Do I Really Need a Bluewater Boat ?

[bangkaboat]

Originally Posted by Ex-Calif

Just a random electron here. Maybe a new person starting out should take a sailing course (ASA123 or whatever) and the very next thing to do is beg, borrow, steal or pay for an ocean passage of at least 10-12 days.

I've only done short passages mainly due to time constraints but I don't think anyone can understand 20 days at sea until they actually do it.

I'm usually knackered after 12 hours or so. I can't imagine 8 months.

Definitely! In the same vein that boat ownership & living aboard requires much knowledge & many skills entirely separate from sailing a boat, bluewater sailing can not be prepared for, adequately, if one only gunkhole sails for their vacations, imho. Good post!

Goldsholl, In the first couple of decades of production building of plastic boats the builders erred on the side of caution, making very thick skins, especially about the keel area. As an example, When I drilled a hole to add a through-hull on my Cal(1976), the scrap piece was more than 1" thick! Unfortunately, competition & the increase in material costs, especially oil, led many builders to cut corners, resulting, in many cases, in lower quality boats. Still, some stuck to their guns.

Many of those old boats you see are production boats from those earlier times. To some degree, this is all relative, Gold sholl. If you have a license to print money, Have a boat built to your specs or buy a boat designed to go anywhere. If your primary consideration is for a well-found, well-equipped ocean cruiser, perhaps getting an older boat for a lower price, sailing the hell out of it locally, then refitting for the offshore & taking longer bluewater voyages would work for you. That's the tough thing about trying to offer advice, I know - in retrospective - what appeals to me, but you are not me.

Single-hand 46 footer? Yes, you can. it would be a real challenge, especially in docking & handling the bigger everything, but others have done it. Best of luck in making your decision, in the end you'll be sailing & happy on whatever you buy!
Mike

[MarkJ]

Originally Posted by bewitched

Production boats should not be considered as inferior - they just aren't designed to meet the needs of what the majority of people looking to sail for extended periods of time offshore would be looking for in a boat.
They are however, specifically designed for what you want to do - a comfortable home for coastal cruising.

LOL then why do they ones you are talking about have offshore classification?


A Ocean
B Off Shore
C Inshore D Sheltered Waters

Mine is A 8 its engraved right here on the Nav station by the builder. The 8 is the number of persons certified.

Or is it a lie? If its a lie then they would be sued by American lawyers.

You have to have reality pop into the argument at times.

The reason why they are cheaper is that the production line makes it cheaper than making them by hand.

Look at a boats CE catagory and it will tell you what it is.

[bewitched]

Originally Posted by MarkJ

You have to have reality pop into the argument at times.
.

the reality is:

Safe to go offshore - yes, that's what the certification is for

Designed to meet the requirements of what most (not all - most) people demand for prolonged offshore cruising - no

I appreciate you have a production boat and are cruising is quite happily. I too have a production cruising boat (Catalina 42) and did over 10,000 miles cruising on it last year - also quite happily. I made a number of modifications before I went - Inner forestay & runners, increased fuel & water tankage, upgraded anchor, chain, windlass, permanent shade in cockpit, dingy davits. I was really glad of the inner forestay and the rest made the trip more enjoyable.

Is it capable of going offshore - yes. Is it capable of banging to windward for 2 weeks - no. It's not designed to do that and will probably incur quite significant damage.

To say that production boats, such as yours and mine, are designed for extended offshore use is stretching reality more than a little.

[MarkJ]

Originally Posted by bewitched

prolonged offshore cruising - no

designed for extended offshore use is stretching reality more than a little.

Oceanis 43 CE Certification A10/B11/C12/
A prestigious yacht that heralds a new era in the history of blue water cruising yachts.
Oceanis 40 CE Certification A8/B9/C10
Oceanis 37 CE Certification A8/B9/C10
Oceanis 34 CE Certification A6/B7/C8/D10 (deep draught keel)
Oceanis 31 CE Certification B6 /C8 /D10

The 31 isn't, so, yes, you are right. The 31 isn't designed for it.

[Pacific Jewel]

Hi there, you're absolutely right; hunters have lots of space and are quite affordable. Would I sail it RTW? Nope. I agree completely with Sailabel. Having been in some pretty horrific seas for 11 days with a not pleasant ending myself (and that was in a VERY seaworthy boat, I will tell you, you need think safety first. Hunters would definitely not make the list for the type of trip you are proposing.

My thoughts.

[bewitched]

Mark, you're still missing my point...

The CE certification is a safety certification and therefore an important consideration, but it is far from the only consideration when choosing a boat for extended offshore sailing - a blue water boat; comfort of ride, degree of redundancy in rig, hardware, ability to carry increased provisions / fuel / spares, degree of protection from sun / waves and so on and so on.

Sure, production boats can cross oceans, but it is not what they are designed to do. In other words, the design brief was not "Design a boat suitable for extended offshore cruising"

[MarkJ]

Originally Posted by bewitched

Mark, you're still missing my point...

I know what your point is.

I think you are wrong.

I think people should go on long crusies in boats that do not fit your ideals.

Thats fine.

To the original poster I say look at the boats that will enhance you life as you live it. Not some fear of a day or 2 or heavy weather once every few years. I definitly think you would be better with a Beneteau, Jenneau, or the well made American production boats. The larger the better. The newer the better.



Mark

[bewitched]

Originally Posted by MarkJ

I think you are wrong.

Then we will have to agree to a differ

To scm007: In my opinion there is a huge difference between a Hunter 47 and say a Van De Stadt 47 Samoa. One is designed specifically for the purpose of extended and offshore cruising, the other is not.

Do you need a blue water boat to sail RTW? - no. Is it prudent to sail RTW in a blue water boat - yes.

[anotherT34C]

RTW means different things to different folks, of course. RTW can be done with relatively short hops, always choosing a safe weather window. Or... you could do the clipper route.

[MikeinLA]

Originally Posted by scm007

I'm really diggin the Hunter line (cheap, lots of space). Do I truly need a boat that can take a 100kn beating? I want to sail RTW.

My suggestion would be that you should buy a used Hunter from a desperate seller at a great price and then sail the living cr@p out of it. After you get used to her, take her out in all sorts of conditions. Anchor overnight alot. When others are running for the marina, you go out. By the time you have become a good enough sailor to sail around the world, I think you will know what kind of boat you want. You will also have a better idea of where you want to go, who is going with you and what size boat you want. And if, like many, you decide that you don't REALLY want to sail around the world, trade up for a new Hunter and live a happy life.

Mike

[NanoWest]

MarkJ,

It is pretty clear that many on this site do not understand the CE certification system.

[jdoe71]

NMMA web page on CE certification:
NMMA - CE CERTIFICATION PROGRAM

Especially read the PDF linked as "PCA General Information".

From what I gather, CE ratings are primarily intended to let people sell their stuff in EU countries. As with many things intended to let companies make more money, compliance is kind of loosey goosey and determined on the spot by the reviewer. Many things in that document are not well defined as to what is acceptable and what is not.

Our boat is CE "A" rated. Despite the fact there are several that have circumnavigated, I don't put much faith in that rating, especially being in the middle of a total refit and seeing all the warts.

Just finished reading a boat blog where a couple in a Hunter 466 heading to New Zealand lost the rudder. They were in 1 -2 meter waves and the boat fell off a sharp one breaking the rudder off. If I read it right it sounds like the rudder stock was composite, not metal. Probably a CE "A" rated boat?

If it makes one feel comfy to believe that CE "A" rating makes their boat safe to sail around the world that's great! But if I was intending to do an ocean crossing I would buy a boat based on what the years of real testing in the real ocean tell us is a real tough boat, not a commerce friendly rating scheme.

[witzgall]

I think Hunter moved fairly quickly away fro those composite rudders? I think I read that they are plenty strong, but damage from grounding can be hidden and detrimental to rudder integrity. I think I also read that they offer replacements with SS shafts, for a reasonable price.

Originally Posted by jdoe71

NMMA web page on CE certification:
NMMA - CE CERTIFICATION PROGRAM

Especially read the PDF linked as "PCA General Information".

From what I gather, CE ratings are primarily intended to let people sell their stuff in EU countries. As with many things intended to let companies make more money, compliance is kind of loosey goosey and determined on the spot by the reviewer. Many things in that document are not well defined as to what is acceptable and what is not.

Our boat is CE "A" rated. Despite the fact there are several that have circumnavigated, I don't put much faith in that rating, especially being in the middle of a total refit and seeing all the warts.

Just finished reading a boat blog where a couple in a Hunter 466 heading to New Zealand lost the rudder. They were in 1 -2 meter waves and the boat fell off a sharp one breaking the rudder off. If I read it right it sounds like the rudder stock was composite, not metal. Probably a CE "A" rated boat?

If it makes one feel comfy to believe that CE "A" rating makes their boat safe to sail around the world that's great! But if I was intending to do an ocean crossing I would buy a boat based on what the years of real testing in the real ocean tell us is a real tough boat, not a commerce friendly rating scheme.

[VirtualVagabond]

There have been a few different production boats mentioned here and I'm sure they can all hold up their examples of RTW successes. Does anyone have suggestions of boats that are generally recognised as bluewater? I'm thinking along the lines of boats that by reputation are heavily built, such as Hans Christians, or possibly Perry's CT 54?

[Christian Van H]

The Valiants, Pacific Seacraft, Amels, Morris Yachts...there has been a lot of threads about this before on this forum.