[.216558]

whole heartly agree with the importance of seamanship and fitness as regards improving chances of survival in an survival storm. But would note boats differ in abilty to "care of you" when you are no longer able or willing to sail the vessel. Issues of how she handles and survives when hove too or fore running or trailing jordan series drogue. Will she survive a knockdown, pooping or g-d forbid pitch poling. Attention to suitable backing plates and chaff free runs is sometimes over looked. That walk through companion way or nature of construction of the lights on the hull may be a weakness. Think it goes beyond just the model of hull or expense of the infill.

 

[.216558]

smack- Have very limited experience c/w other posters but
sailing old pearson424 accross mouth of buzzard bay ( bristol to M.V. Cllear day 15-20SW. boom knockdown by rogue wave
coming back from Bermuda ( good forecast) clear day running with poled genny. boom sail gone boat on side. ?microburst
transport from sw harbor to mass. fair forecast. boom 5d of misery ( caught edge of no name.)
I look at OPC even when I just go to the boat to sit and have a cup of coffee but weather is local. I know folks who have circumnavigated never seeing more than 30kt. but I seem to have a cloud over my head so plan accordingly. The gribs are great but weather is local. Actually think in some regards weather is more of an issue coastal as there are more local events (line squalls, thunderstorms etc.) that can riun your day.

 

[.216558]

Amazing numbers and a very good thread to read. Gonna show it to the admiral. Prooves the point. It's the hard edges that's the problem. Out in the wild blue yonder get the rags down. Through something off your stern. Button up and go down below. You may have some reverse peristalsis but you'll be fine. Tx. Smack.

 

[.216558]

Problem is I think on most boats autopilot does almost all the steering. Only go off autopilot for a minute or two to check balance every hour or so. In weather hide under the hard dodger with the remote. Guess as I get older becoming a whimp.

 

[.216558]

Having been on a hinckley that jammed its in mast roller main on a trip back to N.E. from Bermuda after a Marion I'm not a fan. Also like roach in a main. But Amels which for decades have been considered good blue water boats seem to do quite well with them.
New production boats seem to be following the slice of pizza trend in hull shape. Also not a fan mostly due to how they ride in a seaway. That shape is obviously successful and fast in the hands of a professional French blue water racer but also felt like with cats concerned I want a boat that will take care of me not a boat I need high vigilance to care for. Think the new systems are fine as long as you can run the boat in their absence e.g. I have powered winches and the winch handle rarely leaves it's pocket on the binicle. Still it's nice to know it's there if needed. Issue of redundant systems( to extent feasible) is germane to ocean boats. Issue of ergonomics in a boat expected to rock and roll off the shelf v. the more placid coast setting is relevant. Simple things like a berth or galley that works when the seas are over 4'. As time passes there are fewer boats made dedicated to the niche market of off shore sailors and more to coastal or charter markets. In past had V40-42s, the larger cape Dories, Pearsons, B40s, SW ers, PSCs etc. all being built in this country and sailing the oceans of the world. Now defunct or the molds/tooling rarely used.

 

[.216558]

I LOVE Hinckleys, I'd be walking on clover with a new B50 under my toes. I'm reluctant to have in mast due weight aloft and to past experience but accept if done right a reasonable feature. I pointed out many voyagers have them without mishap.I'm reluctant to have schaeffer or leisure furl due to weight of the boom, fear if you break the halyard you have a large uncontrolled sail on the deck and loss of ability to shape sail but realize it may be a good trade off of larger boats sailed by small crews. Once again many far reaching cruising boats have them without mishap.For convenience like all powered winches and Dutchman. That why even if the power is lost you can still raise, reef and strike the old fashioned way.
What I object to is the current generation of both sail and power boats where if you have a software malfunction or lose electrical power you have a large piece of flotsam.

 

[.216558]

Smack you are never ever to disparage a mans boat or his wife. Otherwise you end up like BS. However, I remain convinced there are a few boats being made still aimed at the very limited market of offshore sailors. The production builders appropriately see this market as so limited as not to be worth the cost of tooling and molds. The resultant boats reflect this economic reality.
I was just invited to crew on a vessel going from California to Europe. I declined as it would conflict with the SDR. In discussion you would want to know
type of vessel
age of vessel
equipment on vessel
maintenance and state of vessel
and then about crew/captain.
Surely where would you feel more secure. On a vessel purpose built for blue water or a production boat aimed at the coastal market.
Simply things like a boat built with a liner would make me nervous- I cant see nor access much of the interior of the hull. Safely factors in rig and hull construction. I'd rather be in a hull with factors of 3-4x than 2x. No fears of oilcanning. No fears of catastrophic failure falling off a wave. In an aged hull would be wary of cored vessels and so on.
Yes a skilled mariner is important to the survival of the craft but knowing the craft was built to the purpose used gives great comfort.
I don't think its about production v one offs. I'd rather be on a good condition PSC, Mason, Outbound, Shannon, Hinkle etc. than a B,H or J. when it gets really nasty.

 

[.216558]

Bubble agreed. I have no wish to disparage any one's boat. Like the ladies they are all beautiful but none do everything well ( just like me- I do few things well). Still I was trying to make a fundamental point. The market has diverged. In the past more boats were multifunctional. You could reasonably be competitive on a stock boat racing and cruising. Now my boat with a PHRF of 90 would get smoked by a dedicated racer with a PHRF of zero or negative numbers. With cheap oil and U.S. labor being reasonable a Cape Dory 40 or 45, a Valiant and like boats of past decades were in reach of us expense wise and could be sailed anywhere. The markets have diverged. A friend took his Bene 50 to the Caribe. Its a fine boat with huge expanses of room to live in and entertain. The boat got beat up. He had huge bills to restore it to its former glory and vowed to never make that trip again. A couple on my finger pier "commutes" yearly on their Valiant to the BVIs. They short haul for the bottom/zincs and life goes on. As an example I'd rather be on Smacks Hunter than one built more recently aimed at competing for the usual coastal cruising couple or family's dollar.

 

[.216558]

So let me understand this Jon. You would rather be on a Baba then an Outbound or a Boreal or a recent HR or a Morris going upwind in the snot. I have the utmost respect for you and your experience but think you are offending all the NAs of the last thirty years. Surely they are smart and have advanced boat design with each passing year. I have gone to weather in thirty knots. I appreciate the moderate weight of my boat ( she's not an ultralight flyer). I can only compare to my prior Tayana to say the ride is much better as is the vmg. Bob designs and has designed great boats. I would like to think his best days have not passed.

 

[.216558]

So we are back to the original premise. There are truly offshore boats and coastal boats. Whether they are in production or one offs is not relevant. As time goes by the lines of production boats are more likely to be aimed at coastal use with fewer production offshore boats being made. Given how limited this market is a premium is charged for them as with limited runs cost per unit is higher.

 

[.216558]

Live in fear of stuff washing free and wandering about the decks. To the point of getting a dinghy with fold down transom in order to decrease profile to a boarding wave and not obstruct vision. Also think having the side is clear is a safety issue as it's problematic to get by them where you usually see them e.g. By the shrouds. Think offshore boats should have 200g plus of fuel or enough for 300 - 500 m plus. Fuel like water should be in multiple tanks in case one tank contaminated.
Love your bike Jon. How expensive was it?

 

[.216558]

Wasn't talking about myself. Not that self referenced. I can power
Hampton to virgin gorda and have the genset on the whole time.

 

[.216558]

Old Nate the wizard of Bristol said "there are two colors for a boat-white and the wrong color"

 

[.216558]

Been following this thread for awhile and still think its not about production v. custom but rather boats designed for coastal v. offshore use.
I have driven across the US in a car and on an old Triumph 650. I made it both times. I had to rework the carb and chain on the bike. I could ride for 8h max on the bike and I was a kid at the time. Crossing the plains and dealing with the cross winds was a ***** on the bike. In the car could do 12-14h days. Rain, cold and wind was no issue. Could eat and drink while driving even pee using the coke bottle trick. Yes there are Iron Butt riders. Yes a bike may be better for trail riding but for long hauls a well prepared car or truck is safer, faster and more comfortable.
Same kind of thing f or water travel -the boat designed for offshore work is safer, more comfortable and ultimately faster as you are more likely to "work the boat" and get a good vmg then its coastal counterpart. Fewer production boats are aimed at the offshore market then custom but some production boats are specifically aimed at the offshore crowd. To say a Bene or other like production boat with an open floorplan, large distances in the cockpit, insecure galley and unprotected flat glass expanses is aimed at going offshore is foolish. As a coastal live aboard or getaway it is clearly a better boat with more bang for the buck. As an open ocean passagemaker there are better choices from other production builders.

 

[.216558]

Sorry guys I was too free with my words. Yes it isn't by brand but rather by design. At the last several Annapolis and newport shows there has been a swan which is cavernous below and devoid of effective handholds. You folks have,in the main, been referencing boats constructed in past decades. I been referencing boats of much more recent vintage. In an earlier post tried to make the point that it seems in recent production boats apparently due to market forces there has been a divergence. On one side ( and the overwhelming focus) boats aimed at pleasant sailing. On the other boats aimed at voyaging designed with the worst in mind Both are production boats. The extreme of the second group would be boats aimed at high latitude sailing. In this group the customs dominant. Sure a Contest or BCC of decades past may successively engage in this activity but of current production runs which boat do you think is a good choice?

 

[.216558]

What follows will be a long post as I see things differently than Byrce. I will reference my own boat only because I had investigated its structure prior to commitment to its build. But what follows applies to many boats.
I have six integral tanks. 4 fuel and 2 water placed amidships below the sole. They have oversized examination ports large enough for my wife to just about crawl through. They are heavily constructed and baffled. In 53 sisterships over a decade+ no boat has had a failure or leak. This method plus the integrated stringer system adds to the rigidity strength of the hull as well as improving gyradius and comfort quotient . Given these tanks neither leak nor degrade issues of replacement or repair are not operative. Unfortunately from what I understand either metal or plastic tanks will likely require repair or replacement so it's great Bryce can get at them.
Much has been written about whether it is better to have a boat designed to slip down a wave front implying the need to decrease side profile of underwater appends ages or strive for most favorable capsize quotient. Full keel boats or modified full keeled boats may not be a favorable design element under either construct.
The issue of chain plates is quite germane. Attachment of the shrouds to either the main structural bulkhead or the hull or even the toe rail as in Cheribinis can be equally strong. This is a matter of design and execution. Ability to inspect and maintain all aspects of this structure is important and not infrequently overlooked. Ability to further augment the rigging with dedicated storm jib stay and running back stays should be incorporated into the original design parameters.
In short there is no reason a good "blue water" boat cannot be a good " rough water" boat. In fact I believe most designs by many production builders are just that when the N.A. is told to design with that possible use in mind. Frers,Perry, Schumacher , Crealock etc. have all,done so.
Smack speaking of Cherubini my favorite Hunter was the little one he designed. A small tough but pretty boat.

 

[.216558]

+1 on hard dodgers. With inset in to,hard Bimini cockpit is out of wind and weather. Choose clear safety glass so it functions at night. Put in two opening port lights so can get a breeze to cool,hot days and you can see the sails through them. Got that semitransparent cloth that snaps in that sport fish guys use to cover the glass on hot days so no hot house effect. Put red/white LEDs in the overhead so you can read be on deck but totally out of the weather.. Have grab rail running its length making standing in the middle of cockpit holding that rail my favorite spot.Only downside is you may need to move a foot or three to see all of the sails and I still bang my stupid head from time to time.

 

[.216558]

Remain confused Bryce. Been on several boats as old as yours with integral tanks good as new. As with most things depends on design and execution.
BTW in 40 yrs. I'll be worm poop. Think more important is miles traveled and stress cycles than age. When a boat is overbuilt to take what the open sea demands she is more likely to remain safe into her senescence. I think you should agree you be more sanguine doing open water in a boat built for that purpose than a boat built for coastal use regardless of age.
Haven't been on any blue water boats that weren't good rough water boats yet. Been at this awhile. Can you name any? Agree some are much more comfortable than others and N.A.s have learned a thing or two in the last 40yrs.
Do you personally know of any failures of integral tanks in well thought of blue water boats? Can you reference the event? Still think an overbuilt vessel with as many features leading to minimal stress loading of any component is wise. BTW the tanks are under the sole. The sole panels are on retainers but do come up with a twist. The out sides are not hidden to the degree you imply. Think your concern is a non issue. Surprised you didn't make issue of the encapsulated keel also part of the initial lay up. Even though bulbed it too is encapsulated . The keel is done in the mold.Here again a belt and suspenders attitude was taken. Loads are transferred to the stringers grid system and the solid glass hull also supports it. The bulb is horizontally through bolted and glassed in. This over build is still seen with different production runs with totally different solutions. Examples being HR, ocean series Morris, Waterlines, K&Ms, Bobs new PSC etc. Again the point isn't production or custom. It's whether the boat was designed and properly executed to serve as an open water boat. Paulo previously mentioned many boats of light weight but of strong construction built and used for voyaging. Here again this was the design objective. His view of blue water boats was quite different than mine but equally valid.
I don't wish to be argumentative but I don't understand your position. Please expound as I would like to learn. Thanks

 

[.216558]

Bryce that's a good topic for another thread. Would be very curious what Bob and our esteemed pro captains would opine about good rough water boats.
I know Smack likes to rag on the SDR but would note there is one Catalina and six Outbounds this year. They made a lot more Catalinas. The 47 is a good boat ( and I would crew on one without concern) and I'm sure they'll do just find but its nice to have a flotilla of sisterships. Reassures one others have similar views of what makes for a good boat for this use.

 

[.216558]

Bryce please start it off. When I start a thread it flops. Read old and new about this topic and just get more confused. My distorted limited understanding is some more recently say
Light - using mostly form stability and withdrawn centerboards. The light and wide,at least, seems to work for the open boats. The boat floats on not in the water so will slide not trip. Stable if even caught broadside to the wave front. Wonder if this is relevant to us run of the mill cruisers with all our stuff and weight we carry.
Others say narrow and long with high righting arm due to deep high aspect bulbed keel. Again how muchdraft will you tolerate and fees are by length. But you have to agree dashews narrow boats work well. Just glad I don't have to pay the slip fees.
Others say traditional slack bilges,low freeboard and high displacement to length. But don't these boats have trouble with their sailing polars compared to others unless it's an exceptional design and isn't elbow room at a premium. Also aren't your spirits better when you don't live in cave.
Others say design so vessel will ride well to a drogue or sea anchor. Seems scary to have your life depend on a piece of cordage.
Most seem to agree bare poles or hoving to may not suffice in the ultimate survival setting. In short I'm confused how to interprete these assessments as how they may relate to how we sail and use our boats.
Go for it Bryce. You asked a great question.