Blue Jacket 40 (new racer/cruiser) - Page 10 - 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 > General Interest Forums > Boat Review and Purchase Forum
 Not a Member? 


Like Tree17Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #91  
Old 01-14-2013
Cruisingdad's Avatar
Best Looking MALE Mod
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Mobile Liveaboards
Posts: 9,894
Thanks: 3
Thanked 94 Times in 49 Posts
Rep Power: 10
Cruisingdad is a jewel in the rough Cruisingdad is a jewel in the rough Cruisingdad is a jewel in the rough
Re: Blue Jacket 40 (new racer/cruiser)

Quote:
Originally Posted by zz4gta View Post
PHRF rating for NE.
PHRF New England - Handicapping - Base Handicaps

Catalina 400 = 102
Bene First 40 = 36

End of discussion.
I think they are arguiing which boat would be stiffer, the C400 or the BF40. I actually think the C400 is, but I am steering clear of that debate.

As for which boat is faster, hands down, the BF40.

As for which one is a better cruising boat, the C400.

My opinions.

By the way, can I ask a question here: How many people arguiing this have actually been on a C400 AND a First 40? I have. I am a bit miffed we are even having this conversation. THey are very different boats and accomodations. They are both performance cruisers, but the First is definitely at or close to the racing side of the performance scale while the C400 is more in the middle, if not on the lower end. And if strictly performance with minimal accomodations is the preference, no offense, but the First would not even enter the picture.

Brian
__________________
Sailnet Adminstrator & Moderator
Catalina 400 Technical Editor

2004 Catalina 400, Sea Mist IV (our boat, F/T Mobile Live Aboards in S FL and Keys primarily)
1987 Tayana Vancouver 42, Credendo Vides, (Mom and Pops boat, F/T Mobile Live Aboards in Puget Sound)

My Website:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Follow My Blog at:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Follow me on Facebook:

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #92  
Old 01-14-2013
blt2ski's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,587
Thanks: 0
Thanked 17 Times in 16 Posts
Rep Power: 9
blt2ski will become famous soon enough
Re: Blue Jacket 40 (new racer/cruiser)

The First 40 is what I would call a race-cruiser, the C400 a cruiser. In between would be the cruise-racer and performance cruiser. Some of the faster boats in what I would call a given division, "may" fall speed wise into the next higher slow group of boats. ALA the C400 may by some accounts be a performance cruiser, but it would be on the slower end, or the faster end of a cruiser. If you want to throw in a FAST race cruiser to slower race 40'ish foot boat, look at a club swan 42. I would have to look up PHRF, but IIRC in the -20 to -50 range, leaving both the B40 and C400 in its tracks!

The first 40 is a reasonably fast race cruise, to a slow racer. A true race boat would be a figaro from Beneteau or a mumm/farr 30, melges 32......even a the old americas cup 12m boats racers. Altho on the slow end of todays boats for boats of that size.

As far as which boat is stiffer, not sure, have not been aboard either the B40 or the C400. I have seen a C400 next to a C420, for my useage, the C420 looks like a better boat for around puget sound frankly. But for how I use a boat, the B 1st 40 would be the better one for the amount of around the cans plus a few cruises here and there. Stiffness be danged, as I can reduce sail to keep the boat on its feet if it is just the spouse and I. With a crew of 5-7 racing, you reduce when you heel more than you keep gaining speed going upwind, down wind, everything up when you can! generally speaking.......

Marty
__________________
She drives me boat,
I drives me dinghy!

Last edited by blt2ski; 01-14-2013 at 10:28 PM.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #93  
Old 01-14-2013
Cruisingdad's Avatar
Best Looking MALE Mod
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Mobile Liveaboards
Posts: 9,894
Thanks: 3
Thanked 94 Times in 49 Posts
Rep Power: 10
Cruisingdad is a jewel in the rough Cruisingdad is a jewel in the rough Cruisingdad is a jewel in the rough
Re: Blue Jacket 40 (new racer/cruiser)

Quote:
Originally Posted by chef2sail View Post
Yes I think your boat is a perfect cruiser for a family. It has the large amount of room in the cabin areas, and cockpit which are necessary for a group of people to be comfortable. It reflects in how you chooose a vessel when you are looking to carry 5 people comdortably then if there are only 2 most of the time.

Thats probably where most of the difference is in what you and I view when we are looking at cruising boats. Multiple berthing areas as well as heads are something which is not necessary to start. Storage is much more important.

When you look at the Moodys, Masons, HRs thats one of the appartent difference IMHO. Ample tankage. Large areas to work on the engine etc.

Like you I love the Hylas, Taswell, Moodys and some of them are as affordable yet a little older than a Newer Catalina, Hunter, or Bene
Thats where you ave to decide whether the tradeoff is worth it. The Cat/ Hunter/ Benne designs are not what I look for as volume is not important to me. Nice rich teak and mahongany wood and joinery work, replace laminate.

The modern C&C and J122 is a great boat for 2, but probaly doesnt envison your crew of 5. They are more racers also as are some of the boats Paulo often mentioned. You Cat is more in the middle, a comfortable, quick cruiser which is built to accomadate a family. We havent even looked at boats like the Pacific Seacrafy and others similar which are bulletprooof for real long range cruising, but not built for straight line speed.

If I had a family and wanted to cruise comfortably and safely I probably would choose as you did. I admire you teaching them and taking them. They are getting quite and education. You are not the normal profile of a cruuiser though. Most are parties of two I think.

We are different and my kids are grown and not comming. I may represent more of what the majority of the cruisers look like. Thats why you may see such a disparity of vessels cruising and the same disparity in what people want in their vessel. It seems as though seakindness is the priooity as opposed to speed. Storage and tankage is important, Well made accessable systems are important. Weight seems to be important due to the areas you sail in. Sail configuations seems to be important as you need to be able to sail in the trades for long periods. Open space gives way to safe space both above and below deck. Safe gunwhales are a factor.

My question is if it was just you and your wife at 55 getting you final boat which you expected to last 25 years and you were going cruising, but not selling your land based home to live aboard, how would that affect what you buy and you had $250,000 total to spend. ( Maybe I should start a new thread)

dave
Now hang on Dave... don't you dare mention family of 5! Family of 4! That's it. THat's all, period!!! You ever seen a grown man cry??

Some of the Benes have great joinery work. Ever been on a 2002 Bene 473? Fast boat and beautiful lines.

BTW, just so you know, the only lamainate on the MK II C400 is 4 doors on the owners cabin beside the berth, and the three opening hatches in the galley. Every other door is solid teak, including the large hanging locker doors and and salon doors. THe galley cabinets are wrapped in sold teak, just have a plywood (2sided teak) center. I was told that for some time, the C400 was the most expensive boat Catalina made untilo the 470 came out. The c400 came out of the Morgan plant from the beginning, not transfered there from CA. Have you been on a Mark II C400, Dave? Ever sailed one? You might like it.

Now, to your question:

250k? Cruising? Is cruising crossing the pond(s) or this hemisphere? If I were going to cross either pond, with 250k, I would probably look into a heavier boat that was sea kindly. Maybe a Caliber LRC, maybe a Valiant 42, maybe a PSC, maybe a Tayana 42, Cabo Rico. SOmthing like that I suspect. Of all of them, the Tayana 42 is probably the best match between comfort and long distance cruising. You would like it: lots of solid teak and vast storage amounts. You can crawl under the sink in the aft cockipt Vancouver model (that is what mom and dad have and I obviously know it quite well).

We started discussing this in a different thread, and I stand by what I said, but when talking about speed, it is only good for weather forecasts up to about a week. Right? After that, it gets pretty iffy. SO when talking about taking a boat like the C400 across the pond, while it would make it, and would likely make it faster, the boat will end up being a lot more uncomfortable I suspect. You will simply have to deal with storms or seas that otherwise you might avoid (and would be right to avoid) when under a 7 day window. My issue with these long distance cruisers is that they are horrendously slow, in general. THey are overbuilt and made to take a beating and have good motion at sea, but they suck when you get there. aNd the PSC and V42, for example, are much smaller than my boat inside. I would put them at the C36 level or smaller.

Now, for this hemisphere, assuming you are going to go cruising and you are going to keep your house, I would get a boat with zero outside maintenance (teak). For the most part, that is a production boat. And for staying around here, that boat will not only be fine, it will be ideal. WHere the V42 and PsC often discourage large hatches or a multitude of them, many of the production boats are loaded with them. THey have lots of portlights to let in light, making the boat bright and airy feeling, while a Tayana 42 has none and uses deck prisms instead which don't come close to the same amount of light or bright feeling. Many of the things that make the Tayana a great long distance cruiser are the very same thing that make it a bad cruiser for what we do here.

So unless I was 100% sure I was taking off across the pond, I would personally opt away from those types of boats. And another option is to get the comfortable boat or production boat (sabre, Catalina, Beneteau, etc) and just ship it across on DOckwise. Save yourself the trip and heartache.

I am not saying production boats cannot cross the ponds. THey have, do, and can. They just simply would not be my first choice to do it in. I think the boats built for that type of long distance are better. But those same boats are why they are not the right boat for many if island hopping or staying in or around this hemisphere.

I would not own a j122 or first for any of what i consider cruising. I would be horribly uncofortable on those boats, even just the two of us, for cruising. THere is also a big tankage issue and storage issue. I would own one of those boats for club racing or the peroidical taking off for a week or two.

Just my opinions.

Brian
__________________
Sailnet Adminstrator & Moderator
Catalina 400 Technical Editor

2004 Catalina 400, Sea Mist IV (our boat, F/T Mobile Live Aboards in S FL and Keys primarily)
1987 Tayana Vancouver 42, Credendo Vides, (Mom and Pops boat, F/T Mobile Live Aboards in Puget Sound)

My Website:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Follow My Blog at:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Follow me on Facebook:

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #94  
Old 01-14-2013
Cruisingdad's Avatar
Best Looking MALE Mod
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Mobile Liveaboards
Posts: 9,894
Thanks: 3
Thanked 94 Times in 49 Posts
Rep Power: 10
Cruisingdad is a jewel in the rough Cruisingdad is a jewel in the rough Cruisingdad is a jewel in the rough
Re: Blue Jacket 40 (new racer/cruiser)

Quote:
Originally Posted by blt2ski View Post
The First 40 is what I would call a race-cruiser, the C400 a cruiser. In between would be the cruise-racer and performance cruiser. Some of the faster boats in what I would call a given division, "may" fall speed wise into the next higher slow group of boats. ALA the C400 may by some accounts be a performance cruiser, but it would be on the slower end, or the faster end of a cruiser. If you want to throw in a FAST race cruiser to slower race 40'ish foot boat, look at a club swan 42. I would have to look up PHRF, but IIRC in the -20 to -50 range, leaving both the B40 and C400 in its tracks!

The first 40 is a reasonably fast race cruise, to a slow racer. A true race boat would be a figaro from Beneteau or a mumm/farr 30, melges 32......even a the old americas cup 12m boats racers. Altho on the slow end of todays boats for boats of that size.

As far as which boat is stiffer, not sure, have not been aboard either the B40 or the C400. I have seen a C400 next to a C420, for my useage, the C420 looks like a better boat for around puget sound frankly. But for how I use a boat, the B 1st 40 would be the better one for the amount of around the cans plus a few cruises here and there. Stiffness be danged, as I can reduce sail to keep the boat on its feet if it is just the spouse and I. With a crew of 5-7 racing, you reduce when you heel more than you keep gaining speed going upwind, down wind, everything up when you can! generally speaking.......

Marty
You see, I would call any cruising boat that can get over hull speed (or very close to under normal circumstances) a performance cruiser. I would call a boat that has to go on the back of a truck to get to hull speed in normal circumstances, a cruiser. I have owned both.

It would be interesting to see how some of these higher end performace cruisers worked if equally loaded up as we are. Can they still get to hull speed? Beyond? Or would the weight seriously effect their ability. I really don't know. I know it would seriously effect a cat.

BTW, Marty, my experience on the sound is that the man with the most diesel and biggest engine wins the race. I rarely saw any winds and a one foot swell was about as high as it got. It was like a giant lake... but a gorgeous lake. I am not putting it down, just the summer seemed awfully devoid of any wind. Down here, we plan on trips by the weather. Up there, you plan them by the tides!

Brian
__________________
Sailnet Adminstrator & Moderator
Catalina 400 Technical Editor

2004 Catalina 400, Sea Mist IV (our boat, F/T Mobile Live Aboards in S FL and Keys primarily)
1987 Tayana Vancouver 42, Credendo Vides, (Mom and Pops boat, F/T Mobile Live Aboards in Puget Sound)

My Website:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Follow My Blog at:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Follow me on Facebook:

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #95  
Old 01-15-2013
zz4gta's Avatar
I don't discuss my member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Chesapeake Bay
Posts: 2,394
Thanks: 0
Thanked 15 Times in 15 Posts
Rep Power: 7
zz4gta is on a distinguished road
Re: Blue Jacket 40 (new racer/cruiser)

Brian, I've delivered a Bene 40.7 back from bermuda to annapolis. I'm sure the C400 is a great cruising boat, probably much better than the Bene, but crossing the stream in the Bene w/ a reef and the #3 was just fine. For me, the bene's have enough below to be great cruising boats. The Catalina's have even more room and cool stuff, but sacrifice some speed. I don't think we need 10 pages of discussion to determine that.
__________________
Merit 25 # 764 "Audrey"
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #96  
Old 01-15-2013
PCP's Avatar
PCP PCP is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal, West Coast
Posts: 16,129
Thanks: 21
Thanked 89 Times in 73 Posts
Rep Power: 10
PCP will become famous soon enough
Stiffness

Quote:
Originally Posted by zz4gta View Post
Brian, I've delivered a Bene 40.7 back from bermuda to annapolis. I'm sure the C400 is a great cruising boat, probably much better than the Bene, but crossing the stream in the Bene w/ a reef and the #3 was just fine. For me, the bene's have enough below to be great cruising boats. The Catalina's have even more room and cool stuff, but sacrifice some speed. I don't think we need 10 pages of discussion to determine that.
What was being argued from the beginning was the stiffness of both boats, nothing else. Regarding cruising, what makes a great cruising boat for some would make a boring and less safe boat for others. The First 40, or the First 40.7 can make a great cruising boat, even as a good bluewater boat, if the crew is small and enjoy simple life and fast sailing. I have posted about a couple that have been cruising Antarctica on one and are now somewhere in the Pacific.

By this I don't want to say that the Caralina 40 or any other boat is better as a cruising boat than the First 40 or any other boat. As I have said that discussion does not make sense for me even if I am quite sure that most would prefer the bigger interior of the Catalina, that comes with the disadvantage of being a not so good sailing boat, not only in what regards speed but also stability (including AVS and final stability). Compromises, it's what cruising boats are about.

Regarding the First 40.7 the First 40 is a considerable stiffer boat having for about the same weight more 25% RM.

Regarding stiffness I maintain that it makes no sense to compare the one from the First 40 with the one from the Catalina. That difference of PHRF gives a good idea about that difference. Stiffness is directly connected with power in a sail boat, meaning the amount of RM available for a given wet area (that has to do mostly with weight). That's why normally a racer is more stiff than a performance cruiser (like the First 40) and a performance cruiser is more stiff than a mass production cruiser like the Catalina 40 or the Benetau Oceanis.

This means that normally a race boat is more powerful than a performance cruiser and a performance cruiser is more powerful than a mass production cruiser.

I guess that Brian is confusing initial stability (that has to do with beam) with stiffness. That is not the same thing.

A narrow boat can have a huge stiffness and a low initial stability. A good example are the monohulls from the AC.



Regards

Paulo
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #97  
Old 01-15-2013
Cruisingdad's Avatar
Best Looking MALE Mod
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Mobile Liveaboards
Posts: 9,894
Thanks: 3
Thanked 94 Times in 49 Posts
Rep Power: 10
Cruisingdad is a jewel in the rough Cruisingdad is a jewel in the rough Cruisingdad is a jewel in the rough
Re: Blue Jacket 40 (new racer/cruiser)

Hey Paulo,

Glad to have you back.

Well, my definition of a stiff boat is a boat that sails, even in relatively high winds, relatively flat.

This pic was shot in a strong gale off the northern coast of florida. I do not know the exact winds at this moment, but we got to 35-45 sustained, much higher gusts. Look how flat this boat is. At this time, I think were sailing with a second reef in the main and the jib was in IIRC:



This pic was shot in what I beleive were 15-20 kts wind. This was in a lake (lake Texoma, where they made the Valiants). This boat is sailing flat, more or less.





A boat I would NOT consider stiff (I have a lot), would be a Catalina 380. I owned one and cruised it for years. This boat sailed more like a traditional "bluewater" boat. She would quickly drop to 15-20 degrees, rail in the water, then stick there. It would take a very bad blow to get my boat to do that.

One key difference is that I drop in a first reef after 20. I have no interest in putting my gear through that much of a beating. I don't need a blown out sail.

My experience with most racing boats is that they like to drop their rail in the water, then stop. We try to counteract that with shifting weight around the boat (rail meat) to make the boat flatter. However, one of the IOR boats I race on (a bene 10m), actually likes to be sitting on her side a good bit. SHe sails faster.

In my opinion, and please share with me where I am wrong, but I find most racing boats have a narrow beam and a finer entry. THis maxizes their wetted area (LWL) but minimizes their drag. Because of their narrow beams, they counteract this with a deep, narrow keel. THis provides their opposing righting moment. THese boats also minimize all weight, especially weight above the waterline as their abaility to right themselves becomes compromised with more weight above the water. This is often done with loads of carbon fiber, super high tech blocks, minimal furnishings down below, etc. In essense, they create a race car with the sails being the engine and the super lightweight hull being the chasis.

Because of this narrow beam, I have found most race boats inital stability pretty low. I would call this a tender boat - especially one that is quick to fall to its ideal sailing spot (sweet spot). THat is the spot where any more heeling and she slows down, any less and you are not maximizes what you have.

I am not a racing expert. I enjoy it (on other peoples boats). I especially enjoy it on boats that are fun and fast to sail. I would never own one to cruise on. I like a slow to heel, relatively flat sailing boat. I call this a stiff and sure footed boat. Where are my definitions different than yours?

Now, here is a more important question: Our discussion is what is a good performance cruising boats. THe boats you and ZZ chose are what I consider more of a club racer. It is not to say you could not take one of those boats cruising. THere is a guy here living on his Catalina 22. However, when you get that boat ready for cruising, including increasing the tankage (water, diesel, and holding which is especially a problem on the BF40 and J122), how muh have you altered the benefits of that boat? In essense, once you drop thousands of pounds of gear on that boat, will she still be a good sailing boat?

I actually do not know the answer. I can tell you that your C400 can weight in around 28500 lbs, and you can exceed hull speed. That is a full decked out cruising boat, with a solar arch, tender, 4 solar panels, carrying 65 gallons of diesel, some of it above the waterline, etc. So when you outfit your BF40, are you still going to leave me behind in the dust, or are you going to be like that catamaran that is over loaded and cannot get out of its way?

Brian
__________________
Sailnet Adminstrator & Moderator
Catalina 400 Technical Editor

2004 Catalina 400, Sea Mist IV (our boat, F/T Mobile Live Aboards in S FL and Keys primarily)
1987 Tayana Vancouver 42, Credendo Vides, (Mom and Pops boat, F/T Mobile Live Aboards in Puget Sound)

My Website:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Follow My Blog at:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Follow me on Facebook:

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Last edited by Cruisingdad; 01-15-2013 at 01:33 PM.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #98  
Old 01-15-2013
PCP's Avatar
PCP PCP is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal, West Coast
Posts: 16,129
Thanks: 21
Thanked 89 Times in 73 Posts
Rep Power: 10
PCP will become famous soon enough
Re: Blue Jacket 40 (new racer/cruiser)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cruisingdad View Post
Hey Paulo,
...

Well, my definition of a stiff boat is a boat that sails, even in relatively high winds, relatively flat.
It all depends on what you call stiffness.

For instance the NA that for many years designs the J boats says about stiffness:

"stiffness (is) the ability of the boat to resist the heeling force of the sails"

and it is a pretty accurate definition.

You are associating stiffness with boats with an initial high stability, beamy boats with a lot of hull form but as I have said some boats with a high initial stability (beamy boats) are stiff boats, other have just a big initial stability and are not stiff boats. A stiff boat is a boat that has a big ability to resist the heeling forces of the sails. Some are designed to do that with less heel (beamy hulls) other are designed to resist that force heeling more (narrower hulls with a bigger ballast/draft/more efficient keel).

If we have two boats with the same wet surface the one that can carry more sail with the same wind will be the stiffer and more powerful boat.

A beamy one will carry it with less heel a narrow one with a big bulb at the end of a big draft will carry it with more heel but, depending on design, it is possible that the narrow one can carry more sail then the beamier boat and in that case it is a stiffer and more powerful boat. The beamier one has only more initial stability but will be less stiff.

If stiffness and initial stability were the same thing, these boats would not be considered stiff and that of course is ridiculous. Just look at the sail area they can carry.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Cruisingdad View Post

My experience with most racing boats is that they like to drop their rail in the water, then stop. We try to counteract that with shifting weight around the boat (rail meat) to make the boat flatter. However, one of the IOR boats I race on (a bene 10m), actually likes to be sitting on her side a good bit. SHe sails faster.

In my opinion, and please share with me where I am wrong, but I find most racing boats have a narrow beam and a finer entry. THis maxizes their wetted area (LWL) but minimizes their drag. Because of their narrow beams, they counteract this with a deep, narrow keel. THis provides their opposing righting moment. THese boats also minimize all weight, especially weight above the waterline as their abaility to right themselves becomes compromised with more weight above the water. This is often done with loads of carbon fiber, super high tech blocks, minimal furnishings down below, etc. In essense, they create a race car with the sails being the engine and the super lightweight hull being the chasis.

Because of this narrow beam, I have found most race boats inital stability pretty low. I would call this a tender boat - especially one that is quick to fall to its ideal sailing spot (sweet spot). THat is the spot where any more heeling and she slows down, any less and you are not maximizes what you have.

I am not a racing expert. I enjoy it (on other peoples boats). I especially enjoy it on boats that are fun and fast to sail. I would never own one to cruise on. I like a slow to heel, relatively flat sailing boat. I call this a stiff and sure footed boat. Where are my definitions different than yours?

...
The answer to that question is above.

You are generalizing and in fact the only thing all true race boats has in common is stiffness. The beamy ones are designed to sail with less heel and the narrow ones designed to sail with more heel.

As an example of narrow stiff racing boats look to the photo above, as example of beamy racing boats look at this movie:


Vendee Globe por Sponsorshop


Your idea of race boats seems to be cruising-racers, mostly old, that race on handicap. That is not what I was talking about, on handicap a slow boat can win. I am talking about pure performance and boats designed to achieve that. Designed to race only. Regarding those and real performance, stiffness equals power, with more or less heel depending on sailboat design. PHRF numbers are also an indication of the boat power when they refer to boats with the same length. The Catalina 40 Wk has a PHRF of 120, the First 40 was a PHRF of 36. I am not saying that the Catalina is not stiff to a mass production cruiser, just saying that the First 40 is incomparably more, but then it is not a mass production cruiser but a mass production performance cruiser.

I found little on the internet about stiffness except on this patent regarding movable ballast:

.." "stiffness", - the ability of the sailboat to resist the heeling force of the sails. The stiffness, as it will be called in the following, is afforded by the righting moment. Enhancing the stiffness brings significant extra power to the sails and, furthermore, increases the equilibrium and the safety of boats in general. Good stiffness enables a ship to have all sails set wind abeam, whilst maintaining the boat at angles of about a normal heeling (the first 30 degrees of heeling). The greater the stiffness (or righting ability) of the boat, the more powerful the sails can be and the faster the boat can be."

EP 2197734 A1

Regards

Paulo

Last edited by PCP; 01-15-2013 at 03:19 PM.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #99  
Old 01-15-2013
chef2sail's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Maryland
Posts: 6,704
Thanks: 23
Thanked 46 Times in 42 Posts
Rep Power: 7
chef2sail will become famous soon enough
Send a message via AIM to chef2sail
Re: Blue Jacket 40 (new racer/cruiser)

Brian,

I am not trying to argue with you, but i really dont understand

Americas Cups boats and for that matter my boat when we race are never sailing flat, especially to windward. What does sailing flat have to do with stiffness.

I undertand about over heeling a boat, so it pushes and slows down so we dont have to go into that.

I am not a brochure person or will not get into the numbers, righting ratios, even though I do uindertand them basically.

I can only go on what I see from a practicality first hand actual sailing experience. Why dont we see more Catalinas racing in the races in Annapolis, Newport or wherever. There are lots of other boats represented and there are plenty of Catalinas?

Again this is not meant to deigrate them in any way or to say I would not purchase one or it isnt good for a family of 4 ( the five included the hound and he takes as much room up as your kids////BTW kids grow up and leave....dogs dont)

I can look at at Catalina as a quick cruiser....but I can not put them in same class as the Farr, Sabre, C&C, some Bennes and other racer cruisers that Paulo has mentioned from Europe like Hanse, X Yachts. They do not compete and they do not point to windward the same. They arent designed to. Seems to me if they were they would be in these races.

Dave
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
___________________________
S/V Haleakala (Hawaiian for" House of the Sun")
C&C 35 MKIII Hull # 76
Parkville, Maryland
(photos by Joe McCary)
Charter member of the Chesapeake Lion posse

Our blog-
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


“Sailing is just the bottom line, like adding up the score in bridge. My real interest is in the tremendous game of life.”- Dennis Conner
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #100  
Old 01-15-2013
blt2ski's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,587
Thanks: 0
Thanked 17 Times in 16 Posts
Rep Power: 9
blt2ski will become famous soon enough
Re: Blue Jacket 40 (new racer/cruiser)

Brian, yes we do plan trips on tides, otherwise you hit them in the 6-8 knot range, with a 4ksb....well, you go backwards! LOLOL

Hence why also many of us like lighter, lower gallonage race/cruise style boats, so when the wind does hit over 5 knots, we can actually sail! vs then heavier sometimes/sometimes not full/shoal or equal keeled boats. The higher the SA/disp, the better you are when it comes to sailing.

Of course, now we have these inversion thingies around here, no wind, along with local air forecast! yucko can we say!
...AIR STAGNATION ADVISORY IN EFFECT FROM 10 PM THIS EVENING TO
NOON PST FRIDAY...

THE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE IN SEATTLE HAS ISSUED AN AIR
STAGNATION ADVISORY...WHICH IS IN EFFECT FROM 10 PM THIS EVENING
TO NOON PST FRIDAY.


* IMPACTS...STAGNANT CONDITIONS IN THE LOWER ATMOSPHERE WILL ALLOW
POLLUTANTS...SUCH AS WOOD SMOKE AND CARBON MONOXIDE...TO
INCREASE NEAR THE SURFACE.

* RESTRICTIONS/BURN BANS...CHECK WITH YOUR LOCAL AIR QUALITY
AGENCY FOR ANY RESTRICTIONS IN YOUR AREA.

PRECAUTIONARY/PREPAREDNESS ACTIONS...

AN AIR STAGNATION ADVISORY MEANS THAT LIMITED MOVEMENT OF THE AIR
MASS OVER THE ADVISORY AREA WILL ALLOW POLLUTION TO INCREASE TO
DANGEROUS LEVELS. PERSONS WITH RESPIRATORY ILLNESS SHOULD FOLLOW
THEIR PHYSICIANS ADVICE FOR DEALING WITH HIGH LEVELS OF AIR
POLLUTION.

Hope we get some wind sooner or later!

Marty
__________________
She drives me boat,
I drives me dinghy!
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 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
Gill OC1 vs OC2 Ocean Racer Jacket granche1 Gear & Maintenance 2 12-03-2012 11:33 AM
I'd Like to Obtain -- Navy Blue Jacket Manual HighFly_27 Seamanship & Navigation 6 10-27-2012 02:22 AM
Paceship Blue Jacket 23 from the 60s?? hriehl1 Boat Review and Purchase Forum 3 07-26-2010 12:18 PM
Racer / Cruiser T34C Boat Review and Purchase Forum 34 07-18-2008 01:30 PM
racer/cruiser? railsunder Boat Review and Purchase Forum 1 11-26-2006 06:17 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:37 PM.

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