Light vs Heavy boats

[Paul L]

Originally Posted by Alchemist

On my return to NZ from Fiji last year I went past a light 38 footer (MINES A HEAVY 25 T FERRO 45FOOTER) wind 20-kn+ fwd of beam for 7 days. he commented that they where sick of the pounding I hadn't noticed any at all .heavy=comfort=well rested happy crew=bigger margin of safety

Alchemist,
You are comparing a 45 ft boat to 38 ft boat. That is a lot of LOD difference, so I'm not sure it is very meaningful. In the conditions you describe, 20+kts of wind in front of the beam, 1,000+ mile passage, open ocean seas, I'll do just fine in my lighter boat too while carrying a lot less sail.

Tom has it nailed. Some like Vanilla and some like Chocolate, and there isn't a right answer or a catchy phrase that is accurate that says heavy is the way to go all the time.

Paul L

[Tom967]

I came down from St. Pete to Key West ..Wind coming out of the NNE..between 20-25mph...I was on a broad reach, port tack..with 10 ft seas off the port stern quarter..my average speed a la GPS..7.5 knots..

I was under full sail.. mainsail..high clue yankee and staysail...reefing would have been dictated if excessive rudder was required to maintain course.."A lighter boat would have needed to reef"

My boat 40 LOA...36 LWL.. Beam 14 ft..Modified full keel..disp 23,500# draft 5.5 ft...Heavy scantlings...Male molded custom hull..no liners..

Not bad on the wind and that's where good design comes in.

If a smaller lighter lighter boat could do better...God bless em..

Comfort factor...Things down below rather civil...

I just exemplified.. to point out certain things..If the wind would have been light..coming out of the south...on a beat in light air..a lighter displacement boat with fin keel would have performed better..So the key is to evaluate prevailing expected sailing conditions and your preferences.. A weekender..around the buoys..maybe a few racers..then a light displacement vessel. would seem preferable....Cruising..particularly blue water cruising..heavy displacement preferred..where performance is not a high priority. as opposed to comfort.

[Paul L]

Originally Posted by Tom967

...
I was under full sail.. mainsail..high clue yankee and staysail...reefing would have been dictated if excessive rudder was required to maintain course.."A lighter boat would have needed to reef"
...

You say this like it is a good thing. The lighter boat would have been able to make the same speed while carrying less sail. Easier for the crew to manage, less strain on the rig, safer in the gusts. There is nothing wrong with reducing sail

Paul L

[Captain Mark]

Having owned both light boats 32' and 41' Sloops and now a 51' Ketch I would have to agree that a) it's all about preference, b) depends on what type of sailing you are planning on doing and c) that all of these issues have been covered in the previous posts.

I would like to say that the one valuable lesson I have learned about "weight" is... where the weight is located. Several (not all) of the "light" boats with fin keels place the weight higher in the boat. For instance, my Beneteau 411 had the engine compartment behind the companionway stairs, all the plumbing for ventilation, etc. were also above the salon deck level in the bulkheads, etc. This made for a LOT of moving at sea, at anchor...

A few years ago at the boat show in Annapolis I boarded a Cabo Rico 45' Cutter... what a wonderful boat! Couldn't afford one, but got to talk for quite a while with the owner of the boat and also with the owner of the Company and his wife. After a couple of days sitting on that boat, talking to everyone and poking my nose into every nook and cranny... I noticed that the items I mentioned before were placed much lower in the boat. Hmmm!

This surely solved the sea-kindliness issue, but it also solved another great problem... more storage space, a) because there wasn't a lot of hoses, wires, etc. needing to run through the lockers and b) the boat could support more weight higher in the structure without sacrificing the ride!

Now since I couldn't and still can't afford a Cabo Rico, I just started looking at older boats, and since I'm also partial to full keels or at least a modified full keel, I get the best of both worlds and it's a bit easier on the wallet.

"Attitude: The difference between a problem and an adventure!"

[Hubec]

I'm considering buying a 2002 or newer Catalina 380 (or 390/387). I'm going to be a livaboard cruiser exploring the great lakes, eastern seaboard, and caribbean, and in the future who knows... I'm sure many of you heavy boosters would tell me that this isn't a solid enough boat for me, even though it weighs 10 tons, 3.5 of which are 4' below the waterline. So I'm asking for some help, if the Catalina 380 doesn't cut it as a "serious" cruiser, what should I buy keeping in mind; I don't want to spend much more than $150k, I will NOT tolerate bumping my noggin in the salon or head (I'm 6'3", and I know from experience that an advertised 6'5" of headroom doesn't cut it), I want a fairly new boat that won't require any work and that I can expect to be reasonably trouble free, it must also be single handable.

Thanks for any helpfull advice!

[Cruisingdad]

Hubec,

Guess what? My family and I lived aboard and cruised on a Catalina 380. I now own a 400. I have weathered more storms than I can count including one hurricane (Gabrielle, which I guess officially came in as a TS... but my wind said differently).

Anyone that says you cannot do it on that boat just let me know and I will send them pictures. That boat is MADE for that. I would take a Catalina to the islands before I would take a Valiant (another boat I know fairly well). I would NOT take a Catalina across the Pacific (where I would want a Valaint, which it was made for).

Why dont you start up a new thread or PM me with questions so we do not hijack this thread. Great boat. Lots of super memories. Kept me and my family safe - it would you too.

- CD

PS My parent are now shopping for a boat too. Guess what they want... a 380.

[Tom967]

Originally Posted by Paul L

You say this like it is a good thing. The lighter boat would have been able to make the same speed while carrying less sail. Easier for the crew to manage, less strain on the rig, safer in the gusts. There is nothing wrong with reducing sail

Paul L

The point is.."remember in terms of discussion comparison"..Under those conditions..I didn't " HAVE "to reef..diminishing speed..dictated by my rudder angle, course made good.. and stability factors.."That's FACT...

What a lighter boat given those conditions.."You can only speculate",..
Might of had the poop kicked out of her and crew. regardless of sail reduction..

[Paul L]

There is nothing wrong with reefing or reducing sail. If the boat moves along well with less sail then it is easier on the boat and the crew. Having to carry a lot of sail because a boat is heavy is not a positive attribute.

Paul L

[Captain Mark]

Hubec, My first boat was a 22' Catalina on a Lake Grapevine in TX. Much smaller than the great lakes, but I loved the boat. Still out of fondness, everytime I'm at a boatshow, I tend to stop by the Catalina's to see what's new! Although my taste has changed, as have my sailing grounds, you'll have fun! It's always better to live your dream than to dream your life!

[jim lee]

I'm beginning to think that there is more than one "Light boat" definition going on here.

-jim lee

[44'cruisingcat]

Our old boat is what would be considered heavy - 40 foot and about 13 tonnes. The motion is not always what I would describe as even remotely comfortable. Even at anchor. I've been on a 50 footer that weighed a little more than 1/2 that, and it was amazingly comfortable and stable. (It did have an additional hull though)

[Tom967]

Originally Posted by Paul L

There is nothing wrong with reefing or reducing sail. If the boat moves along well with less sail then it is easier on the boat and the crew. Having to carry a lot of sail because a boat is heavy is not a positive attribute.

Paul L

It's not about HAVING to carry a lot of sail Paul...it's about sailing efficiently?

If I can efficiently carry more sail..given the conditions I'm able to make better speed..In the examble I gave you I was doing 7.5 knots...(efficiently)..."neither overpowered or underpowered"

When you reef you slow yourself down....simply by reducing sail area..your driving force..This is what a lighter boat would be (required to do) in order to sail efficiently.. given same conditions "If you are overpowered by conditions..reduce sail to efficiently make way.."

Simply said in heavy conditions, a heavier boat will outperform a lighter boat given all the dynamic factors the vessel is confronted with to sail efficiently..If you don't think this premise true..go back and look at race results of the old America's cup 12 meter races..the heavier displacemrnt vessels performed better to lighter displacement vessels in heavier conditions...Why?..Because of stability and the ability to carry more sail. Simply meaning if you have the ABILITY to carry more sail..you will outperform the lighter boat..or do better against them...other design factors irrelevent to the point not necessary to be considered.

The whole nature of sailing is to sail as efficiently as you can for your given vessel and rig..If you don't think that premise is true reduce your sail inventory to two sails...for all occasions..

[Catamount]

Originally Posted by Tom967

IWhen you reef you slow yourself down....

Tom, this is not always true. For many boats, particularly lighter boats, sailing heeled well over is not fast -- sailing flat is faster. Too much weather helm is slow -- re-balancing the sail plan to reduce weather helm is faster. In other words, often when you reef you speed yourself up!

True, for many lighter boats (mine has D/L around 200) with relatively high SA/D ratios (mine has an SA/D around 20), we might reef in conditions where heavier boats (say D/L over 300) with lower SA/D ratios (say 16) are just getting going under full sail --- BUT all our reefing has done is bring our SA/D down to be in line with that of the heavier boat under its full sail.

Regards,

Tim

[Paul L]

Tom,
One boat carrying more sail than another has very little to do with which one will be traveling toward their destination faster. If a boat that is lighter and with less wetted area has less sail up, it will still sail at its expected speed for the conditions. I'm not sure about the relevence of your argument about looking at old 12 meters. We are comparing a classic older heavy design to a modern lighter design design. There were no modern lighter designs in old 12 meter races.
There are a lot of postive attributes of a well designed heavier boat. Having to carry more sail is not one of them.

Paul L

[Tom967]

Originally Posted by Catamount

Tom, this is not always true. For many boats, particularly lighter boats, sailing heeled well over is not fast -- sailing flat is faster. Too much weather helm is slow -- re-balancing the sail plan to reduce weather helm is faster. In other words, often when you reef you speed yourself up!

True, for many lighter boats (mine has D/L around 200) with relatively high SA/D ratios (mine has an SA/D around 20), we might reef in conditions where heavier boats (say D/L over 300) with lower SA/D ratios (say 16) are just getting going under full sail --- BUT all our reefing has done is bring our SA/D down to be in line with that of the heavier boat under its full sail.

Regards,

Tim

I'm not disagreeing with your first paragraph..That's exactly why you need to reef....That's what I referenced regarding "efficiency"..That accounted in one word every thing you said....I don't know whether it was you or some else...wetted surface is a factor in the light air envelope..irrelevant in heavy air

Your sail area to displacement numbers cannot be directly proportionalized with the "logic you use"..There is no a direct correlation as the wind picks up..the factors actually become dynamically cubed..Those factors are used to determine the sail area..which is done relative to it's stability curve..You pick up stability..allowing greater sail area..2 ..ways displacement and beam..In a 25 mph sustained wind.. my example 30 hrs..I'd much prefer the 23,000# vessel to the 17,000# vessel..comfort and performance. "In that envelope"

Without going into volumes.and going into hull configurations..I brought up the 12's..so you could see for youself.

My point about the 12 meters is an empirical comparison...since they ran from 45,000 lbs to 63,000 lbs..displacement..(over a span of 50 years) with appropriate sail areas to fit formula..What you'll find to sustain my argument is this..since conditions vary from light to moderate to heavy in racing series, .The Higher displacement boats did better than lighter displacement boats..in heavier air..Why?..because they could carry more sail when the wind picked up..

This is the last I'm commenting on this subject