SailNet Community banner
  • SailNet is a forum community dedicated to Sailing enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about sailing, modifications, classifieds, troubleshooting, repairs, reviews, maintenance, and more!

Full or fin keel?

191K views 846 replies 107 participants last post by  mstern 
#1 ·
Can somebody pro/con a full vs. fin keel for a newbie (will learn to sail on said boat) and taking it thru the Caribbean? All I can seem to come up with so far is fin keel is better to the wind, and a full keel will protect your rudder.
 
#190 ·
Re: Full or fin keel? Depends

I tend to agree with jackdale the full keel is more sea-kindly but doesn't point as well. If you are heading to Bahamas or other shallow waters, a full keel might be a better choice. Years ago, planning Bahamas/FLA cruising, we elected to go with a Tartan 33 (S&S designed classic plastic) with a Scheel keel. Fully loaded she carries a 4'9-10" draft. You don't find Scheel's on too many classic boats but they are solid and point a bit better, while offering a shallower draft. Not too sure why they weren't more popular.
 
#194 ·
SKygazer,

Sorry, but unless something different has happended back then, most were not very fast back in the day. The newer ones by RM seem to be adding some of todays design elements into a setup that frankly, could be quick, etc. ALong with make for a boat that will cruise, race if need be, carry some weight, be fun to sail etc.

Still, not "my" style of boat.....but, if it is yours, frankly "GO FOR IT!" I'm not going to say a given boat is right or wrong. I do have a what I prefer if I bought a boat today, not sure if it would be the Jeanneau SF3200, or the Elan 310/350. Those are close to being affordable, and a design that would work for how "I" sail etc. The E350 would be more to my wifes liking, better yet one of the 40-45' DS style boats........yucko! but if the wife is not happy.....neither is I!LOLOL

Marty
 
#197 ·
Also, IIRC, these V70 and open 60 boats to get certified, HAVE TO be inverted with rigs, put in the water, and right themselves with in "30 secs" to be able to race these races. Not sure if it is 30 secs, 45, 10 or ______! but there is a literal test to verify it can right itself with in the allotted time period. Or it is a no go.

I am sure, not only is the wt on the keel, type etc a factor, but deck design too would also come into play etc too.

Marty
 
#201 · (Edited)
Mitiempo is right. Used RM boats are very hard to get. There are a lot of sailors that would like to have one and that makes the prices of the used boats high:

FORA MARINE RM 1050 - Voilier FORA MARINE RM 1050 d'occasion - Page 1

There are however a twin keel sailboat that is possible that you would like even better that the RM. It is a more classical boat and also a favorite among French sailors. It is a seaworthy and the boat is made almost without alterations for a lot of years. I am talking about the Biloup.

They are making now a new 365 that I will post on "interesting sailboats" soon but they have a 36ft and a 30ft for a long time.

Wrighton Yachts | Bi-loup 365

They are not cheap because, like the RM, there are more sailors wanting them than the boats they have available but I guess they can be older and therefore not as expensive. For instance this one for 65 000€ that sailed far for 8 years.

Bateaux autour du monde - Sail The World - L'Univers de la grande croisière en voilier - STW

site de Mareja

Or these, even less expensive.

biloup France - Bateaux France

Regarding speed and twin keels look at this Bongo. The first movie is from a Transat race with a duo crew. They have done well.



 
#202 · (Edited)
Yahhh ... but Hinckley makes a gorgeous boat. And you didn't buy Ibis to back her up, now, did you? ;)

2011 was my first year with a proper keelboat, a Bristol 29.9 - and as much as I learned about prop-walk over a summer of backing her into my slip, I know full well that I've only scratched the surface. (Well, actually, scratched the topsides. More than once.) But I was glad to find a boat like the Bristol, with her long, shallow-draft keel and her big solid skeg-protected rudder. After two seasons with Bossa Nova, my previous MacGregor 26 (a tender centerboard boat that gives up a lot of leeway), I wanted to go to the other extreme; and the 29.9 looked right, felt right, sailed right, and she's still right for my tastes and the next couple of years' worth of my goals.

Maybe some day I'll be sailor enough for a lovely yawl like the Bermuda 40 ...
 
#203 ·
I don't think anyone has mentioned the type of boat that is very popular in France, often aluminum and with a centerboard. The name most common over here is Alubat's Ovni. Not a light fast boat but a very comfortable cruiser with a good performance and a shallow draft that opens up some interesting options.
 

Attachments

#208 · (Edited)
That is the kind of boat most French would consider a voyage and a bluewater boat. They have a bit more ballast than fin keel boats but even so they are not very heavy, thanks to its aluminum construction. For instance, an OVNI 395 weights 8800kg and a Bavaria 40 weights 8680kg.

Regarding speed they do not point as well as a good fin boat but I guess the difference will not be much if any compared with a full keel boat. They sail fast downwind with the centerboard up, and I mean really fast (can reach double digit figures) and as most ocean voyages are made following the trade winds, these boats are relativelly fast voyage boats.

Have a look at the OVNI performance (several boats) on the last ARC and you will be surprised;).

Regards

Paulo
 
#211 ·
In effect Paulo is saying "the wider boat with fin keel will snap faster than the full keel boat, but both will heel to the same angle"
So what happens when that heel angle is reached? Does the fin keel boat just sit there, frozen in time?

I'm confused as well Peter. I would also have thought that "rotate much easier" would mean "snap faster" as well.

None of this addresses your question about damping. Perhaps he didn't understand what you were asking.
 
#213 ·
In effect Paulo is saying "the wider boat with fin keel will snap faster than the full keel boat, but both will heel to the same angle"
So what happens when that heel angle is reached? Does the fin keel boat just sit there, frozen in time?
....
Snap is a bad word to describe the movement but since you are using it:

So what happens when that heel angle is reached? Does the fin keel boat just sit there, frozen in time?

No, the boat will snap back almost as fast as it snap before on the opposite direction. When the light boat is already "snapped" back, the heavier boat is probably still rolling down slowly or perhaps it is starting slowly to come back to its feet.

Regards

Paulo
 
#219 · (Edited)
I am not 100% certain that Paulo and I are in agreement on all of this, in fact I am certain we are not, but that is okay. Through discussion I would expect that we will end up perhaps a little closer in our views. This is my understanding of some of the issues being discussed above.

Starting with the issue of relative dampening force of a deep fin vs a shallower greater area keel. (Trying to avoid the semantics issue) The dampening force generated by a keel rolling through the water is proportional to the area of the keel, and the distance (from the roll axis to the center of the dampening) to the third power. So while a deep fin keel will have much less surface area than a traditional, because it has a significantly longer dimension from the roll axis to the center of the dampening than a more traditional keel it may actually develop greater dampening forces.

The potential of a deep fin keel to produce dampening is somewhat mitigated by the fact that high aspect ratio fin keels of stall more easily than lower aspect keels and so potentially produce less side force per unit of area. That said, these types of discussions are hard to broadly generalize and the specific reality will vary with the specific design of the keel, boat and wave shape. In most larger-wave induced rolls, the side speed of the keels through the water is so great that virtually all keels are effectively stalled, and so the side force per unit of area may actually be the same between a deep fin and a shallower full keel.

Further complicating this discussion is the shape of the keel, shape of the hull/keel intersection, and proximately of the keel to the hull. The more vertical geometry of a deep fin keel would result in the face of the keel operating more perpendicular to the flow of the water. In a stalled state that would produce a higher unit force. The area around the hull is highly turbulent during a roll, and might entrain more air, therefore producing less unit side force, and since a full keel has a larger portion of its keel in this region, it might be expected to produce a relatively lower unit side force. But because there is a gentler curve in this area of a traditional full keel, there is also likely to be less turbulence in the area of the keel to hull intersection, therefore somewhat mitigating the impact of the larger percentage of the full keel operating in this zone.

Another factor that complicates this discussion is that traditional full keel boats tend to (but not always)roll at a slower rate than more modern designs (which tend to be lighter for an equal length). That slower roll rate means less turbulence and so a greater dampening unit force per area, but the keel passes through the water at a slower speed suggesting in reduced unit dampening force per area.

(See why I say this is hard to generalize about and why I said 'may result in greater dampening')

As a word about my personal opinion in these discussions, and in an effort to provide a filter which would help provide a fair minded sense of where my personal prejudices tend, when it comes to offshore cruising boats, I am not a fan of the Open Class style boats that Paulo likes. They are clearly faster than more moderate designs, but that speed comes at a price in terms of motion comfort and self-righting.

While these Open Class based designs have demonstrated an enviable record as race boats, and may even be a reasonable basis for coastal cruisers, I personally prefer more moderately narrow beam boats for distance cruising containing significant amounts of offshore use.

Which brings me to the issue of boats in waves and GBurton's question about what happens when that heel angle is reached? Does the fin keel boat just sit there, frozen in time?

I think that these questions have little to do with the keel type, and everything to do with form stability. Fin keel or not, a high form stability boat will want develop a greater force trying to make it heel parallel to the plane of the surface of wave. All other things being equal, a higher form stability boat will tend to move more in sync with the wave face. (Not a good thing in big waves)

To one degree or another, mitigating against that is the tendency of modern deep fin keels with bulb designs to have a proportionately high righting moment due to very low centers of gravity. And also mitigating against the impact of form stability is that deep fin keel boats tend to develop very high roll moments of inertia relative to their displacements often having roll moments of inertia similar to much heavier displacement boats. That would tend to slow the roll rate some, but of course not as much as would be the case of a more moderate beam design, in other words a boat with less form stability.

As I said earlier, in big waves, a large roll moment of inertia does two things, at the top of the wave, it delays the rotation of the boat relative to the rotational force. A good thing, but at the bottom of the wave, its greater stored kinetic energy, tends to cause it to get out of phase with angle of the wave face and continue to roll as the bottom of the wave flattens out so that there is a greater danger of dipping a spar in the water (never a good thing). At the bottom of the wave, the boat with greater form stability would generate more righting force, remaining in sync with the wave surface and so would be less likely to dip a deck or spar or keep rolling as far as a boat with a high roll moment of inertia and/or less stability.

I am running out of time but I also want to touch on the issue of inverted stability. Pretty much any reasonably normal sailboat of most eras of history, placed in perfectly calm water exactly upside down, will remain so. When you talk about a boat with a large angle of positive stability, it simply means there is a smaller angle at which it is stable inverted. But since it requires wave action to invert almost any reasonably safe design, there is usually some wave action trying to rotate the boat past the point that it again starts to develop positive stability. When you talk about traditional designs, or more moderate modern designs (either with an LPS approaching 150 degrees), this can happen at inverted heel angles as small as 25 to 30 degrees. But when you consider a design like the open class boats, with the keels centered, the limits of positive stability can be down in the 125 degree range.

What is impressive to me about the video is that the inverted Open Class boat with its keel canted, begins to develop positive stability at an angle which appears to be somewhere around 15-20 degrees. That is amazing! But to me, in my personal opinion, having to cant a keel of an inverted boat to right the boat is no way to go cruising, especially if you visualize the potential weight shift in an inverted distance cruiser.

Lastly there is the question of the impact of the mast on righting. Like most of this, this discussion point is complex and situational. As someone said above, the reason that a mast may be seen as being helpful to righting a boat is that in a large enough wave situation that a boat can be knocked into an inverted position, the mast being deeper into still water, acts a very deel keel so that the force of the wave is amplified and there is more force exerted to rotate the boat toward upright. But that is in part offset by the ballast affect great weight of the sails and rig below the surface, and damping resistance of trying to move the sail sidewards through the water once positive stability is achieved.

There is also a thought that few boats will survive a roll to inverted with their rig intact. The flat water test, therefore is supposed to demonstrate what happens in most likely condition, (inverted without rig) and the hardest to re-right (inverted without wave action to re-right). I am not sure that I buy that, but that is my understanding of the rationale.

Cheers….
 
#238 · (Edited)
I am not 100% certain that Paulo and I are in agreement on all of this, in fact I am certain we are not, but that is okay. Through discussion I would expect that we will end up perhaps a little closer in our views. This is my understanding of some of the issues being discussed above. ….
Ok, lets see what we can do about this;).

While these Open Class based designs have demonstrated an enviable record as race boats, and may even be a reasonable basis for coastal cruisers, I personally prefer more moderately narrow beam boats for distance cruising containing significant amounts of offshore use. ….
Me to, but this has to do with personal taste and nothing to do with the suitability of those designs (based on Open boats) for offshore use in what regards seaworthiness.

Most boats based on Open boats are not fast light boats and the ones that are light are for more frugal cruisers than me, or are richer and have money for a bigger boat:D.

Cruising in fast performance boats of this type imply to live in a very frugal way due to the light load capacity and to the simple interior. For living with the same comfort and carrying load of a more traditional cruiser you will need a bigger boat, and that costs more money.

But aside that, Open boats were design not only for offshore use but for solo offshore use. They are very forgiving boats and very safe boats.

I have already show to you that a 40 class racer has a better stability curve than a Vaillant 40, in what regards AVS and in the proportion between the energy needed to capsize the boat and the energy needed to re-right the boat when inverted, or putting in another way, in the proportion of the size of the wave capable to capsize the boat compared with the size of the wave that will re-right the boat. These boats can be not only easy but very seaworthy.

But of course, in what regards cruising boats based on these designs each case is a case and as in any other sailboat it is better to have a good look at the stability curve. That is not different than with any other sailboat, beamy or not. I know of some good narrow boats with a stability curve not as good as some of these boats in what regards AVS and in the proportion between the positive and negative part of the curve, not to mention the righting force at 90º.

As a word about my personal opinion in these discussions, and in an effort to provide a filter which would help provide a fair minded sense of where my personal prejudices tend, when it comes to offshore cruising boats, I am not a fan of the Open Class style boats that Paulo likes. They are clearly faster than more moderate designs, but that speed comes at a price in terms of motion comfort and self-righting. ….
Regarding this some confusion and some disagreement:).

As I have said before many times for my personal use as a cruiser I prefer more classical boats and not boats derived from Open boats. If I could chose a cruising boat I would chose a XP 38 that is not a beamy boat neither a boat based on Open boats.

That does not mean that I don't like Open class boats as I like many other types of boats. I can appreciate and understand their advantages and weaknesses and I have posted already about it.

The disagreement :

I don't consider that boats based in Open class style boats are faster than other modern boats based on more traditional rule like IRC or ORC. Actually only downwind in very heavy conditions a racing Class 40 will be more fast than a racer like a Ker 40. Even in what regards fast performance cruising boats a ker 39 will beat any fast cruising boat derived from the Open classes, the same way a Volvo60 will beat an Open 60.

So what is the advantage?: The easiness of use. You need a crew and a good one to race a ker 40 (or a Volvo), the boat is very nervous and need a constant trim especially downwind while an Open boat is designed to go downwind on autopilot. Upwind, the Ker 40 will slam less and will be more faster but it will be a more nervous boat with less form stability and a less stable platform.

It will be more easy and safe to leave the boat on autopilot and go forward in a class 40 then in a ker 40 type of boat (more narrow and with a huge ballast/displacement ratio).

The ease of use is the main reason that motivates the designers to base their cruising boats on the type of hulls of the Open boats. After all most cruising boats are sailed solo or with the little help of a wife that is not normally much:D, so what better model could they have than the type of hull of a boat that is designed just to be sailed offshore solo and have been improved through the years?

And I don't mean only performance cruisers like the Pogo, but almost all modern designs by all the main Na and main boatbuilders: Beneteau (Sense and Oceanis), Hanse, Jeanneau, Bavaria, Dufour, just to name a few.

I agree that advantages (not the speed) comes with a price in what regards motion comfort upwind with waves but I completely disagree in what regards a lesser ability to self-righting.

That it will depend on each boat but as a rule I don't think that is true. Generally the AVS of these boats is not lower than the previous boats from the same brand with a narrower hull, but the overall stability is bigger.

Putting in another words, the wave energy needed to capsize these boats is bigger than on previous less beamy models and the proportion between the wave capable of capsizing the boat and the wave capable or re-righting is about the same. As an important bonus these boats have more RM at 90º.

How was this possible? Look at the keels and the drafts. The B/D ratio is about the same but now almost all the keels have more draft and more weight on the bulb, some fast cruising boats have fin torpedo keels and their number is increasing.

You pointed to me once a Claughton paper that related capsizing resistance with beam and that is logical in fact. A wide cat is much more difficult to capsize (with no sails) that any monohull with the same size. So these boats have advantages in what regards positive stability and also in what regards dynamic stability : their keels have much less area than the previous ones and that and beam will make these boats harder to trip on the keel and will make them more able to dissipate the wave energy with any other movement than not a rolling one.

There is a good reason for all main boat builders and main yacht designers going on this direction. I still prefer a boat with better tracking ability upwind and with a better motion in waves upwind, but understand the reasons that makes most sailors prefer other type of boats. Many don't sail much upwind or with waves:D

As I have explained elsewhere I think these boats based on Open boats make a lot of sense if you will sail extensively upwind and want a forgiving boat that don't heel much. These boats will be very adequate for voyaging with the trade winds that is the way most of the cruisers sail when crossing oceans.

About the rest, I will try to reply in another day, with more time.

Regards

Paulo
 
#221 · (Edited)
The paper I was referring is from the Australian Maritime College. I cannot post it since it not free but I guess I can post this one By Richard Birmingham from the School of Marine Science and Technology, Newcastle University, UK (2004). On this paper he explains why a boat with an intact mast returns easily to its feet:

Another result of recent research has caused considerable discussion due to its unexpected nature:

Should a capsized vessel retain its rig intact it is usually assumed the damping effect of the rig would impede any action tending to right it. In theory a vessel capsized by breaking waves may be righted again by another wave with similar energy. However as the mast in the water would have a damping effect not present if the vessel had been dismasted it has been assumed that this would slow the righting action.

Experimental result from the towing tank in the Australian Maritime College, Tasmania, found that a dismasted vessel required more waves to right it than
the vessel with the intact rig . ... the effect can be demonstrated, and it is argued that the damping effect is in fact helping the righting process.

The explanatory theory is that the breaking wave force the hull of the vessel at the surface sideways (in sway), while the rig, deeper in the water is
left behind. After the wave has passed the vessel starts to return to 180 degrees of heel (i.e. fully inverted) but the damping effect of the mast slows this such that it is still heeled when the next wave arrives. Each wave arrives with the vessel at a reduced angle of heel (160 degrees, 140 degrees etc.) until the angle of positive stability is reached, and the vessel re-rights.

In contrast the dismasted yacht returns to 180 degrees more quickly, so the progressive righting process does not occur.

Off course this is pretty meaningless other than from the theoretical point of view because almost all sailing boats break the mast when rolled to the inverted position.

There is a small lapse on this paper: when it is said :

"In theory a vessel capsized by breaking waves may be righted again by another wave with similar energy. "

This would only be true if the area under the positive part of the RM curve was equal to the area over the negative part of the RM curve, or saying in a simpler way if the energy required to capsize a boat was the same as the energy to roll it back to its feet.

A modern sailboat stability curve has almost always at least 2 times more area under the positive part and many times about 3 times more positive area.

This means that almost any sailboat will only requires a wave with half the energy of the one that capsized it and many will requires only about 1/3 of the that energy to get back to its feet.

Paulo

...
 
#225 ·
This is so far one of the best threads on sailnet but it has not pushed me to pick a winner between full and fin keel. Could you all name types of heavy weather boats that shed water come back upright and fend for themselves? Full or fin or does it have more to do with the sailor than the boat? Thanks for some great reading.
 
#227 ·
.... Full or fin or does it have more to do with the sailor than the boat?... .
This discussion is one area where the poor hapless sailor involved cannot really be a factor anymore. Whether the boat will right itself smartly or eventually is subject to many factors including the design, condition of the boat at the time (holed or not?), sea and wind conditions, and perhaps a good dollop of luck (or lack thereof)..

Where the sailor is during the event is yet another factor.. locked below? on deck and 'hanging on for dear life'? underwater at the end of a tether? knocked free and floating away? Conscious? Not part of the full/fin debate, obviously, but part of the overall outcome.

This is a decision that most make on another 'many factors' basis. Speaking personally I like a boat with good weatherly performance, will move in light air, with an interior I can comfortably live aboard for months at a time. I also really appreciate a boat that will back up predictably in close quarters maneouvering, which pretty much eliminates a full keel, or even most long keel/skeg rudder designs ( I LOVE the Passport 40, for example, and it would be way up my list for offshore sailing, but not for BC coastal cruising...)

And it's another one of those areas where one camp will never convince the other.. but if people reading it all learn something from it, or at least take away a balanced view of the issue then I suppose that's all to the good.
 
  • Like
Reactions: joebeach
#226 ·
Lou,

There is another sticky thread somewhere with one persons "bluewater" boat list. Even that list draws critiques if you will, as that person has a particular set of what the boat should have to be bluewater! As such, a boat may be built to the correct scantlings, but be 20 gals short of water and fuel, and NOT make the list due to insufficient stock water and fuel tankage.

Reality is, there are many boats with ALL types of keels that will survive, roll correctly if you will.........

marty
 
#233 ·
As I will try to look for a boat that will fit my needs first I need to figure out what that need is right now the 13 ft flying junior fits me. I was going to buy from a 16 to 26 foot looking at what could be pulled down the road. already looking at dreaming of the next boat. Do others do this? This kind of leads away from a fin I am in KY no huge waves here. I grew up on Lake Eire feel just fine on that water any summer wind or wave in my sunfish. Still this is not blue water. I plan to move but for now I am here. Next boat for here sailing in the lakes should be? I Like to scuba dive play on the beach . I would like to get on and in the water easy from the boat. From what I am learning about fin vs full a full keel shoal draft might fit my needs better? The next boat should be? Also I could get a slip an go up to say 36 foot but this would be a boat that would have to make the move with me and the move is 8 years min time frame away
 
#242 · (Edited)
Hello Lou, here is some of my experience on lakes. Centerboards are great, you can find the hidden shallow spots with the board down, just pull it up to get off, or it will just bounce off. Here in Maine the lakes were all raised for logging by dams. In fresh water wood doesn't rot, so there are stumps over 100 years old still down there with the sunken logs. I hit a big stump pretty far from shore with my center boarder, taught me I should never sit on the trunk, because the board kicked up the handle, which would have been between my legs :eek: I avoid that area, I took rough sightings.

Now I know the bad spots on "my" lake, and am using a Victoria 18 there. I don't want to go much bigger, the lake is only 7 miles, and very narrow. The V18 has a fixed long lead filled shoal keel. My wife loves it, much more stable. However, be aware that you must anchor and swim to shore, or we sometimes use an inflatable and paddle in. This is not a problem for us, we never beached anyway because wave action works the boat against the shore. We always carry an anchor, and a light anchor to keep the stern from swinging. Here in Maine sand beaches on lakes are rare, there is much granite everywhere so again, we never think of beaching. To get in and out of the water a folding swim platform can be good, and a cheap ladder with hooks that you put on and off is OK, and below when not using it.

I'm sure a fin keel would be fast and fun, you might need to stay in deeper water. Harder to trailer and harder to launch without a deep steep ramp. Look for a depth map, fisherman at least make them. Mark off the areas that are too shallow for whatever fixed keel you look at, and decide if you are happy to give up going to those areas.

There are also swing keels (heavy swinging keel) which could be good, and shallow keels with small centerboards inside, maybe the best of both worlds? An example for sale here is a 23ft Seafarer Kestrel, very trailerable. SEAFARER 23 KESTREL (DAYSAILOR) sailboat specifications and details on sailboatdata.com

I purchased last fall and have not yet sailed a Seafarer 24, which has a weighted lead bottom with a slightly heavy swing keel/centerboard. Because the main part of the lead is up high, it can't be as good as a deeper keel, it is not an off shore boat, but probably great in the lakes around here.

To summarize, decide how much of the lake you are willing to give up (depthwise) to determine your acceptable fixed keel depth. Check your ramps by measuring how far out you need to go to launch. You can use an extension, but check for the "standard" deep hole right at the ramp end where prop wash digs out the bottom when powerboats power onto their trailer. Don't run your trailer wheels into that hole if too deep.

We like trailering for lakes, because we can go to new areas for variety and interest. And work on the boat at home, and no fees.

Edit: I almost forgot. Make sure that whatever boat you get to trailer has a hinged mast tabernacle on the cabin top, with support under it. Do not get a keel stepped mast, very much harder to step and unstep.
 
#234 ·
Lou,

From what you have described, it would be neither fin or full, but a "centerboard!" IE, this can get very close, if not beached, if it has a swim platform, you can get in and out easy from the water.........

The question on which keel to get, is not as simple as this or that. Reality is, one needs to know also where they will sail, use the boat etc. From what you described, it would be a centerboard, or possibly a wing/shoal fin or the scheel fin that was mentioned too. The Centerboard is the only one that is beachable or able to go into really shallow water.

It should also be pointed out, all of these models have potential stability issues on par to somewhere in the middle, or completely different than already mentioned in this debate.

Marty
 
#241 ·
Hey men Please keep the debate going !!! Some of it is over my head but You all keep at it ! BE nice others are looking at you. We might learn a thing or two. Lets get some more data How many full keel boats built are on the bottom and how many fin keels have been laid to waste. Try to find some way of apples to apples hard to match a 1928 wood full keel up to a 2002 fiberglass fin keel. Want to add just read Cats may not be allowed off shore in anything less than calm weather In the USA unless crew and boat meets standards to be set. Check out that news. It is off subject of fin and full Put it in because cats came up in thread. Once more keep it up. This is a good thread!
 
#243 · (Edited)
... Want to add just read Cats may not be allowed off shore in anything less than calm weather In the USA unless crew and boat meets standards to be set. Check out that news. It is off subject of fin and full Put it in because cats came up in thread. Once more keep it up. This is a good thread!
That's odd. Are you sure? Do you mean that all cats will be "grounded" inshore till they prove to meet standards that had not even been set?

That is crazy:eek:. It is hard to believe!!! Any link to that?

Regards

Paulo
 
#249 · (Edited)
My full keel boat was commissioned to be a single handed ocean cruiser, fast sea worthy and easy to handle on all points of sail, granted there isn't enough room to swing a cat, but I don't have cats on board and I choose grace over space. A friend of mine in talking about his Catalina 30 (a fin keel boat) commented that even though it took a lot more work to sail at sea and wasn't as "sea kindly" his wife likes the extra room. If you are wondering which boat will be easier to handle at sea a full keel wins hands down...that said some will not get out of their own way in a calm and not all point well...but this also applies to to some fin keel boats. Some of the best ocean cruiser designs are "old school" designs which some consider to be obsolete because they do not emulate modern day racers as closely. I would take my boat to sea ahead of 95% of the boats in the harbor...she is safe, easy to handle, comfortable and tracks well on all points of sail...tending the helm is relaxing (some of the fin keels out there require 100% of your attention at all times) and the tiller can be lashed rather than using high tech gadgets and gizmos.
 
#253 ·
My full keel boat was commissioned to be a single handed ocean cruiser, fast sea worthy and easy to handle on all points of sail, granted there isn't enough room to swing a cat, but I don't have cats on board and I choose grace over space. A friend of mine in talking about his Catalina 30 (a fin keel boat) commented that even though it took a lot more work to sail at sea and wasn't as "sea kindly" his wife likes the extra room. ....
Has have been pointed out the cost of a boat and partly its seaworthiness have to do with weight. you should compare, as Marty as done, your boat with a boat of a similar weight, not length.

If you do that the story would be completely different in what regards interior space, seaworthiness, speed and even sea motion. Your boat has the advantage of mass for length (for the ones that prefer that kind of motion) but the big disadvantage of a much shorter LWL and that, as also have been pointed out, is very important in what concerns wave passage and the pitching movement of the boat.

Regards

Paulo
 
#250 · (Edited)
What kind of boat Wolfenzee?...i just was lucky enuff to obtain a Columbia 40 for the right price...she needs lots of deck re-hab...but otherwise seemed a good bet as her rigging, spars and engine and sails are good from what I can tell...I know there will be a few surprises.... but she has a partial full keel and C/B.

Keel has 8,400 lbs lead...and C/B can drop her draft to 9 feet...4.5 feet when board is up. Charlie Morgan design..(1964) for Columbia and only 10.5 beam..plenty of room but sea-kindly lines...What I am getting at is hearing you talk about your old girl makes me itch to see how this boat handles...(wheel-steering) but also "emergency tiller" access plate at rudderpost head...
I can't wait to see how she tracks...after reading your post above...standing on her deck mid-river with gusts to 20 mph she seemed to almost not move..back to the tracking..,interested to see if I can "lash off" the helm easily like you spoke of... instead of flirting with the autopilot(if it works) or self-steering(doesn't have..maybe doesnt need?)
Anyways..I am in love and lust..can't wait to get her near me..she's lying 80 miles away...awaiting P/O to send fuel injectors he already purchased...(already has new injector pump he installed)...and it's a 1988 engine Universal diesel 24 hp(kubota) ..a little underpowered for a 19,000 lb boat but... it seems is just a marinized version of kubota tractor engine that should be easy to get stock parts for from local kubota tractor dealerexcept for some certain ones...
 
#252 · (Edited)
Atkin & Co. - Captain Cicero
Designed by William Atkin in 1936, the rig was modified boom was cut down from 18ft and raised, foot is now 15ft with a 37ft luff, permanent back stay was added (keeping the running back stays), cap shrouds and spreaders were added to the existing lower and intermediate shrouds, head stay was made detachable so a larger sail could be flown on the top stay ( a pad eye on deck was added so the head stay and top stay are parallel making it a cutter rig), head stay luff 29' top stay luff 40', mast is 3 piece laminated Sitka spruce 45' head off the water. The boat was designed to have an Atomic 4 but was re-powered with a Vetus M415 (33hp Mitsubishi based diesel) with a 16" three bladed prop...a 2200rpm the stern is squatted down and the boat moves at 7knots using less than 3/4 gph. 3200lbs of lead with an 1000lbs added in the form of a lead shoe. A boomkin was added at onetime for a self-steering vane but the it was discovered she will sail for just fine with a lashed tiller.
I have done a complete rebuild of the cabin, added two-speed winched to the two single speed that are there, new standing rigging and replaced the tired old SS chain plates with 954 bronze...beefier and will hold up better.
 
#251 ·
Wow, souljour, I just went to sailboat data COLUMBIA 40 sailboat specifications and details on sailboatdata.com and checked out your boat, looks really good. I'd love to try out a keel/centerboard.

Drop that board to 9 ft. and seems you could go upwind nicely, plus track downwind with the keel.

Wolfenzee, your boat sounds great, I really like the lines. I've only really been (sailing) on wooden full keel boats, so I'm not sure how the fins handle. I've been on one, but they only motored :(
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top