Cruisers Forum
 


Join CruisersForum Today

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 03-07-2008, 19:22   #1
cruiser

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Brecon, Wales
Boat: St Francis 50 on order
Posts: 269
Leopard 46 V FP 48

Has anyone out there any experience of sailing these two boat the Leopard 46 and/or the FP Salina 48?

How do both perform in light winds, heavy winds, sail to windward etc.

Any first hand experience of either boat in any regard would be welcome.
__________________

__________________
Gludy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2008, 13:50   #2
Registered User
 
freetime's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Posts: 685
Images: 2
Why just between leopard 46 and f-p 48? Do you want to buy a new one or do you compare 2 used specific boats.

Tell us what you want from the catamaran.

The leopard is not a fastcat...or is it?
__________________

__________________
freetime is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2008, 14:22   #3
cruiser

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Brecon, Wales
Boat: St Francis 50 on order
Posts: 269
What I want

I would like a cat that can manage a VMG .... a planned voyage speed of about 10 knots.

I want it to be spacious and luxuriuos and with all the mod cons from washing machine, dishwasher, radar, etc etc.

It must be able to be sailed by a couple.

It must be able to safely dry out in drying hrabours etc.

It must have a long range even under engines of at least 1000Nm

It must provide as much green power as possible.

It must be real easy to move into very difficult marina berths even when there is a decent wind and do so without anyone needing to jump off before the boat is secured.

And .... I suppose above all, it must capture my imagination and heart.

I am used to power boats and can sort the wheat from the chafe. I have been horrified by both my experience and the experience of others with $2m boats. In order to remove the rocker cover to check tappet clearance on one $2m boat you had to rip out all the fixed furniture in the saloon, rip up the glued carpet and throw it away, then in putting it back have to apply new veneer etc - that was on a 2004 boat considered top of the market ..... so I took a few years but I ended up understanding that market.

Now I am in a new world of sailing cats where people tell me that you can plan on an 8.5 knot VMG towards your destination with a Lagoon 500 - where Fountaine Pagot are the one of few production cats that publish polar charts only to discover that such charts are meaningless!

Its a bewildering world and I do not want to make a mistake. I have set myself 3 months to decide which boat top go for and so I learn every day.

I compared one against the other on this thread because I hoped it would bring out some points I could learn from.

Any boat I buy will be a compromise - I just do not want to make a mistake and I am flyhing all over the place trying to ensure that I do not.

I hope that explains a bit more
__________________
Gludy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2008, 14:48   #4
Registered User

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Vancouver, Can.
Boat: Woods 40' catamaran
Posts: 277
10 knots VMG is very hard to do for the biggest cruising cats. That's > 240 mile days.

You might get 10 knots from time to time with both those boats, but to average 10 knots you're going to have to be hitting lots of 15 knots.

Look at the ARC rally course records (~2700 n.mile course) , all set by big racing monohulls (faster than all the cruising catamarans), with fully crewed and very motivated skippers. They will be flying spinnaker all the way.

World Cruising Club: ARC results
Results -> ARC Course Record ->

1998 Sydney 60 13d 2hr = 8.6 knots
2000 Open 50 12d 18hr = 8.8
2002 Farr 65 11d 23h = 9.4
2004 Volvo 60 11d 13h = 9.75

Ain't no way a typical cruising cat is faster than a Volvo 60....

A Gunboat 60 might be close or a bit faster than a Volvo 60 but not with a typical cruising crew.

Your expectations are not reasonable for speed; the rest is achievable.
__________________
Evan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2008, 14:54   #5
cruiser

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Brecon, Wales
Boat: St Francis 50 on order
Posts: 269
So how about the FastCat?

It seems that the FastCat can get that 10 knots VMG.

I always understood Cats were faster than mono hull - of course the racing mono should be compared to the racing cat. Were their any racing cats in any Arc?
__________________
Gludy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2008, 15:20   #6
Registered User
 
Nordic cat's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Denmark
Boat: FP Tobago 35
Posts: 721
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gludy View Post
It seems that the FastCat can get that 10 knots VMG.

I always understood Cats were faster than mono hull - of course the racing mono should be compared to the racing cat. Were their any racing cats in any Arc?

Gludys, as I mentioned on the other thread, "Beware of...."

Here is the log of Gideons trip across the Atlantic, I haven't done the calculation of the average for the whole trip, but the average for one of the faster legs has been calculated by the author of the document, and it is a VMG of 6,45 knots. (St.Helena to Barbados leg)


http://web.archive.org/web/200505041...Miami09-02.pdf

Look at the comments around jan 24.

Of nearly 100 entries not more than 10% show speeds of more than 9 knots.

These are the hard facts, explanations will surely be available, draw your own conclusions......

Using a waterline length of 43 ft, hull speed is 1.34 x SQRT 43.5 = 8.83 kts.

So 6.45 knots (VMG) is around 72% of hull speed, which is around par for the course on a light boat in cruising mode.


A performance cruising cat will give you a comfortable and safe journey, but unless you have a skilled crew on board, and really push it, don't expect much faster times than on a fast monohull, especially on downwind passages. Reaching, will give the cat a larger advantage.

Regards

Alan
__________________
Nordic cat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2008, 15:54   #7
cruiser

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Brecon, Wales
Boat: St Francis 50 on order
Posts: 269
Hull speed

Please understand that I am grateful for you taking your time with helpful comments so whilst I may debate what you say it is in the spirit of just trying to find the truth.

First of all the hull speed factor is 1.34 for a typical width of hull i.e a typical bean/wl length ratio. It does not apply to narrower hulls which basically have a higher factor than 1.34. Otherwise no matter how you pushed a cat with more and more power you would hardly ever exceed say 10 per cent past its hull speed.

Secondly according to the log you gave the link for the average speed over the entire 8032 Nm was 8.81 knots - am I missing something?
__________________
Gludy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2008, 16:02   #8
Registered User

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Tortola
Posts: 700
Images: 1
Send a message via Yahoo to bvimatelot Send a message via Skype™ to bvimatelot
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nordic cat View Post
Using a waterline length of 43 ft, hull speed is 1.34 x SQRT 43.5 = 8.83 kts.
Maximum Theoretical Hull Speed equation above is for monohulls, I believe. There isnt a M T H S for catamarans - they just go faster as the wind picks up. Rob James in his book worked out an equation but it applied to cats with a certain hull width/overall beam ratio (I cant remember the details) and he admitted that it wasnt terribly accurate.

Tony
__________________
bvimatelot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2008, 16:22   #9
cruiser

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Brecon, Wales
Boat: St Francis 50 on order
Posts: 269
Rowing boats

In the Oxford/Cambridge boat race the rowing boats are very long and slim and travel well past their 1.34 ratio hull speed because of it.

Once a boat reaches its hull speed even a large increase in power will provide hardly any extra speed. Its a speed brick wall. So cats must have higher hulls speeds than the 1.34 formulae indicates.
__________________
Gludy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2008, 17:00   #10
Registered User
 
Nordic cat's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Denmark
Boat: FP Tobago 35
Posts: 721
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gludy View Post
Please understand that I am grateful for you taking your time with helpful comments so whilst I may debate what you say it is in the spirit of just trying to find the truth.

First of all the hull speed factor is 1.34 for a typical width of hull i.e a typical bean/wl length ratio. It does not apply to narrower hulls which basically have a higher factor than 1.34. Otherwise no matter how you pushed a cat with more and more power you would hardly ever exceed say 10 per cent past its hull speed.

Secondly according to the log you gave the link for the average speed over the entire 8032 Nm was 8.81 knots - am I missing something?
I agree with the fact that one can not just simply use the 1.34 factor for narrow hulled vessels, I just used it as a generic "hull speed" that most people use. There will in fact always be a "resistance hump" there but the size of the hump varies with beam-wlLwl ratio.

The 8.81 average speed statement is not a result of the tabled values above it.

Have a closer look at the individual entries. The VMG is stated in these, the 8,81 is a claim.

Durban to Capetown: 93 hours with 51.5 hours at 9 knots or more. Remember that there is at least 2 knots of following current for a good part of this journey.



Let's analyse the Atlantic crossing.

Capetown to St. Helena: 22 hours at 9 knots or more or in mileage it is 213 out of 1689 miles or 12.6%
1689 miles in 245 hrs gives 6.89 average

St. Helena to Barbados: 36 hours at 9 knots out of 519 hrs. or 6.9% of the time.
3608 miles in 519 hours gives 6.95 average.

Barbados to BVI: No speeds 9 or above.
433 miles in 72 hours gives 6.01 average.


BVI to Miami: No speeds at 9 or above.
850 miles in 181.5 hours gives 4.68 average.


Capetown to Miami in summary:

Mileage: 6580 miles
Time : 1017.5 hours.

Average speed (VMG) is: 6.46 knots

To average 8.81 knots you need to sail 21.1% further or 1389 miles.




Gludys, as you can see, there is quite a way up to your required VMG, which is not realistic even on a 50 footer.

I reiterate, quoted speeds are often optimistic and boat weights pessimistic.

See Evan post above, once again, these are facts, let's stick to them when we actually have some!

Regards

Alan
__________________
Nordic cat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2008, 17:41   #11
cruiser

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Brecon, Wales
Boat: St Francis 50 on order
Posts: 269
Your opinions

Very interesting/

OK so if even a FastCat gives only about 6.5 knots or so, what planned speed could I expect from the FP48? Surely that would be even slower??

I am trying to establish the range of planned voyage speeds that cats can offer. Its seems that there is little difference between them on your figures?
__________________
Gludy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2008, 18:14   #12
Registered User
 
Nordic cat's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Denmark
Boat: FP Tobago 35
Posts: 721
It mostly boils down to the SailArea/Displacement ratio which will probably be 70-80% of the speed picture, the rest is beam, hullshape, windage, rig efficiency. Use cruising displacement not the official marketing statements....

So do i reckon a 42 ft Lwl Fastcat will probably be the same speed across the Atlantic ocean as a 48 ft Lwl FP? Given the typical cruising crew of 2-4 people who aren't out to win a race under the same conditions, I reckon they would be within 10 -15% of each other, probably closer.

From Panama across the Pacific, my money would be on the high SA/D boat to keep moving in the light stuff, there could easily be 50% difference.

The key thing is to be able to sail well and fast in light air, when it's blowing 25 knots, you would probably ease off so the difference won't be as pronounced.

If you look at the speed potential, then the fastcat will easily outperform the FP in reasonably flat seas and a good wind from the best angle. The Fastcat might do 15-18 and the FP around 12-13 I expect. I haven't sailed any of these boats, but have sailed other FP's. A new 40 footer didn't go over 9 in 25 knots on flat water, 6 men onboard otherwise empty.

It's not always clear cut....

If I load a ton on my 35 footer (5 tons lightship), I lose between 0.7 and 1.0 knots easily, so 20% more displacement will lose me around 12-15% in speed in 12-16 knots TWS.

regards

Alan
__________________
Nordic cat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2008, 18:49   #13
jzk
Registered User

Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 639
The Leopard 46 is a good performer, but I am hearing that they are having problems with the first wave of them.

Hull speed is relevant for displacement boats, which catamarans are for awhile. Once hull speed is acheived, the boat must start going on a plane. This is much easier in a catamaran as they don't have heavy keels like monohulls.
__________________
jzk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2008, 00:23   #14
Marine Service Provider
 
fastcat435's Avatar

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Amstelveen Netherlands
Boat: FastCat 445 Green Motion
Posts: 1,649
Images: 10
Send a message via Skype™ to fastcat435
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nordic cat View Post
I agree with the fact that one can not just simply use the 1.34 factor for narrow hulled vessels, I just used it as a generic "hull speed" that most people use. There will in fact always be a "resistance hump" there but the size of the hump varies with beam-wlLwl ratio.

The 8.81 average speed statement is not a result of the tabled values above it.

Have a closer look at the individual entries. The VMG is stated in these, the 8,81 is a claim.

Durban to Capetown: 93 hours with 51.5 hours at 9 knots or more. Remember that there is at least 2 knots of following current for a good part of this journey.



Let's analyse the Atlantic crossing.

Capetown to St. Helena: 22 hours at 9 knots or more or in mileage it is 213 out of 1689 miles or 12.6%
1689 miles in 245 hrs gives 6.89 average

St. Helena to Barbados: 36 hours at 9 knots out of 519 hrs. or 6.9% of the time.
3608 miles in 519 hours gives 6.95 average.

Barbados to BVI: No speeds 9 or above.
433 miles in 72 hours gives 6.01 average.


BVI to Miami: No speeds at 9 or above.
850 miles in 181.5 hours gives 4.68 average.


Capetown to Miami in summary:

Mileage: 6580 miles
Time : 1017.5 hours.

Average speed (VMG) is: 6.46 knots

To average 8.81 knots you need to sail 21.1% further or 1389 miles.




Gludys, as you can see, there is quite a way up to your required VMG, which is not realistic even on a 50 footer.

I reiterate, quoted speeds are often optimistic and boat weights pessimistic.

See Evan post above, once again, these are facts, let's stick to them when we actually have some!

Regards

Alan
The original speeds given where taken from a sat tracker each 12 hours and although it gives a correct location of the vessel it by no means gives the speed.
If I recall well ( and my memory is Good ) we had to tack all the way from Barbados to Miami with the wind on the nose and the actual covered distance was double that of the direct routing . Also the stops made in St Helena , Barbados , and Tortola where not taken into account when the post was made as you can clearly see .
The total distance covered was acually almost 1800 more than the direct course as give by the sattelite tracker. after having calculated the correct distances traveled by log we recalculated the total average speed to 8.81
We did not ever have 2 knots following current , the best we have seen was 1 knot and that was for 6 days only , in front of brazil we had a counter current of 1 knot and the same the whole trip from Barbados to Miami

Greetings
__________________
fastcat435 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2008, 01:42   #15
cruiser

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Brecon, Wales
Boat: St Francis 50 on order
Posts: 269
The truth is in the eating

Those posts raise more points.

I will be trying out the boats of interest to me. Those trials tend to be in just what happens to be the weather at the time. I hope they will demonstrate to me first hand the difference between the boats. I will be sailing in a Fastcat this month but within 2 months should have sailed in most of my short list. I am trying to proceed through the list as fast as possible as time counts for me.

I accept that loading a cat reduces performance but then so must building a light cat with carbon mast etc etc increase performance. You cannot have it one way and not the other

On the ARC the Lagoon 440 won - the problem is that there are many factors but Lagoons tended to dominate the top position yet my own impression of Lagoons was that they are not fast boats at all. Also the Broadblue 385 beat the Lagoon 500!!

I am not sure if cats actually plane above the 1.34 formulae hull speed- is it not that they just have a higher hull speed and the lighter they are the higher the hull speed?
__________________

__________________
Gludy is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
leopard, leopard 46

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Leopard 46: Leopard 46 Adaero Robertson & Caine 30 29-03-2016 17:10
Leopard 38: Leopard 38 redbreast Robertson & Caine 10 01-12-2012 07:29
Leopard 42 glassboat Multihull Sailboats 17 04-09-2010 05:53
Corsair 24 vs Leopard 46... esse0esse Multihull Sailboats 0 20-01-2008 11:36
Leopard 40 marisol Multihull Sailboats 16 06-03-2006 19:20



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:21.


Google+
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Social Knowledge Networks
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

ShowCase vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.