|Topic Review (Newest First)|
|11-22-2009 11:48 AM|
We have a 1996 Beneteau Oceanis 400. Our boat is the 3 cabin 2 head layout. My wife and I bought her over a year ago now. When I'm home (not deployed in your part of the world) we sail her constantly.
She has crossed the Straits of Juan De Fuca several times and brought us through in winds at or near 40 knots or a little more with me single handing her. We have an 11 month old and my wife is usually busy taking care of her.
We have taken her on a few 15 day trips and a bunch of week long and long weekend trips in all types of weather.
Before we bought her we looked at almost 100 boats of comparable length from 38-45 feet and from 1975-new. We like our decision but there were other boats I enjoyed sailing including Catalinas,J boats, a beautiful Moody and a few other Beneteaus.
Since we bought her I have installed or purchased:
A Boom Break
An Asym. Spinnaker
Increased the sail inventory
Flexofold prop (made a .5 kts difference in anything below hull speed)
What we like:
She sails to weather extremely well for a “performance cruiser”.
She reaches hull speed (7.3ish kts) with little effort. For a cruiser she is a good light air boat.
The Pullman berth is outstanding.
When trimmed correctly she has a light responsive helm that is well balanced.
The inside is beautiful with plenty of room, a good galley and a comfy living space (the extra cabin becomes storage when no one is using it).
Light and airy interior
What we don’t:
Like a lot of the newer, lighter boats she’s not as sea kindly as a full keel boat weighing twice as much. This boat is not as happy in a following sea as a boat without the suger scoop stern.
With three cabins she could use more tankage.
She’s loud when motoring (hence the insulation which helped).
The aft head has a shower but is only really usable as a head and wet locker (too cramped to shower in).
I wish she had a few more handholds down below for heavy seas.
Hope this helps you make a decision. Feel free to ask for pics if you want them.
|11-22-2009 10:59 AM|
Originally Posted by night0wl View Post
|11-22-2009 12:10 AM|
Originally Posted by soulfinger View Post
|11-21-2009 09:29 PM|
|soulfinger||Agreed that Catalinas are more expensive than Beneteaus, but not by 25%. I would say more like 10-15%.|
|11-19-2009 09:39 AM|
Originally Posted by malyea View Post
The plus of iron is the lower cost.
|11-18-2009 11:51 PM|
nightOwl states "Also, they use Lead keels over Iron which have their plusses and minuses." ref Catalina compared to Beneteau.
Please expand on what are the plusses and minuses comparing lead to iron keels.
|11-18-2009 05:27 PM|
|Vasco||Bay of Biscay can act up like the devil. Can be a very rough stretch of water.|
|11-18-2009 04:18 PM|
Crazy - that report is definitely interesting...especially in light of their route which, in earlier discussions about what constitutes "blue water", could be classified as "extended coastal" (from Malta, to Gibraltar, to A Caruna, and toward Plymouth); the farthest point from land being in the Bay of Biscay where they rolled (maybe 300-350 nm from land?).
So, with that in mind, look at this section of the report...
Ocean Madam was a production Beneteau Oceanis 390 yacht. The class is typical
of its type with a high volume, low ballast ratio, light displacement and shallow
hull form. It is highly suitable for most activities including charter work and has a
good safety record. It is not a suitable craft for crossing oceans in bad weather.
Such craft are more susceptible to the effects of oceanic weather conditions and
especially to heavy seas. No stability information about the yacht was held in
board. Indeed at the time of purchase such information was only made available by
the builders to owners on request. There is no evidence to suggest the craft was
unsuitable for moderately rough weather conditions nor is it suggested there should
be any restrictions imposed. The lack of this information about the yacht's
stability, including a GZ curve, denied the skipper any opportunity to scrutinise the
possible implications of handling such a yacht in a very high sea state. The
limitations of this type of light displacement craft are, however, well known to
experienced blue water sailors."
Was it an "ocean crossing"? Or was it "coastal"?
Interesting reading. Lots to think about.
|11-18-2009 12:11 PM|
One thing I will say about Catalina vs Beneteau...(and I love my Beneteau).
The designs tend to be more tried/true for Catalina. Not fancy opening ports/hatches...not a lot of "skylights" that may leak in the future...etc. Their hardware also tends to be a bit sturdier (larger winches for the same LOA..etc). Also, they use Lead keels over Iron which have their plusses and minuses.
Foot for foot, you'll pay about 15% *SNIP*(25%)*SNIP more for a Catalina though.
*I edited to accurately reflect that Catalinas tend to be 10-15% more than a comparable Beneteau.
|11-18-2009 09:46 AM|
|MJBrown||I don't think you'll find much difference in overall quality between the two. Each goes about it differently but the net result is the same; nicely built boats for the money. Catalina like Beneteau has a very strong following of owners and each will try to sell you on their own brand. I think it will boil down to asthetics. Which one catches your eye? How are the cockpit, instruments, sail handling gear, interiors, etc laid out? You'll also want to see how they sail and handle under power. How easy will it be to service or replace parts? How comfortable at anchor or under sail? What does the wife think? Good luck with your shopping.|
|This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.|