Production Boats and the Limits

[Sanduskysailor]

Smack Daddy. I respectfully disagree with some of your choices. The summation of your reasoning is somewhat ok. I do have a problem with your blanket statement about 5 day forecasts. Maybe in the Pacific where the storms are moving from a long way but in the Atlantic not so accurate. Beneteau would generally be off my list for the following reasons: check out the cockpit drains, they go to a standpipe not a thru-hull. Not a good idea. The all glass hull flexes quite a bit. Nice in that it doesn't have core problems but not very reassuring in a seaway when the hull is flexing a half a foot like the Beneteau 42 I've sailed on a lot. Some of the Catalinas mentioned have an issue with cockpit volume. Nice at the dock but can be a serious problem if you poop one. Hunters- uh I wouldn't feel all that comfortable with a top heavy boat in a blow. Hunter has made vast design improvements but come on, the ports/deadlights are too big, that nice roller furling main has a very high center of effort which is not good if the wind unexpectedly pipes up. Look at the Hunter deck/hull joint. The external flange and fastening is susceptible to docking damage which cause some pretty bad leaks. One bump and you have a leak. Also take a look at the fasteners on the underside of the Hunter rail. They are corroding within 2 years in a saltwater environment.

Give me a Tartan 37, Sabre 38-II, or even the IP 38 before these boats. A few modifications like additional tankage and maybe a staysail cutter with check stays retrofit on the Tartan and Sabre and you have a pretty good compromise near offshore boat.

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by Valiente

I think I would call this "a good start", but it neglects major makers like Dufour, Hanse, Farr, Saga and J-Boat, and ignores that Tartan are making boats equal in seaworthiness to Beneteau (some models, anyway), and ignores a huge swath of production boats made in the thousands, but no longer being produced, like the C&C Landfall series, CS 36 and 42, Niagara 35 and 42, the bigger Pearsons, Gulfstar, Southerly, Peterson...yadda yadda.

We haven't even gotten to the "old shoe" class, like Westsail, Bristol, the various Taiwan-built cutters and schooners and clippers. The Island Packets, the Passports, the Shannons. Basically, anything Alex finds amusing.

And then there's the 10,000 steel or ferrocement Roberts designs out there, and the odd fibreglass replica of "Spray" with authentic teak and brass below, some in the cook's peg leg and parts of the parrot.

Ye be only wetting yer buckles, matey. Dive a little deeper 'til there be the devil to pay! Y'arrrrrrrr.....

Awww crap Cap'n Val - I thought I was DONE! You guys are just too freakin' hard to please!

As to other boats you list - I'm trying to keep us focused on true production boats - and those that are still in production (as much as possible). So that nukes the no-longers. Of course - that can be stretched but that means YOU have to do the rundown of all those, pal. I'm too damn lazy.

As for the Hanse, Dufor, etc. in my mind those boats are above the level of the "production boat" line we're discussing. It seems that the Tartan/C&C lines are still on the lower end of that scale, and probably slide into the PB camp. But I don't really know for sure.

The other ones you list are definitely in the blue water family I would say. So fugedaboudit. And don't even get me started on steel pal!

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by Sanduskysailor

Smack Daddy. I respectfully disagree with some of your choices. The summation of your reasoning is somewhat ok. I do have a problem with your blanket statement about 5 day forecasts. Maybe in the Pacific where the storms are moving from a long way but in the Atlantic not so accurate. Beneteau would generally be off my list for the following reasons: check out the cockpit drains, they go to a standpipe not a thru-hull. Not a good idea. The all glass hull flexes quite a bit. Nice in that it doesn't have core problems but not very reassuring in a seaway when the hull is flexing a half a foot like the Beneteau 42 I've sailed on a lot. Some of the Catalinas mentioned have an issue with cockpit volume. Nice at the dock but can be a serious problem if you poop one. Hunters- uh I wouldn't feel all that comfortable with a top heavy boat in a blow. Hunter has made vast design improvements but come on, the ports/deadlights are too big, that nice roller furling main has a very high center of effort which is not good if the wind unexpectedly pipes up. Look at the Hunter deck/hull joint. The external flange and fastening is susceptible to docking damage which cause some pretty bad leaks. One bump and you have a leak. Also take a look at the fasteners on the underside of the Hunter rail. They are corroding within 2 years in a saltwater environment.

Give me a Tartan 37, Sabre 38-II, or even the IP 38 before these boats. A few modifications like additional tankage and maybe a staysail cutter with check stays retrofit on the Tartan and Sabre and you have a pretty good compromise near offshore boat.

Sandy - respect is absolutely unnecessary. Feel free to call me a flaming idiot. That's cool. I got no pride.

As for the 5 day forecast limitation - as I said I know it's wildly variable, but let's try to dial it in a bit to keep it harder for people to hind behind uncertainty. As Tom Cruise said, "I WANT THE TRUTH!".

Your run down on the contenders is very good. That's the kind of info we need around here.

As for the Tartan - what's the cut-off year before all the problems? I actually like those boats personally - but there is the hubbub that can't be named.

Do me a favor and quote my run-down and tweak it where you think it needs to be tweaked. Then we'll go from there.

(You too Val)

[graemefromdownunder]

"Then look at the hull shape - greater beam aft of the CLR as well as CE behind or about the CLR. Therefore downwind she might wish for her rear to race past her bow."

I have looked through the various posts and my notes on boat design but would be grateful if you could tell me what CLR and CE stand for? I think I understand what you are getting at however.

Regards

Graeme

[sailingmum]

Price and rig are a consideration for me.
When I worked in marina, Beneteaus, new and older ones, had many issues. They seem so light for crossing the ocean as well, but that said I know many do.
My budget is no more than 20 to 25K, which leaves me in this market, looking at Allied Seawind, Pearson Triton 28, Ericson 28 and in a stretch maybe the Telstar 28. I won't be crossing oceans but I want to do long cruises down the coast of US, Caribean and Central America.
I prefer a fractional rig and a tiller. That's not set in stone but as single hander, seems like way to go and I just love the feel of a tiller, and that you can tuck it out of the way, when you're not sailing. A wheel is like another guest when you're at anchor. But a guest who just won't get out of the way.

Also, I'm one of the few sailors I know that wears a life jacket anytime I leave the mooring or dock. It's a pain but I don't care. If the boat sinks, I don't want to sink too. Sadly as a marine professional for a few years, I witnessed many freak accidents that lead to injury and death.
I mention only because it often makes me think about monohulls opposed to catamarans or trimarans. One sinks, the other doesn't.
I often ask myself, why am I considering long cruises.... on a boat that could sink and sink quickly. At least the catamarans and tris, have floatation.

Lots to think about...

Originally Posted by Valiente

I think I would call this "a good start", but it neglects major makers like Dufour, Hanse, Farr, Saga and J-Boat, and ignores that Tartan are making boats equal in seaworthiness to Beneteau (some models, anyway), and ignores a huge swath of production boats made in the thousands, but no longer being produced, like the C&C Landfall series, CS 36 and 42, Niagara 35 and 42, the bigger Pearsons, Gulfstar, Southerly, Peterson...yadda yadda.

We haven't even gotten to the "old shoe" class, like Westsail, Bristol, the various Taiwan-built cutters and schooners and clippers. The Island Packets, the Passports, the Shannons. Basically, anything Alex finds amusing.

And then there's the 10,000 steel or ferrocement Roberts designs out there, and the odd fibreglass replica of "Spray" with authentic teak and brass below, some in the cook's peg leg and parts of the parrot.

Ye be only wetting yer buckles, matey. Dive a little deeper 'til there be the devil to pay! Y'arrrrrrrr.....

[St Anna]

Graeme,
Ilumination via KISS principle. This will cause some conjecture and correction from those who really know what they are talking about, but here it is;

CE is the centre of effort of the sails. Some yachts (esp racing) have the mast quite back and either raked or tensioned to curve the top back. This brings the power of the sails back (aft) --> great for windward sailing. For downwind sailing, you want that power of the sails concentrated further forward. Average boat - CE is found 3-4' above the goosneck and 3' behind

CLR is the centre of lateral resistance of the boat. Its the pivot point forward/aft and sideways. Average mono - bottom of the round part of the bilges and close to the widest part of the beam.

If the CE is in front of the CLR, downwind performance is better. CE behind CLR windward better. Also ballast, level of weather helm and a thousand other factors are involved.

Modern yachts have the beam well aft and small dense bolt on keels, with flat hull sections aft. Their CE is fairly aft so they go to windward and are fast and stable. However when going downwind (and more particular - with following sea) and relying on an autopilot, not an experienced (racing) helmsman, there is a chance you will broach.

Cruising from the USA to OZ is a lot of downwind stuff (thats how those yanks get here - and then they use {need}a ship to bring the boat back uphill!!! just kidding guys) Dats wot I say.

[Valiente]

Originally Posted by smackdaddy

Do me a favor and quote my run-down and tweak it where you think it needs to be tweaked. Then we'll go from there.

(You too Val)

Well, we have to get real about your goals, then, Smack.

Are you looking to eventually purchase a coastal cruiser capable of hopping from Florida to the Bahamas and then running the chain down to Trinidad and back?

In that case, pretty well any of the production boats you listed will do. They can all carry five days' worth of water, fuel and electricity in relatively comfort, and could handle a reasonable blow of reasonable duration, say, 35-40 knots, 15 foot seas, for 36 hours in the open ocean.

But if you are wanting to go off the continental shelf and to spend two to three weeks crossing the Atlantic from Boston to Bristol in June, or from Portugal via the Azores to Guadaloupe in March, you may wish to rethink certain aspects of your boat. If you are planning to go from Panama to the Marquesas (which can take a full month at 105 NM per day, or just over 5 knots SOG every hour out of 24), you are going to need solar, wind, a genset and loads of fuel and water, or a watermaker and loads of power to run it...and so on.

A lot of production boats have a finite amount of space and reserve buoyancy with which to play in terms of adding extended tankage, batteries or other heavy objects. It's like putting a production car like a Toyota or Volkswagen sedan in an "across the Sahara" rally: Extensive modifications are required to do the trip at all, and you can toss the car in the garbage when you're finished.

Of course, "boat show cruisers" can and do make long passages. People live on them for years. You don't need an "old shoe". But I think you'll find that the compromises and changes needed to go from a "mostly coastal, with occasional point-to-point oceanic" capabilities to "trans-Pacific, multi-point randomness, with occasional month-long, shore-autonomous stints on the hook in some distant lagoon where the 200 locals turn off the three lightbulbs at 8 PM, because they only get 55 gallons of diesel a month for the whole village".

I don't even consider that hypothetical boat extreme. Extreme is someone who goes to the fjords of Patagonia for laughs, and who crosses from Cape Horn to the west side of the Antarctica Peninsula as a challenge or because they finally received the DVD of "March of the Penguins" by poste restante.

So there are production cruisers out there, but the runs are small and the models are invariably more expensive, but less so in most cases than modifying an existing fast cruiser happy with 25 knots between Rum Reef and Cola Cay.

I haven't seen a boat show production boat for years that I would deem suitable for ocean crossings just on the basis of beam and too large open space in the interior, too big portlights, and too weak hatches and dropboards, and too large cockpits with too small scuppers. Don't get me started on backing plates, lack of handholds or a hundred other details.

I've seen most of these points addressed on Island Packets and J-Boats, even though they are quite different beasts. So I know that the builders know what is needed for oceanic work.

But the fact is that there's no point spending the money for this when the target audience are modestly skilled sailors planning modestly distant passages in fair weather. There's no shame in wanting a safe, untroubled three-day sail to Bermuda in a gold-plated weather window, or the same trip from Bermuda to Bahamas.

So either look at European boats from places where crappy weather is inevitable, but holidays are limited...or look at buying someone else's offshore boat where the stuff that didn't break the first time around is probably still good for another few thousand miles.

[sailingmum]

Please more of this no-nonsense sharing. This is the best post I've read anywhere on the subject.
Thanks

[smackdaddy]

Great write up Val! Again! Honestly, I'm not wanting to make this about my personal purchase. I will most likely end up with a 10-12 year old center-cockpit production boat due to comfort factors for the family and my budget. I think it will be fine for us cruising around the Gulf and Carib which will be our thang for the foreseeable future. That is to say; I promise to stay on the shelf. If per chance I do get a wild hair and decide to take in the "Patagonia Penguin Run" - I'll trade in for a suitable boat.

So, for this thread, I'm really just trying to do a thorough run-down of these non-blue boats because in researching it, I hadn't found much in-depth comparisons between production boat models as regards heavier sailing. Just the comparisons of them to blues - which doesn't make sense to me. As you say, they're very different animals.

Which are the badass production boats (BAPBs) and why? St's write up is also extremely informative in this regard as I now understand the CE/CLR coefficient to mean fatass production boat (FAPB).

Great stuff.

[St Anna]

Hiya Smacker,
Keeping out of trouble??
Here is another factor. Most offshore trips will be less than 7 days max and usually less than 5. In W Pacific, I could expect to get from Oz to Am Samoa with most legs 4 days, maybe one leg 5 days. @$#@^%$ etc dependant.

A friend (75yr old solo sailor) brought a Halberg Rassy from Hawaii to Brisbane and averaged 175nm/d. (Downwind stuff) We use the HF daily on an informal net and give our position and tell a few lies etc.{Security Blanket}