Gut feeling on boat sizes.

[sailorboy1]

The length of a boat is a poor indicator of “size”. I had a 1988 39’ and now have a 2001 41’ boat (deck lengthens) and the “size is HUGE! Get the shortness length with best “size” and be a happy cruiser as opposed to get a happy sailor.

[a64pilot]

First as far as seaworthy, the difference between 30 and 50 is insignificant, in my opinion. Boat design and construction is more relevant, both are in fact tiny boats.
Difference between 30 and 300 is not of course.
We are an IP 38, 41.5 overall length, and she is big interior wise for a 40’ Boat.
However I find myself wishing often that we should have gone larger for the extra room, by the time she was fully outfitted and provisioned, we pretty much took up most of the available storage, and if she was bigger, then bicycle storage and maybe that Dive compressor I have in storage would fit.
So, she is enough I guess, but isn’t it normal to wish for just a couple of more feet?

[Mike Banks]

Buy the smallest vessel into which you can live in some comfort--and about 35 to 38 feet in length seems about ideal for me.

I think the 36 foot length was supposed to be the ideal length of vessel for rounding Cape Horn. Apparently it is something to do with the distance between the crests of those grey beards.

For my coastal passages forty feet is about right--but it is a length I could no longer afford to maintain. All of my friends sailed smaller vessels, and the smaller the vessel, the further they seemed to have travelled and the more interesting the places they had visited..

A sailing boat is not supposed to be a palatial apartment that floats, although many of them are, and there are a great many purchasers of such craft. A cruising yacht is for cruising, and compromises have to be made. Maintenance is a HUGE on-going cost for cruisers--and the smaller the vessel, the less those costs are.

People have crossed the Pacific in 28 and 27 foot vessels such as the Albin Vega, and I am sure many other similar strongly built and well designed vessels. What level of comfort they experienced during the crossings is another matter. For me--38 feet is ideal, provided they are well designed and well built.

The Roberts you mention sounds good--but it needs a survey by a PROPER surveyor (not all of them are worth their cost) before you set sail into a southern ocean gale.

[Simi 60]

What's your intended use?
That will dictate to some extent the boat.

Pointless having an ice proof pocket cruiser if you want to live aboard in the tropics , pick your weather windows and do miles in idyllic weather.

Originally Posted by Elie

Economicaly, smaller boats means much cheaper, to own, and operate..

Not necessarily

[Jim Cate]

FWIW:

I have owned and made long ocean passages in three boats: 30, 36 and 45+ feet LOA.

We have completed the passages in each in safety, but the comfort factor has gone up significantly with each increment in size, as has the speed of passage. For me, the larger boats have been much more satisfactory than the smaller.

The speed differential is often dismissed as trivial, but I don't find it so, especially when coastal passages are considered. Being able to do an extra 15 or 20 miles in daylight hours can ease harbor hopping coastal trips considerably. Cutting days off of transoceanic voyages isn't a bad thing either, but to me is less important.

And as to the relative strength of boats of different sizes, as mentioned upthread... well, I think that is all wrong. Strength and flexural stiffness is more a result of design and construction than simply size. I know that in our case, the 36 foot foam cored glass Palmer Johnson was much stiffer than the uncored 30 foot Yankee, and our current strip plank plus glass 45+ foot boat is stiffer yet. Insatiable II does not groan under way in big seas, all the cupboards and doors open at sea and when she is balanced on her keel on the hard, evidence of structural rigidity. And according to studies by research groups, resistance to capsize is strongly related to beam, and larger is definitely better here.

It is surely possible to make most passages in smaller boats, but that in itself does not mean they are superior, or even the equal of larger well found and designed yachts.

Jim

[GILow]

So, reading through the responses, I’m not getting much to reinforce my sense of the smaller, more compact boat being more seaworthy.

I happily concede all the stuff around comfort and handling and passage speed. Easy to see the logic in those.

Reefmagnet made a remark that turned what I am trying to articulate upside down, with the remark on the smaller lighter boat maybe riding the waves rather than diving through them. I sort of felt the opposite with a sense of the smaller boat knifing through walls of water and offering less resistance.

Maybe they are similar sentiments. Maybe it’s just the design of the Roberts I have been contemplating.

Since I plan to go nowhere near the sort of places the Golden Globe skippers are currently sailing I am not too worried about my “vulnerable” Swanson.

[alansmith]

GI, I’m going to throw U a curve ball. What u r experiencing has nothing to do with boat design, size, or any such thing. You are experiencing vibrations from the Freudian “ID”. Think of it as something like your unconsciousness speaking to you. “Whispering”.... if you will. You have deep concerns about the proposed journey and who wouldn’t? Our id is responsible for our safe existence. Have u ever been in a relationship and everything seems okay? But somehow you start having guarded feelings about the person. Maybe a strange dream where you feel you are drowning and she is smiling as you do it. Think of the id as an early warning device. Your subconscious mind is playing its card.

You have worries and your subconscious mind is warning you... manifesting it with another boat as being more sea worthy. Calm yourself. Read up on Freud a little bit. It is more real than most people want to accept.

[Pete7]

Originally Posted by GILow

Reefmagnet made a remark that turned what I am trying to articulate upside down, with the remark on the smaller lighter boat maybe riding the waves rather than diving through them. I sort of felt the opposite with a sense of the smaller boat knifing through walls of water and offering less resistance.

I think the comment about riding waves has some merit; all be it at a more violent motion. The little Contessa 32 moored next to us will without a doubt out sail us on every point and knife to windward. Shaped like a dart and with a moderate fin compared to our more tubby design. However, they are wet to sail and have nothing like the living space below, so some downsides depending on your needs.

One of the things we do on our 31ft yacht if something needs to be done like cook or even use the heads is slow down temporarily. The difference in motion from say 5.5 knots down to 3 or 4 knots just calms everything down dramatically. Once sorted either shake out the reef or adjust the sails after pinching up to get going. The difference in passage times isn't really noticeable, the risk of a fall or injury substantially reduced.

Originally Posted by GILow

Since I plan to go nowhere near the sort of places the Golden Globe skippers are currently sailing I am not too worried about my “vulnerable” Swanson.

Us too and with thousands of miles of superb cruising grounds on our doorstep no need to either. This fits in with Simi's comment about choosing a boat and size to fit your needs. Want to cross an ocean? well water and food are both heavy and bulky and as Jim says passage times are dramatic over a longer distance with a larger yacht. Coastal cruising with a smaller yacht, well access to some of the places that larger yachts can't get into is a really valuable factor. The two of us have regularly turned the yacht by hand with ropes to get out of a really tight spot. At 5 tonnes its all quite controllable even in windy conditions.

Also is there something about a small boat being used more because stuff is just easier to do? like raising sails. 30ft yacht just pull them up, 50ft that will need a winch all the way. Drop the anchor? I just lift it out of the anchor locker and chuck it over the side, it only weighs 10kg. We have a manual winch but unless its blowing hard or a tide is running then I just pull it in hand over hand, so stopping for an hour to do lunch or a swim an easy task.
The down side is we need water and fresh food every 4 days really. Thankfully lots of pretty little harbours with free water that we want to stop in makes this easier. Just a case of choosing the right size and design to meet your needs.

Pete

[Sojourner]

With three of us and three cats, about to start a many-year circumnavigation, we had to go as big as we could. Even though we all sleep in the same berth, we still needed an office, a guest berth or two, the cats needed space to run around, prosecco storage, blah blah. And we have 3 pairs of hands to run a boat, so the Amel SM at 53 feet was the perfect gut-feeling size and boat for us. And of course it is a seaworthy beast, like all Amels, so we're feeling pretty good about it

[Pete7]

Originally Posted by Sojourner

With three of us and three cats, about to start a many-year circumnavigation,

We moored up opposite one last year then for sale in the UK. Super yacht and the first time I was able to see one close up. Great choice for you needs.

Pete

[Fore and Aft]

I think regardless of size the boat has to be well maintained. I have surveyed a very well maintained Vertue 25 and would have been happy to go cruising in her. Then I have surveyed a Roberts 44 that was poorly maintained and I would have been happy to not leave the marina dock in her.
I think there is a comfort in size, but then for me I feel a little overwhelmed when I am surveying 50 foot plus yachts. I just look at the handling of a beast this size and know it is beyond the wife’s and mine comfort level.
Cheers

[DawnTreader]

Larger boats have greater capsize resistance, but smaller boats might be easier to reinforce to endure a capsize without structural damage. Larger boats can be built of stronger and heavier materials, but smaller boats have to shoulder much smaller loads. Larger boats might take watertight partitions more gracefully, but smaller boats might be able to store enough foam to make them unsinkable. I think there are circumstances where a larger version of the same boat would fare better and vice versa. Perhaps there is a seaworthy sweet spot balanced between larger and smaller.

[barnakiel]

My gut feeling follows USCG findings (e.g. in their drogues white paper).


BIGGER = BETTER.


NOT longer = better.


Bigger is the boat that has more displacement. It is "heavier".


This has to do with the energy required to toss an object. Given wave energy as constant, the only variable available to our modification is the displacement of the boat we are sailing thru the waves.


I think hull design is of less importance. Strength counts, but who can afford a carbon/nomex baked cruising hull ??? I can't.


Modern uldb designs have some edge but older 'classic' hulls have some merit too. I bet these must be matched with the style you sail your boat. Someone who grew up surfing will be unhappy in a Rustler. Someone who grew up sailing junk rigger lifeboats will be unhappy in a Mini boat.


Still, whether you pitch a Mini against an IMOCA or a Rustler 36 vs. a Rustler 42 - the BIGGER one is better. Get the 42 Rustler or the IMOCA, if you can afford one and if you are headed for the SO.


To me, boats like those Rustlers, Biscay, etc. are fine for the right season SO passages in the right latitudes. I would not seek too much inspiration from the GGR event - it is a race, the season is off - this is not what most reasonable cruisers will do to their boats and to themselves.


Even the smaller OE32 boat that did not even make it into the SO (rolled and badly broken in S Atlantic) could be marginaly OK to sail RSA to AUS to Patagonia - at the right time and latitude.


Oddly, we are not discussing the sailors, their skill and stamina. And we should, before the boat displacement and design. Because it is in fact the most important factor as well as the one over which we have FULL control.


Cheers,
b.

[AiniA]

I think what we are seeing by the responses here is that the OP's question is actually quite complex. A few thoughts, I base on our experience with a heavy (40,000 lb all up) 45'. It is important to consider the displacement as well as the LOA, and likely other measures like beam and hull form. There are 45' cruising boats with displacement half of ours. I am sure they would be faster but doubt they could be as robust. The hull design (Ted Hood) had very full bilge sections so we did not heel very much at all and had a very stable ride. A comparison to the Hiscock's 45' is largely pointless since modern gear makes a newer boat (although ours was 1982) much easier to handle. The Hiscocks did not have the modern furling jibs, furling main, and really large winches that made our boat quite easy to handle.

We found long ocean passages (our longest was 25 days) quite comfortable and did not feel particularly tired on arrival. I am sure the same passages could be made, perhaps just as safely on a much smaller boat but it would be a much more exhausting experience I think. Our admiration went out to the typically younger folks who were cruising on Vegas and other smaller boats.

[Cpt Pat]

There's an old adage that one should add one foot of length for every year of the skipper's age over 20. I'm three times that age, but not yet tired enough to need a size upgrade.

My overall rules of thumb are:

The smaller the better - until I hit my head on the overhead.

Through hulls are evil.

I must be able to perform all operations including taking in sail (while hove to) and docking, single-handed, without an engine. This eliminates high freeboard as I'm too old to get on the dock by swinging Tarzan style from a halyard.

The jib must always come down (no roller furlers).

She must lay stable while hove to.

I must not worry about the keel falling off (no stick-on keels).

I must not worry about the rudder falling off (only keel-hung or skeg-protected rudders). If there's a skeg, it must be able to support half the weight of the boat and place no weight on the rudder.

I must be able to muscle all lines with only a mechanical winch.

The cubic area must be small enough that I could dewater the boat, on the verge of sinking, in reasonable time, using only a bucket.