Do Multihullers Ever go Back?

[weavis]

Originally Posted by weavis

Well yes.
Its not a catamaran either. I was reading this earlier strangely enough.

And I do think, we need to get back to REASONABLE priced Multihulls vs Cats in our discussions simply because this is discussing vessels WAY above the average persons payscale.

I cant afford a $500K Cat or boat unless I sell up real estate. Im pretty sure MOST people cant lay their hands on 200K CASH either without liquidating something...... so we need to define a parameter for price.

If I had an Outremer or Gunboat, I dont just have a Catamaran.....I would have the latest technology and vessel design available that is encompassed in a Catamaran, and for that reason is faster than most other things as a liveaboard or even as a sailing vessel.

There is also another disadvantage which has been mentioned in purchasing a Cat, and that is the cost is triple or quadruple for a similar quality Monohull.

Im not seeing that a quantifiying answer about Cats vs Monohulls can be made on anything except in the individual REASON/s a person buys a Catamaran as opposed to a Monohull.

Ill go first.
I would buy a Cat for:

• Stability at anchor.
• Width
• Privacy and space.
• No keeling
• No stepping down into Saloon.
• and finally....... I think they look $%#$@ Cool.

And to answer the OP question...... In a straight choice, I would stick with Catamarans forever as my PERSONAL choice of liveaboard.

But Im still gonna thrash around in #3 nephews monohull around UK waters and have fun with it.

[tomfl]

Originally Posted by Polux

Most of the time if it looks fast it is fast

SNIP

If you see a cat that is sleek, has low windage and curved surfaces (to diminish windage) than it is almost for sure a fast one

SNIP

Since we are talking about sail boats the first hint a boat is fast is it's sails.

I would guess a big screecher on a bow sprit would be the first clew a boat would be fast. Next would be a modern looking square top. Not trying to get into a discussion about the merits of a fractional rig but a lot of race boats seem to fly a screecher and jib and try and get the two slots working together.

All that being said and all else being equal a tri is going to be faster than a cat and once you get over 40-50 feet or so the tri will have the ability to carry the load needed to cruise. Most likely the cat will be easier to sail short handed, and almost for sure the tri will be wetter.

There is also the consideration of finding a boat. It is not at all hard to find a C24, C27, C28, C31 at prices many folks can afford; not just to buy but also to store and maintain. These multihulls hold their value well, will do what most folks that are not full time live aboards are looking for, and are easy to sail at speeds faster than almost anything else around.

Once you get past the day sailing/ weekend and a few times a year cruising you are limiting the market to a lot of folks who are looking for a hard price point or those who have the big bucks. The limited market means not a lot of builders are supplying that market. Sure there are some boats but you have to look long and hard to find them.

[weavis]

Originally Posted by tomfl

There is also the consideration of finding a boat. It is not at all hard to find a C24, C27, C28, C31 at prices many folks can afford; not just to buy but also to store and maintain. These multihulls hold their value well, will do what most folks that are not full time live aboards are looking for, and are easy to sail at speeds faster than almost anything else around.
.

For me, the ride is too wet. I love sailing and love the speed of a trimaran but dont want to be in Northern Waters in full wet gear and heating pads.....
Ive been sailing in winter in the North of England when the deck started to freeze and the heater in the cabin would not stay alight because the diesel was solid.
The Tri's are put away over Autumn and Winter for all except the most hardy.
But your right. They are trailerable.

[tomfl]

Originally Posted by weavis

Hammerhead 54 Trimaran High Performance Cruising Catamarans and Trimarans by Chris White Designs

I really like Chris White designs, in the same class as Ian Farrier. While some of the Farrier designs (the Corsairs) are production boats I really don't consider any thing else to be a production boat.

I really like the F39 I recently saw, but it was home build and the builder did a great job. But the builder/owner claimed, and I agree, all these boats require quality seamanship from the crew. And by crew I mean a live hand on every sheet and tiller when you are sailing faster than 15 knots.

Would I like one of these boats. Your darn tootin. But check out some of the threads here about going now as opposed to having a five or ten year plan. Even if one has $US300,000 to buy one of these boats how long would they have wait to find one for sale.

I spent some time looking for my boat. While it is not perfect it does meet a lot of the criteria I set when looking for a boat. Each of us probably has different criteria for the perfect boat and will have to accept compromises.

[tomfl]

Originally Posted by weavis

For me, the ride is too wet. I love sailing and love the speed of a trimaran but dont want to be in Northern Waters in full wet gear and heating pads.....
Ive been sailing in winter in the North of England when the deck started to freeze and the heater in the cabin would not stay alight because the diesel was solid.
The Tri's are put away over Autumn and Winter for all except the most hardy.
But your right. They are trailerable.

Almost everyone agrees boats used for cold weather sailing and boats for warm weather sailing are different animals. If I was rounding the great capes I would want a sixty foot plus steel hull monohull.

But there a lot more folks who sail in warm weather on nice days and the Fboats are great for that. They are wet when you get over ten or twelve knots, but many boats are wet in those conditions.

Not sure there a lot of folks who would go sailing if the diesel was solid, but that is just me.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by deckofficer

****** isn't a one off either and I hope I'm lucky enough to be in a position to buy the next one that hits the market.

That's a great boat. I don't find it very beautiful but I could get used to it

[Southern Star]

I am unsure what much of this has to do with the OP's topic - "Do multihullers ever go back?" Seems to me as if this thread has turned into yet another tiresome 'monos are better than multis, multis are better than monos' discussion.

Does it matter if most of the new cats sold are viewed by mono owners (or even some other multi-owners) as 'condomarans'? No more than it matters if many of the new, high-volume production monos sold could be perjoratively called 'monomarans' - you know, monohulls that are trying to emulate some of the popular features of catamarans, at the expense of compromising some aspects of monohll seaworthiness, such as:
- higher freeboard (and compromised ability to tack, anchor, or reduce speed downwind under bare poles in heavy conditions);
- greater beam and relatively flat underbodies aft (that increase inverse stability and the tendancy to pound to windward);
- larger, less well protected cockpits (increasing the risk of injury in heavy conditions, especially when heeling);
- higher, brighter deck salons (which further increase windage and the center of gravity of the boat, to say nothing of having larger portlights that are at risk of imploding in a knock-down - something which is much more likely in a mono than a multi);

Please understand, I am not criticizing these modern monohull designs per se. They will be incredibly well suited to the needs of many, if not most of their purchasers, including charter companies. The point is that all boat designs are a compromise. What is important to one person may be unimportant to another: priorities vary.

The number of monohull owners who have switched to multihulls is huge (and no doubt includes the majority of multihull owners on this site). The number that have gone in the opposite direction - from a multihull to a monohull is....judging from this thread, pretty small. I suppose this could mean that those who made (and are sticking with) the move from mono to multi are lacking in knowledge and the capability of undertaking a performance/accomdation analysis that is possessed by, or that can be performed by all monohull owners. Well, all except those who owned monos and then inexplicably moved on to a multi.

I suppose it could mean that they are incapable of performing a cost/benefit analysis with respect to their purchases. I suppose it could even mean that they are incapable of properly analyzing their intended use for their vessel and then buying accordingly. Alternatively, it could be that while they owned both monos and multis, they have never actually sailed them. Or anchored them. Or motored them. Or lived in one for any period.

It could be that they made a faulty analysis of the risks posed in sailing a multi (as the risk of loss of a monohull is actually much less). Of course, if that is the case, it would seem that insurers and actuaries have made the same faulty analysis (as the insurance premiums on boats of the same value/condition are comparable).

Ultimately, however, a simple question was asked in this thread. From some of the defensive posts here by monohullers, am I to take it that you are at least conceding that few who buy multihulls move back to monos? And that while individual preferences/needs may vary, there must be valid reasons beyond the incompetence/lack of experience/lack of analytical capabilites of their owners?

I am not saying that a monohull is not a better boat for you and your set of priorities. It likely is. But can you not at least concede the same for those who have chosen to move from mono to multi and stayed there?

Brad

[Polux]

Originally Posted by tomfl

Since we are talking about sail boats the first hint a boat is fast is it's sails.

I would guess a big screecher on a bow sprit would be the first clew a boat would be fast. Next would be a modern looking square top. Not trying to get into a discussion about the merits of a fractional rig but a lot of race boats seem to fly a screecher and jib and try and get the two slots working together.

All that being said and all else being equal a tri is going to be faster than a cat and once you get over 40-50 feet or so the tri will have the ability to carry the load needed to cruise. Most likely the cat will be easier to sail short handed, and almost for sure the tri will be wetter.

...

You are generalizing too much. You can carry the sail you want if the multihull is fat and heavy will not be fast. A much lighter slimmer multihull carrying less sail will be way faster.

Regarding the looking sharp in a cat normally meaning a very fast boat, that's because the designers are not dumb and are not going to diminish the beam on the hulls, and give it less windage at the cost of valuable space for nothing. Space is a commodity and the only reason that can lead to have less when you can have more is a better performance.

Regarding the cat being easier to sail short handed I don't get it, a trimaran is more forgiving than a cat, all things being equal (size, weight, beam) and regarding being wetter, it depends on the design. I bet this one is quite dry.

Neel 45 Trimaran in Miami - YouTube

[44'cruisingcat]

Originally Posted by Southern Star

I am unsure what much of this has to do with the OP's topic - "Do multihullers ever go back?" Seems to me as if this thread has turned into yet another tiresome 'monos are better than multis, multis are better than monos' discussion.

Does it matter if most of the new cats sold are viewed by mono owners (or even some other multi-owners) as 'condomarans'? No more than it matters if many of the new, high-volume production monos sold could be perjoratively called 'monomarans' - you know, monohulls that are trying to emulate some of the popular features of catamarans, at the expense of compromising some aspects of monohll seaworthiness, such as:
- higher freeboard (and compromised ability to tack, anchor, or reduce speed downwind under bare poles in heavy conditions);
- greater beam and relatively flat underbodies aft (that increase inverse stability and the tendancy to pound to windward);
- larger, less well protected cockpits (increasing the risk of injury in heavy conditions, especially when heeling);
- higher, brighter deck salons (which further increase windage and the center of gravity of the boat, to say nothing of having larger portlights that are at risk of imploding in a knock-down - something which is much more likely in a mono than a multi);

Please understand, I am not criticizing these modern monohull designs per se. They will be incredibly well suited to the needs of many, if not most of their purchasers, including charter companies. The point is that all boat designs are a compromise. What is important to one person may be unimportant to another: priorities vary.

The number of monohull owners who have switched to multihulls is huge (and no doubt includes the majority of multihull owners on this site). The number that have gone in the opposite direction - from a multihull to a monohull is....judging from this thread, pretty small. I suppose this could mean that those who made (and are sticking with) the move from mono to multi are lacking in knowledge and the capability of undertaking a performance/accomdation analysis that is possessed by, or that can be performed by all monohull owners. Well, all except those who owned monos and then inexplicably moved on to a multi.

I suppose it could mean that they are incapable of performing a cost/benefit analysis with respect to their purchases. I suppose it could even mean that they are incapable of properly analyzing their intended use for their vessel and then buying accordingly. Alternatively, it could be that while they owned both monos and multis, they have never actually sailed them. Or anchored them. Or motored them. Or lived in one for any period.

It could be that they made a faulty analysis of the risks posed in sailing a multi (as the risk of loss of a monohull is actually much less). Of course, if that is the case, it would seem that insurers and actuaries have made the same faulty analysis (as the insurance premiums on boats of the same value/condition are comparable).

Ultimately, however, a simple question was asked in this thread. From some of the defensive posts here by monohullers, am I to take it that you are at least conceding that few who buy multihulls move back to monos? And that while individual preferences/needs may vary, there must be valid reasons beyond the incompetence/lack of experience/lack of analytical capabilites of their owners?

I am not saying that a monohull is not a better boat for you and your set of priorities. It likely is. But can you not at least concede the same for those who have chosen to move from mono to multi and stayed there?

Brad

Great post. And the answer to your final question is, in many cases, no they can't.

[Canibul]

It might be my own misconception, but doesn't it seem that the majority of the "hard core" monohull evangelists have never actually owned a catamaran?

[downunder]

Originally Posted by Canibul

It might be my own misconception, but doesn't it seem that the majority of the "hard core" monohull evangelists have never actually owned a catamaran?

That does not seem to preclude them from wanting one either so it seems.

[SaltyMonkey]

NO i don't need 4 cabins and a wheel nailed to a wall to steer. I just don't.

[SV THIRD DAY]

The dirty little secret most of us mono owners never want to admit in public is that the vast majority of cruisers (like 90%) would be cruising on Cats if they were the same price as monos!
The price keeps monos being build, bought and cruised! We have a 50ft floating condo of a mono (A Hudson Force 50) but it still doesn't have the space or living aboard comforts of a Lagoon 380. Bring down the price of a Cat to the same price of monos and besides the die hards (which will no doubt flip out at my comment here) it’s game over for monohulls.

There....someone had to say it......

[weavis]

Originally Posted by SV THIRD DAY

The dirty little secret most of us mono owners never want to admit in public is that the vast majority of cruisers (like 90%) would be cruising on Cats if they were the same price as monos!
The price keeps monos being build, bought and cruised! We have a 50ft floating condo of a mono (A Hudson Force 50) but it still doesn't have the space or living aboard comforts of a Lagoon 380. Bring down the price of a Cat to the same price of monos and besides the die hards (which will no doubt flip out at my comment here) it’s game over for monohulls.

There....someone had to say it......

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

I love you man.!!

[smj]

Originally Posted by SaltyMonkey

NO i don't need 4 cabins and a wheel nailed to a wall to steer. I just don't.

My guess is a wheel mounted directly in front of your keyboard would suit you quite well!