Production Boats and the Limits - Page 18 - SailNet Community
 646Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #171 of 1894 Old 11-06-2009
Best Looking MALE Mod
 
Cruisingdad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Washington State
Posts: 9,917
Thanks: 3
Thanked 123 Times in 57 Posts
Rep Power: 10
     
Quote:
Originally Posted by danielgoldberg View Post
In what way? Not picking a fight at all, just curious about your perspective.
I was wondering the same thing Dan.

Brian

Sailnet Moderator



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.
Cruisingdad is offline  
Quote Quick Reply Share with Facebook
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #172 of 1894 Old 11-06-2009
Senior Member
 
blt2ski's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,849
Thanks: 0
Thanked 26 Times in 25 Posts
Rep Power: 11
 
Not that I will answer for bb74, but here in my take, and it is similar......

When reading the Jeanneau owners forum, there seem to be more folks willing to take/sail this brand of boat in the 30-35' range across a smaller sea/bay etc, we are talking 100-200 miles mind you, ie bay of biscay off of france from england than you will see NAmerica folks would generally speaking, not recomend a production boat like a JEanneau, beneteau, hunter, Dufour, hanse etc to do so. Even tho many of these boats in this size range have the "Cat A" ie open ocean cert that the European government has for boats to do this. Cat B and C are smaller bodies of water etc.

Not sure if this is because if they want to sail, they have to sail in places like that, or if we NA folks are just plain too chicken or plan too much or what it is. Like my 29' 1985 Jeanneau has a then equal to a cat A cert, I would not have issues taking it off shore a bit. I know of some larger heavier built boats I would not, as they do not have what I would call some of the safety features mine has. Again, this is a personal issue, as much as anything. Please not, I have not been what I would call offshore either, so take these comments for what they are worth, probably .02!

If brian gets mean........i'll have to sick Winston and his ferocious tongue on him!:B:B:B:B:B

marty

She drives me boat,
I drives me dinghy!
blt2ski is offline  
Quote Quick Reply Share with Facebook
post #173 of 1894 Old 11-06-2009
TQA
Bombay Explorer 44
 
TQA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,868
Thanks: 0
Thanked 74 Times in 70 Posts
Rep Power: 7
 
Quote:
NO current production boat that meets bluewater capable requirements.
Amel a French manufacturer build proper cruising boats. Absolutely no concessions to the racing boys and girls or those wishing to be the queen of the marina. It has big tanks, watertight bulkheads, ketch rig etc.

Here is a review.

Quote:
Like its predecessor, the Super Maramu, the Amel 54 has a conservative sail plan and hull shape designed for comfortable sailing. On a CW test sail last year, in 16 knots on the beam with choppy cross seas off Florida, the 54 logged an effortless 9 knots. Old-school cruisers will appreciate the full-skeg rudder and twin reaching poles for downwind work. Because safety is Amel's paramount concern, the boat has four watertight bulkheads. The 54's solid hull is laminated to the deck, which has high bulwarks and full-length stainless-steel railings for added security.

Many Amel customers are older cruising couples, so easy operation is key. "If you can lift 50 pounds, you can do everything on this boat yourself," says U.S. agent Joel Potter. The electric furling main and genoa, electric winches, a bow thruster, and hydraulic pistons to help lift berths to access storage all support his claim
Related Resources
2007 CW Sailboat Show: Boat Reviews and Photo Gallery Directory

Amel's characteristic steering station, behind the hard windshield/dodger, has push-button controls and readouts for almost all systems, although visibility from the chair is limited.

Built-in lee cloths and ample tankage indicate a boat designed for passagemaking. In port, the sumptuous leather-and-mahogany interior makes the 54 a queen on any quay that the built-in passerelle touches. The seaworthy galley has a dishwasher and a deep freeze; a washer/dryer is standard. Ample storage for cruising gear includes a cavernous lazarette fit for an RIB.
Henri Amel knew that cruisers don't hand steer standing up.

Henri Amel knew that a ketch rig made a more flexible rig.

I am not sure that I need two anchor winches but Henri could propably convince me.

This a production boat that can be circumnavigated with confidence, it comes with lee cloths, a hard dodger, big tanks and it is bullet proof. The chain plates, rudder, bulkheads and hatches will all remain where they are supposed to be. It even has a lazerette locker that can swallow a rib! No davits or dinghy on deck. [ Yes all proper cruisers have a rib. ]

The only thing I would worry about long term say 10 years plus is the number of electric motors involved in sailing it. But for a boat to sailaway from the factory this is it.

Mind you it is not cheap! I certainly can not afford one, but if I find a couple of million down the back of the couch then it is no 1 on the list.

There is a nice video on the factory site, switch to English and enjoy.
http://www.amel.fr/
TQA is offline  
Quote Quick Reply Share with Facebook
post #174 of 1894 Old 11-06-2009
Best Looking MALE Mod
 
Cruisingdad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Washington State
Posts: 9,917
Thanks: 3
Thanked 123 Times in 57 Posts
Rep Power: 10
     
Quote:
Originally Posted by TQA View Post
Amel a French manufacturer build proper cruising boats. Absolutely no concessions to the racing boys and girls or those wishing to be the queen of the marina. It has big tanks, watertight bulkheads, ketch rig etc.

Here is a review.



Henri Amel knew that cruisers don't hand steer standing up.

Henri Amel knew that a ketch rig made a more flexible rig.

I am not sure that I need two anchor winches but Henri could propably convince me.

This a production boat that can be circumnavigated with confidence, it comes with lee cloths, a hard dodger, big tanks and it is bullet proof. The chain plates, rudder, bulkheads and hatches will all remain where they are supposed to be. It even has a lazerette locker that can swallow a rib! No davits or dinghy on deck. [ Yes all proper cruisers have a rib. ]

The only thing I would worry about long term say 10 years plus is the number of electric motors involved in sailing it. But for a boat to sailaway from the factory this is it.

Mind you it is not cheap! I certainly can not afford one, but if I find a couple of million down the back of the couch then it is no 1 on the list.

There is a nice video on the factory site, switch to English and enjoy.
http://www.amel.fr/

Funny thing about those boats... you either love them or you hate them. I personally do not care for them. Have you seen how much electrical gadgets that boat has? Even the jib has an electric roller on it. And what is up with that blue, plastic, non-skid stuff everywhere?

I actually went to the boat show one year (Ft. Luderdale I believe) to take a serious look at one versus a trawler. It simply did not appeal to me, at all. The Hylas 54, on the other hand, was awesome. They also had a Mason 54 (used IIRC) that was beautiful. That was when I fell in love with about anything PAE has been involved with - from Sailboat to trawler. But an Amel takes a particular person.

I realize they have gond all of the place. I am not doubting their sea qualities. I am questioning whether I would want that many gadgets on my boat... and that is coming from the gadget king.

Just my opinions. I am not trying to diss you boat, I was simply not impressed by it. Others love them and hate Catalinas and Masons and Hylas, so each to their own.

Just curious if you have spent any time on the boats I mentioned and how you would compare them to the Amel SM?

Brian

Sailnet Moderator



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.
Cruisingdad is offline  
Quote Quick Reply Share with Facebook
post #175 of 1894 Old 11-06-2009
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 260
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rep Power: 7
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by danielgoldberg View Post
In what way? Not picking a fight at all, just curious about your perspective.
OK, so here's my take and I admit it is perhaps tainted by all the blue water boat babbling on these forums. It's a condensed view/summary.

In the US and UK you still have a significant design trend for moderate LWL vs. LOA, narrower beam/LOA/LWL ratios, and only moderate transom width. You find few if any true "planing designs". Big premium on the creature comforts under deck leading to higher displacement ratios. That doesn't even include the likes of an IP that is really a design of another age. I'm not suggesting these boats don't work, and I do like the Rustler 42 as an example, but the sailing qualities are overrated for the vast majority of sailing in these parts (and I think on the East coast US as well)

Over here you have a much broader and generally available set of designs where planing hulls, whether aggressive like the Pogo, JPK, Bongo, etc, or the more moderate designs like the First classes, X, Dehler, Comets, ets. The boats typically have a near even LOA/LWL ratio, larger beam/LOA ratio and larger transoms. Displacement is lower but the Keel/ overall Displacement ratio is pretty good. Even the more recent HR's, Najad, etc are following this trend. I won't get into the sail plans and rigging as it really depends on who you buy from but you don't see those big 135% foresails anymore over here.

I tend to find that the argument (at least on these boards) for what's a safe, sturdy well found boat always comes back to some roundabout justification of why the narrower, non-planing, heavy, and non fin-keeled boats are better than the lighter, faster, wider and high keel/disp ratio boats. With todays manufacturing methods and materials there is really no reason to state one is better than another as a fact, just take a look at a Pogo 6.50 on the transat or almost any of the Transquadra boats. Any well manufactured design these days is capable of taking you from A to B in safety. Some may prefer to take longer to get there and there may be greater comfort depending upon the seas and wind, but I do not think one can state that those are the "safer" designs.

And no worries, all boats... well almost, are beautiful so no reason to fight over'em!
bb74 is offline  
Quote Quick Reply Share with Facebook
post #176 of 1894 Old 11-06-2009
Best Looking MALE Mod
 
Cruisingdad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Washington State
Posts: 9,917
Thanks: 3
Thanked 123 Times in 57 Posts
Rep Power: 10
     
Quote:
Originally Posted by bb74 View Post
OK, so here's my take and I admit it is perhaps tainted by all the blue water boat babbling on these forums. It's a condensed view/summary.

In the US and UK you still have a significant design trend for moderate LWL vs. LOA, narrower beam/LOA/LWL ratios, and only moderate transom width. You find few if any true "planing designs". Big premium on the creature comforts under deck leading to higher displacement ratios. That doesn't even include the likes of an IP that is really a design of another age. I'm not suggesting these boats don't work, and I do like the Rustler 42 as an example, but the sailing qualities are overrated for the vast majority of sailing in these parts (and I think on the East coast US as well)

Over here you have a much broader and generally available set of designs where planing hulls, whether aggressive like the Pogo, JPK, Bongo, etc, or the more moderate designs like the First classes, X, Dehler, Comets, ets. The boats typically have a near even LOA/LWL ratio, larger beam/LOA ratio and larger transoms. Displacement is lower but the Keel/ overall Displacement ratio is pretty good. Even the more recent HR's, Najad, etc are following this trend. I won't get into the sail plans and rigging as it really depends on who you buy from but you don't see those big 135% foresails anymore over here.

I tend to find that the argument (at least on these boards) for what's a safe, sturdy well found boat always comes back to some roundabout justification of why the narrower, non-planing, heavy, and non fin-keeled boats are better than the lighter, faster, wider and high keel/disp ratio boats. With todays manufacturing methods and materials there is really no reason to state one is better than another as a fact, just take a look at a Pogo 6.50 on the transat or almost any of the Transquadra boats. Any well manufactured design these days is capable of taking you from A to B in safety. Some may prefer to take longer to get there and there may be greater comfort depending upon the seas and wind, but I do not think one can state that those are the "safer" designs.

And no worries, all boats... well almost, are beautiful so no reason to fight over'em!
What is the typical draft of one of yrou boats compared to ours?

Brian

Sailnet Moderator



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.
Cruisingdad is offline  
Quote Quick Reply Share with Facebook
post #177 of 1894 Old 11-06-2009
TQA
Bombay Explorer 44
 
TQA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,868
Thanks: 0
Thanked 74 Times in 70 Posts
Rep Power: 7
 
Quote:
Funny thing about those boats... you either love them or you hate them. I personally do not care for them. Have you seen how much electrical gadgets that boat has? Even the jib has an electric roller on it. And what is up with that blue, plastic, non-skid stuff everywhere?
I agree that it has too much electrification. I would prefer manual roller furling on the headsail and a 2 line reefing system plus a dutchmen stackpak on the main. But I keep seeing them where the cruisers gather on there way to do serious miles. The original poster wanted a factory ready blue water boat. This may be as good as it gets. An Oyster 54 is a prettier boat but the salon is enormous, you need to rig ropes to cross in safety when rolling down the trades.

Did you mean "brown plastic non-skid" IE the fake teak decks. It needs zero maintenance and Ambre Soleil wipes off. Grown men cry over spills on teak decks then comes the worry over what to do when they age. The decks that is.

There are lots of prettier boats around but Amel build practical boats.
TQA is offline  
Quote Quick Reply Share with Facebook
post #178 of 1894 Old 11-07-2009
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 260
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Rep Power: 7
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cruisingdad View Post
What is the typical draft of one of your boats compared to ours?

Brian
Typical draft on a 30-40 foot range is from 6 1/2 to 8 feet on the boats I've mentioned here.
bb74 is offline  
Quote Quick Reply Share with Facebook
post #179 of 1894 Old 11-07-2009
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: NY
Posts: 2,245
Thanks: 1
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Rep Power: 8
 
Pacific Seacraft? I also think my Caliber is pretty stout though some of the more purist would argue.
sck5 is offline  
Quote Quick Reply Share with Facebook
post #180 of 1894 Old 11-07-2009
Senior Member
 
blt2ski's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,849
Thanks: 0
Thanked 26 Times in 25 Posts
Rep Power: 11
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bb74 View Post
Typical draft on a 30-40 foot range is from 6 1/2 to 8 feet on the boats I've mentioned here.

It should also be pointed out, many of the manufactures will have at least 2, if not 3 keel depth options, a std say around 6', a deep at 7' and a shoal at 4.5'. Please note, examples only, some depths will be deeper or shallower too!

In the US, Tartan does the same.

marty

She drives me boat,
I drives me dinghy!
blt2ski is offline  
Quote Quick Reply Share with Facebook
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the SailNet Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
Please note: After entering 3 characters a list of Usernames already in use will appear and the list will disappear once a valid Username is entered.


User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome