Fake Boats?

[ontherocks83]

Captain58, Thank you those are a lot of very good points to consider. I definitely have enjoyed the forum since I joined, banter and all. I'm even starting to warm up to Boatman despite our previous disagreements on things.

To be honest I have grown very fond of the newer Catalina's they seem to fit the bill for what my wife and I are looking to upgrade to including, construction, amenities, price point, handling, customer service etc. A lot of what I am trying to do is double check on our decision and make sure it is a decent one.

[ontherocks83]

Kenomac, I have noticed some of those things you are mentioning and for certain reasons have decided to stay away from the French designs (mostly because of steel keels, I like lead....and I'm not a euro style person so they just don't tickle my fancy). I'm surprised about the Hunter though the 50 I was on had a very deep dedicated bilge, maybe things have changed. Like I said in my last post I am looking at Catalina's but wanted to keep the question vague to get an overall response and analyze the answers.

[boatman61]

[QUOTE=ontherocks83;1424553]I definitely have enjoyed the forum since I joined, banter and all. I'm even starting to warm up to Boatman despite our previous disagreements on things.QUOTE]

What am I doing wrong......

Happy New Year mate... enjoy the new boat when it happens..

[lifeofreilly57]

Boatman61, I can appreciate your perspective since you've had the chance to experience so many different makers boats for extended deliveries. Although I've been able to weasel my way onto many different makes as racing/ delivery crew and through buying/selling insurance boats to pay for my habit I still haven't had the chance to sail them over longer distances, which can change one's perspective on the pros and cons of certain makes.
Here's to a healthy boat market with so many good boats to choose from, Cheers!

[ontherocks83]

Originally Posted by boatman61

What am I doing wrong......

Happy New Year mate... enjoy the new boat when it happens..

Unfortunately it's going to be a few more years so I guess we'll have to suffer with our old cramped C30. Ah well there's worst things in life. Happy new year to you too.

[Cuttyhunk]

This is an interesting thread. I had avoided it until now, because of the title. But today it's either read stuff here or start installing zippers on the boat cover I'm making.

The back-and-forth about the Hunter keel failure interested me. Here in New England, most keelboats sit on their keels on the hard 4 or 5 months out of the year. Boat stands keep the boat on center, but the keel really supports the vessel when it's on the hard. So the keel/hull attachment area had better be solid and I would expect nothing less.

Also, my opinion about winches is that on most boats, they are sized for a youngish man, and therefore are undersized for most women and anyone over 70. On the CSY 33 I once owned, everything was oversized -- the 33 was their smallest boat, these boats were designed for charter and they put the same stuff in all the boats, so I had big beautiful winches that were a dream to use. I didn't cross any oceans in it, just cruised the Caribbean, but that boat liked being out on the water and never seemed unhappy in any conditions we encountered. I honestly feel the boat thought at times that I was a wimp for wanting to head to port.

[sailorboy1]

A lot of examples of "bad" boats being tossed around highlight that people make wrong choices, then blame the builder. If people really believe that all "production" boats have problems with hull flex, keels leaking and falling off, rudder problems, bilges that don't have capacity and are set low, etc etc etc......................well all you are really looking for is something to justify whatever other boat you got instead (assuming you aren't looking to be part of some armchair expert group).

[scuba0_1]

I've never seen a current boat with out a dedicated bilge. I put a alarm on mine so any time it runs a red light and a alarm goes off. The alarm can be turned off. My ac filter sump pump filter, water filter strainer are all in there. Can't imagine a sail boat without some kind of the bilge..

[neilpride]

Is imposible to get a deep bilge sump in some production boats due the designer choose to bolt the keel to a flat hull section, there the bilge sump in most cases is located in the interior liner if you are lucky, if not , the Rule 1500 is just 4 inches below the cabin sole, hugggg...
No keel stub no bilge sump...

[Blue Crab]

Originally Posted by S/V Illusion

Not at all. Rather, it was to point out that these type judgments only seem to occur on this forum and usually written by the same people. As someone already stated, they never occur in remote anchorages in far off places. Telling!

Now to cancel the email notification of posts

Geez, ya coulda not read the thread in the first place, and skipped the insulting posts. Can't see what benefit you got out of it other than some faux sense of intellectual superiority.

[DoubleWhisky]

Originally Posted by sailorboy1

A lot of examples of "bad" boats being tossed around highlight that people make wrong choices, then blame the builder. If people really believe that all "production" boats have problems with hull flex, keels leaking and falling off, rudder problems, bilges that don't have capacity and are set low, etc etc etc......................well all you are really looking for is something to justify whatever other boat you got instead (assuming you aren't looking to be part of some armchair expert group).

Hmmmm...............
I really do believe that they are different quality mass production boats around. Some are better, some not so good...
I really do believe that no single type of mass production boat was designed with bluewater cruising on mind.
I really do believe that all mass production boats were primary designed for coastal cruising od some sort.
I really do believe that it is possible to undertake a long oceanic passages on many mass production boats.
I really do believe that they are boats better suited for bkuewater work - designed and built for that.
I do really high regard the sailors cruising far in mass production boats and really do believe that their achievements should be appreciated.
I really do believe that it is easier, more comfortable and safer to cruise the oceans in the boat designed and built for the purpose.
I really do believe that McDonald's sells to the milions of people around the world the food of not too high quality.
I really do believe that mass production boatyards and McDonald's are selling to the customers on the same basis - low prices, quality lowest possible to accept and massive marketing suport.
I really do believe that this principle is just a variation of the old Copernicus' Law
( Monetae cudendae ratio - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ) and is valid for money, food and boats as well as other goods.

If this all make me a part of some armchair expert group - let it be.
Why not? For some next months at least I will sit in armchair rather than on helmsman seat

Cheers!

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by DoubleWhisky

It still Christmas time, so may be a good time for a tale. Even a fairytale…

Once upon a time, on the continent far, far away (or close, close to – depending on the point of being) called Europe were tens and hundreds of boatyards. The craftsmen there were skilled, tradition of boatbuilding long and seas demanding. So the yards built the boats sound and robust, boats designed to look after the seamen when the things go wrong. But (there is some but in every tale) one day some people found that all yards together build a lot of the boats. These people called it “the market” and found, that this market is huge. The also looked at the seamen innovative way and named them “customers”. They also decided that a boat should be a “product”, not an object of craftsmanship. They looked around and found that there are the modern ways to “produce” boats rather than built them. They came to conclusion, that it is feasible to produce boats in large quantities, just like a cars, to bring the cost and price of produced boats down to the levels unheard of before, to attract a lot of new customers and sell them a boats to their satisfaction. So, for the benfit of customers only, they made a substantial investments and put together a new yards, building not tens, not even hundreds but whole thousands of boats each year. They produced more and more boats, but still they were struggling. They goodwill was not rewarded. The people they want to become their customers were still unenlightened to call themselves a sailors still. And a lot of the sailors still preferred the boats build in old fashioned way. Some of the old yards disappeared, especially the ones building cheaper boats, but still the progress of the industry was blocked by boatbuilders and sailors with the luddite mentality.
The boatproducers decided to offer their products even cheaper in order to find the more and more customers. They looked thoroughly at all costs and found a lot of ways to cut them down. For example, they found some old principles of boatbuilding just ridiculous and inappropriate for modern boatproducing. Why to fiberglass the bulkheads and frames to the hull when it is feasible just to glue them in? It is cheaper, easier and quicker. Why to build the interior in the boat, making it a structural? It is possible to produce it outside and put together in the hull just a way Your home kitchen is fixed. Why to stick with old safety factors in construction resulting from centuries of experience? If the safety factor of four is accepted surely the factor of two will suffice? Still something will be twice as strong as necessary in most of the cases. Why to depend on sizing guidance provided by the manufacturers of spars, rigging and deck hardware. The manufacturers were beyond any doubt misled by old, traditional approach. And thinner, lighters spars, smaller winches and so on need less support in the structure of the boat – additional benefit for the less paying customers.
But still it was no sufficient demand for the huge boatproduction, so the producers offered their product to charter fleet operators with handsome discounts. It made chartering cheaper and effectively banned the boat builders from the sales to charter operations. Additional profit was in persuading the charter operators to include into the charter contracts the clauses forbidding sailing in anything above Force 6, which added enormously to the overall safety of sailing sport.
There were other positives about the progress. As the boats became cheaper and cheaper, more and more clients were able to afford one. At some point owning the boat became the element of the lifestyle, more than sailing the boat. Affordable boats sailed less by average, as now it made a sense to buy one for occasional use only. So the boats spent more time in marinas, venturing to the sea mainly in nice and settled weather. As most of customers were not similar to sailors now, the boats changed further still. The customers didn’t need interiors safe in seaway, with well rounded corners, lot of handholds and so on. Demand turned to open spaces, wide berths and generally the styling reminding this of an upscale loft. On deck minimalist approach was en vogue, resulting happily in further cost cutting, as two winches instead of six do much less damage to the clean look of boat, only accidentally being cheaper triple. Some boatproducers were creative enough to realize that on the boat sailing quite sparsely and for not long time some older extravagancies, like helmsman seat or navigation table are possible to exclude from modern boats.
No effort was spared to restructure all the industry, but still a lot of the seamen were denying the obvious benefits of progress. It was necessary to make some decisive move to keep the progress going, but it was beyond the possibilities of boatproducers alone. The cases of keels falling off, masts falling down, booms breaking in Force 4 or 5, or interiors going apart on short photo-op trips just before the opening of the boatshow were the proof that it is impossible to make much more savings on costs of production. Biggest boatproducers in Europe were on the verge of bankruptcy. Some were in fact taken over by creditors. Being desperate, the boatproducers went to the renowned and influential consultants, contacted the politicians and presented them the case of the progress being blocked by the builders of unfairly high quality boats. Disscussions started, lobbyists get to work and for the sake of progress and to the benfit of the customers, and also in order to save thousands work places provided by boat producers, the Recreational Craft Directive was invented and applied thorough the European Union.
The RCD introduced new system of categorisation, attributing each boat the allowed area of operation and, if applicable , limitations.
The highest design category in RCD is Category A – OCEAN. Attributing this category to the boat means that given boat was designed for extended voyages where conditions may exceed wind force 8 (Beaufort scale) and significant wave heights of 4m and above but excluding abnormal conditions, and is largely self-sufficient. Of course it was self-evident for boatproducers that now the boat able to survive Force 10 and to withstand the waves of 6 or 7 meters can be counted as an ocean going craft, condition to fulfilling all detailed demands of the Directive. The main requirement for the boat became to have the proper so called STIX number, the artificial figure presented as the measure of the seaworthiness. The STIX algorithm was broadly criticized by naval designers unaware of its importance for progress, but with massive support of boatproducers it was included into the Directive. Lot of luddites lamented over the STIX having nothing or almost nothing to do with such a nuisances like righting arms, righting moments, ballast ratios and depending on measurements and weights too much, but they were just enough ill-informed to be unable to realize how succesfully RCD supports and promotes broad hulls and wide sterns so necessary to put roomy, loft-alike interiors into the boats. Those murmuring something about Ocean category boats prone to capsize and not so able to right themselves after capsize were just doomsters, of course. And pointing to the boats widely renowned for their bluewater capabilities, and unable to be attributed Category A, like Vancouvers, was… hmmm… pointless.
Anyway, the RCD was not invented to promote the safety in boat design and boat producing. As anybody can check the RCD is one of the trade-enabling European New Approach Directives, which sets minimum requirements of a boat making it suitable for sale and use within the European Union. The main aim of the RCD was and is to provide the even ground for competition in producing and marketing the boats. With the advent of RCD the boatproducers were, at the very last moment, granted the possibility to compete successfully against the builders of unfairly sound, robust and seaworthy boats.
Of course, a lot of attention was given to the safety, but not in the way to promote it. Really the RCD introduced minimal standards – often much less demanding that older customary ones. Single and well known, but by no mean only, example is the seacocks case. In old times before RCD it was widely accepted, that through-hull fittings should be made of bronze and last for a lifetime. RCD authors decided, that such a fittings should last for not less than five years – minimal standard was set. Producers were able to replace bronze for fittings by other, much cheaper metals. After few years, when seacocks on boats started to fail serially this small problem was unhonestly used by Luddites in their efforts to discredit RCD as a whole. Of course it is possible that RCD is not perfect in such a smallish details, but generally it is a great success.
Now the average customer can easily compare two boats of the same design category and size, for example the HANSE 575 and DISCOVERY 57 or OYSTER 575, just to realize how unreasonable will be to pay double or triple for the second one and even triple or quadruple for the third one, while first have all necessary amenities, is contemporary stylish and EU approved as the same category A - OCEAN.
Nothing strange that in several years after introduction of the RCD so many of the boatbuilding yards went into bankruptcy just one by one. Somebody can feel sorry for them, but should remember all the work places saved at great boatproducers’ factories.
Now the future of the boatproducing is more or less assured. The future of boatbuilding not so much. But boatproducing caters for some 90 or more per cent of the market and should by supported by all means, shouldn’t it?
At least their product is well suited to the contemporary mode of the boat using.
And if Luddites call this use “porting” or “harbouring” as opposite to sailing, it is humilliating and should be prosecuted.

Somebody reading this fairytale can possibly think, that RCD is European only achievement, but it is not the true. Strength is in numbers and first three of five biggest boatproducing groups are European based. The European market for the sailboats is huge also, and only the boats conforming to the RCD are admitted to it. Anyway, all the producers thorough the world are more or less willingly influenced by RCD.
The worst effect of RCD was probably that it almost literally wiped out the middle of the market. Smaller yards, building sound boats in the price range somewhere between mass production and top shelf brands all but disappeared. Some were taken over by mass producers, some closed premises. Few still struggle for life. It does nothing good to us, as it is difference between Average White Boat and proper bluewater boat really. It is the difference between the boat looking after her crew and the boat the crew need to look after.
Of course – not all the production boats are the same. For example, the Beneteau Group – with single exception of shortly produced Cyclades range – never went to extremities of cost cutting.
But still it is a difference. Someone can go to McDonald, have a sandwich and tell that he dined out in restaurant. Someone can think other way. So it is possible to sail round the world in production boat. May be not in each production boat but in many of them. Everything is to people in the last instance. But why to go in Hanse if You can go in Rustler..?..

An amusing fairy tale and should be treated so as the vast majority of this tale is falsehood, lies and mis truths. For example STIX plays no part in the RCD.

Dave

[goboatingnow]

Hmmmm...............
I really do believe that they are different quality mass production boats around. Some are better, some not so good...

Or course, but what's good or bad is not necessarily a function of selling price, nor is there a direct ratio

I really do believe that no single type of mass production boat was designed with bluewater cruising on mind.

No production boat is designed for so called " blue water " cruising , that market is tiny


I really do believe that all mass production boats were primary designed for coastal cruising od some sort.

Have you tried " coastal cruising say around Ireland , Scotland , the North Sea , when you have cone bs k to me a d slk about " coastal cruising" , give me a South Pacific or Atlantic crossing any day

I really do believe that it is possible to undertake a long oceanic passages on many mass production boats.

Or course , it's the sailor not the boat

I really do believe that they are boats better suited for bkuewater work - designed and built for that.

Not that I'm aware of

I do really high regard the sailors cruising far in mass production boats and really do believe that their achievements should be appreciated.

Thanks
I really do believe that it is easier, more comfortable and safer to cruise the oceans in the boat designed and built for the purpose.

" easier and more comfortable " are subjective personal decisions , I have many long distance sailor who say speed is everything

I really do believe that McDonald's sells to the milions of people around the world the food of not too high quality.

When's the last time McDonalds poisoned you , compare with middle to high end restaurants food poisoning. , cone back to me then ..


I really do believe that mass production boatyards and McDonald's are selling to the customers on the same basis - low prices,

quality lowest possible to accept and massive marketing suport.

Ridiculous comparison , what marketing support.


I really do believe that this principle is just a variation of the old Copernicus' Law
( Monetae cudendae ratio - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ) and is valid for money, food and boats as well as other goods.

If this all make me a part of some armchair expert group - let it be.

Yes it does, cause your arguments are not based on facts that's certain

Why not? For some next months at least I will sit in armchair rather than on helmsman seat

[DoubleWhisky]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

An amusing fairy tale and should be treated so as the vast majority of this tale is falsehood, lies and mis truths. For example STIX plays no part in the RCD.

Dave

Yeah...
and demand for Category A to have STIX numer equal or greater than 32, or for Category B to have STIX numer equal or greater than 23 plays a violin part of course?

[goboatingnow]

You have to laugh at some of the nonsense spouted here , the RCD fairly story being a great , albeit totally misleading one. Then there is the keel sump nonsense etc ( steel versus lead etc )

Firstly the RCD is primarily a quality documentation process, requiring the builder to maintain consistent documented build records. The RCD was purely designed to allow an internal EU market to develop, that was free of national certification processes. It's introduction was primarily driven by UK powerboat builders to try and compete in the then large med power boat market where the Italians held sway.

The Category designations are not in any way prescriptive or limit area of operation, to meet cat A , the RCD simply sets out a few rules , the builder can demonstrate meeting those rules, by a number of means only one of which is compliance with the ISO standards ( the seacock issue is an ISO issue not a RCD issue , and anyway that loophole will be closed in the next release of the standard.

The fact is if RCD was the issue, then EU boat manufacturers would be at a disadvantage elsewhere , yet EU manufacturers dominate the globe in sailboat manufacture. It helps of course that Europe is buy far the largest market for sailboats in the world , much bigger then the US.

The demise and continuing problems of so called high quality small boat manufacturers has nothing to do with the RCD, these manufacturers never competed at any stage with the big production boys. There demise was purely down to two things , increasingly the cost of skilled labour in European economies and the huge increase in the cost of grp and exotic timbers. Both conspired to move their price range upwards out of reach of their customer base. Added to that production boats got better and better , attracting buyers that traditionally bought more specialist boats. Then add in increasing regulations involving working time , work place safety , chemicals , VOC and solvent regulations and it became increasingly impossible for a small builder to survive and build in the western world.

The exact same situation occurred 60 years previously with cars.

Today you can buy a new roomy 38 footer for 150K, it is " good enough " to take you round the world. Is it the best example of its craft , of course not , there will always be market for those that want " the finer things in life ", just as there will always be a market for jaguar cars , even if half the parts are made by ford and its sits near the bottom for un reliability. Do outback drivers cross desserts in range rovers , no hell they do , they use a cheaper mass produced , Toyota.

Get over yourselves, if you have the disposable income and like " fine things " then splash the cash , if you can only afford the " Toyota" , well rest assured it will cross that " dessert "

Dave