Do Multihullers Ever go Back?

[geoleo]

Originally Posted by u4ea32

If I had unlimited funds, I would only sail very high performance multihulls. When I go on OPBs, its virtually always a very high performance multihull.

The thing is, I do have a specific, finite amount of money, to buy, to operate, to maintain, to and to live on.

In order to live and cruise, there is an amount of volume, and an amount of payload mass: living space and weight of people, clothes, dinghies, fuel, water, food, equipment, ...

The cheapest way to enclose that volume, and provide the water plane area to absorb weight changes, is a monohull. The closer to a sphere, the better: minimize surface area (construction material), maximize moment of inertia, and therefore minimize the amount of structural material. Therefore, the least material, the least weight, the best performance potential.

Yes, performance is dominated by weight, far more than shape.

We all know that most cruising boats are pigs to sail. Way, way to heavy, too much wetted surface, too little sail area, and generally horrible helm feel. Nice helm feel is exemplified by Soling or Tornado: light, responsive helm, where the performance changes quickly, so its fun to sail, instead of just a slow, expensive, uncomfortable way to get around.

Also, the secret of sailing multihulls in big seaways is to keep only one hull in the water. That really drives the load and cost through the roof, and eliminates any sort of "comfortable cruising."

So, while if one was comparing off-the-shell cruising boats, such as Gunboats, Lagoons, Farriers, Jenneaus, Hunters, Hinkleys, and so on, they all are such horrible trade-offs: Gunboats and Farriers are fast and fun, but only if you have an unlimited budget and/or don't take anyone or anything with you; The others -- mono or multi -- are sluggish pigs.

Therefore, for me, a mono is the way to go. But a custom mono, not one derived from a race boat (such as a retired TP52, say), or designed to look like a race boat but handle like a barge (all production monos and multis this side of, say, a Gunboat).

Custom mono so its very light, so the loads are very low, so its very fun, yet can still carry the volume and weight needed, at the lowest cost to build, own, and sail.

La de da

[tomfl]

Originally Posted by downunder

SNIP

Some generic cat performance numbers to consider
Beam to length ratio
Less than 10.5 Slow- go buy a mono
10.5 – 11.5 Baseline for good sailing
12.5 - 14.0 Mod to high performance
14.0 – 20 Racing cat
Bruce numbers
1 Slow
1.3 – 1.4 Good cruising
1.5 – 1.9 Very fast

Wondering about the source of this

[markpierce]

Gee. How many bedrooms/berths does one need? And they are mostly configured for couples. Good for short-term party outings, I suppose. Are they any good for long-range cruises?

[downunder]

Originally Posted by tomfl

Wondering about the source of this

Acquired some time ago.

http://www.freeflowcatamarans.com.au/FF46.aspx

Others who are expert might be able to comment.(need Barry ) I am not one. Seems reasonably valid to me. Quite a number of cats have seen a documented lift in performance after adding length to the sterns.

Seawind 1000 for one. Weight is one of the other factors and one can also expect the Seawind's have improved their performance with lighter weight by moving to vacuum bagging technology.

Charles Kantor's numbers in his book Cruising Catamaran Communique are different and more general. His rule of thumb for fineness ratio in catamarans .

16:1 Race boats
10:1 racer/cruiser (could go either way depending on other factors0
8:1 cruiser
4:1 monohull

Numbers don't really bother me but some think they are everything particually those with a racing bent..

A comment of Kantor's

"Obviously even a small increase in average speed would be of an enormous advantage. The reality is that any of the presently available production cruising catamarans can increase that 5 knot monohull speed easily to six knots and possibly to seven without sacrificing one iota of comfort or convenience. Quite the contrary. Because the catamaran does not heel and is more sea kindly, you can go faster in rough seas and be far more comfortable than your fellow cruisers on their monohulls."

I would think those numbers of his are possibly somewhat out of date and more relevant to the traditional older bluewater designs as certainly some of the newer productions designs (Bendi's etc) have changed the numbers somewhat.

Numbers are just an indicator and a long way down my personal list as I search for a cat to live aboard and cruise.

[SaltyMonkey]

Originally Posted by markpierce

Gee. How many bedrooms/berths does one need?

Thats my problem with cats. Too many bedrooms/berths. I just need one for me and a guest. His and hers.

Like this Mahe 36:



Only with this too:

[markpierce]

Originally Posted by SaltyMonkey

Thats my problem with cats. Too many bedrooms/berths. I just need one for me and a guest. His and hers.

Like this Mahe 36:



Only with this too:

Great for two couples. But how about singles without partners? Or is that what's about single sleeping bags? (Did plenty of that backpacking.)

[44'cruisingcat]

Originally Posted by u4ea32

Also, the secret of sailing multihulls in big seaways is to keep only one hull in the water. That really drives the load and cost through the roof, and eliminates any sort of "comfortable cruising."

The internet is SUCH a great source of information! But surely it would be more comfortable with no hulls in the water?

[Factor]

Originally Posted by minaret

[[when talking to 44c]]Yea, see, that's the thing. I just don't believe you. Never known anyone to make a passage like that and arrive with the interior and all their bedding and clothing soaked. You keep making statements like that, and it just hurts your credibility. Let's stick with solid indesputable recorded data, like the ARC numbers you refuse to discuss.

I have spoken with 44C (and looked over his boat - what an excellent job), and spoken with another yachtie who did the same trip at the same time. He confirms 44C's account, still think its okay to call him a liar? Perhaps an apology is in order.

[SaltyMonkey]

How about a steel cat? any? seems cheaper to make.

[Canibul]

was that a French design for threesomes in each bow? With two foot fetishers in the forepeaks...

[Factor]

Originally Posted by SaltyMonkey

How about a steel cat? any? seems cheaper to make.

Seriously?

[tomfl]

Originally Posted by 44'cruisingcat

The internet is SUCH a great source of information! But surely it would be more comfortable with no hulls in the water?

Thread winner.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by 44'cruisingcat

The internet is SUCH a great source of information! But surely it would be more comfortable with no hulls in the water?

Off course, like the America's cup cats, well over the waves

[SaltyMonkey]

Originally Posted by Factor

Seriously?

lets try

[tomfl]

Originally Posted by SaltyMonkey

How about a steel cat? any? seems cheaper to make.

Been there, done that.

IMG_0367.JPG photo - Tom Rowland photos at pbase.com

http://www.pbase.com/tommy2guns/image/155618496.jpg