Making Ex-Racer My Cruiser . . . Am I Mad ?

[MacG]

As an ex amateur (gentleman) jockey I think you may this compare to riding a thoroughbred. A horse that is a handful but a joy for the experienced rider to mount.
So is sailing with an ex racer. You need to have the skills. If you do, you haven a hell of a boat and maybe the best of two worlds.

@Weyalan

Agari design is much older than 1997. It might be 1987. Or even earlier than that. I see clearly similar lines in your boat. The way you describe her reminds me of the Agari. Hans Koerner tol d me when I bought the first plans to extend the stern with about 1' simply by extending the keelsection.
I have been partner in a shipyard where one build some Van de Stadt Designs between 1970 and 1990.

[roverhi]

I detect a bit of envy in your evaluation of the IOR boats. If you consider todays butt ugly plumb bow, fat assred boats a thing of beauty, you probably are very fond of English culinary delights.

Spindly rigs are the result of racers desire for the lightest, tallest sticks they can put on a boat. Don't think that has changed much in the last century or two. Double, triple, quadruple and more spreaders are a dvotion to ever narrower sheeting angles and seem to be even more prevalent on today's boats, even those not designed strictly for racing.

Long spinnaker poles are a function of 'J' measurement. The IOR did encourage a large 'J' in relation 'E' measurement but for cruising long distances in other than DDW conditions, a large foretriangle with a double headsail rig is still the fastest way to sail without resorting to overly large overlapping headsails. Penalty poles weren't universal in the IOR world like they are now with the racing set. Let's hear it for the return of the bowsprit to make up for the small foretriangles of our current racing uglies.

The extreme mid beam and pinched sterns aren't the ideal design but at least you can sail them with only one rudder and wheel. The cockpits of these new boats are like a catamaran that they forgot to add the second hull to. DDW and driven hard, IOR boats are squirrely but quite controllable when sailed reasonably. They don't surf well but most boats require an experienced quick and alert helmsman in DDW surfing conditions. Something that point of sailing might be best avoided by the shorthanded cruising sailor.

IOR boats tended to be heavy in comparison to todays lightweight throwaway boats. They carried a lot of lead in keels that are long enough to take the ground in intentional and, more likely, unintentional groundings. The keels are long enough that the load is carried over a much larger area of the hull so are much more likely to suffer only superficial damage should you hit something with the keel. I would live in constant fear of my life cruising in one of the 'modern' ultra short bulb keeled boats. Being heavier, the boats are able to carry more weight without seriously effecting their performance. That's more stuff like a decent interior and the detritus that a cruising life accumulates.

The IOR boats will also do something the modern boats don't do well and that is go to weather in fair weather and foul. Talked with a couple who'd sailed their S&S designed Tartan 41 to Alaska from SF in the middle of winter and were on their way back south the following winter. They had nothing but superlatives for the sailing and ability and handling of their boat.

Their are some 'racing be all' IOR designs that I would not want to cruise in. There are many that have either been converted to a cruising interior or actually came with an interior that are out their cruising successfully. Don't there are going to be a lot of the current crop of 'Racers' that will be out cruising when their racing days are done.

Yes the IOR had its faults, but it also had its good points that shouldn't be ignored. Given the current state of racing boat design, I'd rather cruise sin one of the old IOR sleds. They actually look good and sail well on all points of sail under almost all conditions. Even in their worst point of sail for handling, they do fine if not overpowered.

[Weyalan]

Originally Posted by MacG

@Weyalan

Agari design is much older than 1997. It might be 1987. Or even earlier than that. I see clearly similar lines in your boat. The way you describe her reminds me of the Agari. Hans Koerner tol d me when I bought the first plans to extend the stern with about 1' simply by extending the keelsection.
I have been partner in a shipyard where one build some Van de Stadt Designs between 1970 and 1990.

My mistake in typing / copying from the website linked. Agari is listed as 1977, not 1997... you are quite correct.

[MacG]

@ Weyalan

No harm done and in any case you have opened a very interesting thread.

I think that all of us share more or less the same opinion. The IOR boats are not bad at all and the inferior designs from the early days of mixing exotic materials are well known.
I like the boats of the 70's and 80's - Frers, Holland, Judel & Vrolijk, C&C and S&S not in the least.

[sailstoo]

U R not mad, not even mildly deranged. Not all the IOR boats were bad dsesigns. I own an old 3/4 tonner and we love it. So what if it's got lotsa draft (air and water) and so what if it's got runners. Go into it with open eyes and a good survey and when the air's light and they're running the iron genny you'll be ghosting along at 4 knots. There was a great naval designer, Bill Lee, that said "fast is fun". It is.

[kevlarmike]

Sailstoo can you see yourself going cruising with just you and your wife on your 3/4 tonner? Your are way off base with Bill Lee he did say fast is fun, when he was sailing ULDB's he and a few others like the Moore brothers and George Olson disliked IOR boats so much they designed and built ultra light displacement boats

[kevlarmike]

Greetings Roverhi If you are refering to me being envious you could not be mistaken more, I have much experience with all types of boats, i also have the perfect boat, to get it right, i had to do it myself.

[kevlarmike]

Sorry folks i am out of here, a reply of mine was deleted, did not think was offensive this kind of control is not for me. Cheers

[MacG]

Some opportunity came up my way and I will give it a serious thought. The Lady is stinking far away from my regular hunting-ground, but all nice babe's have their regular disadvantages. She is a pure tropical girl and offers little protection against the Atlantic Najades on her clean features, though, that can be helped.
She is the ultimate IOR in extremis and a handful to play for the single sailor who wants to "mount" her.

Below decks she offers sober but sufficient environment to dwell in relative comfort with no lack of space. This is a "Mean Machine" with splendid prospects, at least for a fit and game couple.

What do you think of her? She is 43/44 ft with an 8 ft draft ......

[Weyalan]

Originally Posted by MacG

What do you think of her? She is 43/44 ft with an 8 ft draft ......

She looks excellent to me, but then again, I would say that, having already chosen the difficult path of refitting an old IOR boat to be a cruiser.

Judging by the photos, she's a masthead rigged 2-tonner, and at least part of the refit work is already done... furler for the headsail and lazy-jacks/boom bag for the main... For me the downside would be the flush deck, unless there was already good standing headroom down below, I suppose, which is a little unlikely. If your shipwrigthing skills are good enough to countenance building a cabin-top (and given your references to working in ship-building yards, I'm betting that they are), then perhaps this isn't a deal breaker.

The 8' draft wouldn't worry me - Insatiable is about 7'9", which hasn't been a problem for us so far. Assuming it is a masthead rig; while I prefer a fractional rig in many ways (not a huge fan of massive masthead overlapping headsails) the masthead rig will make it easier and more realitic to add an inner forestay - be that cutter or solent style... I think, for a cruiser, a furling headsail is a real plus but that it is good to have the ability to hoist a small sail (even a storm jib) with the headsail still on the furler.
43-44 foot is probably as big as I'd want to go, for 2 reasons - firstly I think it is about as big as a couple can easily handle in and around marinas and docks, and scondly because everything becomes more exponentially more expensive as length increases. I sometimes look jealously at people on bigger boats, but then I think about the cost of new sails for those big boats versus our (relatively) smaller boat...

I'm sure you are well aware of this, but if you do buy a 25+ yr old racing boat, with a view to cruising, be prepared to spend quite a lot of money and an enormous amount of time working on her. Do I regret buying Insatiable - no, not for a second. If I knew, 6 years ago, what I know now, I might have done things slightly differently, though. However, you obviously know what you are doing, so if the price is right and you are up for the challenge, go for it!

[hellosailor]

"Insatiable is about 7'9", " In some parts of the world, you could volunteer for offshore antisubmarine patrol and have lighters come out to resupply you. <G>

I'll bet she stands up & points nicely though.

[Weyalan]

Originally Posted by kevlarmike

Sorry folks i am out of here, a reply of mine was deleted, did not think was offensive this kind of control is not for me. Cheers

I'm sorry to hear that you are absenting yourself from this thread. While I didn't necessarily agree with everything that you posted, I thought that your input was interesting and worthwhile.

[MacG]

Looking what kevlarmike builded himself he know at least ho a boat looks like. Of course this is an ironic remark.

@ Weyalan

There is sufficient headroom downstairs. As I said, the boat is sober fitted out, do not expect Roman Abramovich specifications, but sufficient for a live aboard.
I saw on a Canadian Nelson Marek of same design a splendid solution for, you know, the splashing Najads. A very elegant perspext windscreen fitted into a stainless frame kept all that spray away from the helmsman and winch-grenadiers.
This boat is offered at an affordable price - but this girl needs to have more than one lover in order to get the most out of her.

[Randyonr3]

Originally Posted by MacG

this girl needs to have more than one lover in order to get the most out of her.

Actually Mac, it dosent take that much to keep them on their feet, unless you plan on cruising in race mode..
sure you,ve got many "tweeking " adjustments over the normal cruiser, but they dont have to be used and even then, give her some good open water and a good auto-helm and she can be handled by one person just fine..
with a crew of 4 or 5 people in race mode, those adjustments, can be adjusted in a matter of a few seconds, By yourself, it may take a few minutes to tighten her up but can be done..
we've put a few thousand miles on ours, all Open Ocean, and never had more than the wife and I and the last time I brought her down from Alaska, the wife drove the jeep and I sailed her down by myself..
Give her some good open water to streach her legs and you'd be surprised how easy she is to handle..

[MacG]

I can follow that. And you could not have said it better. I used to sail on an AC as bosun and know perfectly what you mean. When I was still young I had a number of (old) racingcars that I used as roadvehicles in a time that the government(s) was not in the mental disorderly state as the present ones are.

I will give it a thorough think over. Maybe I will do it although I am quite satisfied with my present ship.