then, if one starts looking at other boats hull weight, like the RM1200 5100 kg, Dufour 40E etc 5000 kg hull, Grand Soleil 40 5100 kg, Bavaria 40 6100 kg, Beneteau Sense 43 7500 kg it is pretty clear that the Azuree is not light but not heavey neither, it is the Opium that is outstanding for some reason. If, as Opium says, vacuum, sandwich and vinylester is the key, then Azuree should be lighter. And as a planing hull it really should be lighter I agree. But the Elan 350 is not that light either, and also has a B/D of only 26% and still is creating such a smile on all testers face.

Best regards,
Anders
JAndersB is offline  
post #999 of 6763 Old 05-18-2011
Aac
Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 72
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rep Power: 8
 
I can add that I have a Wauquiez Centurion 40S and its hull (light) minus ballast is supposed to be 4840Kg. It has marine ply for furniture which at a guess would make the boat 2 to 300 Kg lighter if it was light furniture.

The Centurion 40S hull is .55m longer and has more free board than the Opium. This could account for quite a few 100Kg.

If indeed the Opium is as light as quoted then it must be due to less fiberglass and hence not as robust - because as you say they all use basla core and vinylester resin. If I were you I would ask Wauquiez - how come so light compared to the Azuree or Centurion 40S.

As to the robustness of hulls here's a picture of a Centurion 40S keel after hitting rocks (see Material strength and fatigue - Page 2 - Boat Design Forums)

Interesting Sailboats-b0.jpg

The boat hit rocks at 8 knots, broke mast but did not make water.

Modern boats are tough but they weight a bit.

Last edited by Aac; 05-18-2011 at 03:06 PM.
Aac is offline  
post #1000 of 6763 Old 05-18-2011 Thread Starter
PCP
Senior Member
 
PCP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal, West Coast
Posts: 16,201
Thanks: 21
Thanked 103 Times in 86 Posts
Rep Power: 11
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JAndersB View Post
Hi Paulo,
the question of ballast ratio, AVS and stiffness is a complicated one and need careful calculations of among other things center of gravity. I do not intend to go into that. I have also traditionally been an advocate of high ballast ratios.

These new boats are bult on form stability as you know, as is a trimaran or a catamaran. They do not score high on ballast ratios either. ....
Anders,

The stiffness is not a difficult issue . You have only to have a stability curve and to know the boat sail area.

I think there is some confusion here regarding high ballast ratios. The reason some modern boats need less ballast ratio is because today the drafts are a bit bigger but mainly because today most performance boats have all the ballast in a bulb on a keel while some years back the ballast was distributed by all the keel, sometimes with a small bulb and that can make a big difference in righting moment.

The Ballast/Displacement is only comparable in what regards similar keels with similar weigh distribution and similar drafts.

What matters is the stability curve. If I remember correctly the one from the Azuree cruiser has an AVS around 110 and the one from the Opium 39 an AVS around 125. That is a huge difference not only on the AVS but on the force that the boat is making to right itself up from a knock down position and also on the inverted stability.

Some types of new cruising boats have in common with multihulls the fact that they take most of its initial stability (needed to sail) from form stability but contrary to multi-hulls they take the ballast needed to recover from a knock-down or needed to recover from an inverted stability in a short period of time or at least they should have. All the racing boats that served as model to this new generation of boats have that safety potential. The ballast is there not only to increase the stiffness of the boat but mainly for the reserve stability (at high angles of heel).

If you want a boat without or with a bad a reserve stability you should have a multi-hull. At least you would not be tricked into thinking a boat has a safety potential he does not have. Being knocked out on a sailboat, specially for guys that like to push their boats and have a lot of sail out is a fairly common occurrence. It had happened to me already and I bet it had happened to a lot of sailors that like to go fast. It is not a big deal in a boat with a good reserve stability. In a boat with a poor reserve stability it can be a huge problem.

I remember than on the last Transat with Figaros a guy was knock down for a looong time (1 hour?). The Figaro 2 has a good reserve stability (AVS 125/130) but the boat was caught by a wave and partially flooded and that have diminished its reserve stability. That sailor had a lot of work taking out the water of the boat (not an easy task with a lying boat) till it managed to get enough stability to bring it up again. What would have happened if that boat had a poor reserve stability?

The Elan 350, the Pogo and the RM are boats that rely on form stability for most of the stability needed to sail but that have the ballast and the draft needed for having a good reserve stability and a good AVS. I believe the Azuree fast cruiser has it too, but not the Azuree cruiser. I would not take offshore a boat that would have difficulty from recovering from a knock-down, or at least I would be very careful to sail that boat and that would take all the fun away.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JAndersB View Post
Shure, a knock down might be more fatal but as have been discussed in other threads, we spend 99% of our time in not knock down conditions so...

So basically, how much is the ballast ratio really worth for these kind of boats or should we look at other aspects, if we are takling about performance, not flipping around? I am not sure but I think we have to reason slightly different than for more normal single rudder narrower shaped performance cruisers.
I remember that on some test with the Elan the guys from the magazine were amazed because they have tested the boat with lot's and wind and no "wipe-outs". They were not caring because they knew that a knock-down would not have been a problem. Who wants a sportive cruising boat where a wipe-out can be a problem? It makes no sense. It is dangerous.

The ballast/draft should be the necessary to provide a decent AVS and a good reserve stability, no matter what. Otherwise what is the advantage of a monohull over a multihull? if you don't want to have a ballast capable of generate a good reserve stability why bother? Get a multihull .

Quote:
Originally Posted by JAndersB View Post
I am also a little bit pussled that Opium can be so much lighter than all other similar boats with similar interiors. Opium is built very similar to my old Dehler if I compare hull cut outs, even if the Dehler is built without vacuum and basically Opium hull is built as Azuree (balsa instead of pvc sandwich). Pogo is understandable if you look inside but I have a hard time understanding why an Azuree should be 1800 kg (200more in the keel) heavier, you get a lot of interior material for 1800 kg.
The interior of the Opium is much lighter than the one from the Azuree and probably of much better quality. Infusion makes a lot of difference in the weight, there are lot's of different qualities in the infusion process.

I don't think the Wauquiez use a balsa core they say: "balsa and PVC foam sandwich with a vinylester core" and they use In the laminate multiaxial fiber glass (equivalent to multiple layers of unidirectional material). The quality of the vinylester resins or fiberglass can be very different and the same with the workmanship quality.

I know that they make the boat with that weight because they have made a big fuss about that when they have weighted the first boat (and got the correct weight). Quality and control is as important as the process to warranty high standards of quality and in that regard Wauquiez has a long tradition while Azuree has yet to prove itself as a high quality brand.

Regards

Paulo
PCP is offline  
Closed Thread

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the SailNet Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
Please note: After entering 3 characters a list of Usernames already in use will appear and the list will disappear once a valid Username is entered.


User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 2 (0 members and 2 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Cruising sailboats for sale welch Cruising & Liveaboard Forum 10 04-25-2012 05:20 PM
THE Yacht Builder List T37Chef Boat Review and Purchase Forum 26 07-08-2011 05:51 AM
Noob wonderings and questions about sailing, life at sail and sailboats Vans General Discussion (sailing related) 49 06-20-2011 12:18 AM
A List of ALL sailboats made with layouts? Myblueheaven Boat Review and Purchase Forum 8 10-08-2010 11:32 AM
Failure to Navigate - interesting post on Panbo Blog & from the NewsReader Mass Bay Sailors 0 12-11-2006 06:15 PM

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome