|Topic Review (Newest First)|
|12-08-2013 09:07 PM|
World Cruising Club - ARC Results
If you go back on the interesting boat thread to November last year you will find there the coverage of that edition and the one the year before.
Talking about the Laurin I love those guys and their spirit. They certainly very good sailors, even if not young...and that is even nicer. The boat photo shows them going across the finish line with style.
They have that boat for many years and cruised extensively. They made on that boat the first edition of this rally, back in 1986 with the Laurin.
"Even after this long and arduous trip across an ocean, the taste of a cold rum punch and a warm smiley welcome is enough to turn any tiring sailor into a giddy child.
Owner of the Laurin 32’ Corona AQ, Pekka Karlsson steered his boat into Rodney Bay Marina for the third time flying the ARC flag. He and his wife Barbro participated in the very first ARC back in 1986, and again in 2001.
Pekka thought his ARC days were up but when the news came that a new ARC rally had been launched taking the fleet via the Cape Verdes, he and his wife signed up and began preparing their ever trusty Corona AQ for another Atlantic crossing.
On arrival into Rodney Bay Marina Pekka Karlsson explained how ‘the Marina may have changed a lot but the atmosphere and feeling on arrival is just as good as I remember’.
|12-08-2013 08:36 PM|
Re: Full Keel
Originally Posted by bobperry View Post
Last year I was absolutely perplexed with the incredible performance of a Island Packard 485 on the beginning of the Transat. The IP was "racing" in the middle of the performance cruisers and then at less than the middle of the transat they become really slow. I guess that the fuel was becoming low, even if the boat carries about 1200L
|12-08-2013 08:01 PM|
Re: Full Keel
But how can we use results from a race where you can run your engine? Not that I don't like the idea, I've wanted to run my engine in a lot of races, but it sort of throws performance comparisons out the window. Or am I wrong?
|12-08-2013 08:00 PM|
Re: Full Keel
from the little info I could gather about retirements is the ARC:
40Green Pogo Electrical Problems
Liberte Jeanue 57 Broken boom
Zenaarara Clark 72 Steering Problems
A little bit of everything...
|12-08-2013 07:39 PM|
Originally Posted by PCP View Post
Sure, I guess everyone knows it's a race whenever 2 yachts are in sight of each other and going in the same direction, so, statistically, picking the boats in the lead you should be right. Looking at the routes of some of them I'm just not sure your sample size is large enough or that the results of one "race" is enough to make a definite conclusion. Are there any past results available?
Originally Posted by PCP View Post
Anyway, in the 21st Century, no, I don't find it odd at all. People buy whatever happens to be on the market that fits (a) their budget and (b) the kind of sailing they generally want to do - unlike the Sydney Hobart, they don't rush out and buy a new yacht specifically for this event. As you know, Benehuntalina and the rest of the mass-produced plastic fraternity have done a great sales job over the past decade or so and AFAIK almost everything they have ever offered is fin keeled, because speed, cost and manoeuvrability are more important to most people than "classic lines" and storage space in the bilge. For this reason I would also not expect that very many people interested in the ARC would also be the home-built oxidised-aluminium full-keeled low-budget world-traveller types that you see in most ports of the world because I imagine they would be left far, far behind...
It might be interesting to also look at what caused the retirements.
|12-08-2013 06:23 PM|
As you say this is a very low profile race and many just race it for the fun of it even if nobody likes to be left behind.
The objective is to take the boat to the Caribbean to pass the European winter cruising and the boats contrary to the Sydney Hobart, that is a smaller race, are loaded with all it is needed for a transat and cruising equipment.
That's why this transat in what regards the typical cruiser is a much better one to evaluate boat performances not to mention that this transat has 3 more boats than the Sydney-Hobart where most boats are much more raced typed than on this low profile "race".
Sure, the Sydney Hobart because it is a top race is better to evaluate the racing performance of sailboats while racers. This one is much better to evaluate the sailing performance of the boats while fast cruising on a make believe racing. Contrary to the Sydney Hobart there are very few racing boats on this one.
By the way I love the Sydney Hobart and I have made here the coverage of the race on the last years
|12-08-2013 05:30 PM|
I've had a look at the fleet viewer and see nothing unexpected. There are some boats being sailed 'racing style', shall we say, others wandering all over the ocean (trying to find the best wind? who knows!) and some being sailed rather 'comfortably'..
Other than those who have retired and turned back (presumably from gear failure?) I'm sure they're all out there enjoying themselves sailing their chosen yacht - full keel or fin - the way they choose to on the course they choose. In a 'rally' where everyone who reaches the finish wins, far be it for me or anyone else to judge one yacht's "performance" over another.
OTOH, if this was a race..
Paulo, FWIW, like many Aussies I'm a keen follower of the Sydney-Hobart and have been for a few decades now. (I suppose I have to admit that it's a family tradition that every year we sit around the TV and watch the start ). I don't know if you've ever taken much notice of this race over there - but it is a race and it has a wide mix of all your favourites: TP52's, super-maxis, maxis, pocket-maxis, performance cruisers and even, sometimes, and old full-keel cruising boat in it.. but, unlike the ARC, its a race. One I've only been in once, didn't finish and will never do again, but one that would probably provide you with a better comparison of performance than the ARC. It starts in 3 weeks..
|12-08-2013 03:19 PM|
I posted this on another thread and I think it is relevant here too:
ARC- Performance cruisers and comparative difference to other types of cruisers:
So, how compare performance cruisers in a transat with medium height modern cruisers? A lot of talk about the performance of a performance cruiser loaded for a Transat to be prejudiced to the point of being so slow as medium heavy boats, and some would even believe, than heavy boats. A lot of crap. They are way faster than even bigger medium weight sailboats, as we would see.
First let me tell you that modern boats are only considered medium weight if compared with typical modern mass production boats and the difference is not that big. It is certainly much bigger if compared with what used to be medium weight boats or what used to be the weight of this type of boasts 20 or 30 years ago. An average 30 year old performance cruiser (for instance a Swan) has about the weight of a comparably sized medium weight cruiser today.
Secondly that this year the conditions, except for the ones that chose the North route, did not suit performance cruisers. The bigger difference in speed regards the difference of speed downwind with strong winds where these boats can go to semi-planing or even planing speeds and be way faster than much bigger boats. They sail also better with very light winds and even if this year the conditions were strange, with upwind sailing and not strong winds, really light winds were not so frequent (less than 8k).
And finally that the way a boat is sailed is fundamental to the performance. I assumed that among so many boats (+200) the ones of each type that have the better performance are the ones well sailed. In so many boats we should find some well sailed boats in each type and I will consider irrelevant the performance of the others. Any boat can be very slow if sailed badly or very far away from his potential.
A warning also, the boats that are not racing can use their engine and are using the engine on situations without wind or with head wind. In the end sometimes they give the number of hours each boat used the engine but that's obvious that a boat with a large tankage like the IP 485 that carries 1100L of fuel will be motoring a lot more than boats with a 150L tankage. That will be reflected in their "performance" and on the position they occupy on the map.
Regarding those that went North, they sailed faster and made a big difference to the others that choose a central course. That is the case for instance of the Marten 49 that is ahead of the first medium weight cruiser, a boat twice as big, the Oyster 865 by 30Nm and the oyster is making a very fast transat.
If we went looking for the first medium weight modern with the same approximated size of the Marten 49 we would be looking at the XC 45. I know it is smaller but they are faster than any other 49/50ft medium weight boat (it is just a great cruising boat). There are a difference of about 700nm between the two boats. That means they are about 4 days away.
Curiously and as I have been saying the performance of XC 45, even if not a performance cruiser is similar to top performance cruisers from 30 years ago. We can see that a Swan 51, a swan 46MKII or a Swan 53 are in the same performance range being all at more or less the same distance from the finish (+- 100nm).
The Marten 49 is an exceptional and very expensive performance cruiser. Let's see if difference to more "normal" production performance cruisers is also a big one:
There next performance cruiser is a 50ft boat, a X50. The distance for the first medium weight 50ft cruiser (again the XC 45) is of about 500nm (about 4 days). Another performance cruiser doing a good passage is a GrandSoleil 56 that has a an advance of 117 to 120nm regarding a Gunfleet 58, a Discover 55 and a Jeanneau 57.
The difference will be way bigger if we look at the 40ft cruisers. The faster performance cruiser is a Pogo 12.50. The first medium displacement boat is a Oyster 406 and is at 622nm, a Moody 425 is at 694nm, that means at about 4 days away.
Regarding the distance of the Pogo to modern mass production cruisers the distance is smaller. He have a Dufour 385 at 344Nm, another Dufour 375 at 431nm and a Bavaria 40 at about 500nm. The diference of the first 40ft light modern production boat (the Dufour 385) to the first medium weight 40ft is of about 280nm, almost 2 days.
It is true that the Pogo 12.50 is probably the faster 40ft performance cruiser in a Transat since it is a boat maximized for downwind sailing. If we look at the fastest of the more conventional 40 performance cruisers, a First 40.7, that is at about a day from the Pogo, those numbers will be diminished by 180nm. The First would be at 442nm of distance regarding the first medium weight cruiser, the Oyster 406, even so more than 3 days.
If we look at 36ft boats the first is a First 36.7. The first medium weight 36ft cruiser is a Halberg Rassy 36 at 521nm (about 4 days) and the best modern 36ft cruiser is a Hunter 36 at 267Nm (almost 2 days).
Regarding performance cruisers with around 30ft, the first is a Sun Fast 3200, the second a Pogo 30 and the third a Pogo 8.50. The difference from the first to the last is of 188Nm and the 3200 is way faster. The difference between the two Pogos is only 61nm. The distance from the Sunfast to the first medium weight cruiser, a Forgus 31 is of 729nm (about 5 days) and to the Pogo 30 599nm, about 4 days.
We can conclude that in all sizes the difference in performance on a Transat, with the boat loaded with the needed provisions and tankage, between a performance cruiser and a medium weight cruiser is a big one and increases in proportion with the size of the boat. On really big boats, with over 50ft that difference is not as big, maybe because in those sizes the big LWL is a more determinant factor.
We can also see that the performance of a mass produced modern cruiser is better than the one of an medium weight cruiser by about the same margin that separates this one from a performance cruiser.
If we considered heavy boats the diference would even be more substantial. There are some in this rally but as they are not many the best performance between just a few would not necessarily be a good one. They are on the tail of the transat anyway.
Finally we can see that the crew is an huge factor regarding the speed of a boat and if a slower boat cannot go faster than a certain limit, even with the best possible crew, a faster boat can go much slower than his potential with a bad crew. We can see similar boats separated by many days. That has nothing to do with the boat but with the crew.
Just an example: The Belgian Dufour 40 Heckogecko (same model) is at 674nm (about 6 days) from the Portuguese Dufour 40 Conquilha III.
Only two Portuguese boats but both doing well. One is this Dufour the other that First 36.7 that is by far the fastest of the 36ft boats.
|12-06-2013 02:12 PM|
World Cruising Club - Fleet Viewer
Regarding the performance cruisers and cruising boats, these are the ones that impressed me by their performance:
The Mills designed Marten 49 performance cruiser is doing a great transat sailing among the big yachts, going side by side with a Baltic 78.
The first 40ft boat is as usual a racing Class 40 pursued by a X 50 performance cruiser, both doing a great race but no better than a wauquiez (45 performance cruiser) that follows both. The first 40ft performance cruiser is a Pogo 12,50. That cruising Pogo 40ft is battling with ...a racing TP52. Besides the Pogo, the fastest 40ft performance cruisers are several First 40 (and 40.7), but at a very considerable distance.
On the real small performance cruisers going very fast and surrounded by much bigger boats, a Sunfast 3200, a Pogo30, an older and smaller Pogo 8.50 and a first 36.7.
Also doing a great and fast transat A Dufour 45e, a Grand soleil 43, a Dufour 40 (all performance cruisers).
Some other cruisers (not performance cruisers) going fast (and this one will put a smile on my friend Smack) a Belgian Hunter 36 (that have the balls to head North for wind), an American Southerly 42RS, a Van de Stadt Moorea 45, a Jeanneau Sun Odyssey 42, a Dufour 385, a Dufour 375 , two XC 45, a Bavaria 40 and a 42, an Amel super Maramu, a Southerly 110, a Dufour 425, a Bavaria 36, a Benetau Oceanis 411, a Bowman 42 and a Dufour 34.
All modern designed sail boats.
Maybe you can take a look where the more fast group of old designed heavy cruisers are: I give you a hint, look at the tail of the transat, several days behind some of those boats I mentioned
I guess that we can call that a difference of speed.
Surely, like we have seen with the Laurin, the way the boat is sailed has a lot of importance regarding speed and that's why I have looked at the best group of boats among the performance cruisers and modern cruisers and I am asking you to look at the best group among the old designed heavy boats.
The best on the two groups will be certainly well sailed but the same cannot be said for the worse cases on both groups.
|12-05-2013 07:28 PM|
Re: Full Keel
Originally Posted by GBurton View Post
Design rules have changed several times since the 1880's (roughly when gentlemen's yacht racing became a popular sport) and, each time the rules were tweaked to improve one aspect or another (eg. safety!) that did not always mean that the newer displacement yacht design was faster through the water than the old.
..more manoeuvrable, yes, more comfortable, perhaps, but always faster? No.
|This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.|