Blue Jacket 40 (new racer/cruiser) - Page 3 - 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 Tree17Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #21  
Old 12-02-2012
MarkofSeaLife's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,943
Thanks: 23
Thanked 39 Times in 36 Posts
Rep Power: 4
MarkofSeaLife is on a distinguished road
Re: Blue Jacket 40 (new racer/cruiser)

Weird thing about Island Packet yachts... And they are not my sort of boat, but....
Why do they only go up to 48 feet when all other makers have been getting larger and larger?

Oyster now has boats over 100 feet and their median must be now 55 or 57
Swan is the same, Beneteau, Jenneau etc are 68 and 64 respectively.

But IP, Hunter and Catalina are all stuck in the 40s or a 50 for Hunter.

What's the go?

If you were into IPs you wouldn't want a Blue Jacket but you may well like a IP 60 pr IP 65 .... With a jacuzzi.... Double reinforced and made from titanium to be safe, of course....
__________________
Sea Life
Notes on a Circumnavigation:
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
  #22  
Old 12-12-2012
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: On the Tennessee River
Posts: 38
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rep Power: 0
jameso is on a distinguished road
Re: Blue Jacket 40 (new racer/cruiser)

why wouldn't this boat be fast?
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #23  
Old 12-12-2012
PCP's Avatar
PCP PCP is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal, West Coast
Posts: 16,160
Thanks: 21
Thanked 95 Times in 79 Posts
Rep Power: 10
PCP will become famous soon enough
Re: Blue Jacket 40 (new racer/cruiser)

Quote:
Originally Posted by jameso View Post
why wouldn't this boat be fast?
This boat will be fast for a cruiser if we compare it for instance with a Catalina or a Hunter. It has a well designed hull/keel/rudder and is not much heavy.

They announce it as a dual purpose boat, for racing and performance cruising, for that the boat lacks all controls that can give a better control over the sail shape and that way maximize performance. About that see post 14 on this thread.

Regards

Paulo
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #24  
Old 12-12-2012
Cruisingdad's Avatar
Best Looking MALE Mod
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Mobile Liveaboards
Posts: 9,894
Thanks: 3
Thanked 97 Times in 52 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)

Here's PCP's original post on the boat:

Quote:
Originally Posted by PCP View Post
Big surprise: Island packet is going to launch a series of performance cruisers. They will be called Blue Jacket line and will be designed by Tim Jackett (ex-President and Chief Designer at Tartan and C&C) in collaboration with Bob Johnson (CEO and Chief Designer at Island Packet).

The first one is already on its way to production and even if in what regards cabin design I find the boat too classic, not to say old fashioned, in what regards hull design and technical characteristics I love the boat.

Well, the keel could be more modern and efficient (it is similar to the one on my boat) but in what regards all the rest it looks perfect to me. In fact it is very close to the Comet 41s in what regards weight, ballast and hull design. It fits on the Italian way of looking to performance cruisers.

A relatively narrow boat with a good B/D a deep draft (2.30) and a big stability that is the opposite in design conception of the also new Tartan(and the CC121). I like a lot more this one.

Well, there are some things I don’t like: The traveler over the cabin and only one winch on each side of the cockpit that will have to be used for the mainsail and the genoa, but I believe that could be changed if clients ask otherwise.

Technical Characteristics
LOA: 39’ 10” (12.14 m)
LWL: 35’ 0” (10.67 m)
BEAM: 12’ 4” (3.76 m)
DRAFT: 7’ 5” (2.29 m) deep
5’ 2” (1.56 m) shoal
DISP: 16, 500 lbs (7,484 kg)
BALLAST: 6, 100 lbs (2,767 kg) deep
SAIL AREA: 883 sq ft (82.03 sq m) (100% FT)
MAST HEIGHT: 62’ 6” (19.05 m)
POWER: 40 HP (30 kW)
FUEL: 40 US gal (151 l)
WATER: 110 US gal (417 l)
WASTE: 25 US gal (80 l)
SA/D: 21.8
D/L: 172
DESIGNER: Tim Jackett w/Bob Johnson, N.A.



















They say about the boat:

Sailplan and rig:
The large sailplan is a further refinement of the Solent style rig featuring standard double head sails with a working jib and a lightweight 150% reacher that mounts on the integral bow prod, both furled with Harken® systems. The working jib is fitted with a carbon fiber Hoyt Boom® that is self-tending and improves performance with its close sheeting and self-vanging feature while the large reacher boosts performance in light air or when off the wind. The fully battened mainsail is equipped with a standard electric halyard winch and a low friction Battcar system and drops easily into a carbon fiber pocket boom with an integral cover and lazy jack system.

This easily managed rig has ample horsepower and versatility for optimizing performance in a wide range of conditions. All sheets lead to the cockpit near the helm and primary winches for short-handed convenience.
On deck:
On deck, anchor handling has been simplified and made especially convenient with a cleverly designed roller recessed in the bow prod providing secure stowage of the anchor and directing the rode to the anchor locker with a (optional) below deck electric windlass that keeps the deck and profile uncluttered. A deck hatch gives access to this area. Wide side decks with full length raised bulwarks, double lifelines, bow and stern rails and cabin top handrails provide security on deck.

The large cockpit has deep coamings, long seats and twin helm stations with great visibility and ready access to all sail control lines. Seat hatches provide access to storage areas and a (optional) central drop-leaf table makes for a great social area. Hinged transom doors open to the integral stern platform with a retractable swim ladder under a central hatch.

Materials used:
The Blue Jacket’s hull and deck are made with a state of the art vacuum infusion process utilizing 100% vinylester resin, quadraxial knitted E-glass reinforcements and a structural foam core. The end result is superior strength and stiffness with significantly reduced weight compared to conventional laminates. …

The use of premium structural foam coring produces better interlaminar bond properties with freedom from potential core deterioration compared to other choices and allows for an industry-best extended hull and deck warranty.


Blue Jacket Yachts - Performance Cruising Sailboats | BlueJacketYachts.com


..
Well, here's my take from someone who cruises FT on a performance cruiser...

Where do you put your feet when sitting in the cockpit seats? THat span is probably to wide for most people so you will be sliding off the seat.

Where do you put the chartplotter? Working a CP (and seeing it) from across the cockpit is very difficult, especially when navigating unfamiliar waters and in bad weather.

Why not put some seats on the transom to make use of the open space? Maybe a couple of propane lockers? Wasted space withg minimal weight impact.

The stern seats are not angled, and it does not look like the coamings are either. Sure will make for a long, sliding day while you are behind the wheel at sea, especially under a good heal.

A three cabin boat under 40 feet is rediculous. I suspect that the third cabin is a converted workshop... at least I hope so.

Curved settees on a "offshore" boat? Really? Where do you sleep off watch??? I am shocked manufacturers would still consider this.

HERE IS THE KILLER (and why I would completely write this boat off): A forward head on a performance boat SUCKS! When the seas break about 6-8 feet, a forward head becomes almost unuseable. I know this from experience. WHen you are jumping off the seas, your will literally go airborne when you are that far forward. You have to hold yourself down to the toilet seat. Don't even bother trying to stand up unless you want to write your name on the walls. Plus, when you come down, you will be tracking all kinds of salt water and wet gear right through the cabin which undoubtedly makes the floor slick and the whole cabin uncomfortable. As such, I think this would be fine for beer can racing, but not great for offshore distance racing. I also don't think it would be a great cruiser.

Diesel tankage sucks.

Designed weight sounds really low to me unless they really do incorporate a lot of CF. I assume this is a cored hull (not my favorite for cruising)? I bet that boat comes in (realistically) at 20000. The 426 is Designed weight of 24,000 and my boat is about that too. Remember, NEVER confuse designed weight with real displacement. I doubt they are ever the same. I find most designers are woefully optimistic to increase their SA/D numbers. My boat has a designed displacement of 19,500. Realistic is around 24000, and outfitted I am running right about 27000-28000. Now, this is a cruising boat... but dry and empty this boat doesn't weigh its designed weight.

Also, my opinion here, but if your draft is 5'2, you have to really put a lot of lead in that keel. If not, you will have a seriously tender boat (and you may anyways) and tender boats SUCK for cruising. Been there, done that. My boat's draft with its wing keel is right about 6 feet. I would also wonder about that boats pointing abilities at 5'2. For example, we have on HN 317 and above a true 5'4 draft. Everything else is the same, though they modified the keel and hull to do this. The late model HN's do not point as well as the perdecessors and mine is all round a better performer except when running where the draft and hull mods make less of an impact. But I can tell you from a cruisers perspective, you are ALWAYS going to weather. Always. I don't even pull out a map anymore, I just point the boat into the wind cuz somehow mother nature knows thats which way I am heading.

How deep is that bilge? If you draw 5'2, I would be very concerned that would be a shallow bilge... but I am just guessing.

She is too narrow on the beam. Even Sabre has a beam 13.5 at 42 feet. I am 13.5 at 42 feet. That narrow beam will make for a tighter boat to cruise on, reminding me much of a First Series which also would be a great boat for distance racing and beer cans, but not ideal for cruising. My opinion.


I think I would take that boat back to the drawing board. I do applaud IP for trying to get away from the notoriously slow boats they have made. But they do have a lot of competition. For 400k or so (which is realistically what you are going to pay if not more), why not buy a Catalina 445, a Sabre 426, an X yacht, a j44, a First Series, or several other used boats I can think of which ROCK and are really good performance cruisers? Problem is that I'm not sure this boat will be either a good cruiser or a good performer, which basically makes one ask: What's the point???

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
  #25  
Old 12-13-2012
kwaltersmi's Avatar
Broad Reachin'
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Grand Rapids, Michigan
Posts: 1,831
Thanks: 1
Thanked 10 Times in 10 Posts
Rep Power: 8
kwaltersmi is on a distinguished road
Re: Blue Jacket 40 (new racer/cruiser)

Wow Brian, that's a comprehensive breakdown of the Blue Jacket. While I obviously haven't sailed one myself (no one has!) and it is not necessarily my kind of boat, I do feel obliged to take a shot a few of your critiques.

"Where do you put the chartplotter?" - How about on the steering pedestals like many other cruising boats? This puts the screen within easy reach and view of the helmsmen.

"The stern seats are not angled, and it does not look like the coamings are either." - The seat bottoms look angled, which would keep you held back against the coaming.

"A three cabin boat under 40 feet is rediculous. I suspect that the third cabin is a converted workshop... at least I hope so." - Per the literature from BJ: An optional interior plan may be selected with two cabins in lieu of the standard plan’s three. This arrangement deletes the enclosed starboard aft cabin, extends the galley counter, cabinetry and slip resistant sole and creates a large cockpit locker that’s accessible from either the interior or deck. And let's not forget that the C400 was also available w/ a 3-cabin layout.

"Curved settees on a "offshore" boat? Really? Where do you sleep off watch???" - You don't think the port settee would serve as a seaberth w/ some lee cloths installed? Hard to say without knowing the actual dimensions.

"...but if your draft is 5'2, you have to really put a lot of lead in that keel. If not, you will have a seriously tender boat (and you may anyways) and tender boats SUCK for cruising." - Shoal draft version is 5'2", deep draft version is 7'5". The b/d ratio for the BJ40 is .369, while the C400 is a very similar .365 (both deep draft versions). If you believe b/d is a strong indicator of stiffness, these two boats would be similar.

"I think I would take that boat back to the drawing board." - Wow, that's a bold statement considering literally no one has sailed or stepped foot aboard this boat yet. Let's at least wait for the introduction at Strictly Sail Chicago in January. I'll be there to take some photos and give a better first hand impression, but until then I'm reserving judgement.

However, I do agree or am indifferent to a few of your critiques:

"Diesel tankage sucks." - Agreed, 40 gallons isn't enough for big passages. And again just to be fair, doesn't the C400 only hold 35 gallons?

"A forward head on a performance boat SUCKS!" - Agreed, but I'd argue it's no fun to visit any head in 6'-8' breaking seas.
__________________
Catalina 34

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
  #26  
Old 12-13-2012
Cruisingdad's Avatar
Best Looking MALE Mod
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Mobile Liveaboards
Posts: 9,894
Thanks: 3
Thanked 97 Times in 52 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 kwaltersmi View Post
Wow Brian, that's a comprehensive breakdown of the Blue Jacket. While I obviously haven't sailed one myself (no one has!) and it is not necessarily my kind of boat, I do feel obliged to take a shot a few of your critiques.

"Where do you put the chartplotter?" - How about on the steering pedestals like many other cruising boats? This puts the screen within easy reach and view of the helmsmen.
Putting the chartplotter on the pedestal is about the only place you can put it unless on the cabintop. However, what happens when you are at the other wheel? Or do you put two charplotters up there? When steering down a unfamiliar waterway, or watching the radar, you are put behind only one wheel. And does the leads from the lazarette and chain have runs for that much cabeling? THat is why many boats have a combo table in the middle of the cockpit. Other than acting as a table, you can use it as a foot rest and put your CP/Radar there. Let me point out another real problem with mounting the CP's there: when under way at sea for long periods of time, you stretch out along the seats in the cockpit. When you have a CP that is behind where you stretch out, you cannot see the radar or the CP. to see them requires getting up and standing behind the wheel. In this case, only one of the wheels even.

I am not saying you cannot make this work on the Bluejacket. I am saying it is not ideal and is a turnoff for cruising.

What I do like on a lot of race boats is the LACK of a table. It allows the crew to run a tack or jibe quickly without dodging the table in the middle. You can even have the same person blow the sheets and pull in the other. I can do this (and do have to do this) on my boat, but it is a real pita especially when it is howling. Some boats, a B49/50 I saw, have a removeable table for that purpose. But this is a Performance Cruiser, not a racer. Right? If we are talking about a straight racer, this is a different discussion.


Quote:
Originally Posted by kwaltersmi View Post
"The stern seats are not angled, and it does not look like the coamings are either." - The seat bottoms look angled, which would keep you held back against the coaming.
The seats FORWARD of the wheels are likely angled in, but having a place to put your feet when rolling at sea is a HUGE plus. Otherwise, you end up having to hang on to the coaming or other gear which gets very tiring. In order to counteract 15-20 degrees of heel (not to mention the rolls), you would have to have at least that or more on the seats forward of the helms. Propping your feet against something to keep from sliding out is a great benefit.

Now, the seats behind the helms show zero angling nor do the coaming beside them. Or course, this has a great cosmetic look to it and gives the boats pretty lines (think Hunter 460), but at sea, the man behind the wheel will always be standing up or slipping off the seats. Look at the drawings/renderings behind the wheel. Both the coamings and seats are flat - very like the Hunter and some of the Jeauneaus that have come out. That is terrible for long distance stuff, but sure looks pretty at the boat show.


Quote:
Originally Posted by kwaltersmi View Post
"A three cabin boat under 40 feet is rediculous. I suspect that the third cabin is a converted workshop... at least I hope so." - Per the literature from BJ: An optional interior plan may be selected with two cabins in lieu of the standard plan’s three. This arrangement deletes the enclosed starboard aft cabin, extends the galley counter, cabinetry and slip resistant sole and creates a large cockpit locker that’s accessible from either the interior or deck. And let's not forget that the C400 was also available w/ a 3-cabin layout.
The LOA on the C400 is actually over 40 feet (just don't tell the marina). I think it is around 41.3 feet... don't remember for sure. It is true that the C400 was offered in 3 cabin versions. It is also true they didn't sell very many of them. I realize there may only be a couple of 2-3 feet difference between the boats, and I realize the BJ has a plumb bow and skinny transom, but her beam is also pretty skinny. Adding that into the above would make for a tight three cabin boat. I am not surprised that the third cabin can be a workshop. That was my immediate thought too which was why I wrote that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kwaltersmi View Post
"Curved settees on a "offshore" boat? Really? Where do you sleep off watch???" - You don't think the port settee would serve as a seaberth w/ some lee cloths installed? Hard to say without knowing the actual dimensions.
The salon setttes are curved. Salon settees should be straight for sea berths. THe C42 also has curved settees, and that is a real drawback in my opinion and was one of the principle reasons we didn't buy one (the C42 was even cheaper). Having a straight settee that you can lay across and get some sleep without having to make some contortion to fit the curve of the settees is critical for me. Those that don't mind sleeping cockeyed, different story. But there is a reason most offshore boats have straight settes or a dedicated sea berth down below.


Quote:
Originally Posted by kwaltersmi View Post
"...but if your draft is 5'2, you have to really put a lot of lead in that keel. If not, you will have a seriously tender boat (and you may anyways) and tender boats SUCK for cruising." - Shoal draft version is 5'2", deep draft version is 7'5". The b/d ratio for the BJ40 is .369, while the C400 is a very similar .365 (both deep draft versions). If you believe b/d is a strong indicator of stiffness, these two boats would be similar.

"I think I would take that boat back to the drawing board." - Wow, that's a bold statement considering literally no one has sailed or stepped foot aboard this boat yet. Let's at least wait for the introduction at Strictly Sail Chicago in January. I'll be there to take some photos and give a better first hand impression, but until then I'm reserving judgement.

The C400 is one of the stiffest boat I have ever been on. But remember, my shoal draft is 6 feet. it is NOT the listed 5'4. So how do you compensate for that leverage difference? Its not just displacement, it is the keel acting as a lever to overcome the force. Can you do that in 5'2? I guess. But how much lead will you have to put in that keel to do it? If you don't have the same draft, but the same lead in the keel, won't that boat be more tender? Well no, not if you make it very flat on the bottom (hard chimed). Catalina changed the C400's around HN 317 to accomodate that shallower draft which was in the specs. THe did it by making the bilge a lot skinnier which I think was a mistake.

I might be wrong in all of the above. We won't know until she has a sea trial and a one-one comparrison can be made. I am making a lot of assumptions based upon what I see in the specs and rendering. But there's no free lunchs on boats. Everything has tradeoffs. Otherwise, everyone would make a 5 foot draft boat that had a deep bilge, was fast, sure footed, and cheap. Finding the right balance is what is critical. My balance may be very different from others.

Fun discussing this stuff. I am sure others will have a very different opinion of mine. I guess my opinion for Jakcet/IP is that if you are going to break into a market that already has a lot of good performance boats in it, come out with a boat that is considerably better. Make it really good at one aspect or the other and those who buy it will overlook the shortcomings. But in my opinion, especially in this market, you have to really knock the socks off of the competition to carve a name and niche for yourself. Instead, I see this boat as a "nahh, well, (shrug-shrug), ok I guess."

Are you going to sell a lot of boats doing that? THat is especially true with what I see are critical deficiencies from MY Perspective. Others may not care about any of that.

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
  #27  
Old 12-13-2012
PCP's Avatar
PCP PCP is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal, West Coast
Posts: 16,160
Thanks: 21
Thanked 95 Times in 79 Posts
Rep Power: 10
PCP will become famous soon enough
Re: Blue Jacket 40 (new racer/cruiser)

Jesus Guys, I am impressed. It seems that nobody likes that boat. I wonder if the guys from Island Packet have not done any market research before doing that boat.

Actually among the American cruising boats, personally, if I had to chose one I would chose the J 122 (and I like it a lot) but taking that one out this one would be a second choice. Off course there are a lot of things to modify but nothing basic (hull, Keel, rudder are OK) and I guess that they would be glad to satisfy my requests (for a price). Off course, the boat is already expensive, that would make the boat a lot more expensive and I don't think that would be justifiable face to other European performance cruisers that come already with all I want and are less expensive.

Cruisingdad, I understand what you mean but regarding beam the J 122 for instance has less beam that this boat and is a hell of a performance cruiser.

I guess that you, considering the Catalina 40 a performance boat, expect this boat to offer the same as a Catalina. People and manufacturers can call their boats what they want but a Catalina 40 would not be called in Europe a performance boat. See what I mean on post 14.

A sailor that is interested in a Catalina 40 would not be interested in this boat and vice verse. This boat is, according with the design brief a performance boat that could race with success offshore or around the cans and also can provide conditions for comfortable cruising. That is not the design brief for a Catalina.

The design brief of the BlueJacket is very similar to the one of the J122, the difference is that the J122 deliver and this boat would not. I don't mean in what regards cruising but in what regards performance cruising or racing. In what regards performance cruising that has to do basically with the lack of adequate controls to control perfectly the sail shape.

I guess that what this boat should be was a kind of more luxurious and comfortable J122. Well, it ain't

Regards

Paulo

Last edited by PCP; 12-13-2012 at 02:15 PM.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #28  
Old 12-13-2012
Cruisingdad's Avatar
Best Looking MALE Mod
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Mobile Liveaboards
Posts: 9,894
Thanks: 3
Thanked 97 Times in 52 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 PCP View Post
Jesus Guys, I am impressed. It seems that nobody likes that boat. I wonder if the guys from Island Packet have not done any market research before doing that boat.

Actually among the American cruising boats, personally, if I had to chose one I would chose the J 122 (and I like it a lot) but taking that one out this one would be a second choice. Off course there are a lot of things to modify but nothing basic (hull, Keel, rudder are OK) and I guess that they would be glad to satisfy my requests (for a price). Off course, the boat is already expensive, that would make the boat a lot more expensive and I don't think that would be justifiable face to other European performance cruisers that come already with all I want and are less expensive.

Cruisingdad, I understand what you mean but regarding beam the J 122 for instance has less beam that this boat and is a hell of a performance cruiser.

I guess that you, considering the Catalina 40 a performance boat, expect this boat to offer the same as a Catalina. People and manufacturers can call their boats what they want but a Catalina 40 would not be called in Europe a performance boat. See what I mean on post 14.

A sailor that is interested in a Catalina 40 would not be interested in this boat and vice verse. This boat is, according with the design brief a performance boat that could race with success offshore or around the cans and also can provide conditions for comfortable cruising. That is not the design brief for a Catalina.

The design brief of the BlueJacket is very similar to the one of the J122, the difference is that the J122 deliver and this boat would not. I don't mean in what regards cruising but in what regards performance cruising or racing. In what regards performance cruising that has to do basically with the lack of adequate controls to control perfectly the sail shape.

I guess that what this boat should be was a kind of more luxurious and comfortable J122. Well, it ain't

Regards

Paulo
My description of a performance cruiser is a boat that runs close to its hull speed, and under good conditions, can exceed it comfortably. More important, the boat has to be a good cruising boat and suitable for cruising. It needs to have a comfortable motion at sea, sure footed, and the space and setup for systems below to make cruising possible AND reasonably comfortable as a live aboard.

Catalina CERTAINLY is not the only boat that does this. It does it well (for the price) but there are other boats that I like lot that do it better... Sabre, X, J, and some beneteaus to name a few off my head that I have been on and like.

I have been on and raced a 122. I assume you have too? I loved that boat for what it was - a race boat. No offense, but there is no way I would take that boat cruising. But I would have to think a real long time before I took a First cruising either, and it was better suited. My compromise is somewhere in the middle where you are comfortable down below and have a lot of space for storage and systems. The 122 I was on was a carbon fire, stripped down racing machine. SHe was rocking fast, but for a cruising boat?? No way! I don't know that I would want too much CF on my boat as a cruising boat. Of course, there is the other extreme (the Tayanas and IP's of the world) where to heck with speed. It is very focused on being a liveaboard and slower than CHristmas. As long as I can plan on 7ish knots, sometimes 7.5 for my SOG trip planning, I am happy with my 40 foot boat. Hey, soimetimes I exceed it. Sometimes I don't. But there are few points when I canot turn on my motor and go well over 7 knots at a reasonable RPM and reasonable fuel useage. And THAT is a performance cruiser to me.

My definition anyays.

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
  #29  
Old 12-13-2012
PCP's Avatar
PCP PCP is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal, West Coast
Posts: 16,160
Thanks: 21
Thanked 95 Times in 79 Posts
Rep Power: 10
PCP will become famous soon enough
Catalina 40/J122

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cruisingdad View Post
My description of a performance cruiser is a boat that runs close to its hull speed, and under good conditions, can exceed it comfortably. More important, the boat has to be a good cruising boat and suitable for cruising. It needs to have a comfortable motion at sea, sure footed, and the space and setup for systems below to make cruising possible AND reasonably comfortable as a live aboard.

Catalina CERTAINLY is not the only boat that does this. It does it well (for the price) but there are other boats that I like lot that do it better... Sabre, X, J, and some beneteaus to name a few off my head that I have been on and like.
Brian, I don't doubt that is your opinion about what is a performance cruiser to you. I only said in Europe, where there is a bigger variety of boats and a bigger market, a Catalina does not qualify has a performance boat the same way an Oceanis or a Benetau does not qualify. Here we call those boats family cruisers, if we accept the definition that is given for the European boat of the year contest.

I have already explained that the difference that has to do mainly to the ability to be competitive in club racing at a medium level and also have an interior that allows cruising. One thing that all performance cruisers have in common is that they are faster than family cruising boats but also have the ability to have a better control of the sails through adequate rigging. On post 14 I explain better the difference.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cruisingdad View Post

I have been on and raced a 122. I assume you have too? I loved that boat for what it was - a race boat. No offense, but there is no way I would take that boat cruising. ....The 122 I was on was a carbon fire, stripped down racing machine. SHe was rocking fast, but for a cruising boat?? No way! I don't know that I would want too much CF on my boat as a cruising boat. Of course, there is the other extreme (the Tayanas and IP's of the world) where to heck with speed. ...
No, I have never raced a J122 but I have been inside them several times and if the one you raced was a "was a carbon fire, stripped down racing machine" then it was not a standard J122 but a racing machine made out of a J122. The J122 is not a carbon fiber boat neither a stripped down boat. It has a good cruising interior even if what one consider good depends on the type of sailor. I would say that it is adequate for me.

The designer and shipyard says about the J122:

J/122 is a versatile 40 foot performance sailboat with comfortable live-aboard accommodations, a refined deck layout, low VCG keel with a moderate 7.2' draft.

...An IRC-friendly cruiser/racer, J/122 offers a completely furnished interior, a simple to manage balanced sail plan, head turning sailing performance and great looks-- perhaps the ultimate 40' day sailing, weekending, racing and cruising sailboat...

...The J/122 hull is not extreme in any particular dimension and will have a forgiving and predictable motion in a wide variety of wind and seas conditions...

Construction: J/122 is built by J/Europe of Les Sables d’Olonne in France, an area rich with sailing history and experienced boat builders. She is CE certified category A, and hull & deck are SCRIMP molded with e-glass and vinylester resin with balsa and foam core materials respectively. An extensive SCRIMP molded structural grid supports the keel and mast loads as well as the interior components.


Take a look at some interior photos:













Regarding motion comfort I don't think you are right when you think that the Catalina 40 has an easier motion. The Catalina 40 is a much more beamier boat with less fine entries and therefore will have a much bigger wave drag. That will be reflected in a less easier motion through the waves, particularly upwind, I mean if the boats sail at the same speed.

Brian I hope that you understand that I am not saying bad things about the Catalina 40. I am just saying that is not the same type of boat and that a J122 is not a race boat, but a performance cruiser.

Both type of boats have their "clients" in what regards cruising and racing. I have not any doubt that you would prefer the Catalina but give me the credit to say that I know enough about sailboats to say that I without any doubt would prefer the J122 and not for racing but for cruising.

This does not mean that the J122 is a better cruising boat than the Catalina 40. I am a big adept of relativism in what regards cruising preferences and I guess that if you look to the European market you will see clearly that different sailors prefer different types of cruising boats.

In fact one of the hottest success in the market of the performance cruisers was the Pogo 12.50 (there is a member of this forum that has one and another one considering having one to live aboard), a performance cruiser that has a interior more clean and naked than the one from the J122, but functional and very practical. The Pogo 12.50 Was the elected by European journalists of main sailing magazines as the 2012 European performance cruiser and is a boat thought for performance cruising and long range voyaging.

Regards

Paulo

Last edited by PCP; 12-13-2012 at 06:42 PM.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #30  
Old 12-14-2012
zz4gta's Avatar
I don't discuss my member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Chesapeake Bay
Posts: 2,416
Thanks: 0
Thanked 16 Times in 16 Posts
Rep Power: 7
zz4gta is on a distinguished road
Re: Blue Jacket 40 (new racer/cruiser)

If the J122 is a stripped out boat...

Don't look at the Farr 400


A Ker 40



Or any real race boats.
__________________
Merit 25 # 764 "Audrey"
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 07:11 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