Mono vs. Multi - Sailing Ability

[ArtM]

Originally Posted by noelex 77

Art if you are interested in a " global cruser" you will find the facilities for a cat are limited. This is not an insurmountable problem, but is just an example of one of the compromises. I am afraid the nirvana of facilities for cat owners will be a long way off.
The majority of long distance crusing boats are monohull. Even if this was to change overnight, as you predict, the glacial change of facilities in third world countries, means that extensive equipment for cats, worldwide, are a long way off.

I was predicting many years into the future, understanding that change like this - lacking a clear and obvious imperative - is slow. It does seem true that, today, you will find marinas more accommodating to a cruising monohull than catamaran. What I am predicting overnight is that the trend is already beginning, and that it is probably observable in specific locales already.

I've read that some slips charge for 1.5 length of catamarans, and wide cats can only be parked on end slips, or in double slips.

In a Catamaran oriented marina, you may be charged 1.5 times for the extra length of your monohull, if you can get in at all, and further will be limited to end slips or side docks where your long tail will not interfere with "normal" traffic!

[ArtM]

Originally Posted by Randyonr3

The day you join the 300 mile club, you can talk smak about how slow monos are..
I've got more than a few multi-day, open ocean miles under my keel and the only time Ive ever seen a multi-hull on the open water was when I was passing them..
You need to take your attitude back up on the porch, You dont have what it takes to play with the big dogs..............

Thanks Randy! Great contribution, looking forward to more. I'll be sure to wave at you next time you're passing me by. You should be able to see me clearly inside my saloon, as I'll be on my top deck enjoying the view. Hopefully, it won't be raining that day, for your sake. For me, it won't matter. I'll be comfortable and dry regardless of the weather.

[noelex 77]

Originally Posted by ArtM

I was predicting many years into the future, understanding that change like this - lacking a clear and obvious imperative - is slow. It does seem true that, today, you will find marinas more accommodating to a cruising monohull than catamaran. What I am predicting overnight is that the trend is already beginning, and that it is probably observable in specific locales already.

I've read that some slips charge for 1.5 length of catamarans, and wide cats can only be parked on end slips, or in double slips.

In a Catamaran oriented marina, you may be charged 1.5 times for the extra length of your monohull, if you can get in at all, and further will be limited to end slips or side docks where your long tail will not interfere with "normal" traffic!

The infrastructure like marina berths and travel lifts are going to be very slow to change even if your predicted changes occur. Frankly I cannot see I happening in the foreseeable future. Catamarans are common around the charter bases of the world, but are in a very small minority in long distance crusing locations.
There is nothing that has changed reciently to make catamarans more appealing. The pros and cons have remained much the same for the last decade or so.

[tomfl]

A few random comments to muddy the waters a little.

So far I have not seen trimarans mentioned in this thread. At the risk of critics bashing me for using the term conventional wisdom there does seem to be some agreement that a tri will be a better cruiser than a cat for boats under 35 feet.

I have been looking at Fboats, Dragonflys, and a Telstar T2. I have not seen any cat or monohull that I can stand up in and go 55 mph to windward if I put it on a trailer. For the Telstar and anything up to a C31 I can go 55 mph to windward with a fairly standard pickup or van.

I really liked the Telstar for bang for the buck coastal cruiser with the ability to go to the Bahamas and even the Greater and Lesser Antilles and the coast of South America and North back to my home grounds of Florida. The Fboats are stupid fast and the same trip would be possible with what I consider reasonable comfort for two. The Dragonfly is a beautiful boat inside, but they are few and far between.

Then I saw the C37. With a crack crew Miss Siagon has line honors ability. I could sail a C37 short handed, or even solo, and it would be a lot more comfortable than the C31 and have a lot more blue water ability. You could even put it on a trailer for hurricane season.

The thing is maybe a first rate sailor on a monohull with a good crew could beat me and a companion in a C37 or C31, but there is no way I could sail any monohull I know of faster than I could sail a C37 or C31. For two peeps cruising both of those boats have enough room below and load capacity for the cruising I am interested in. While it requires a crane to step/unstep the mast hauling the C37 is a lot easier than any monohull I know of. Almost anyone can step/unstep the mast of a C31, put it on the trailer, and drive it to a RV storage facility, and keep it on the hard secured or $US50 or less a month. I found a place I can store it for $US30 a month.

The first memory I have of sailing is going to Cat Cay with my Dad on his 38 ft Abaco Schooner in 1961 and sailing it back to Miami alone as he pretended to be sick to test my seamanship. I have sailed monohulls almost all my life till I got shanghaied to crew on Stilettos in the 1980s.

But the plain fact of the matter is that Fboats are stupid fast, easy to sail, comfortable enough for someone like me to cruise, and can be put on the hard and kept there at a fraction of the cost of most other boats capable of going from Florida to the Bahamas and points South.

YMMV

[tamicatana]

Originally Posted by David_Old_Jersey

Are your predictions using a Mayan calendar by any chance?

FWIW, I was cruising the Florida Bay side of the Keys last Christmas week, and regularly saw 4.5', in the channel... Yeah, the wattah's gettin' thinnah, certainly more thinnah than the last time we were there

[tomfl]

Originally Posted by Randyonr3

The day you join the 300 mile club, you can talk smak about how slow monos are..
I've got more than a few multi-day, open ocean miles under my keel and the only time Ive ever seen a multi-hull on the open water was when I was passing them..
You need to take your attitude back up on the porch, You dont have what it takes to play with the big dogs..............

A couple of weeks ago I was sailing on the St. Johns River in Jacksonville on an F24MI (one of the oldest and slowest Fboats) I was considering buying. First time ever on the boat, first ever at the tiller. I jibed maybe 1/4 mile behind a First 42 and passed him in 3:37 by my watch. Maybe 8-12 knots of wind.

The point is not that an Fboat will easily pass just about any monohull in ten knots of wind, but that it is stupid easy and stupid fun to be in an Fboat doing it and that it does not take someone in the 300 mile club to do it. Instead it takes someone who can sail back to the ramp after doing it and within 45 minutes have the Fboat on the trailer and tow it back to their front yard. This boat has also been to the Bahamas twice and once had to motor back and did not use all the gas in its five gallon tank.

[ArtM]

Originally Posted by tomfl

A few random comments to muddy the waters a little.

So far I have not seen trimarans mentioned in this thread. At the risk of critics bashing me for using the term conventional wisdom there does seem to be some agreement that a tri will be a better cruiser than a cat for boats under 35 feet.
YMMV

I just don't know how to compare a tri to a cat. I've never seen the interior spaces of them. Also, I don't understand the performance benefits of trimarans. I mean, I know that many trimarans are fast, but I don't know why, except that they are commonly built for speed.

I have commented elsewhere that I do feel that, under 35 feet, a cat will begin to lose it's benefits, and under that range it may be that monohulls have a clear superiority.

I have never seen a trimaran built to the comfort standards of a Lagoon or other cruising catamaran, and definitely don't know if such a craft would have a performance advantage owing strictly to it's tri-hull configuration.

[David_Old_Jersey]

Originally Posted by ArtM

I have commented elsewhere that I do feel that, under 35 feet, a cat will begin to lose it's benefits, and under that range it may be that monohulls have a clear superiority.

I don't think it is that monohulls are "superior" under 35 foot, just that catamarans are not so good at being catamarans under that size - at least not once the RV has been parked ontop..........

[tomfl]

Originally Posted by noelex 77

SNIP
If crusing is hard work you are doing it wrong

+1

Gotta love that.

[s/v Jedi]

ArtM, Lagoon 410... what a joke. Mono's obsolete, ha!

Let's see what we have... first a nice day-sailor for some fun on the water:



and then the real thing. Just watch the guy at the wheel and be totally utterly awesomized by real boats (click that upper bar for larger picture)



Show me a Lagoon that outperforms this on one single point

cheers,
Nick.

[SailFastTri]

Originally Posted by ArtM

I just don't know how to compare a tri to a cat. I've never seen the interior spaces of them. Also, I don't understand the performance benefits of trimarans. I mean, I know that many trimarans are fast, but I don't know why, except that they are commonly built for speed.

I have commented elsewhere that I do feel that, under 35 feet, a cat will begin to lose it's benefits, and under that range it may be that monohulls have a clear superiority.

I have never seen a trimaran built to the comfort standards of a Lagoon or other cruising catamaran, and definitely don't know if such a craft would have a performance advantage owing strictly to it's tri-hull configuration.

A Dragonfly 35 or 1200 is nicer than a Lagoon and would sail circles around it. But a Lagoon will be much roomier and have more load carrying. It's all about trade-offs.

BTW Tomfl, those small tris don't have the tankage and stowage needed for a good cruiser. Under 33 ft is boat camping on a tri.

[ArtM]

Originally Posted by s/v Jedi

ArtM, Lagoon 410... what a joke. Mono's obsolete, ha!

Let's see what we have... first a nice day-sailor for some fun on the water:



and then the real thing. Just watch the guy at the wheel and be totally utterly awesomized by real boats (click that upper bar for larger picture)



Show me a Lagoon that outperforms this on one single point

cheers,
Nick.

I didn't see an upper bar to click, but before I do, does this boat have a topdeck saloon and 4' maximum draft?

If not, then I would not compare it to a Lagoon, nor do I know why you would compare it to a Lagoon, except that either Lagoon is the only Catamaran you're familiar with, or you saw the name "Lagoon" in my profile and assumed that I was planning to race your keelboat with it.

[s/v Jedi]

Originally Posted by ArtM

does this boat have a topdeck saloon and 4' maximum draft?

If not, then I would not compare it to a Lagoon, nor do I know why you would compare it to a Lagoon, except that either Lagoon is the only Catamaran you're familiar with, or you saw the name "Lagoon" in my profile and assumed that I was planning to race your keelboat with it.

Why would you put sh*t on a gold coach? You're trying to make a beautiful and ultimate performance boat into an ugly bug-like creature!


Nick.

[Mark Johnson]

It is always a mistake to generalize, but... Our 34' home made Searunner trimaran is a true "round the world cruiser", that easily goes 7-9 knots, even to windward, VS a (similar size / similar loaded / similar seaworthyness level) monohull's... 5-6 knots. We can do this in really nasty seas, while tacking through 90 degrees. The computer program's "track" feature, shows us our "actual" track, not just an estimate. In other words... We make good a track that looks like 90 degree steps.

Most heavily loaded, 34' "cruising" monohulls, as well as most cruising cats, that are similarly sailed to windward, make more leeway, as well as less speed, than a Searunner of the same length!

Our occasional double digit speed broad reach, ALL DAY LONG, is just icing on the cake!

M.

[tomfl]

Originally Posted by SailFastTri

A Dragonfly 35 or 1200 is nicer than a Lagoon and would sail circles around it. But a Lagoon will be much roomier and have more load carrying. It's all about trade-offs.

BTW Tomfl, those small tris don't have the tankage and stowage needed for a good cruiser. Under 33 ft is boat camping on a tri.

I have kayaked in the Ten Thousand Island and camped there, same for St. George Island and the Smokey Mountains. Even the C24 is big compared to that.

From what I have read a Dragonfly is a nice boat, but they are few and far between. I am still looking at them. From what I have read the lines used to fold the amas have to be replaced every five years or so and you need to watch out for chafe.

I have been inside a C31 on a trailer and at 5'9" was pleased with how much room there was. I am trying to figure out some kinda solar still or water maker and solar panels to reduce needed tankage.

Spec wise the Telstar T2 is smaller inside than the C31but the larger and clear windows made it seem larger than the C31. It also has more displacement and an easier system to raise and lower the mast. I got the feeling it would be slower but more comfortable to cruise than the C31.

The upside is all these boat can go 55mph to windward on a trailer. The C37, at least for me, has enough room and capacity to cruise from Florida to the Bahamas and South if I take my time. But it is not nearly so easy to put on a trailer.

I don't know of any monohull or cat that can do what these tris can do.