JimH, what about that lovely Rival you've bought? It seems like an excellent choice for cruising. It's well-made, sturdy and best of, already yours. If I may ask, what set you to thinking the Rival isn't right for your plans?
Regards,
Mark
Hi, Mark
If it were just my wife and I, the Rival 34 could be a viable option if we traveled light. It's easy to forget how narrow and small 1970s boats can be, and with our two growing kids the concept of doing several years on the boat is almost comical. I believe a woman circumnavigated alone on a Rival, but even it was a 36, which is significantly larger than our 34. I'd trust it off shore.
Now, if there was no choice, we might install a water-maker and buy freeze-dried food and do other crazy things to limit size and weight, but it might make the trip more of an adventure than wanted and distract from other things we'd like to achieve. Still, the boat is already well prepped (windvane, radar, new engine, epoxy bottom, newer sails and rigging, etc.)...
Anyway, we'll have her for at least two more summers, and that's a long time to think things through. I'm happy not to have a 38-47 footer right now, since we really don't need it for Channel trips of 1-2 weeks. If we do move up, many families over here would opt for something like a 41 foot Westerly Oceanlord (as mentioned earlier) or a larger Moody, but I wouldn't do that before considering other options.
__________________
Jim H
London, UK Aurora, a mighty Cal 20 (Portland, OR) Southern Rival, a seasoned Rival 34 (Gosport, UK)
What? You're only recommending a 4 foot thick hull? That could be irresponsible advice when a pack of enraged sperm whales attack me and my family on SV Sailnet and crack the hull open like a rotted peanut. Obviously, a prepared sailor would have a lattice of recycled railroad rails reinforcing the inside of the 4 foot thick hull for when Moby turns evil.
BTW, does SV Sailnet really have 7 stainless steel XXL large BBQs, or are the ones at the tops of the masts emergency inflation devices from NASA Mars missions that become 12 feet in diameter when the Tsunami hits and pitch-poles the craft?
__________________
Jim H
London, UK Aurora, a mighty Cal 20 (Portland, OR) Southern Rival, a seasoned Rival 34 (Gosport, UK)
Some other boats used frequently in the ARC are the Jeanneau Sun Fast 37's, a deeper keel/taller mast of the sun odyssey line. There is also an SF40 too.
An owner of the local Jeanneau dealer took 2" yrs to go around the pacific with an SO49iP. No issues either.
It comes down to what type of boat, handling etc you are looking for. If you got a 40.7 or 44.7 and did the ARC, then panama canal, then back to Portland up the west coast, I believe with some proper planning, you will not have major issues.
Some of the Chevy type boats will do just fine in most conditions. Now try to sail thru a Katrina........think you will have some problems, even in that 4'thick hulled boat Alex is trying to sell you!
marty
__________________
She drives me boat,
I drives me dinghy!
We recently sat through a presentation by a local sailor who took a B 47.7 in the Vic Maui race, family-cruised it to Australia, participated in the Sidney Hobart and did pretty well, and have since sailed it home, mostly with family or friends.
This boat was particularly well setup (money was no object) and no doubt that helped some (eg - watermaker and other helpful accessories). The cruising "delivery" legs were done with at least one reef in the main, and with a smallish family crew incuding preteen and teenage children. Their son, at age 10, already had 12,000 blue water miles under his belt!
So in the right hands these boats are certainly capable of handling these sorts of voyages.
__________________ Boating in BC waters since the '60s, sailing since 1981. Currently on our 5th boat, a 1984 Fast/Nicholson 345.
I guess my previous post was maybe a bit glib --- I should have fleshed out my thoughts a bit more.
As far as the boats in the ARC go, I have commented here on Sailnet before, like others in this thread, that many of the French boats are being "moved downwind" to the Carribbean Islands, very often by professional delivery skippers. Take a look at the "reverse-ARC" boat rosters and you'll see far fewer heading back. This phenomena has in fact been a complaint voiced by some participants in the ARC in recent years -- some feel the abundance of delivery crews has changed the atmosphere of the event.
As for your original question about the suitability of these boats for long range, ocean-crossing voyaging: My biggest gripe is that lately there seems to be a tendency for sailors to expect one boat to do it all well. I just don't see how we can expect that of any boat.
You can't fault a Valiant for failing to bring home silver from your club races any more than you should fault the club racer for its lack of long-range tankage. Most boats follow a design brief, which stipulates the primary objective of the design. That boat may be successful if it meets that objective, not just in hull form but in its interior layout and methods of construction. The problem sometimes arises when sailors ask that boat to fulfill a different objective, or even simply criticize it for its failure to do so.
Those big Farr Beneteaus can certainly cross oceans. There are more than enough testimonials to prove it. But long-range cruising was not the primary, probably not even the secondary, objective of those designs. They can serve, but there are other design more readily suited to the purpose. Just as there are better boats than my PSC for club racing. Yeah, I could race it, but if that was my intended use, why not get a design more suited?
In this age of highly refined and focussed designs, very rare -- probably non-existent -- is the boat that can truly do it all.
P.S. If you follow that impulse, consider the KP 46 as an upgrade to the 44.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim H
Hi, John
Thanks for the post. I don't think anyone wants to make structural repairs when cruising, and I'm not saying that I'm sold on the idea of Beneteau as a cruising boat (the 40.7, the 44.7 or the 47.7, etc.). However, I was intrigued by how many do the ARC (which could be just one-way trips) and how some have done long-range cruising. If they were made to a higher spec than typically discussed, I could see them as an interesting option (as described by Beth Leonard and done by Lisa Copeland and family).
I might also note that structural repairs aren't only reserved for racer/cruisers. We did look at a pristine 38 foot Swedish-made cruiser, less than 10 years old, and it had structural repairs to the hull after falling off a wave in the English Channel.
So, no big racer/cruiser argument from me, but I am intrigued by what others have to say.
(Yet we reserve the right to fly back to the states and impulse-buy a Kelly Peterson 44 footer at any given moment...)
I know that fin keels don't heave to as well as full keel boats. If you can't rest for a while during heavy weather because you are short handed that could be a big problem.
I'd second what JRP has said. One of the best pieces of advice I was given about boats is that their primary use should be primary.
That is: if you're planning on crossing oceans—get a boat designed to cross oceans; if you're primarily sailing as a couple—you don't need a boat with three cabins and two heads; if you're primarily daysailing—don't get a bluewater cruiser, and so on.
__________________
Sailingdog Telstar 28
New England
You know what the first rule of sailing is? ...Love. You can learn all the math in the 'verse, but you take
a boat to the sea you don't love, she'll shake you off just as sure as the turning of the worlds. Love keeps
her going when she oughta fall down, tells you she's hurting 'fore she keens. Makes her a home.
—Cpt. Mal Reynolds, Serenity (edited)
If you're new to the Sailnet Forums... please read this POST.
"I know that fin keels don't heave to as well as full keel boats. If you can't rest for a while during heavy weather because you are short handed that could be a big problem."
That simply is not true as a blanket statement. It was true at one time and it is true that some fin keels can't hove to as easily as some full keeled boats, but today a well designed fin keel boat can heave to just as well as a full keeled boat and may actually make less leeway which is why you see more and more fin keels on dedicated offshore boats.
I know that fin keels don't heave to as well as full keel boats. If you can't rest for a while during heavy weather because you are short handed that could be a big problem.
Cheers and happy hunting
Please, allow me to show you something...
The keel
The heave to
As for refrences as to this being true or not....just ask ChucklesR, how this boat heaves to in 6 to 8 foot swells, and 25knot winds...he witnessed it...heave to in less than 5 seconds...and he actually posted about that here, but I don't know where...
We're keeping an open mind, but as I read more of Beth Leonard's book it's pretty clear that being able to maintain the boat over time is as important as the initial design. I've rebuilt a boat before and re-bedded all hull fittings, and replaced standing and running rigging, and it's easy to forget that all has to be done as well on a longer cruise. In relation to Beneteaus and Jenneaus, it's worth considering how easy they are to work on and maintain as well (when compared to dedicated and perhaps older cruisers).
Leonard notes that it can take two years to find a good long-range boat, so of course we should start looking. It looks to be a rainy weekend, so I've lined up four boats to take a look at on Saturday:
I'll let you guess which has the highest and lowest asking price, and we'll be comparing the boats along the lines of this thread and Leonard's recommendations. If it's not a complete downpour, I'll try to bring back images.
__________________
Jim H
London, UK Aurora, a mighty Cal 20 (Portland, OR) Southern Rival, a seasoned Rival 34 (Gosport, UK)
