Blue Jacket 40 (new racer/cruiser) - Page 8 - 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
  #71  
Old 01-09-2013
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 BryceGTX View Post
Really??
...
Here is the problem with your argument, the Catalina 40 is not just beamier, it is longer at the water line and fuller in the fore and aft body. And its got a hull design remarkably similar to the First 40. Perhaps if you had ever seen these two boats out of the water, you would understand.

And of course the Catalina 40 is heavier. Not sure how you could argue a First is stiffer. Perhaps you should look at the RM disgrams to convince yourself.
.....
The amount of sail area is related to the RM value not the stiffness.

One of the reasons the Catalina 40 is more stiff is that it has a significantly higher RM value than the First 40. All else being equal this simply produces a stiffer boat.
Bryce
Jesus

So as you say :" the Catalina 40 ..got a hull design remarkably similar to the First 40"

Sure, very similar:







They look similar to you?

and you say: "the Catalina 40 is not just beamier, it is longer at the water line.." .Why don't you check before sayng nonsense. The Catalina 400 LWL is 9.30m. The First 40 LWL is 10.67.

CATALINA 400 Mk II sailboat specifications and details on sailboatdata.com
http://sailboatdata.com/viewrecord.asp?class_id=6068
http://l-36.com/boat_dimensions_boat...18000&wll=34.8

I know that you where mislead by the data Catalina posted but they are not very rigorous and this is not the first mistake on that site. If you know something about hulls, bows, sterns and waterlines would see that the boat with that bow type cannot have a hull with 12.34m and a LWL with 11.11m. you will find the correct data on the net (see the posted links).

Of course, the amount of sail area as to do with the boat righting moment but the stiffness is not directly related to that but with the relation between weight (wet surface) and the Righting moment.

You have said: One of the reasons the Catalina 40 is more stiff is that it has a significantly higher RM value than the First 40. All else being equal this simply produces a stiffer boat.

But of course, all things are not equal and the Catalina 400 is a much heavier boat with a GZ curve worse than the one of the First 40.

I have explained this several times and I will explain one more: If we have two boats one with the double of the weight of another and with the same RM, the lighter boat would be massively more stiff.

That is the case between your boat and a 40class racer. I am using the 40class racer example just because it is easier for understanding that the Stiffness has not to do with RM but with the relation between RM and the weight of the boat (wet surface). The same in a lesser extent is valid with the First 40 that would be not be massively more stiff than your boat, just a lot more stiff

The only reason that leads me not to post the Catalina 400 curve is just respect to other Catalina 400 owners. It was posted already (not by me) on another thread as an example of a not particularly very good stability curve.

Regards

Paulo

Last edited by PCP; 01-09-2013 at 10:44 AM.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #72  
Old 01-09-2013
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Michigan
Posts: 180
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rep Power: 3
BryceGTX is on a distinguished road
Re: Blue Jacket 40 (new racer/cruiser)

Quote:
Originally Posted by PCP View Post
They look similar to you?
Yep.. and when you see them for real.. not just pictures.. it becomes even more convincing.
However, in a discussion of stiffness in respect to heeling, not sure why you are showing a side view of the waterline. A front on view would be more useful.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PCP View Post
and you say: "the Catalina 40 is not just beamier, it is longer at the water line.." .Why don't you check before sayng nonsense. The Catalina 400 LWL is 9.30m. The First 40 LWL is 10.67.
Paulo
Perhaps you should look at the data from Catalina. The LWL is 11.11 meters which puts it about one and a half foot longer than the First 40. If we assume the Catalina data is wrong, should we also assume that the Beneteau data is also wrong?

What is even more amusing is the LWL you list for the Catalina 400 is almost the same as the Catalina 355.. are you serious???

Quote:
If you know something about hulls, bows, sterns and waterlines would see that the boat with that bow type cannot have a hull with 12.34m and a LWL with 11.11m.
So it cannot be over 3 feet shorter at the water line... for what reason???

Your first line does not list the LWL for the Catalina 400, and the LOA is short by a foot. So who's wrong?

So yes, it is longer at the water line.
Bryce

Last edited by BryceGTX; 01-09-2013 at 06:43 AM.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #73  
Old 01-09-2013
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Michigan
Posts: 180
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rep Power: 3
BryceGTX is on a distinguished road
Re: Blue Jacket 40 (new racer/cruiser)

Quote:
Originally Posted by PCP View Post
But of course, all things are not equal and the Catalina 400 is a much heavier boat with a GZ curve worse than the one of the First 40.
Paulo
Again.. where is this GZ curve you mention??
Bryce
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #74  
Old 01-09-2013
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Michigan
Posts: 180
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rep Power: 3
BryceGTX is on a distinguished road
Re: Blue Jacket 40 (new racer/cruiser)

Quote:
Originally Posted by PCP View Post
I have explained this several times and I will explain one more: If we have two boats one with the double of the weight of another and with the same RM, the lighter boat would be massively more stiff.

Paulo
Clearly.. the Catalina 400 has a higher RM and it has more mass.. and it has more beam.. fuller body.. similar flat hull.. and it has more LWL.. But you are convinced the lighter boat is stiffer?

From this thread:
Full or fin keel?

Quote:
Originally Posted by PCP View Post
There are two ways of increasing stiffness in a sail boat: increasing beam and lowering the CG (increasing ballast or bigger draft).
You are now arguing with yourself.. perhaps you should come to an agreement with yourself prior to arguing with me.
Bryce

Last edited by BryceGTX; 01-09-2013 at 06:45 AM.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #75  
Old 01-09-2013
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Michigan
Posts: 180
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rep Power: 3
BryceGTX is on a distinguished road
Re: Blue Jacket 40 (new racer/cruiser)

Quote:
Originally Posted by PCP View Post
Stiffness has not to do with RM but with the relation between RM and the weight of the boat (wet surface).
Stiffness is the derivative of the RM. So it has everthing to do with RM.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PCP View Post
The only reason that leads me not to post the Catalina 400 curve is just respect to other Catalina 400 owners. It was posted already (not by me) on another thread as an example of a not particularly very good stability curve.

Paulo
Oh I think we are a hardy bunch of souls and can take it..
Bryce

Last edited by BryceGTX; 01-09-2013 at 01:36 AM.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #76  
Old 01-09-2013
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 BryceGTX View Post
Yep.. and when you see them for real.. not just pictures.. it becomes even more convincing.
and you insist I had not showed a side view but a side view and a top view. With that two views you can have a pretty good idea how different are those hulls. It is absolutely incredible that you cannot see that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BryceGTX View Post
Perhaps you should look at the data from Catalina. The LWL is 11.11 meters which puts it about one and a half foot longer than the First 40. If we assume the Catalina data is wrong, should we also assume that the Beneteau data is also wrong?

What is even more amusing is the LWL you list for the Catalina 400 is almost the same as the Catalina 355.. are you serious???

So it cannot be over 3 feet shorter at the water line... for what reason???

Your first line does not list the LWL for the Catalina 400, and the LOA is short by a foot. So who's wrong?

So yes, it is longer at the water line.
Bryce
Not understanding why the Catalina 400 has a smaller LWL than the First 40 even if the overall hull length is slightly smaller (12.24m to 12.34m) is not understanding why modern hulls have a much bigger LWL. It has to do with bows much more vertical and with transoms finishing almost at the water line.

The hull of the Catalina 400 is an old one since the MkII has the same hull as the MKI and even so is already slightly better in what regards LWL than the even older hull from the Catalina 42 even if that one was a LOA 42cms bigger, that has a LWL of 36' 0" when you claim the 400 has 36' 6".

I don't know if the LWL of the First 40 is right or not but I do no that by considering that the deference in max length of both hulls is just 10cm, the LWL of the First has to big bigger due to a more modern desing of the bow and transom. You only need to look at the side views to understand that:

The last picture is from a Catalina 42, on the middle the 400, on top the first 40.







CATALINA 42 sailboat specifications and details on sailboatdata.com
CATALINA 42 sailboat specifications and details on sailboatdata.com
CATALINA 400 Mk II sailboat specifications and details on sailboatdata.com
CATALINA YACHTS - C400
First 40 CR / First / Sailing Yachts - BENETEAU

Quote:
Originally Posted by BryceGTX View Post

Clearly.. the Catalina 400 has a higher RM and it has more mass.. and it has more beam.. fuller body.. similar flat hull.. and it has more LWL.. But you are convinced the lighter boat is stiffer?
Regarding stiffness the hull design is only part of the equation, the B/D ratio, the type of the keel and the draft are also decisive factors as well as the boat weight and wet surface since is that what mainly determines the amount of sail needed on the two boats to sail at the same speed.

Even considering only righting moment do you have considered how much more RM that modern big draft keel will provide comparing with the Catalina one, knowing that the First has a bigger B/D ratio than the Catalina?

Regarding making Righting moment as the determining factor in what regards stiffness, independently of the boat weight, that would mean that a considerable bigger and heavier boat would be always more stiff than a lighter one and that is ridiculous.

Regards

Paulo

Last edited by PCP; 01-09-2013 at 10:42 AM.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #77  
Old 01-09-2013
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
and you insist I had not showed a side view but a side view and a top view. With that two views you can have a pretty good idea how different are those hulls. It is absolutely incredible that you cannot see that.



Not understanding why the Catalina 400 has a smaller LWL than the First 40 even if the overall hull length is slightly smaller (12.24m to 12.34m) is not understanding why modern hulls have a much bigger LWL. It has to do with bows much more vertical and with transoms finishing almost at the water line.

The hull of the Catalina 400 is an old one since the MkII has the same hull as the MKI and even so is already slightly better in what regards LWL than the even older hull from the Catalina 42 even if that one was a LOA 42cms bigger, that has a LWL of 36' 0" when you claim the 400 has 36' 6".

I don't know if the LWL of the First 40 is right or not but I do no that by considering that the deference in max length of both hulls is just 10cm, the LWL of the First has to big bigger due to a more modern desing of the bow and transom. You only need to look at the side views to understand that:

The last picture is from a Catalina 42, on the middle the 400, on top the first 40.







CATALINA 42 sailboat specifications and details on sailboatdata.com
CATALINA 42 sailboat specifications and details on sailboatdata.com
CATALINA 400 Mk II sailboat specifications and details on sailboatdata.com
CATALINA YACHTS - C400
First 40 CR / First / Sailing Yachts - BENETEAU



Regarding stiffness the hull design is only part of the equation, the B/D ratio, the type of the keel and the draft are also decisive factors as well as the boat weight and wet surface since is that what mainly determines the amount of sail needed on the two boats to sail at the same speed.

Even considering only righting moment do you have considered how much more RM that modern big draft keel will provide comparing with the Catalina one, knowing that the First has a bigger B/D ratio than the Catalina?

Regarding making Righting moment as the determining factor in what regards stiffness, independently of the boat weight, that would mean that a considerable bigger and heavier boat would be always more stiff than a lighter one and that is ridiculous.

Regards

Paulo
Wow!!! I am trying to read back through all of this and get a grip on all the information. However, as a C400 owner, the technical editor, and someone who knows this boat better than most, let me set a few things straight...

First, the LWL on the boat is not the 30.5 feet or whatever that is stated in Sailboatdata. That is not the first time I have seen an error there. The LWL is 38.5. I know because I just pulled a tape measure across it so that we have an exact.

Second, the draft on the boat is completely inaccurate. The shoal draft version (wing keel) is NOT 5'4 as Catalina states, and certainly is not 5 feet. The dry draft on this boat is 5'10, and realistically 6 feet when loaded. I have pics somewhere of me standing beside it if you need me to prove it (I am 5'10 and the waterline is taller than me). Now, there is an exception here: after HN 307 ish, Catalina modified the hull/stinger/keel setup. I don't know what all they did. It seems a mystery. But the post 307ish C400's did come in closer to the 5'4. However, they have a much shallower bilge and do not point as well. I know this because I raced against one. To find out for certain which boat you have, just check the bilge.

Third, the displacement that you read about is DESIGNED displacement. My last pull was either 26 or 28000 lbs. I cannot remember. Now, this includes all my liveaboard junk, but even new I was nowhere near the 20,500 stated. You cannot put on 8000 pounds of pots and pans. Well, maybe you can but that is another story!!!!

I have raced and saild a large variety of boats. I have never been on a stiffer boat than the C400. It is sure footed and slow to heel. The hull of this boat is nothing like the c42 (which I have also sailed). This is a realtively flat bottom boat, and is almost identical to the new Beneteau 40. I saw one side by side and could not tell the difference. Of course, there are differences, but I am giving you naked eye stuff.

THis boat sails very flat and even large gusts of wind do not knock her rail in the water. I have had water hitting the portlights that are under the rub rail, but have never put the rail in the water... even when crossing the gulf in a strong gale.

THis boat will not, as setup, outrun a First 40. I think we could give a stock FIirst a run for its money, but this boat needs to shave off a few thousand pounds. But doesn't that boat have like a 7 or 8 foot draft?? That would rule out almost all of SW FLorida and most of the places I like to go. THe First has a narrower beam and I think a longer waterline. I can't remember. I think the First is a great boat for what it is, but no offense, it would be near the bottom of the list of boats I would ever consider cruising on. Paulo dissagres, and that is fine. His tastes and mine are very different but I have a lot of reasons for not liking that boat to cruise on. Are we talking about a club racer? Sure, it is a great boat. But if you are just doing a club racer, why not just get a Farr or Melges or Tiger.. of J122????

I have, and regularly do, exceed hull speed on my boat (and this is with it being a fully loaded cruising boat with two kids, wife, and fat bulldog). It is a very comfortable and safe long distance cruising vessel. It performs well, and I will outrun most other cruising vessels I come across. There are exceptions, but none of them begin with Val or end with ayana. I do believe this is the best boat Catalina has ever built, with the possible exception being the new 445. But since I wouldn't pay 400,000 US for a Catalina, I guess I will stick with my comment that this is the best boat Catalina has built.

My only comments here are to be careful what data you pull off the internet and NEVER trust the pamplets put out by manufacturers. I think many of them have a tendency to be overly optimistic. Get on the boats yourself and bring a tape measure. Sail them. Talk to owners.

My opinions (but the data I quoted is fact).

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
  #78  
Old 01-09-2013
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)

BTW, I am in the middle of a project so cannot participate in this thread as much as I would like. Excuse my absence (or enjoy it!!!).

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
  #79  
Old 01-09-2013
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 Cruisingdad View Post
...

First, the LWL on the boat is not the 30.5 feet or whatever that is stated in Sailboatdata. That is not the first time I have seen an error there. The LWL is 38.5. I know because I just pulled a tape measure across it so that we have an exact.....
Yes there are several LWL for the Catalina 400 from several sources and Beneteau does not even give the LWL from the First 40. That is probable that the number that we find on the net for the First 40 is inaccurate and the error may be there. The point is that being the First hull length only about 10cms shorter and given the more modern hull, with a much more vertical bow and the a much loger waterline on the transom is impossible that the LWL of the Catalina 400 to be bigger than the one of the First 40.





You have just to use your eyes regarding the hull LWL, bow shape and transom shape to see that the difference will be more than 10cms regarding the gains.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cruisingdad View Post
...
I have raced and saild a large variety of boats. I have never been on a stiffer boat than the C400.
Without all respect Brian, but or you did not sailed the right kind of boats or there is something wrong with what you think it is stifness in a sailboat.

Here is what Rodney S. Johnstone, a very good NA says about it:

Where does performance come from? ...

A cruising sailboat’s performance also depends on stability, or "stiffness"-the ability of the boat to resist the heeling force of the sails. Good all-around speed is possible only if the boat is stiff; a stiff boat can carry more sail and heel less in a breeze than a tender boat. Stiffness can be achieved through a wide beam at the waterline or through a low vertical center of gravity (VCG). If stiffness comes from a wide waterline beam, the boat’s motion tends to be bouncy and abrupt in waves; as soon as this type of boat heels, it usually exhibits excessive weather helm and may be difficult to steer. ..
The most important characteristic of a performance cruiser is that its stiffness be derived from a low center of gravity. This is indicated by a simple ratio of righting moment (RM) at 1 degree of heel to the cube of the greatest beam at the waterline (B). The RM/B^3 ratio indicates whether the boat derives its stability more from its low VCG (RM) or from its large beam, or waterplane inertia (B^3). The greater the number yielded by this ratio, the greater the stability, seakindliness, sail-carrying ability, and potential performance of the boat. Boats with a high RM/B^3 tend to be longer, narrower, and faster than boats with a lower RM/B^3. ...

A high or low rating on this index is independent of a boat’s displacement/length (D/L) ratio. ...

The preponderance of heavy-displacement boats ... reflects a modern trend in cruising sailboats toward increased accommodations and decreased ballast/displacement ratios-a trend that has raised the height of the center of gravity of this type of boat. ...

.. Whether light or heavy, a narrow boat with a low center of gravity will have a rock solid feel, an easy motion, and positive control-the unmistakable aura of power, stability, and passagemaking speed.


Stiffness in a sailboat is related with speed. A stiff boat does not mean necessarily that it heels not much but relates directly with the sail area the boat needs for a given speed. Modern beamy boats heel very little they use basically hull form stability but they have to reef as soon and many times sooner than a more narrow boat that sails always with more heel. Stiffness is not related with a boat being designed to sail with more or less heel but with the amount of sail they can carry in proportion with their wet surface/weight.

That's why many times a boat is refereed as powerful meaning a very stiff sailboat. For instance, America's cup last monohulls where incredibly stiff and powerful boats but also boats that sailed upwind always with a lot of heel.

A slow boat can be stiff but a fast boat has always to be stiff otherwise it would not be able to carry the sail area, that in proportion with its weight, made it a fast boat.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cruisingdad View Post

It is sure footed and slow to heel. ... This is a realtively flat bottom boat, and is almost identical to the new Beneteau 40. I saw one side by side and could not tell the difference. Of course, there are differences, but I am giving you naked eye stuff.
I hope that you don't consider it a fact because in fact both hulls are very different, on the wet surface, on the overall shape, on the type of bow on the transom, on beam/Lenght ratio, on the type of keel and even on the way RM is provided, regarding the proportion that comes from hull form and the proportion that comes from Keel/Ballast. The only thing were there are some similitude is in what regards rocker.

A simple look of a trained eye should be enough to see the many differences, much more than similitude.







Quote:
Originally Posted by Cruisingdad View Post
THis boat sails very flat and even large gusts of wind do not knock her rail in the water. I have had water hitting the portlights that are under the rub rail, but have never put the rail in the water... even when crossing the gulf in a strong gale.
Brian, any boat, even the stiffest of racing boats will put the rail on the water in a gale and even capsize if he carries too much sail. the stiffness regards the amount of sail a boat can carry, specially upwind, in proportion with its wet surface. This means that we can see mostly the stiffness of a boat sailing upwind, specially with waves and there are not much cruisers that can do that better at that than a First 40, and certainly not a Catalina 400, not by a huge margin.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cruisingdad View Post
This boat will not, as setup, outrun a First 40. I think we could give a stock FIirst a run for its money, but this boat needs to shave off a few thousand pounds.

I have, and regularly do, exceed hull speed on my boat (and this is with it being a fully loaded cruising boat with two kids, wife, and fat bulldog). .. It performs well, and I will outrun most other cruising vessels I come across.
Brian, we are talking about stiffness not about the depth of the keel and regarding speed the First is a fast boat even among today's performance cruisers and one of the best upwind.

The Catalina 400, compared with modern mass production European boats is slow, I mean I guess that is slower than them all, I mean Bavaria 40, Jeanneau 409, Hanse 415, Oceanis 41, Dufour 405 and much slower in some cases. And I am not talking about performance cruisers like the First or many others, all considerably faster than any European mass production cruiser.

On another thread I was comparing (with Chef) the performance of a Catalina 40 with an older 40ft Sabre and I found out that the boat was really slow, specially with the wing keel. I was surprised at his bad PHRF, even compared with the older Sabre. I was not expecting it.

Just for you to get you an idea of how Fast the Firs 40 can be just look at its race record, just this year and we are not talking about club racing but racing at the highest level:

2012 Massilia Cup 2012 FR IRC2 1st
2012 Royal Peth Yacht Club AUS IRC 1st
2012 Semaine internationale de Marseille FR IRC2 1st
2012 Hyeres Series FR IRC2 1st
2012 Semaine de Porquerolles FR IRC2 1st
2012 BMW Sailing Fest TR IRC 1st & 3rd
2012 Fahir Çelikbaş Cup TR IRC 1st
2012 Morgan Cup UK IRC2 1st
2012 Ice Breaker Cup UK IRC1 1st
2012 North Sea Race NED IRC2 1st
2012 Around Tjörn Race SU ORC 1er, 2nd, 4th and 9th
2012 Audi Hamilton Race Week AUS IRC2 2nd and 4th
2012 Cherbourg Race UK IRC2 1st
2012 Championnat IRC Médiiterranée FR IRC 1st
2012 Rolex Sydney Hobart 2012 AUS IRC3 1st

I can only guess that most of the boats sailing in US waters are old and slow and that almost any newer model it will be faster, that's the only way I can explain your idea that the Catalina 400 is a fast sailingboat.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cruisingdad View Post

It is a .. safe long distance cruising vessel.
Regarding this, I have not a great faith on its low AVS, I mean 114º, specially if one uses in mast furling and a radar on the mast and charge the boat...how low can that AVS become?

well, not saying that if it was the only boat around I would not cross oceans on it but that AVS is only similar to the one on the Benetau Oceanis 41. All other modern European boats have better ones, some much better and they all are close or superior to 120º and some well over it.

The big ballast on the Catalina can be misleading in what regards final stability. A lower draft and an old designed keel with a high CG are the responsible.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cruisingdad View Post
My only comments here are to be careful what data you pull off the internet and NEVER trust the pamplets put out by manufacturers. I think many of them have a tendency to be overly optimistic. ...
Yes, as some reputation that some boats have regarding others.

Someone had posted on this thread regarding the superior stiffness of the Benetau 40.7. For about the same weight the First 40 has about 25% more RM. It is how stiff that boat is.

Regarding this thread and others I guess that I have run out of patient. One thing is discussing things in an informed way other is having to explain basic things and even so have to "discuss" obvious nonsense.

I know that this is internet but even so how it is possible to even be discussing this, I mean that a Catalina 400 is more stiff than a First 40?

I will not continue this "discussion" and I will take this opportunity to take some vacations from Sailnet.

Best regards to you Brain and to all.

Regards

Paulo

Last edited by PCP; 01-09-2013 at 06:03 PM.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #80  
Old 01-09-2013
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)

Paulo,

You know I like you, but really? Really!!??

I did not discredit anything you said. I told you facts. The problem is that many of your facts are pulled off the internet, and are incorrect. I explained to you the facts you had wrong about the C400. That is a fact. If you do not believe me, tomorrow I will shoot pics with my tape measure. Before you jump into a discussion about the C400, I would highly encourage you discussing it with me first since I represent the boats as the tech editor. And if that isn't good enough, I will see if we can get Gerry Douglas on this discussion!

The rest of that stuff you and everyone else is talking about I have no interest in engaging in. For Heavens sakes, this was a good discussion up to that point. Why can't everyone just see that we all have different appreciations for what is and what isn't??? I don't like brown cars, he doesn't like white. Doesn't make his opinion or mine wrong. For Gawd's sakes!??

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
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 12:22 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

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.