Why a racer for cruising discussion... - Page 4 - 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 > General Interest > General Discussion (sailing related)
 Not a Member? 


Like Tree53Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #31  
Old 04-17-2013
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: Why a racer for cruising discussion...

Quote:
Originally Posted by PCP View Post
I had the luck of having a talk with Eric Stomberg about the boat. Eric belongs to Jeanneau america and was very influential on the design of that boat. He is the one that played the "owner" part with Philippe Briand , the NA and the boat was made accordingly with what he thought it would be the right 40ft cruising.

I believe that much of the success of that boat is due to him. He is also a sailor and at the time (the first boats were being delivered), he didn't miss a delivery to have the opportunity to test the boat. He give me a lot of insight about the boat sailing qualities and I felt that he was a honest straightforward and very nice guy.

I find the interior design very agreeable specially on the 2 cabin model. And I like the boat that even on the 3 cabin has a decent storage. Personally that would be the boat that I would chose among all mass production 40fts, main market. But as I said that is personal, there are also other fine boats on that class.

I like more the interior and also the type of hull, more narrow than the others and with one of the best B/D ratios (taking into consideration draft and type of keel). They have also a performance package that will make it even faster and it is the only boat of that class that uses infusion. That makes is as strong as the competition and substantially lighter, with a better performance.

The only one that comes close is the Hanse 415, also a good design but I don't like the interior and I prefer the concept of lighter with less sail then heavier with more sail.

The Hanse is also maximized for downwind sailing while the Jeanneau has in my opinion a better overall balance in what regards performance: I sail upwind (many cruisers don't, they use the engine) and I like boats with a good upwind performance, and the jeanneau has a good one for a main market cruiser.

They even can run a German main-sheet system if you want to give you full control of the main at the wheel. The only thing I don't like is the two lonely winches on the cockpit and the impossibility of having another two. That is alright with the self taking jib but with a genoa or a geenaker two more would come handy. Anyway, only two winches in the cockpit is the rule to all in that class, with the exception of the Bavaria that is the only one that offer 4 winches in the cockpit as an option.

I agree with you about the Bavaria. I don't like the interior, even if functional and the boat looks left much to be desired. Curiously it is a good hull. They use the boat in a lighter version for Match racing in Germany and it sails much better than what I thought possible. Well, it is a Farr design



They are making a new boat (with the same hull?) along the lines of the 56 and 33 and I expect that the improvements that the 56 shows on overall design and interior design quality would show also on the new 40.

Regards

Paulo
Paulo, have you been on that boat with the mast on?

Not to change the subject too quickly, but I found that boat a disaster. The rigging is WAY too small. The backstays are connected to a little half-eye fitting smaller than what I use to haul up my tender!! All the rigging seems vastly undersized for that boat, except for perfect weather conditions. The mast is inmast and the slot on that mast is very tight and the mast has no room for a crinkle. That thing is one blow from a hangup. The cabinetry down below is sparse and reminds me of Ikea. We actually saw the plastic wood-looking tape peeling off of the cabinet... on a new boat!! Cant wait to see it in a few years in the humidity. I don't think any of those cabinets are real wood. There are very few lockers and very little space for actually storing stuff. Go look back on my list and tell me where you are going to put that on the 409?!?? I found this pretty typical of all the XX9 series of Jeaunneau. Not one single sailor on our dock liked that boat. It became the joke as something was always going wrong on that boat. And don't they run the bilge pump through the Main engine exhaust? What about the coamings on that boat? Even without cockpit cushions, those coamings are only a few inches tall, especially closer to the wheel where others helping you sail will be sitting. Talk about a sore back after being at sea for a day. Weren't the seats behind he wheel also flat, so that on a heel, there is no way to sit erect?

Yeah its a light boat - lightly built. We had one sitting in our marina new for a long time. They couldn't sell it (new). I think Jeaunneau has made some awesome boats, but I personally found that boat lacking anything desirable. It was built for a pricepoint. I think the base price on it was 259,000. Pfft. Not in this lifetime.

George, if you are interested in that boat, let me give you the name of the brokers in Florida that have several. They would LOVE to sell it to you and will make you a deal you cannot believe. I will be happy to send you their number. Just PM me.

My opinions.

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
  #32  
Old 04-17-2013
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,398
Thanks: 0
Thanked 114 Times in 101 Posts
Rep Power: 4
JonEisberg will become famous soon enough
Re: Why a racer for cruising discussion...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cruisingdad View Post
Ahhh.... finally the discussion is getting fun.

Ok, let's talk about what I carry on my boat. I will try and get as many things as I can. I am sure to leave some stuff out.

[snip]

Ok, I am sure to have missed a few odds and ends here. It was not intentionally. But that is everything in my boat within reason. So lets now start talking about what YOU would cut.
Well, although I don't qualify as a real cruiser as per your definition, and I appreciate that any attempt like yours to itemize all the crap I've stuffed aboard my little tub would truly make my head hurt, two things I would rate as essential cruising gear - and that occupy a considerable amount of storage space on my boat - are notably absent from your list...

1) Ground tackle - any/all spares, including storm mooring gear, shore lines, sea anchor/drogue, etc...

2) Sails in addition to working sails - storm and additional light-air inventory, in particular...

I carry what most might consider a ridiculous amount of ground tackle aboard my boat... 2 on the bow, one at the stern, and a large Fortress and a dismantled aluminum Spade stowed below... And, if I'm heading for a place like Newfoundland, my Big Bertha Northill comes along for the ride, I'll swap it for the Spade... Not a cruiser, perhaps, just a graduate of the "What If?/You Never Know" School of Seamanship... (grin)



My boat, like yours, is extremely heavily-laden whenever I take off sailing. She's a heavy boat to begin with, and I've added tons of weight over the years. I've built in extra tankage - 100+ gallons of water, and 50 of fuel is a lot for a 30-footer... However, she was originally designed as a cruiser/racer by Brit Chance, and had an enviable race record after her launch in the early 70's... So, even with all the additional crap I've added, and raising the waterline more than once over the years, she still retains a fairly slippery hull form, and a very seakindly aspect, despite the fact that most of it is underwater... (grin)



As heavy as she is, she is still wonderfully responsive and a delight to sail, but all that mass and volume requires horsepower, especially in light to moderate conditions... And this is where I think most sailors today are really missing the boat, and the reason why so many cruisers I see up and down the East coast of the US are doing so much motoring, and so little sailing... I know I'm a broken record on this issue, but without a compliment of light air free-flying sails - gennakers, Code 0s, etc. - most cruisers and liveaboards as per your definition are gonna be covering a lot more miles under power, than under sail...

And that is where cruisers need to think more like racers, and carry the tools necessary to get the job done... Never ceases to amaze me, the low priority given to a sail inventory to get them through the lighter stuff, by folks sailing the sort of Conestoga Wagons you and I do...
RichH, Faster and Cruisingdad like this.

Last edited by JonEisberg; 04-17-2013 at 11:23 AM.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #33  
Old 04-17-2013
One One is offline
Always tired
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 235
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Rep Power: 2
One is on a distinguished road
Re: Why a racer for cruising discussion...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cruisingdad View Post
What do you consider a minimalist? I hear that term thrown out a lot, generally by Americans (which I dont think you are) who think a minimalist is someone without a TV or microwave. I have never met a true minimalist as a cruiser, but have met a two or three in my previous life as a backpacker.
I do have a tv, I need to keep an eye on the news to make my living.

I am a minimalist in that I make it a point to come up with simple solutions throughout my life (professional and private). I also find things that are not decorated and whatnot, but I do like wood, if the purpose makes it a good choice.


Quote:
Here is a minimalist to me:

They carried everything they own in a backpack.
I can carry everything I need in a backpack, and often do (although, more like a carry-on, that a backpack these days).

Quote:
They caught rainwater or drank out of the stream.
That is not minimalism to me. That is primitivism.

Quote:
They fished for food, generally supplemented by what they could find on the trail. No radio. No electronics.
Same as above.

Quote:
Little to no money.
So, basically, the life of a beggar.


Quote:
They cook on a campfire and start the fire with flint and steel (a long lost art... though we had to do it many times too).
I often take on small camping trips in my open water rowing boat. But since I'm not a beggar, and I care about leaving nothing but footprints, I don't have campfires anywhere.

Quote:
The only modern part of them was their backpacks, tents, and hiking boots... all well worn. They disappeared in the wilderness for weeks at a time. Nice enough people, but not for me. That is a minimalist to me.
See the points about primitivism and the life of a beggar.

Quote:
If you are putting batteries in your boat, I personally would not consider you a minimalist. And the batteries you put in are very new technology, again not what I would see a minimalist ever doing.
You have a very distorted picture of "minimalism". For something simple, go look up "minimalism" on wikipedia, do a google search for "minimalism", and while you're at it, do a google search for "scandinavian minimalism" and do a google image search for both.

Quote:
The label is not important to me, and if you want to call yourself a minimalist or anyone else does, they are welcome to. Makes me no difference. Just my opinion.
See above. I don't bring "everything and the kitchen sink" as you seem to do, according to your list. I make it a point not to.


Quote:
I find that comment pretty typical of someone who has not spent a lot of time cruising. It is one of those things that sounds good in theory, but in reality and practicality does not work.
Ah, yeah, and we're back to you thinking it can't possibly be done any other way than the way you do things. You seem to have failed to notice where I said that by simplifying you will need less spares and tools, and that many tools can be found in compact and lightweight versions.


Quote:
The tools are what the tools are.
No, they're not. Any tool can be had in various versions. It pays to look around.

Quote:
Again: every tool has been used on this boat.
And there's the rub: I don't carry any and all tools I ever used on my boat. It's simply not necessary. I sail in a boat that sails well, and I have no intention of doing anything other than engine work of the very basic kind while underway.


Quote:
The weight saved by using the Motorcycle type wrenches may be lost the first time you break one.
Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't know your engine was one big heap of rust where you had to bang on the spanners to make it work. The motorcycle spanners I have are plenty strong for my needs. I have never broken a single one.

Quote:
Not to mention, we are splitting hairs on the small amount of weight saved with the few tools that can be purchased lightweight. I prefer solid, well made tools that will take a beating.
It was an example of attitude. When you buy everything to "take a beating" and bring spares for that, you end up with a heap of weight and space taken.
If, on the other hand, you consider each detail, you will end up with far fewer things needed, and by extension, carried. And those that you do carry are well considered and chosen to save weight and space.

Quote:
If you are land-side, and your wrench breaks, no big deal. Go to the store and buy another.
I'm sorry, but my wrenches has never broken.

Quote:
If you are at sea or a secluded anchorage and it breaks, you are screwed... just as screwed as if you didn't bring one in the first place.
See above.

Quote:
Modern sailboats, especially American made boats, are filled with a variety of different sizes and bolts and screws. A sailboat by its very nature is 80% made up of things bought from vendors. You will have to carry a full set of metric and american. You will have to have a variety of bits. You will have to carry both metric and american alan wrenches. A drill. A jig saw. Hole saws. Hack saw. A large variety of plumbing and electrical supplies. Can you get away without it? Certainly... until the first time something breaks.
See my above points of simplifying that you continue to ignore.

Quote:
Better hope its not a critical system if you don't have the tool for it.
Apart from the mast, keel, rudder, and, yes, my fridge, there is nothing on board I consider "critical".

Quote:
Nothing pisses me off worse than hearing some cruiser complaining about a broken waterpump - not knowing where it is, not having a spare, and not having the tools to fix it.
You seem to imply I'm arguing that no spares or tools should be carried. Nice strawman.

Quote:
Those people are best left back at the yacht club where fixes are a phone call away. As an old Boy Scout, I say, "Be Prepared."
That is all fine and well. I'm saying: You're not preparing for the end of the world. Keep it simple.

Quote:
Another common misconception I see, generally from those that have not spent a lot of time cruising or away from the marinas. There are several modern items that have really changed sailing. The microwave is one of them.
You must be joking? Maybe in your world. But I don't see a need for one at home (the one I had at one time never got used), so why should I use it when I'm out there? You are reaching at straws when you make the claim that because I think a microwave is ridiculous, then therefore I must only be cruising from marina to marina. How ridiculous is that!?


Quote:
My microwave pulls 80 amps/h. Sounds like a lot, but it is not. Why? Because it only is run for minutes at a time. That comes out to 1.33 amps/minute. In three minutes, I can cook two cans of canned peas. In two minutes, I can heat up an entire can of soup. In one minute, I can cook fish fillets, which come out surprisingly awesome in the microwave - both juicy and tender. Those same items take considerably longer on the stove, and the fish for example, cooked in the oven, will use a LOT of gas and really heat up the cabin.
Yes, I said, I don't eat microwave food, nor do I have any intention to do so.


Quote:
Microwaves can be run from an inverter - they do not require a generator. Their power use is minimal.
I know they can be run from an inverter. See the point about simplifying.

[quote]They are quite light. Their size is small and they make a great place to put things in when at sea because the door can be easily closed and has a positive lock. And most of all, and maybe most importantly, they are readily available everywhere and are very cheap to obtain. Walmart sells them for $35. [quote]

Seriously?

Reread my previous post about carrying everything, just because you can. It's all about attitude.
Quote:
Your stove can easily run over a grand. Your stove uses propane or alcohol.
Actually it's a diesel - this: Wallas 85DP | veneliesi - Wallas




But, anyway, are you saying that you don't have a stove? Or that a microwave can replace a stove? If not, why are you comparing the purchase price of my stove to the price of your microwave?



Quote:
Now, as a cruiser, let me tell you what IS a real PITA to get: Propane. This often involves a long trek to some far off propane dealer to get it filled or exchanged... if available at all (not too many propane dealers in secluded anchorages).
Not that I use gas, but I'm pretty sure you can plan your way out of that particular problem.

Quote:
You can get diesel and gas on the water (to make electricity). No prob. A decent solar system will easily keep up for any loss of electricity the miserly microwave uses. But propane is a RIGHT PITA to get and we covet it, as do all cruisers I know.
I use a diesel cooker.




Quote:
Is this on your "canoe" boat?
No, I knew you had a chip on your shoulder. It's evident from your ridiculous assumptions and insinuations. If you recall, that boat was to be my next boat. Apparently, reading continues to be difficult to some.


Quote:
Is this something you would do or you have done? Not sure where you would put a generator on that boat anyways.
You really have a problem.

Quote:
However, the theory behind not having an engine and the reality I think are two different things. WHen a storm is bearing down on you, it sure is nice to have an engine as a calm often proceeds the storm. When going down the ICW with the Sportfish running you over and cutting you off, it sure is nice to have a engine. When trying to make against the current into a tight channel with breakers and shoals around you, it sure is nice to have an engine. When coming into a crowded marina where currents and winds are not favorable, it sure is nice to have an engine. I can think of a thousand reasons to have an engine, but cannot think of a single reason not to have one.
Wow, you didn't finish reading the very sentence you're responding to. I specifically mentions an electric engine, to be powered by batteries that are charged mostly by a generator. Hello? Could you please finish reading the sentence before flying off making assumptions?

Quote:
An engine can make electricity, but I certainly do not see that as its key purpose. I believe an engine makes up not only a valuable asset on a cruising boat, but it also is a critical piece of safety gear.
Propulsion is important. I did not say I wanted to go without (mechanical) propulsion: I was saying if went the generator route, I would forego the diesel engine driving the propeller and opt for an electric engine at that end, so I only had a single diesel to carry spare parts for, and so that it could do it's work at an RPM that was the best for it. FFS.


Quote:
You better research those electric drives pretty good, especially if you are worried about weight. I thought I heard even Lagoon dumped them? This is hearsay, but I was told a couple with a 420 was spending a LOT of money to have their electric drives ripped out or considering it. They were at one of our previous marinas. They HATE them.
Oh, so you DID notice I mentioned electric engines, but you chose to ignore it to make the strawman that I was somehow saying that I didn't want an engine. Way to go, CD

I'm talking about a single drive installation. One of the reasons lagoon dropped them was complexity, and with two drives it quickly becomes difficult. However, electric engines

Quote:
When cruising, I believe that tried and true and dependable is more important that new and fashionable.
LOL, sorry, LiFePO4 are dependable.

Quote:
Let the guys that don't leave the marinas horse around with the new technology.
. Yes, LiFePo4 batteries are so new, it hasn't been tested on motorcycles, cars, and circumnavigating racers - you know, where there's a lot of money invested in the ability to drive the huge amount fo electronics constantly.

Quote:
My life, and that of my family's, depends on my boat and its proper functioning. That is the mindset of a cruiser.
That's the mindset of some cruisers. Cruisers like you who wants to carry everything and anything, and who doesn't consider the options in detail. I have "tested" (i.e. used) LiFePo4 batteries in my boat for four years, and there are no problems, no downsides. In fact, I'd go as far as to say that lead acid is more dangerous, that if you use too much of the capacity of the lead acids (or agms) your entire battery bank is shot for good. You're acting as LiFePo4 batteries are some brand new tech, never before seen anywhere and it's a hit'n'miss affair to be using them. It's not.

I'm sorry, but unlike you, I have actual experience with LiFePo4 batteries, and I'm not afraid of new tech such as dyneema, or, gasp!, carbon fibre.





Quote:
Lead acid batteries are tried, true, and inexpensive.
And heavy, and you can only use half of the capacity if you want them to last for a while, making them twice as heavy for any given useable Ah.

Quote:
More importantly, they are readily available anywhere. It baffles me why anyone would put a battery in their cruising boat that is not only incredibly expensive, but its availability in most areas is zilch. I paid $135 for my last 4d wet cell. When it goes out, I can probably replace it at any decent port, and if near a major port in the US, probably for the same $135. I plan for failure and how to work around it. Inability to replace systems, or rare and complicated systems without a working knowledge of them, is like playing with fire to me (as a cruiser).
I don't cruise according to what I can get hold of in the most secluded bay in the most far flung third world country. I can't get a new engine there either. I have redundancy with my battery bank, and the charger can charge both agms and LiFePo4. You may plan to fail, I plain to make it even if something fails.
If I do go the electric route for a drive, then the drive is not something that is prone to failure, the battery bank would be the same setup as I have now, only bigger, and what is now a diesel engine would be a (smaller) diesel generator running at optimum RPMs, making it last longer than if it was used directly for propulsion.

Last edited by One; 04-17-2013 at 11:38 AM.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #34  
Old 04-17-2013
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: Why a racer for cruising discussion...

Quote:
Originally Posted by JonEisberg View Post
Well, although I don't qualify as a real cruiser as per your definition, and I appreciate that any attempt like yours to itemize all the crap I've stuffed aboard my little tub would truly make my head hurt, two things I would rate as essential cruising gear - and that occupy a considerable amount of storage space on my boat - are notably absent from your list...

1) Ground tackle - any/all spares, including storm mooring gear, shore lines, sea anchor/drogue, etc...

2) Sails in addition to working sails - storm and additional light-air inventory, in particular...

I carry what most might consider a ridiculous amount of ground tackle aboard my boat... 2 on the bow, one at the stern, and a large Fortress and a dismantled aluminum Spade stowed below... And, if I'm heading for a place like Newfoundland, my Big Bertha Northill comes along for the ride, I'll swap it for the Spade... Not a cruiser, perhaps, just a graduate of the "What If?/You Never Know" School of Seamanship... (grin)



My boat, like yours, is extremely heavily-laden whenever I take off sailing. She's a heavy boat to begin with, and I've added tons of weight over the years. I've built in extra tankage - 100+ gallons of water, and 50 of fuel is a lot for a 30-footer... However, she was originally designed as a cruiser/racer by Brit Chance, and had an enviable race record after her launch in the early 70's... So, even with all the additional crap I've added, and raising the waterline more than once over the years, she still retains a fairly slippery hull form, and a very seakindly aspect, despite the fact that most of it is underwater... (grin)



As heavy as she is, she is still wonderfully responsive and a delight to sail, but all that mass and volume requires horsepower, especially in light to moderate conditions... And this is where I think most sailors today are really missing the boat, and the reason why so many cruisers I see up and down the East coast of the US are doing so much motoring, and so little sailing... I know I'm a broken record on this issue, but without a compliment of light air free-flying sails - gennakers, Code 0s, etc. - most cruisers and liveaboards as per your definition are gonna be covering a lot more miles under power, than under sail...

And that is where cruisers need to think more like racers, and carry the tools necessary to get the job done... Never ceases to amaze me, the low priority given to a sail inventory to get them through the lighter stuff, by folks sailing the sort of Conestoga Wagons you and I do...
Jon! Mark this in your calendar. For once... I AGREE WITH YOU! Gawd, the shame of it. Next I will be pulling off my bimini (snicker).

My point in defining a cruiser was not, as I said, to say THis is a REAL cruiser and any of you are just second best. Quite the contrary. I was trying to define the word in terms of the USE of the boat. That is very important when talking about a 'cruiser'. I am sure you agree (or think you do, at least).

The problem with many modern boats, mine no exception, is the lack of lazarette storage. Take a boat like yours, for instance. Not many people used roller furlings, in mast, etc. Was it even around then? If it was, it was likely not a very reliable system. No, most cruisers hanked on their sails and when they wanted to power up or depower, they changed sails. I personally believe that those times made better sailors and the boats made better boats. The boat was not only designed to be able to accomodate all those sails in lazarettes, but was also designed with the realization that a sailor was going to have to go forward in what might be crappy conditions to change them out or reef them. High lifelines, deep lockers, and friendly decks were the norm, often associated with granny bars and solid handholds. Many of the modern boats I would hate to go forward in (but many of them I would equally hate to sit in the cockpit of). It almost seems like many boats today were built to look good in the showroom or the boat show, and not with going to sea in mind. I can give a LOT of examples, one of them being the Jeauneau 409 I mentioned earlier. Hunter has made some improvements, but I see many of their boats doing likewise. Same with Catalina. Valiant was one of the last holdouts of boats I am familiar with that hung true to the old adage, but I guess Chris couldn't keep it afloat after his dad died. I do like many things they did on Valiants, but there are also many things they should have done that were absent. That, I guess, is for another thread.

Ground tackle, extra lines, etc... I couldn't agree more. I do not have your inventory of anchors. I am actually interested in buying a large fortress as I could break it down. My primary is a Delta that has never once let me down, but we will see how she grips the grass in the Bahamas. She is oversized for the boat (two times), and all chain. Once I set her, she doesn't move. Getting her back up would be a nightmare without a windlass though.

Another comment about racers: I enjoy racing. I really do. In a perfect world, I would have two boats... one to race and the other to cruise. And I have long said, the best way to become a good cruiser is to hang around racers. There are things racers do which do not work or are unsafe on a cruising boat - but a good racer and captain will teach you more in one race than you will learn in a year of cruising on your own. The ability to tweak a sail for everything its got should be first chapter reading for a cruiser. My opinions, just don't let Jeff_h read that.

Pretty boat, btw, Jon. Look better with a bimini and full enclosure (snicker)....

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
  #35  
Old 04-17-2013
RichH's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 2,760
Thanks: 9
Thanked 64 Times in 57 Posts
Rep Power: 15
RichH will become famous soon enough
Re: Why a racer for cruising discussion...

I think Petercheck pretty much nails it for long term cruising boats (post #3) .... immersion factor, or how much a heavily loaded boat sinks into the water when filled to capacity with cruising stores. Purpose built long distance cruisers/passagemakers typically have more 'stowage capacity' and when fully loaded with stores wont be wallowing against a deeply submerged waterline.
Also for long distances, a boat that 'snaps' on every wave can become quite tiring in comparison to a more 'sea-kindly' boat ... theres a big diff. between a 'slow roller' and a 'snappy' boat when it comes to 'roll period'.

Also too structural fatigue can be a concern for long distance/long term, a heavier 'beefed up' boat will typically have a higher inbuilt 'structural factor of safety' which prolongs the time frame of 'endurance limit' in total stress cycles (rigging and hull). Generally, a 'flimsy' is certainly going to come apart faster and become 'structurally tired' sooner than a 'crab crusher', although composite structural design keeps getting better and better during this current 'evolution'.

"Sea-kindliness" is probably more important than ability to 'quickly accelerate' when youre 'cruising' ... especially if you havent worn a wristwatch for many years!!!! A crab crusher with a 'rounded power-bow shape' will 'blast its way' through the real steep stuff due to is momentum and latent inertia, while the 'flimsy' will tend to pound and pound (and possibly get stopped) and pound again until your dental fillings loosen and fall out.
Cruisingdad likes this.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #36  
Old 04-17-2013
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: Why a racer for cruising discussion...

[quote=One;1017585]I do have a tv, I need to keep an eye on the news to make my living.

I am a minimalist in that I make it a point to come up with simple solutions throughout my life (professional and private). I also find things that are not decorated and whatnot, but I do like wood, if the purpose makes it a good choice.



I can carry everything I need in a backpack, and often do (although, more like a carry-on, that a backpack these days).


That is not minimalism to me. That is primitivism.



Same as above.


So, basically, the life of a beggar.



I often take on small camping trips in my open water rowing boat. But since I'm not a beggar, and I care about leaving nothing but footprints, I don't have campfires anywhere.



See the points about primitivism and the life of a beggar.



You have a very distorted picture of "minimalism". For something simple, go look up "minimalism" on wikipedia, do a google search for "minimalism", and while you're at it, do a google search for "scandinavian minimalism" and do a google image search for both.



See above. I don't bring "everything and the kitchen sink" as you seem to do, according to your list. I make it a point not to.



Ah, yeah, and we're back to you thinking it can't possibly be done any other way than the way you do things. You seem to have failed to notice where I said that by simplifying you will need less spares and tools, and that many tools can be found in compact and lightweight versions.




No, they're not. Any tool can be had in various versions. It pays to look around.


And there's the rub: I don't carry any and all tools I ever used on my boat. It's simply not necessary. I sail in a boat that sails well, and I have no intention of doing anything other than engine work of the very basic kind while underway.



Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't know your engine was one big heap of rust where you had to bang on the spanners to make it work. The motorcycle spanners I have are plenty strong for my needs. I have never broken a single one.


It was an example of attitude. When you buy everything to "take a beating" and bring spares for that, you end up with a heap of weight and space taken.
If, on the other hand, you consider each detail, you will end up with far fewer things needed, and by extension, carried. And those that you do carry are well considered and chosen to save weight and space.


I'm sorry, but my wrenches has never broken.


See above.



See my above points of simplifying that you continue to ignore.


Apart from the mast, keel, rudder, and, yes, my fridge, there is nothing on board I consider "critical".


You seem to imply I'm arguing that no spares or tools should be carried. Nice strawman.



That is all fine and well. I'm saying: You're not preparing for the end of the world. Keep it simple.


You must be joking? Maybe in your world. But I don't see a need for one at home (the one I had at one time never got used), so why should I use it when I'm out there? You are reaching at straws when you make the claim that because I think a microwave is ridiculous, then therefore I must only be cruising from marina to marina. How ridiculous is that!?




Yes, I said, I don't eat microwave food, nor do I have any intention to do so.




I know they can be run from an inverter. See the point about simplifying.

[quote]They are quite light. Their size is small and they make a great place to put things in when at sea because the door can be easily closed and has a positive lock. And most of all, and maybe most importantly, they are readily available everywhere and are very cheap to obtain. Walmart sells them for $35.
Quote:

Seriously?

Reread my previous post about carrying everything, just because you can. It's all about attitude.


Actually it's a diesel - this: Wallas 85DP | veneliesi - Wallas




But, anyway, are you saying that you don't have a stove? Or that a microwave can replace a stove? If not, why are you comparing the purchase price of my stove to the price of your microwave?




Not that I use gas, but I'm pretty sure you can plan your way out of that particular problem.



I use a diesel cooker.






No, I knew you had a chip on your shoulder. It's evident from your ridiculous assumptions and insinuations. If you recall, that boat was to be my next boat. Apparently, reading continues to be difficult to some.




You really have a problem.



Wow, you didn't finish reading the very sentence you're responding to. I specifically mentions an electric engine, to be powered by batteries that are charged mostly by a generator. Hello? Could you please finish reading the sentence before flying off making assumptions?


Propulsion is important. I did not say I wanted to go without (mechanical) propulsion: I was saying if went the generator route, I would forego the diesel engine driving the propeller and opt for an electric engine at that end, so I only had a single diesel to carry spare parts for, and so that it could do it's work at an RPM that was the best for it. FFS.




Oh, so you DID notice I mentioned electric engines, but you chose to ignore it to make the strawman that I was somehow saying that I didn't want an engine. Way to go, CD

I'm talking about a single drive installation. One of the reasons lagoon dropped them was complexity, and with two drives it quickly becomes difficult. However, electric engines



LOL, sorry, LiFePO4 are dependable.

. Yes, LiFePo4 batteries are so new, it hasn't been tested on motorcycles, cars, and circumnavigating racers - you know, where there's a lot of money invested in the ability to drive the huge amount fo electronics constantly.


That's the mindset of some cruisers. Cruisers like you who wants to carry everything and anything, and who doesn't consider the options in detail. I have "tested" (i.e. used) LiFePo4 batteries in my boat for four years, and there are no problems, no downsides. In fact, I'd go as far as to say that lead acid is more dangerous, that if you use too much of the capacity of the lead acids (or agms) your entire battery bank is shot for good. You're acting as LiFePo4 batteries are some brand new tech, never before seen anywhere and it's a hit'n'miss affair to be using them. It's not.

I'm sorry, but unlike you, I have actual experience with LiFePo4 batteries, and I'm not afraid of new tech such as dyneema, or, gasp!, carbon fibre.







And heavy, and you can only use half of the capacity if you want them to last for a while, making them twice as heavy for any given useable Ah.



I don't cruise according to what I can get hold of in the most secluded bay in the most far flung third world country. I can't get a new engine there either. I have redundancy with my battery bank, and the charger can charge both agms and LiFePo4. You may plan to fail, I plain to make it even if something fails.
If I do go the electric route for a drive, then the drive is not something that is prone to failure, the battery bank would be the same setup as I have now, only bigger, and what is now a diesel engine would be a (smaller) diesel generator running at optimum RPMs, making it last longer than if it was used directly for propulsion.
Pretty much the response I expected from you. Pretty much the way you have responded to everyone else in this forum you don't agree with. No surprise.

Lets be clear: You ever call me a strawman again, any other member a strawman again, or anything I even remotely with my wildest imagination find condescending or aggressive (and as a writer, I have a HUGE imagination), you so much as cough the wrong way, and you are OUT of here. You have already been warned ONE time, there is no TWO. Your participation here hangs from a straw. I will not put up with ONE more reported post about you.

There is so much wrong with everything you just wrote from a technical point of view, I won't even bother to respond to it further. If you can make that work, go for it. Next...

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
  #37  
Old 04-17-2013
hellosailor's Avatar
Plausible Deniability
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 10,449
Thanks: 1
Thanked 77 Times in 75 Posts
Rep Power: 10
hellosailor has a spectacular aura about hellosailor has a spectacular aura about
Re: Why a racer for cruising discussion...

Sails:
An interesting point and I would suggest a big racer/cruiser divide. The low end of either might be one main and one headsail, a 130-150. But while the serious racer may sort through 14 sails to load the day's inventory...a cruiser has to carry all the sails they own, and build inventory a bit more parsimoniously.

One main, storm sail, maybe 3-4 headsails if they're seriously considering light air and storms? What does who consider "proper" for the cruising sail inventory, as opposed to racing?
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
  #38  
Old 04-17-2013
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: Why a racer for cruising discussion...

Quote:
Originally Posted by PCP View Post
Many years of experience looking at all kind of sailing boats, specially between 39 and 45ft boats, and for looking I mean actually being inside the boats with my wife taking a special care in what regards storage space I can tell you that typical main mass production like yours are normally more "fat" (to use my daughter terminology), than the typical performance cruiser, like the J122 or an Arcona 41. For having the same space you just have to bought the next size in what regards boat size. You will have a bigger saloon but probably the same storage space.

However some modern cruising boats that are faster than the typical fat cruiser manage to have the same storage space, or even more since they are designed with voyage in mind. that does not mean you like them, but we are only talking about storage and speed. It has also other advantages in what regards blueawater sailing namely a cuter rig, with two front sails on furlers plus alight removable furler for the asymmetric spinnaker. The boat comes standard has a twin keel and can be beached for cleaning the hull or repairs.

I am talking about the 2013 European family cruiser, the RM 1260:






RM 1260: Flinker Knickspanter im Exklusiv-Test - Yacht TV - Segel Videos von Europas größtem Yacht Magazin

Regards

Paulo
Hey Paulo,

I watched the video. I completely understand we have different tastes in boats. But I have some questions.

1) How would that boat, with hard chimes, handle a steep sea with a short period? Even my boat is tough in those conditions. I was on a Hunter with a flat bottom and it sounded like a PDQ going into those waves: Bang! Bang! Bang! Do you think that boat would do that? Would you buy a boat with hard chimes like that for cruising?

2) Of course, this is all from pictures, but I don't remember seeing any cabinetry on the walls. That means much of the storage has to go into the settees. Did they put all the tankage below the floorboards? If not, wouldn't that kill the storage on that boat?

3) Wouldn't you prefer more wood? Nothing to do with the performace of the boat, but it didn't seem very warm.

4) Would you have a problem not having a place to put your feet for long distance voyaging? For example, when on the same tack for a long period of time, we stretch our feet across to the foot hold between the two settees on the table. THis was one of the issues I had with the Blue Jacket. Without that, you are forced to sit on the highside - exactly as they are showing in the video. Now that isn't a problem for a day sail, but could you personally do that for a long period of time? Wouldn't your butt fall asleep? Wouldn't your back get sore. My issue with many of the new boats coming out (production boats primarily) is the rediculous coaming in the cockpit and the flat seats behind the wheel. I realize they are trying to maximize the space below, but in doing so, have they made a less comfortable boat for long distance sailing?

5) My boat is 41'6", and 13'6 wide. That boat is 39 long, and 14.5 wide. And you call my boat fat!!! (Snicker)

6) I like the storage area which they are using as a line locker. I really wish I had that on my boat. I said before that one of the failures of many modern boats is the crappy lazarettes.

7) What do you think that boat makes good in 15-20kts sustained? What if she were loaded down with a couple two-three thousand of pounds of gear? How would that change the charachteristics of that boat? Since it is devoid of any real cabinetry, where would you put things that you have to get to often and quickly, like spot lights, paper charts, paper towels, flour, sugar, coffee, large pots and pans like a pressure cooker, etc? If you think about the things, even in a house, that you use on a daily basis, don't you want them easily accessible? We end up having to put a lot of stuff in our settees, and having to pull the cushions and boards to get to them and mangle through all the stuff is a PITA. Would you agree?

8) I agree with you that many of the production boats stink at storage. Large salons, terrible handholds, cruddy storage. I have LONG been screaming about that. They make these huge salons that look great in the boat shows, but when you have to load it up, there are very few cabinets. I cannot tell you the number of boats I have been on that don't even have fiddleboards! So in general I agree with your statement, though it depends on the boat (both ways). I will tell you that my boat, for instance, has a nice amount of cabinetry on it... and I still had to add more. Other boats that come at a higher price point, like you were mentioning, already have that.

Its a neat looking boat. Pretty lines. Kinda pricey though... I saw the older models, and 2008 at that, were over a quarter million US on yahctworld. I wonder what that boat costs new. Do you know? Just curious.

Brian

PS A Catalina 400, though I think has many good qualities, is NOT my ideal cruising boat. I hope you don't think it is. I like many things about it, hate some things, but in general have made it work. There are definitely better boats that I like better... but $$$$!!! I have not sailed one, but I really like the looks of the X yachts. I have suggested that to many people (and Sabres and a couple of others) that have a larger budget than I do. But that is why I am cruising now with a boat I make work instead of working at an office to have my perfect boat sitting at the marina!!! I just remind myself that both me and the guy next to me on the Taswell 49 has the same view. His is just a lot more quiet (no kids). HEHE!

PPS Anyone ever see Romancing the Stone? The boat in that movie is in our marina. Kinda cool.
__________________
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
  #39  
Old 04-17-2013
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: Why a racer for cruising discussion...

Quote:
Originally Posted by hellosailor View Post
Sails:
An interesting point and I would suggest a big racer/cruiser divide. The low end of either might be one main and one headsail, a 130-150. But while the serious racer may sort through 14 sails to load the day's inventory...a cruiser has to carry all the sails they own, and build inventory a bit more parsimoniously.

One main, storm sail, maybe 3-4 headsails if they're seriously considering light air and storms? What does who consider "proper" for the cruising sail inventory, as opposed to racing?
I think many of the cruisers, with their roller furlers and inmasts, have gotten away from carrying any extra sails. I am one of them. Does not mean I think I should.

I have often considered investing in a trysail. I already have the track for it. I actually have a heavy made sail for a much smaller boat in storage in Washington. I wonder how that would work on my boat??? Anyways, I am as guilty as the crowd and admit it. Does not mean I don't agree with Jon, which I do.

Another sail I would like is a cruising chute. I had one on my last boat and loved it. I loved just flying it. Unfortunately, I have had my boat dollars going elsewhere. And in all honesty, and I will ask Jon what he thinks too, I just don't see many cruisers using spis. He is right about motoring a lot too. It shocked me how much we end up motoring.

I will say one thing though (about motoring): We try to avoid sailing when we will get bounced around too much. Sometimes you can avoid that and have a better voyage (not a better sail) by motoring. Also, where before we might just sail, it is not unusual for us to motorsail to make better time. I think that argument for a "Racer" could be that they do not have to do that as much and their boats will point better, making for a better VMG. I also think, in theory, they will be able to sail and make better speed in winds where many cruisers will have to sail.

One of my consistent arguments though, and it may be a Bob Perry question, is when you load up a racer-cruiser with cruising stuff, how have you affected the stability of that boat? THe performance? The RM? Wouldn't a race boat, given its nature of design and the lack of storage, be forced to put things higher thus decreasing its RM for instance, versus a HD cruiser might keep it low and secured? Because the percentage increase of displacment would be much higher on a racer-cruiser versus a HD cruiser, wouldnt the effects of loading it down really alter it more than a HD Cruiser?

I really don't know. It is a question. But it seems logical to me that it would.

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
  #40  
Old 04-17-2013
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: Why a racer for cruising discussion...

Quote:
Originally Posted by RichH View Post
I think Petercheck pretty much nails it for long term cruising boats (post #3) .... immersion factor, or how much a heavily loaded boat sinks into the water when filled to capacity with cruising stores. Purpose built long distance cruisers/passagemakers typically have more 'stowage capacity' and when fully loaded with stores wont be wallowing against a deeply submerged waterline.
Also for long distances, a boat that 'snaps' on every wave can become quite tiring in comparison to a more 'sea-kindly' boat ... theres a big diff. between a 'slow roller' and a 'snappy' boat when it comes to 'roll period'.

Also too structural fatigue can be a concern for long distance/long term, a heavier 'beefed up' boat will typically have a higher inbuilt 'structural factor of safety' which prolongs the time frame of 'endurance limit' in total stress cycles (rigging and hull). Generally, a 'flimsy' is certainly going to come apart faster and become 'structurally tired' sooner than a 'crab crusher', although composite structural design keeps getting better and better during this current 'evolution'.

"Sea-kindliness" is probably more important than ability to 'quickly accelerate' when youre 'cruising' ... especially if you havent worn a wristwatch for many years!!!! A crab crusher with a 'rounded power-bow shape' will 'blast its way' through the real steep stuff due to is momentum and latent inertia, while the 'flimsy' will tend to pound and pound (and possibly get stopped) and pound again until your dental fillings loosen and fall out.
I agree with much of that.

Brian
__________________
Sailnet Adminstrator & Moderator
Catalina 400 Technical Editor

2004 Catalina 400, Sea Mist IV (our boat, F/T Mobile Live Aboards in S FL and Keys primarily)
1987 Tayana Vancouver 42, Credendo Vides, (Mom and Pops boat, F/T Mobile Live Aboards in Puget Sound)

My Website:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Follow My Blog at:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Follow me on Facebook:

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
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
A Discussion of the Philosophies of Cruising and Circumnavigating Cruisingdad Boat Review and Purchase Forum 158 04-21-2013 11:19 PM
General discussion MarioG Endeavour 51 03-03-2013 09:45 AM
Additives ( a discussion) deniseO30 Diesel 10 05-27-2012 07:05 AM
Is cruising only for my parents? sorry, posted this one is general discussion too Newport41 Cruising & Liveaboard Forum 68 01-24-2007 12:25 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:35 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.