Interesting Sailboats - Page 123 - SailNet Community

   Search Sailnet:

 forums  store  


Quick Menu
Forums           
Articles          
Galleries        
Boat Reviews  
Classifieds     
Search SailNet 
Boat Search (new)

Shop the
SailNet Store
Anchor Locker
Boatbuilding & Repair
Charts
Clothing
Electrical
Electronics
Engine
Hatches and Portlights
Interior And Galley
Maintenance
Marine Electronics
Navigation
Other Items
Plumbing and Pumps
Rigging
Safety
Sailing Hardware
Trailer & Watersports
Clearance Items

Advertise Here






Go Back   SailNet Community > On Board > Boat Review and Purchase Forum
 Not a Member? 


Like Tree1265Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #1221  
Old 06-28-2011
EricKLYC's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Antwerp, Belgium
Posts: 468
Thanks: 16
Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts
Rep Power: 4
EricKLYC is on a distinguished road
These results are indeed somewhat suprising. Class 40's being built following only a "box rule" without any handicap concerns, one should expect they perform best in real time.

I think one thing is for sure: upwind class 40's and consorts will not do better and may be worse than less beamy cruiser-racers. And because of their very light weight they then are less comfortable in an seaway, especially in wind-against-tide conditions. I only thought that bearing down just a little would improve this without compromising VMG but these results seem to contradict this thumb rule.

But I also think there is little doubt that light, beamy and twin ruddered boats like the class 40's will perform better at any other wind angle. If not in speed, then most certainly in comfort and control.
I had the same experience Capado described on a Pogo 10.50: while others where struggling at the winches and on the rail to keep both boat and spinaker in control, we passed by having tea on autopilot.

As stated again and again on this thread: it all comes down to choices and the right compromise.

Kind regards,

Eric
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #1222  
Old 06-29-2011
PCP's Avatar
PCP PCP is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal, West Coast
Posts: 16,164
Thanks: 21
Thanked 95 Times in 79 Posts
Rep Power: 10
PCP will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by Capado View Post
Hello,
The more upwind, the better is a narrow and heavy boat. No doubt about that.
Looking at your conclusions, I have to admit I am quite surprised. I guess I'll have to race the Fox 10.20, and see by myself how this goes. It could be interesting..... I guess I'll need new sails by the time I reach Sydney. :-)
Yes I would be very interested in seeing how the Fox 10.20 would go on an offshore race. That boat is different from the Pogo, not only the hull but mostly the beam, with a significant difference. The Fox 10.20 has 3.60m the Pogo 10.50 has 3.90. Probably the B/D ratio (both boats with 1.95 drafts) is close and around 35%. Probably that will give the Pogo a bigger stability (more form stability) and will make it slightly better downwind but the Fox should be better upwind.

Maybe your time in Australia coincides with the Sydney-Hobart I am sure you would like to do that and it would give a lot of publicity to the boat.

Regarding the Class 40 performance we tend to think that it is pretty much an open boat with some limitations concerning making it affordable and I think that was the intention but the Box rule as a snag in it that condition the shape of the boat and greatly limit the designer options: Regarding stability the boat at 90º of heel has to make a righting force of at least 235kgf and a maximum force of 320kg.

The minimum force has to do with safety measures, giving it the ability to recover easily from a knock out but the max force has to do with giving all the boats a similar stability and that has to do with a similar sail performance.

This way of measuring the max righting force for performance purposes limits the choice of the type of boat and don’t make any sense to me. Measuring the Max righting force at 90º will give only one option to the designer: To increase form stability (beam) and to limit the boat ballast to a minimum. Why? Because increasing sail power with form stability has no effect in the force the boat makes to right itself up at 90º while increasing sail power with ballast has a direct effect in that measure at 90º.

This does not make any sense because limits the choice of the type of boats regarding pure performance and because it is stupid to limit final stability. At 90º on an offshore boat you will want to have all the righting force you can at 90º. It will never be too much.

For limiting righting force for performance purposes the force should be measured at 25 or 30º not at 90º.

We tend to think that a 40class boat is the best shape for an offshore boat assuming wrongly that the designers can pretty much design what they want and that is just the better compromise because it is what they all design but it is not so and evidence on offshore races with varied winds show that those boats overall performance is inferior to other 40ft racing boats that are not limited by that senseless rule.

The 40 class boats have a similar overall performance with fast cruiser racers like the J122, Ker 39, King 40, First 40 (and are often beaten by them) and have a very significant inferior overall performance compared with the fastest racing 40ft, like the Farr 400 or the ker 40.

On the Round the Island Race, a race with varied winds, even a smaller racing boat, a single Ker 11.3 has beaten every year (I have saw in the last 3) very clearly and without any doubt four class 40 . The races had very different weather patterns, the last with stronger winds on 2010 with medium to light winds and on 2009 with light winds.

With light winds all the Class 40 were also beaten very clearly by a 37 cruiser racer, a Santa Cruz 37 (the fastest 40class by 17 minutes).

Ker Design

On 2011: Ker 11.3 – 6.20 The fastest 40class – 6.36. On this one raced also a racing Ker 40 – 5.53 (look at the difference).

On 2010 Ker 11.3 – 7.12 The fastest 40class – 7.41

On 2009 Ker 11.3 – 9.48 The fastest 40class – 10.10

And we are talking about the performance of a single boat against the best performance of four, which makes a big difference.

All these boats(that are faster than a class 40) have one thing in common, a moderate beam, are heavier and have a much bigger B/D ratio, in some cases almost half the weight of the boat is on the keel. They are heavier but they are faster.

I know that downwind a beamy boat with the beam brought aft is more stable and easier to sail solo but I doubt that it will be easier to sail upwind, probably quite the contrary. It is really a shame that the Box rule for the 40 Class would not allow different kinds of hulls to be competitive. I would like to see what is really the fastest type of 40ft, for solo sailing or short crew sailing, a boat like the 40 class or a less beamy boat with a bigger B/D ratio.

Regards

Paulo
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #1223  
Old 06-29-2011
EricKLYC's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Antwerp, Belgium
Posts: 468
Thanks: 16
Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts
Rep Power: 4
EricKLYC is on a distinguished road
So even box rules include stupidities to limit performance (and safety!), which is exactly what they are supposed to avoid.
Another valuable lesson learned, Paulo.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #1224  
Old 06-29-2011
Aac Aac is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 72
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rep Power: 7
Aac is on a distinguished road
The results seem intuitive. A hull with a lot of form stability at the expense of ballast stability will heel more on the slopes of swells and this has the greatest effect when going to windward. I also guess that fat boats in a 2m sea state may pitch more spilling energy.

Righting moment increases by the sine of the healing angle thus at 30 degrees of heel you have 0.5 times the keel righting moment that you have at 90 degrees; at 20 degrees you have 0.34 times. Thus boats with deep heavy keels have a significant amount of righting moment even at 20 degrees of heel. A 2000Kg bulb at 3 meters depth equates to 6000 kg m of righting moment at 90 degrees.

The new Farr 400 http://www.farrdesign.com/FYS/724_Fa...s_detailed.pdf has a ballast of 2464Kg and a draft of 2.9m; the boat itself weighs 1666Kg. With a beam of only 3.42m this makes for a very high performace boat indeed.

Most manufactures give total ballast weight which includes the keel; the keel itself being around 20 to 30% of the total ballast weight.

Excessive boat weight minus ballast is always a negative in my mind which is important even in cruising boats. The typical 40ft racer/cruiser gives about 1000kg difference between design weight and light displacement. Not much once water and fuel is considered. Saving 500Kg (light furniture for example) would give 50% more carrying capacity. And if the boat is too light then take more water or make the boat unsinkable with foam or put some layers of Kevlar in the hull.

And as I have noted before righting moment at 90 degrees divided by “Boat weight minus ballast” is, a good first approximation of the performance characteristics of a boat with performance increasing as the ratio gets larger – just an opinion.

Last edited by Aac; 06-29-2011 at 12:37 PM.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #1225  
Old 06-29-2011
PCP's Avatar
PCP PCP is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal, West Coast
Posts: 16,164
Thanks: 21
Thanked 95 Times in 79 Posts
Rep Power: 10
PCP will become famous soon enough
Thanks Erick, I look at it that way, I hope I am not wrong.


Too much talk Time for a boat and an American one that is a favorite among the European that like to race, the Summit 40.



















A beauty isn't it?

The hull shape is not far away from the Salona 41 (the Salona 41 has more beam and less ballast) that someone on this thread have called "old fashioned"

This boat is practically the King 40 made in the States by Summit yachts.

When Summit yachts went to Mark Mills (an Irish designer) and ask him to design the ultimate IRC racer, Mills told them that he had already done that and that the boat was winning everywhere, it was the King 40 (one of the boats that have beaten all the class 40 on the last Round the Island race).

So I guess that Summit Yachts had bought the licence to the Argentinians that were manufacturing the King 40 (King Marine) and introducing some very small modifications suggested by Mills, called it the Summit 40:

"The design is based on Mark Mills design for Summit Yachts and originally built by King Marine.

It is arguably the most successful IRC 40 internationally in the last two years.

... On the design side specifically, Mills Design has made subtle changes to the keel fin, bulb, and rudder. The keel will be a bit more forgiving coming out of down speed tacks and will improve acceleration, especially in light air and chop. The bulb has been slightly reduced in wetted surface area, and now allows a slight alteration in weight and draft for more aggressive programs ...

The rudder area and planform remain virtually the same, but the redistribution of volume along the chord will keep flow attached longer and improve heavy air control.

The new keel fin has a provision to add 65mm (2-1/2”) of extra draft and another 255 pounds (115.6 kg) of ballast. Moving the bulb down and increasing its weight will increase righting moment. The weight savings in rig, gear and equipment will still mean an all up lighter boat with more ballast and
a lower VCG, higher RM: all going in the right direction. ...

One area where improvements always yield better performance is the rig. We have made significant changes here. First, there are no longer any standard aluminum components in the rig. The entire structure is carbon. Along with this, the mast will be built by Southern Spars and will have better structural properties, and detailing. Specifically, the standard Southern rig will be 55 pounds (24.9 kg) lighter than the previous rig. An internal hydraulic mast jack is now standard. The standing rigging is stainless rod from Rig Pro, and it has significant upgrades in fittings and details. All together the new Southern Spars rig will be a significant improvement over the previous rig in stiffness, windage, and weight."






The boat weights 7100kg has a moderate beam (3.7m) a big draft 2.51m and 3 300kg of ballast, 2500kg on the bulb. The boat has a B/D of 46%.

Compare it with the one from the Pogo 10.50: 36% and remember that the one from the Pogo is at 1.95m and this one is at 2.5m. This huge difference is needed because while most of the stability for sailing in the Pogo (or in a 40 class) comes from form stability here it comes from form stability but also from the ballast.

This way of providing stability for sailing has a very positive effect on the safety stability, AVS and inverted stability that in this boat will be much better than in a 40 class boat. This boat would not pass that 40class test with the boat at 90º. This one will make a lot more force to right itself up than the maximum that is allowed on a 40 class boat.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #1226  
Old 06-30-2011
PCP's Avatar
PCP PCP is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal, West Coast
Posts: 16,164
Thanks: 21
Thanked 95 Times in 79 Posts
Rep Power: 10
PCP will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricKLYC View Post
These results are indeed somewhat suprising. Class 40's being built following only a "box rule" without any handicap concerns, one should expect they perform best in real time.

I think one thing is for sure: upwind class 40's and consorts will not do better and may be worse than less beamy cruiser-racers. And because of their very light weight they then are less comfortable in an seaway, especially in wind-against-tide conditions. I only thought that bearing down just a little would improve this without compromising VMG but these results seem to contradict this thumb rule.

But I also think there is little doubt that light, beamy and twin ruddered boats like the class 40's will perform better at any other wind angle. If not in speed, then most certainly in comfort and control.
I had the same experience Capado described on a Pogo 10.50: while others where struggling at the winches and on the rail to keep both boat and spinaker in control, we passed by having tea on autopilot.

As stated again and again on this thread: it all comes down to choices and the right compromise.

Kind regards,

Eric
Eric,
the last posts may induce some in error regarding the seaworthiness and safety of class 40 and Pogo cruisers. Not what I meant.

As I have said before Pogo cruisers and Class 40 have a good AVS and a good safety stability, by modern standards. A boat like the KING 40 or the KER 39 would have even a better one but if we compare the Pogo with a Benetau Oceanis a Dufour Grand large, Jeanneau, Bavaria, Hanse the Pogo will have a better AVS and a better final stability and most of all a much better dynamic stability.

I have said that the Pogo 10.50 has an B/D ratio of 36% in a 1.95 bulbed keel, while a Benetau Oceanis 40 has 25% with a similar draft keel. Even some cruiser-racers, that have generally a better B/D better than the cruising versions go as low as 30% (Dufour 40e).

Regarding boats like the Pogo its big advantage is really downwind sailing and not only in what regards speed but easiness. It is simple to understand why:

The boat is lighter because has not to carry as much ballast as a King 40 type of boat ( less form stability) and as much of the stability comes from form works since very small angles of heel. If you go downwind on a Pogo and the boat gets unbalanced the form stability will provide the force to counteract that without almost any heeling. Besides being wide provides a better weight distribution and makes it easier to plan.

On a narrower boat that relies more on ballast the same unbalance will need a lot more heel to generate the force to be counterbalanced. But heel downwind is a treacherous thing. When the boat heels it generates more unbalances.

Those that are used to row a a kayak now that if the unbalance that is created while rowing is not immediately counteracted and the bow starts to swing than it will be needed a lot more force to bring it back. On a sailing boat when the boat heels and the bow starts to swing it is needed a sharp correction, otherwise it can pass the point the rudder has the power to correct and a broach will follow.

These makes a beamy boat, with the beam brought back a lot more stable and easy to sail downwind (form stability). And not only because of that but also because a narrow boat with a lot of ballast, that needs some heeling to counteract any unbalance, will tend to heel from side to side, like a pendulum, situation that can be aggravated by waves in synchronicity.

While a boat like the Pogo will naturally kill that movement absorbing it with form stability (that does not need any significant heel to act) a narrow boat will need heel for counteract each movement and the form stability can be not enough to stop that movement. A good hand at the wheel can be needed while on the Pogo an autopilot it will be enough.

As you have said before it is all about choices and the right compromises: How much should one abdicate for a good upwind and more comfortable performance to a good downwind performance?

As you can see the answers, even in what concerns performance boats come in very different ways: From boats like the Pogo that for a 40ft has a 4.5m beam to boats like the Luffe 4004 with 3.4m. The combinations of beam/Ballast/weight are also very different and not all narrow boats have very high B/D, and some medium beam boats have very high B/D ratios, like the King 40/Summit 40.

Most of all his important to know what to expect from each combination because only that way we can chose the boat that we find more fit to our program or to our sailing pleasure.

Regards

Paulo

Last edited by PCP; 06-30-2011 at 10:33 AM.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #1227  
Old 07-01-2011
PCP's Avatar
PCP PCP is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal, West Coast
Posts: 16,164
Thanks: 21
Thanked 95 Times in 79 Posts
Rep Power: 10
PCP will become famous soon enough
For those that like the Pogo 10.50 (and that includes me) some good news:

A new version a lot less expensive, they call it Transquadra and it will cost 135 000 € with 19.6% VAT included. The boat has a fixed keel with 1.99m and an aluminum mast.











Another Pogo is coming, a 9/9.5m boat that can have or not a swing keel. The target price is 80 000€.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #1228  
Old 07-01-2011
PCP's Avatar
PCP PCP is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal, West Coast
Posts: 16,164
Thanks: 21
Thanked 95 Times in 79 Posts
Rep Power: 10
PCP will become famous soon enough
So it seems that a 40 class boat is not as an open design as we thought. I have posted some time back about an open design, a boat that was designed without any regard to any handicap rules or box rules, the Soto 40, designed by Soto Acerbal for two Argentinians pissed with handicap racing. The boat uses not high technology (carbon) to be affordable and is probably the top racing boat that have experienced in the last year the biggest expansion in one class series all over the world. No doubt, a dam fast boat, upwind and downwind.

Let's have a second look:







Looks beamy. Well it is not. a 40class racer has 4.50m, this one has 3.75m.







compare it with a 40class:




Both boats have the beam brought back but the difference in beam is huge.

Both boats have about 2200kg of ballast but the Class 40 in a bulb at 3.0m and the Soto 40 also in a bulb but at 2.60m. The Class 40 has liquid ballasts, the Soto 40 has also movable ballast with about the same weight (the crew). I guess we could substitute that crew by liquid ballast.

The weight of both boats is close, a bit better on the Soto: 4200 to 4500kg.

The Soto carries 88m2 of sail upwind, a 40class 118m2 (the 40 class has a superior righting moment).

Less sail and all, the Soto will have a much better performance upwind and in a mixed wind race, like most offshore races, the Soto will fly away (I guess the performance would not be very far away from the Ker 40 one, and on the race I referred on a previous post that difference was 5.53 to 6.36).

On a "normal" transat with lots of downwind sailing and strong and medium winds the Class 40 will be probably faster. But mind you, the Soto is no sluch downwind and can easily make over 20K speed with strong winds. Take a look:

YouTube - ‪MedCup Soto 40 action‬‏

The Soto is really a fast good looking boat. I wonder about a cruising boat based on that hull, well maybe someday Soto Acerbal will do it.










Last edited by PCP; 07-01-2011 at 07:26 PM.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #1229  
Old 07-02-2011
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 218
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rep Power: 4
MikeWhy is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by PCP View Post
[Summit 40]
A beauty isn't it?
It's absolutely stunning, inside and out. I love the open interior plan, but wonder about the lack of compression post. The interior photo doesn't show what they might have done with the deck structure (presumably centered above the foldaway table). Or did they just leave it out for illustration purposes?

But, I likely needn't concern myself with these pithy details, since the likelihood of me owning one seems nil at the moment. (Any idea of its pricing?)

[Edit: oops. the photo is looking aft, probably taken from directly in front of the compression post.]

Last edited by MikeWhy; 07-02-2011 at 01:16 AM.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #1230  
Old 07-02-2011
PCP's Avatar
PCP PCP is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal, West Coast
Posts: 16,164
Thanks: 21
Thanked 95 Times in 79 Posts
Rep Power: 10
PCP will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeWhy View Post
It's absolutely stunning, inside and out. I love the open interior plan, but wonder about the lack of compression post. T...
But, I likely needn't concern myself with these pithy details, since the likelihood of me owning one seems nil at the moment. (Any idea of its pricing?)

...
An idea yes, EXPENSIVE, but not much more than a J122 that is also expensive. They talk about competitive prices but a boat like that has to be expensive.

Here you have a 2008 King 40 (basically the same boat made by another builder) by USD 400 000. The boat has lot's of racing sails but I would say that a basic Summit 40 without sails would not cost less.

Summit King 40 used boat for sale. The Yacht Market online boat sales and charters.

Regards

Paulo
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 6 (0 members and 6 guests)
 
Thread Tools

 
Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may post attachments
You may edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On


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


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:29 AM.

Add to My Yahoo!         
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1
(c) Marine.com LLC 2000-2012

The SailNet.com store is owned and operated by a company independent of the SailNet.com forum. You are now leaving the SailNet forum. Click OK to continue or Cancel to return to the SailNet forum.