Full Keel Sailboats

[thomm225]

Originally Posted by wingssail

That photo was taken by Bill Baum just after the start of a Jack and Jill (double handed) race. We've come off the line and have just sheeted in the sails. Now I have to set up all the fine trim. Just under the traveler is the hydraulic panel and we keep the hydraulic backstay down during the starting sequence so we are free to tack and gybe without much attention to the running backstays. As soon as we're off we set the runner (done) and now pump up the backstay to shape the mainsail. That is what I'm doing.

In the Jack and Jill races Judy steers, handles halyard tails, pole lift, and helps with the running backstays while I do everything else.

I will tell you that when she insists on short tacking the beach with a heavy #1 genoa up I'm doing all the hard work. It is very aerobic.

Well, has to be done since many times the best wind is along the beach.

Plus you get a good workout.

[KJB]

We have a full keel with a cutaway forefoot. All that's been said about their tracking and the way they feel secure is true. It's also true about the maneuvering in tight spaces. I docked at a new slip this morning and it took two tries. I did it early so not many people would be watching.

I sometimes see these guys with modern designs dock their boats almost they're parking a car. That is so not my boat!

I have a fairly unique (i think) full keel in that the ballast is bolted on. It is an 11,000 lb molded lead piece. It is shaped to the hull and when out of the water, it is hard to tell that it is not encapsulated. I tried to upload some pics, but they failed...twice. Happy days!

[wingssail]

Originally Posted by thomm225

Well, has to be done since many times the best wind is along the beach. Plus you get a good workout.

It's the tide. In Puget Sound like any place where there is a lot of tidal range, there is reduced tidal current on shore and often back eddies behind each point or peninsula.

If you need to sail against the tidal current you place the beaches. If you are sailing with the tidal current you play the middle.

[mstrebe]

I've owned a traditional full keel boat (A '69 Columbia Sabre 5.5m) and two modern fin-keel twin rudder boats (Beneteau Oceanis 38 and 51.1). I also had a no-keel water ballasted sailboat (a MacGregor 26M). I've sailed each type pretty much weekly for at least four years and I've sailed them all in very heavy weather offshore (the MacGregor unintentionally both times). I've done serious passages in all of them. I'm not going to discuss the MacGregor further other than to say that it's great for protected water and nearshore but not for offshore passages, period.

In light weather, the keel doesn't matter. If you're a fair-weather sailor who isn't going to be making serious offshore passages of a week or longer, it's pretty much a wash IMHO. Full keel boats are easier to sail and very forgiving of sail trim. If the sails are up, they'll do 4 knots accidentally. Fin keel boats are much more maneuverable in marinas, more tender at the dock, and more nervous on the helm. You can't just hold the wheel and know which way you're heading, you have to keep your eyes on the compass or a landmark. Fin keel boats require your trimming attention even if you have them on autopilot.

Fin keels "hunt" on anchor a lot more than full-keels. The boat rotates easily on a fin-keel, and constantly oscillates between even a light wind and current dominance, causing constant hunting. It can be quite annoying. Full keels on the other hand are current dominated all the time and so they only hunt in a really bad blow.

Full keels are a PIA in tight quarters. If you intend to race your boat, forget a full keel. Not only will it accelerate slower than a fin keeler, you'll be unable to maneuver out of the way when you don't have rights as quickly as a fin keel. Coming into my slip without a motor on the full keel was a sphincter gripper that often left foot-prints on nearby boats (because the motor was also a '69) but coming in under sail on my fin-keel isn't much different than being under motor (don't get me started on sail-drives). Maneuverability under sail is an important safety factor and being able to control a 38' fin keel boat that has the dexterity of a dinghy under sail saves a lot of insurance money.

Fin-keels--especially twin rudders which all of mine have been--collect so much more kelp, lobster pots, and fishing line than full keels it's ridiculous. A bulb forward of the fin ensures that anything you run over says caught. If there's something under water, a twin rudder fin bulb-keel boat will find it. You basically have to have a strategy for dealing with the subsurface hazards, whereas with a full keel you can ignore the underside of the boat pretty much completely. Even a soft grounding with a bolted fin-keel necessitates a check of the keel bolts and hull joint. With a full keel, if you're not taking on water, you're good to go.

Keel structure changes everything about offshore heavy weather performance. Firstly, full keels certainly track better and are easier to helm without an autopilot. They're much more resistant to sudden round-ups (although not slow ones) and to broaching than fin-keel boats because they're unlikely to spin on their keel, which any fin-keeled boat can easily do. The helm is less nervous and the boat wanders much less with just a locked or tied-off helm.

HOWEVER, the fin-keel boats are so much more efficient that they're ultimately safer. There's a mythology on this board that the only difference between a heavily wetted full keel hull and a lower-drag fin-keel boat is that they >accelerate< more slowly but ultimately are as fast as a fin-keeled boat. It's as if you could compare a Honda Civic to a Mack Truck by saying they both go freeway speed and since the fuel is free the only difference is the zero-to-sixty time.

That's simply not true. While it's obviously possible for any boat to reach its displacement speed in a strong enough wind with enough sail up, the physics require that continuous forward motion with additional drag requires more power, full stop. More power is required to overcome the same weight in the same conditions with more drag. More power under sail means more sail area, and more sail area in a serious blow means more heeling all the time and much sensitivity to gusting, and therefore higher possibility of a knockdown. It means less safety on-deck. It means far more chance of crew injury.

A 34' fin-keeled modern hull sails with with considerably less sail area at 7 knots than a full-keel sailboat of the same LWL. I'd estimate based on my experience (not math) that it's as little as half the sail area for a fin-keel boat to maintain a controllable 7 knots in a 25 knot blow as the same full keel boat.

This means you can reef earlier. It means you can make good use of a roller-furling mainsail which would be seriously underpowered on a full keel boat. A full keel sailboat isn't going to go anywhere fast with the 25% sail area discount you have to take with a roller-furling main. It means a shorter and therefore safer boom. It means you can take 35 knot winds and 15' seas and continue to sail comfortably infinitely reefed on a balanced main and jib, rather than giving up and lying a-hull which you'd have to do with a two-reef traditional main on a full keel boat. I know because I've done both.

People here talk about sea-kindliness, and yes a full keel boat feels less slamy and less wet in moderate weather, but in really heavy weather, the strengths of a fin-keel boat come to the forefront by being able to continue to sail controllably beyond the conditions where you have to give up on a full-keel boat. That's a more important form of sea-kindliness in my opinion (but I don't get seasick so I'm not the best person to rate sea-kindliness).

My 51.1 fin keel twin rudder is by far the safest boat I've ever helmed. Why? Because I can reef the main (infinitely) right from the helm station. Right there. Not even going to the cabin-top, not leaving my helm seat. Manually. I can reef the jib from that same location. I can dump the main, right there. I have every working sheet on the boat led right back to the starboard helm--all of them. I can single hand the entire boat from lofting sails to reefing to trimming the self-tacking jib WITHOUT LEAVING MY STATION. Meaning I can stay tethered. The halyards, topping-lift, vang, and I'll say "less working" sheets are all clutched at the port helm.

The dramatic increase in crew (read my) safety afforded by not having to move around in weather is all afforded by the additional efficiency of ultralight construction: Because the boat is relatively light due in no small part to its fin keel, it can loft less sail, which makes the roller-furling main and the self-tacking jib all possible. This boat reaches hull speed in the same wind with a 90% self-tacking jib and a -20% mainsail compared to a full-keel competitor, and those two things enable everything else.

Fin keels have their issues. Honestly, if you have a fin keel boat, you won't want to be offshore solo or as a couple without an autopilot for more than a few days because the nervousness of the helm is exhausting and requires constant attention. If you don't have enough crew for a full watch rotation, you need an autopilot with a fin-keel. I know this isn't much concern these days, but autopilots do fail. You can't just lash off the helm for an hour and still be on anything like a consistent heading. You also have to helm manually in the worst weather because autopilots cannot predict following wave-trains well enough to keep the boat from being broached, and you've got to keep the stern perpendicular to what's coming next, not what just went by. It's exhausting.

But the idea that full-keel sailboats are inherently safer offshore is incorrect. They're inherently different. Your tactics change depending on the boat's differing capabilities. Both have their competencies, both have significant drawbacks, both have their feel, and both have their capabilities.

I personally feel safer in my fin-keelers continuing to sail (and control my destiny) than I do lying a-hull because the weather is beyond what the boat can possibly be sailed in.

[wingssail]

What an interesting and competent article from mstrebe

I would argue with only a few points:

Originally Posted by mstrebe

I've owned a traditional full keel boat (A '69 Columbia Sabre 5.5m) and two modern fin-keel twin rudder boats (Beneteau Oceanis 38 and 51.1). I also had a no-keel water ballasted sailboat (a MacGregor 26M). I've sailed each type pretty much weekly for at least four years and I've sailed them all in very heavy weather offshore (the MacGregor unintentionally both times). I've done serious passages in all of them. I'm not going to discuss the MacGregor further other than to say that it's great for protected water and nearshore but not for offshore passages, period.

Fin keels "hunt" on anchor a lot more than full-keels. The boat rotates easily on a fin-keel, and constantly oscillates between even a light wind and current dominance, causing constant hunting. It can be quite annoying. Full keels on the other hand are current dominated all the time and so they only hunt in a really bad blow.

Fin-keels--especially twin rudders which all of mine have been--collect so much more kelp, lobster pots, and fishing line than full keels it's ridiculous. If there's something under water, a twin rudder fin keel boat will find it.

Maybe it's where I've sailed or maybe it's my single rudder configuration but we've managed to collect something on our keel or rudder exactly twice in 34 years and over 55,000 miles of sailing. Once I went in the water and moved the net off the rudder, once I used a knife on a broomstick on a boat hook and cut the fishing lines.

Keel structure changes everything about offshore heavy weather performance. Firstly, full keels certainly track better and are easier to helm without an autopilot. They're much more resistant to sudden round-ups (although not slow ones) and to broaching than fin-keel boats because they're unlikely to spin on their keel, which any fin-keeled boat can easily do. The helm is less nervous and the boat wanders much less with just a locked or tied-off helm.

I'd like to add that the powerful rudders on fin keeled boats make recovery more likely. And without large sails broaching has not been a problem for us, ever, In fact not even with spinnakers. We've rounded up several times, but a full on broach, never. The rudder can get you out of it.

Fin keels have their issues. Honestly, if you have a fin keel boat, you won't want to be offshore solo or as a couple without an autopilot for more than a few days because the nervousness of the helm is exhausting and requires constant attention.

It's true that you don't want to be steering continuously, on any boat. Upwind the fin keel boats I've sailed track very good and don't hunt. Off the wind I don't think any boat sails a straight course for very long. Perhaps the fin keel boats drift off course sooner.

If you don't have enough crew for a full watch rotation, you need an autopilot with a fin-keel. I know this isn't much concern these days, but autopilots do fail.

We've had excellent luck with the monitor wind vane

You also have to helm manually in the worst weather because autopilots cannot predict following wave-trains well enough to keep the boat from being broached, and you've got to keep the stern perpendicular to what's coming next, not what just went by. It's exhausting.

I think auto pilots are improving, however our experience is that a wind vane with the proper sail area up, handles hravy downwind work fine, and upwind or on a reach they are also fine.

One of the more difficult passages for any cruising boat is Aruba to Colombia past Cabo de Vela. The wind and waves build for a 1000 miles, then accelerate around the cape.

Here is a shot of our passage there, under jib and reefed main, with the wind vane steering, and it was an easy passage. The wind was rarely of 30 but the waves were huge. We didn't steer a minute of it.
Log Book Pages: Aruba to Santa Marta, Columbia
You can read the log book account.

[Delfin]

Originally Posted by mstrebe

I've owned a traditional full keel boat (A '69 Columbia Sabre 5.5m) and two modern fin-keel twin rudder boats (Beneteau Oceanis 38 and 51.1). I also had a no-keel water ballasted sailboat (a MacGregor 26M). I've sailed each type pretty much weekly for at least four years and I've sailed them all in very heavy weather offshore (the MacGregor unintentionally both times). I've done serious passages in all of them. I'm not going to discuss the MacGregor further other than to say that it's great for protected water and nearshore but not for offshore passages, period.

In light weather, the keel doesn't matter. If you're a fair-weather sailor who isn't going to be making serious offshore passages of a week or longer, it's pretty much a wash IMHO. Full keel boats are easier to sail and very forgiving of sail trim. If the sails are up, they'll do 4 knots accidentally. Fin keel boats are much more maneuverable in marinas, more tender at the dock, and more nervous on the helm. You can't just hold the wheel and know which way you're heading, you have to keep your eyes on the compass or a landmark. Fin keel boats require your trimming attention even if you have them on autopilot.

Fin keels "hunt" on anchor a lot more than full-keels. The boat rotates easily on a fin-keel, and constantly oscillates between even a light wind and current dominance, causing constant hunting. It can be quite annoying. Full keels on the other hand are current dominated all the time and so they only hunt in a really bad blow.

Full keels are a PIA in tight quarters. If you intend to race your boat, forget a full keel. Not only will it accelerate slower than a fin keeler, you'll be unable to maneuver out of the way when you don't have rights as quickly as a fin keel. Coming into my slip without a motor on the full keel was a sphincter gripper that often left foot-prints on nearby boats (because the motor was also a '69) but coming in under sail on my fin-keel isn't much different than being under motor (don't get me started on sail-drives). Maneuverability under sail is an important safety factor and being able to control a 38' fin keel boat that has the dexterity of a dinghy under sail saves a lot of insurance money.

Fin-keels--especially twin rudders which all of mine have been--collect so much more kelp, lobster pots, and fishing line than full keels it's ridiculous. A bulb forward of the fin ensures that anything you run over says caught. If there's something under water, a twin rudder fin bulb-keel boat will find it. You basically have to have a strategy for dealing with the subsurface hazards, whereas with a full keel you can ignore the underside of the boat pretty much completely. Even a soft grounding with a bolted fin-keel necessitates a check of the keel bolts and hull joint. With a full keel, if you're not taking on water, you're good to go.

Keel structure changes everything about offshore heavy weather performance. Firstly, full keels certainly track better and are easier to helm without an autopilot. They're much more resistant to sudden round-ups (although not slow ones) and to broaching than fin-keel boats because they're unlikely to spin on their keel, which any fin-keeled boat can easily do. The helm is less nervous and the boat wanders much less with just a locked or tied-off helm.

HOWEVER, the fin-keel boats are so much more efficient that they're ultimately safer. There's a mythology on this board that the only difference between a heavily wetted full keel hull and a lower-drag fin-keel boat is that they >accelerate< more slowly but ultimately are as fast as a fin-keeled boat. It's as if you could compare a Honda Civic to a Mack Truck by saying they both go freeway speed and since the fuel is free the only difference is the zero-to-sixty time.

That's simply not true. While it's obviously possible for any boat to reach its displacement speed in a strong enough wind with enough sail up, the physics require that continuous forward motion with additional drag requires more power, full stop. More power is required to overcome the same weight in the same conditions with more drag. More power under sail means more sail area, and more sail area in a serious blow means more heeling all the time and much sensitivity to gusting, and therefore higher possibility of a knockdown. It means less safety on-deck. It means far more chance of crew injury.

A 34' fin-keeled modern hull sails with with considerably less sail area at 7 knots than a full-keel sailboat of the same LWL. I'd estimate based on my experience (not math) that it's as little as half the sail area for a fin-keel boat to maintain a controllable 7 knots in a 25 knot blow as the same full keel boat.

This means you can reef earlier. It means you can make good use of a roller-furling mainsail which would be seriously underpowered on a full keel boat. A full keel sailboat isn't going to go anywhere fast with the 25% sail area discount you have to take with a roller-furling main. It means a shorter and therefore safer boom. It means you can take 35 knot winds and 15' seas and continue to sail comfortably infinitely reefed on a balanced main and jib, rather than giving up and lying a-hull which you'd have to do with a two-reef traditional main on a full keel boat. I know because I've done both.

People here talk about sea-kindliness, and yes a full keel boat feels less slamy and less wet in moderate weather, but in really heavy weather, the strengths of a fin-keel boat come to the forefront by being able to continue to sail controllably beyond the conditions where you have to give up on a full-keel boat. That's a more important form of sea-kindliness in my opinion (but I don't get seasick so I'm not the best person to rate sea-kindliness).

My 51.1 fin keel twin rudder is by far the safest boat I've ever helmed. Why? Because I can reef the main (infinitely) right from the helm station. Right there. Not even going to the cabin-top, not leaving my helm seat. Manually. I can reef the jib from that same location. I can dump the main, right there. I have every working sheet on the boat led right back to the starboard helm--all of them. I can single hand the entire boat from lofting sails to reefing to trimming the self-tacking jib WITHOUT LEAVING MY STATION. Meaning I can stay tethered. The halyards, topping-lift, vang, and I'll say "less working" sheets are all clutched at the port helm.

The dramatic increase in crew (read my) safety afforded by not having to move around in weather is all afforded by the additional efficiency of ultralight construction: Because the boat is relatively light due in no small part to its fin keel, it can loft less sail, which makes the roller-furling main and the self-tacking jib all possible. This boat reaches hull speed in the same wind with a 90% self-tacking jib and a -20% mainsail compared to a full-keel competitor, and those two things enable everything else.

Fin keels have their issues. Honestly, if you have a fin keel boat, you won't want to be offshore solo or as a couple without an autopilot for more than a few days because the nervousness of the helm is exhausting and requires constant attention. If you don't have enough crew for a full watch rotation, you need an autopilot with a fin-keel. I know this isn't much concern these days, but autopilots do fail. You can't just lash off the helm for an hour and still be on anything like a consistent heading. You also have to helm manually in the worst weather because autopilots cannot predict following wave-trains well enough to keep the boat from being broached, and you've got to keep the stern perpendicular to what's coming next, not what just went by. It's exhausting.

But the idea that full-keel sailboats are inherently safer offshore is incorrect. They're inherently different. Your tactics change depending on the boat's differing capabilities. Both have their competencies, both have significant drawbacks, both have their feel, and both have their capabilities.

I personally feel safer in my fin-keelers continuing to sail (and control my destiny) than I do lying a-hull because the weather is beyond what the boat can possibly be sailed in.

Regarding safety offshore, can you point me to a loss of rudder on a full keel boat?

[Don C L]

Hmm I'd still like to maintain that it's not so simple as "full keel" and "fin keel." Displacement, location of the center of gravity and hull design figures in here. The Columbia Sabre is more like a J-boat and I am not sure I'd call J-boats "full keel" except that they aren't going to be as nimble around a harbor.

[Delfin]

Originally Posted by Don C L

Hmm I'd still like to maintain that it's not so simple as "full keel" and "fin keel." Displacement, location of the center of gravity and hull design figures in here. The Columbia Sabre is more like a J-boat and I am not sure I'd call J-boats "full keel" except that they aren't going to be as nimble around a harbor.

The Sabre's D/L puts it in the "light" category, and was built and advertised by Columbia as a "racer". Not exactly my idea of a full keel cruiser. But, at least if you hit something the keel hung rudder would be protected, and that is something, I suppose, but I doubt that would be a vessel you would take far off shore.

[mstrebe]

I've always appreciated the idea of a wind-vane, but haven't used one. Sounds like I need to.

[mstrebe]

Originally Posted by Don C L

Hmm I'd still like to maintain that it's not so simple as "full keel" and "fin keel." Displacement, location of the center of gravity and hull design figures in here. The Columbia Sabre is more like a J-boat and I am not sure I'd call J-boats "full keel" except that they aren't going to be as nimble around a harbor.

The Sabre had a 6,000 lb. formed in permanently attached full keel. It doesn't look like a J-boat at all to me--a lot more freeboard and a much larger cabin. It was advertised at the time as a racer and they remain a fast boat to this day. Mine was sold into a one-design club.

Certainly cramped for me with a cabin not designed for offshore use, I mostly slept in the cockpit underway. 3/4" thick resin hulls. They were only "light" when compared to other boats of its day, certainly not by today's standards.

I was young and did all kinds of stupid stuff in it. She never let me down and wasn't fussy. Almost sunk when a passenger kicked open a thru-hull--took on four feet of water in as many minutes to the point where by brother-in-law had to dive inside the cabin and listen to find the open thru-hull to close it. Sailed her back to her mooring flooded to her companionway hatch.

Not sure my current boats would be able to do that :-)

[mstrebe]

Originally Posted by Delfin

Regarding safety offshore, can you point me to a loss of rudder on a full keel boat?

Regarding safety offshore, can you point me to a loss of both rudders on a twin rudder full keel?

[Don C L]

My point being the Sabre and J-boats are slender, long overhanging hulls with a long keel and rudder attached designed for racing. When I think of "full keel" I usually think of a Tahiti ketch or a Dreadnought.

[Pendragon35]

Originally Posted by Paul L

There was one more step in backing on my Alberg 35. You set everything up and then threw her in reverse. Then I'd watch which way she went. If it was the way I wanted then I kept going. If not, then start over. After 15+ years of ownership I'm still convinced it was random.

I have an Alberg 35 too and yeah... going in reverse is .. interesting. I've learned to use prop walk; our stern does go dependably to port. On the other hand, going reverse/forward/reverse...etc, you really can spin her in about her own length. I had to do that in a 40 ft wide fairway once.

[hatteras53]

the wife and I have a 44' nauticat full keel motorsailor and love it. in tight spaces we just use our bow thruster. problem solved. it is very steady and seaworthy too. not interested in racing. can do 6-7 knots in a good wind. or turn on our 150 h.p. cummins. best of both worlds with 2 helm stations. michael

[Delfin]

Originally Posted by mstrebe

The Sabre had a 6,000 lb. formed in permanently attached full keel. It doesn't look like a J-boat at all to me--a lot more freeboard and a much larger cabin. It was advertised at the time as a racer and they remain a fast boat to this day. Mine was sold into a one-design club.

Certainly cramped for me with a cabin not designed for offshore use, I mostly slept in the cockpit underway. 3/4" thick resin hulls. They were only "light" when compared to other boats of its day, certainly not by today's standards.

The D/L of Wingsail's IOR Serendipity makes it "heavier" than the Sabre. There are many lighter boats today as you suggest, but it's hard to argue that the Sabre could be considered as an example of the full keel offshore vessels referenced in this thread.