Too open ended a question to really answer, it needs to be bounded. Any modern design will fit your spec.

 

@Sabreman - thanks for your reply - I have not seen a 16 foot beam on any vessels shorter than 52 and up -
and they have foam core - do you have any suggestions on alternatives? I'd prefer to be 42-48 solid glass construction.

 

Even a Benetaeu 46 will come up short with respect to your 16' beam requirement. And the Bene's beam is massive. You're kind of edging toward a catamaran. Not sure why you're set on solid glass either. prePreg Epoxy or similar is superior. A cored hull isn't necessarily good nor bad, it's all about the engineering. Old solid glass boats aren't necessarily superior either, just heavy. We have a balsa core above the waterline and we've never had a moment of concern. In fact, I really don't think about it. There are so many other considerations.

 

@Sabreman - I appreciate the input - not even remotely interested in a cat.

 

It is a bit strange to be starting with beam being your #1 search parameter. There are so many more important considerations than the actual beam measurement.

I get that you want a beam boat because you want the interior volume, and there are many modern designs that will likely give you what you are looking for but may not meet your 16ft beam requirement. That said, many of those designs were intended for coastal cruising, and while fully capable of offshore cruising, may not be the best choice. You specify a "Blue Water Cruiser", but you don't say exactly what you intend to do with it.

You have also dismissed cored hulls out of hand. You need to keep in mind, modern boats that are built with solid glass hulls were not built that way because they are stronger, they were built that way purely to keep production costs down. Cored hulls are stronger and lighter, but much more expensive to build.


Sent from my SM-G981W using Tapatalk

 

It is a bit strange to be starting with beam being your #1 search parameter. There are so many more important considerations than the actual beam measurement.

I get that you want a beam boat because you want the interior volume, and there are many modern designs that will likely give you what you are looking for but may not meet your 16ft beam requirement. That said, many of those designs were intended for coastal cruising, and while fully capable of offshore cruising, may not be the best choice. You specify a "Blue Water Cruiser", but you don't say exactly what you intend to do with it.

You have also dismissed cored hulls out of hand. You need to keep in mind, modern boats that are built with solid glass hulls were not built that way because they are stronger, they were built that way purely to keep production costs down. Cored hulls are stronger and lighter, but much more expensive to build.


Sent from my SM-G981W using Tapatalk

@SchockT thanks for the reply
Modern sailboats have foam core hulls to save money as it is less labor intensive and cheaper to manufacturer - there are many reasons why I prefer solid glass - I am not interested in superfast - I want a heavy offshore boat designed for that task - glass versus foam core has been discussed here at SN for years - there are endless threads and opinions and each person has to decide what is more important to them - for me solid glass and wide beam are number 1 and number 2 for me - Benetaeu has foam core hulls but otherwise the design is nice - I could live with a 50 or a 51 - but who makes a solid glass hull? I want the solid hull as it makes the boat heavier - there is no right or wrong answers for the solid glass as opposed to foam core - I want the 16 foot beam for the room - suggestions?

 

I am genuinely curious: why a 16 foot beam? Is there a particular boat that has that size beam that you like? Where you aboard a boat with a 14 foot beam and thought "if only there was another foot on each side...."? Interior volume on a boat is not just a function of the beam; it also is greatly impacted by the coach roof, the outboard fittings and cabinetry, and the shape of the bilges, among lots of other factors. You might open up a lot of other possibilities if you were able to quantify your needs via something other than the beam.

 

I guess he wants to fit his reclining couch

 

To get a 16' beam, you are going to have to go above 50'. There is no sailboat made that will fit all your criteria unless you have one designed and built specifically to your specifications.
Our 53' Pearson took a direct hit amidships from a container in a gale, while an Oyster, considered by many to be one of the best built yachts, sank without cause some years back. My suggestion is if you want ultimate safety at sea on a production boat, you should get a Westsail 32, which fits none of your criteria.

 

I assume yiubate specifying beam in order to assure adequate size. May I suggest that DISPLACEMENT is a better indicator of size than either beam or LOD.

Displacement specifies the sizeof the hole in the water you make. A bigger hole means more room. Our 44’ cutter has 40,000 lbs displacement and has huge interior space. Much if that space is not immediatly obvious because it is under the sole or under settees.

But also space depends upon the number if amenities you need/want. AC - space, water heater - space, etc. A simpler boat has more space for the owner and leas **** to hreak means more time for the owner and less repair and less hassle.

Many people hat our big ol steel boat. We met a lady who was jusr so proud of her new 42’ production boat, but she would nit use the reefer and or freezer because she had only 32 gallons tankage and running those amenities meant running the generator which meant too little reserve fuel.

At 42’ and nearly double her displacement we have nearly 200 gallons of water and another near 200 gallons of fuel. And enough solar to run the reefer. Sure she had more amenities, but we have more unsupported range.

How do you intend to use the space? Dock queen? Weekender? Coastal cruiser? Distant cruiser?

That is more important.

 

Re heavy vs lighter displacement for a blue water boat;? Consider yourself on board a wine bottle vs a plastic water bottle on a windy sea.
The plastic bottle would be bounced and blown off much more uncomfortably than the heavy displacement wine bottle.
Very few boats are designed as pure blue water cruisers, especially today. The smallest might be a Nicholson 31,.. beamy at 10’-3”, displacing 14,000 lbs, and designed to go anywhere, in relative comfort, fully loaded .

 

I don't think that analogy actually works for sailboats unless you are comparing ultra light full blown racing sailboats to more normal designs. There is a couple reasons that this is the case. To begin with thee really isn't that large a difference in overall weight between a normal offshore cruiser and a normal coastal cruiser. The more apt comparison would be between a thick wall wind bottle and a thin wall wine bottle.

In reality, in pretty much all of the motion studies and studies of seaworthiness, actual displacement plays a very minimal role in motion comfort or seasworthiness. By far the single largest determinants in order of significance are 1) Waterline Length, 2) Buoyancy and weight distribution (over the full range of heel angles), 3) Roll and Pitch moments of inertia (which are actually derived from #2) 4) Damping, and 5) water plane size and proportions.

Old school thinking was that boats that were short for their displacement were thought to have more comfortable motions because their roll rates were slower than longer boats of equal displacement. But as research (and the physics behind motion) has shown, boats that are short for their displacement tend to roll slower through much wider angles. That works well in single wave incidents and widely spaced wave trains. But the wider roll angles tends to put the boat out of phased with the wave frequency and so the motion in a chop is much less comfortable than a boat if similar displacement but sailing on a longer water line (i.e. what you are calling a lighter boat).

Pretty much all of the major studies of boat behavior in storm conditions have shown that the only single constant that impacts seaworthiness is water line length. And those studies also show that within reason, displacement and beam, have almost no role at all.

Respectfully,

Jeff

 

My intention is not to sound harsh, but to provide a reality check.

IMHO, if you want a blue water boat because you intend to sail the ocean, then the beam you are hoping for, especially at the price point you are looking, is just plain dangerous.

At best, in even moderate seas it will be an extremely uncomfortable ride, bobbing like a cork on top of the water, pounding, falling off waves, roll like crazy, and not track worth a damn in following seas with a high broach potential.

Also, at your price point anything of the size you'll need to get that sort of beam will either be in highly questionable condition, a project boat, or a production boat not suited for serious offshore work. Back in the day, no one that built moderate to heavy displacement boats built anything with the sort of beam to length ratio you are looking for.

If you haven't, I'd suggest you read "Sailing a Serious Ocean", by John Kretschmer. In it he describes the attributes that make a good blue water boat, and gives very valuable information about offshore conditions.

I may be biased, but you couldn't give me one of those silly wide modern Beneteaus for offshore use.
My 2 cents

Bill Berner
2006 Passport 470

 

In the event I haven't thoroughly alienated you, I will make a suggestion of what you might consider looking at that could get you into the ballpark of your ideal.

Others may howl in protest, but I'd give Island Packets a good look. You would be able to find a 2 digit model in your price range, and they are all very beamy, and crazy comfortable down below. Tremendous amounts of storage and tankage as well. They are basically bullet proof and will get you anywhere and back safely. You won't win any races, but you'll be safe and along the way. Displacements are the high side of moderate, and the ride is very comfortable even in a blow.

Now the downsides -
They need a fair amount of wind. I had a 420 that wanted 12kts and above to get going. Upwind performance is not so hot until it really gets windy. Beam reach and below is not bad, and I used to broad reach at 7.5kts in 15 apparent.
You need to be absolutely sure that the holding tank has been replaced with something other than the original aluminum. At the age you'd be looking at, if the original tank is still there you will be looking at a very expensive job to change it when it starts leaking next week. Another harder to evaluate situation is the chain plates. They have been known to be problematic due to the fact that they are encapsulated and inaccessible. Many would make the investment in having them replaced in a vintage boat, but it's not cheap either.