420: Lagoon 420 Owners & Fans

[cat man do]

[quote=planetoftheapes]Please, I know much of this post is speculation, but if the Fastcat 435 can sail 21.5 knots so easily, why does the log show it going over 9 knots so few times?

Maybe they only had light air a lot of the time, if this was the case you may well find the Lagoon would be motor sailing to maintain anywhere close to these speed's.

An average of 8.7 knot's is actually quite impressive and while the Lagoon may have seen close to this in 15 knot's of wind, I doubt it could maintain it on passage, due to wetted surface area, weight, and lack of sail area[hp]

It is better to try and make decisions based on reality rather than hype

Indeed it is , for all involved.

Dave

[planetoftheapes]

Cat,

Do you have anything substantive to add or is this where the personal attack begins again?

[cat man do]

Originally Posted by planetoftheapes

Cat,

Do you have anything substantive to add or is this where the personal attack begins again?

What was the personal attack?

I only asked a question.

Lighten up

Dave.

[planetoftheapes]

Gentlemen,

I calculate the average speed of the Fastcat 435 on this passage to be 6.98 knots based on the log data. This number looks more consistent with a glance at the data. How did they get 8.8 knots when they were sailing 5-9 knots most of the time?

Also they appear to have rounded everything to a whole number. Were they rounding everything up? Why not leave the data with more significant figures?

I smell a rat.

ID, did you look at the Fastcat log I posted the link to?


Catman, I just tried to make the point that there is a lot of hype surrounding the speed of catamarans that doesn’t pan out in real life.

The point is, the owner of this company makes it sound as though his catamaran will dance along at near wind speed day in an day out and occasionally hit 20 knts.

Look at the log data on this speedster. She is sailing well below hull speed most of the time. Sure maybe there was just no wind or maybe this is consistent with the other data we have which shows cruising boats generally make passages below theoretical hull speed.

[cat man do]

And on that note I'll repeat my quetion.

I have to ask POTA, have you actually done miles on a performance cat, or any cat, or are your comment's just what you have read ?

Dave
__________________

[Quiet Riot 420]

POTA,

I have come up with the same number as you, as it seems that he went 8032 n.miles in about 48 days (1152 hours) = just under 7 nautical miles per hour.
I subtracted 5 days (53-5=48) from the log to compensate for in harbor days.

When they bring my 420 over from France to the BVI in March, there will be a positioning transponder on board, so maybe we can make up some kind of log to show the miles made good every day and get some feeling for average speed in real conditions. It would be nice to get at least a copy of the real log once they arrive in the BVI. These numbers should give us a good starting point from which to evaluate the boat. And I suspect that the delivery captain will also have some personal insights and observations to add to this evaluation process. A long talk over dinner and into the evening seems eminent!

Fair Sailing _(\_
Quiet Riot 420

[planetoftheapes]

QR,

Yes, the log for the Fastcat 435 sure supports my and ID’s position that these expensive lightweight catamarans are really no faster than the cheap “heavy“ ones over a passage. Hey the FC435 sails at the same speed as my old mono-hull, 5-8 knots.

Why have I been trying so hard to convince people that in real life the multi-hull speed mantra does not pan out? ID did a full statistical analysis, complete with tests for statistical significance!

Cats, Weight, Performance and Value puts some numbers to my madness. ID, I did not see your thread until just now.

Cat,

I am sure I have nowhere near the experience that you have with multi-hulls. Also, I am probably half your age.

I believe we have been though this once before about 9 months ago? I think you have already told me. You’ve cruised 30,000 miles and sailed all the way at 12 knots using only a single tank of gas. That was you, wasn’t it?

I will tell you I have plenty of experience cruising at the speed of a Fastcat, 5-8 knots.

[cat man do]

Originally Posted by planetoftheapes

QR,

Cat,

I am sure I have nowhere near the experience that you have with multi-hulls. Also, I am probably half your age.

I believe we have been though this once before about 9 months ago? I think you have already told me. You’ve cruised 30,000 miles and sailed all the way at 12 knots using only a single tank of gas. That was you, wasn’t it?

I will tell you I have plenty of experience cruising at the speed of a Fastcat, 5-8 knots.

I am only 42.

I've had the computer about 4 mth's.

Those miles are form day 1, not just Multi's, but that would be 70% of it.

That trip you're refering to was a 1000 mile up and a 1000 mile back trip, mostly off the breeze and under kite and including the dinghy we probably used around 40-50 Litres, over 3 mth's, but i'd have to check.

This was also a "special trip" as one usually has to beat back for the latter 1000 miles, but on a fine windward machine we would have still only used the same amount of fuel.

At least now we know that your comment's re: performance multi's is not from first hand experience.

cruising at 5-8, is that average, continuous or on the fly.?

And, what's a "Fastcat" ?

Dave

[planetoftheapes]

Cat,

Did you see ID’s incredible analysis of the ARC and did you examine the African Cats Fastcat 435 log?

This is the same result I read in a study a few years back in Cruising World or Sail. In that informal study, to the best of my recollection, they interviewed a variety of cruisers and from their logs looked for statistically significant variables predicting greater than 200 miles per day average during a passage.

The only independent variable they found was waterline length.

Not even multi-hull versus mono-hull made a difference. Hence the only evidence based conclusion we have is that for a cruiser, on a passage, heavy versus light, mono versus multi, racer vs. cruiser, the only thing that decreases passage time (that we can control) is waterline length.

Again as ID said, this does not mean weight does not matter, it only means that a “light weight” catamaran won’t necessarily get you home any faster than a “heavy weight“ catamaran.

Why is this? Because virtually all boats loaded for cruising act as displacement hulls. The equation below says that in displacement mode, the energy required to push the hull through its own bow wave goes hyperbolic. It is an exponential rise.

Hull Speed = (1.34) * (LWL)0.5

Horsepower = Displacement / ((150)2 / (Hull Speed)2)

That said, even if your boat has the power to pass through its bow wave, things feel different, less in control, at this speed. Most multi-hullers offshore don’t seem to enjoy long periods close to the “edge.” Hence, cruisers tend to stay in the comfort zone below theoretical hull speed. Hence, dwl becomes the primary controllable factor dictating passage speed.

For a 30 foot waterline this is 7.34 knots
For a 40 foot waterline this is 8.47 knots.
For a 50 foot waterline this is 9.48 knots.

So the reality is, even dwl does not play that big a role in passage speed, in the size range of boats we usually sail in. You gain or lose about a theoretical knot going up or down 10 ft from a 40 foot waterline.

[cat man do]

Yep, read that well written post, and also read this from SMM

[hope you don't mind me pinching your text]


While it isn't statistical, I note that the Outremer finished
behind (by 7 hours) a Catana which was 13 feet longer,
and just behind the Kelsal 52. The first Lagoon 410 finished
3 days after the Outremer, the Dragonfly 2 days. The Outremer
also bested the winning (56 foot) monohull by several hours.

So anecdotally, the "high performance" catamaran is _much_
faster that both larger catamarans and larger monohulls. You can
average the performance of the Outremer and the Lagoon 41, but
I don't think that the resulting number means anything. I wish you
had some data on the Australian cats...


Seem's to me that high performance cat's are faster than charter cat's.

As said previouslly, I don't have a problem with comfortable charter style catamaran's, there is definetly a place for them, but they are not fast.

Comfortable----- Yes
Fast-------------No

If you were to actually sail on both style of vessel's you would see and understand for yourself.

This would be why in fun races, lighter performance cruiser/racer style cat's and tri's alway's give time to the slower cruiser style of multi, and even more to most monohulls.

I used to sail every Wedneday afternoon on my last cat, we always gave the slowest mono's arond 1 hour head start, some started with us, some of the absolute racer boy's would start after us.

Some of the slower cruising cat's would start 20 min's in front, some with and a couple always 30 min's behind.

The whole fleet, usually 50 boat's [sometimes up to 100] 12 or more being multi's would finish within a couple of miles of each other.

On windier day's about 4 of the multi fleet were rounding the turning mark and heading home, a couple of miles in front of the fleet, after giving most a head start.

We would often be finished, then sailed around for half an hour, be back in and parked and spending time socialising on board, before the last boat's were approaching the lead's.

This is a short race that took most boat's 2 to 3 hours to finish.

The record set by a Crowther Shockwave 38 cat cruiser/racer was 45 minutes.

And you still continue to say that all boat's sail at the same speed's.

I give up.

Dave

[Factor]

So you should Dave - the trouble with debating with idiots is they drag you down to their level and beat you up with experience. I am pleased that Lagoon is succseful and pleased that so many people enjoy them, but I cannot accept that they are fast boats - or at least no slower than other multis, personally I think they are a bit ugly but there ya go.

Australia is blessed with fine designers and quite reasoanble production builders other parts of the planet aren't. Which is not to say that the fench cant bdesign great boats they can and do, as I said before prsonally my speed/comfort money dilemma would resolve it self in favour of say Fountaine Pajot rather than lagoon, but in both cases a lightwave or seawind would be in front - and they are better value here, though not necessarilly so elsewhere.

[planetoftheapes]

Yes sorry Dave, we seem to have a terminal misunderstanding. You seems to persistently disagree with arguments I did not make.

For starters, light weight performance cats are faster than charter cats. I repeat everyone knows light weight performance cats are faster than charter cats. Why do you keep insisting that I am arguing against this?

Next the Lagoon 420 is not a racing boat. The Lagoon 420 would never be considered a fast boat. Who ever said the Lagoon 420 is a high performance catamaran? She is a spacious cruiser.

I say over and over that, in general, on a long passage, with the boat loaded for cruising, having a light catamaran will not guarantee a faster passage. The vast majority of data, what little we have, supports this.

You say it will always make a faster passage. We will not agree on this point.

You say the fusion 40 will make a passage faster than the Lagoon 420. I say sure if you carry a few thousand pounds less cruising gear.

You say in a race a light performance cat will blow away the field. I say your absolutely correct. No one ever said it wouldn’t.

I say if you are going to load up the wife and kids and all the stuff that comes with them, it does not make much sense buying a light weight cat. Your light weight cat will quickly become a heavy cat. Then the speed advantage you paid for disappears.

You point to the Outremer in the ARC. I see that as a single data point that I can’t draw a conclusion from.

Now you give up? Give up what? Making argument against things I never said?

I give up as well.

Best Wishes

-John

[ess105]

Originally Posted by Factor

The trouble with debating with idiots is they drag you down to their level and beat you up with experience.

More pooh throwing. This is so tiresome. Trouble is - anyone who drops this well known statement into an public discussion has to bear in mind every reader is going to make their mind up who's who.

I'm a simple guy and am only interested in real results.

Quiet Riot. I'm looking forward to your comments on Marth R's March delivery.

[Quiet Riot 420]

Factor,

Why don't you switch to a different thread, your comments here are counter productive, and from what I have read of your poorly written posts, you have added zero to this discussion. To call other people idiots, for intelligently discussing their views on different sail boats shows me that I can just skip posts from the genius "Factor" as they contain nothing but misspelled BS. Lighten up or butt out.

Fair Sailing _(\_
Quiet Riot

[Quiet Riot 420]

By the way Factor, did you call the factory and tell them they had a typo error in their spec sheet for the American version of the 1160, which states clearly that the draft if 3'9". Maybe this will give you someone else to argue with about your measurements on the draft of the 1160.

The 1160 has its galley down in the starboard hull, and this was totally unacceptable with all the cooks I know,especially my better half.

Fair Sailing _(\_
Quiet Riot 420