Modern Production Cruisers at Sea

[tropicalescape]

Originally Posted by JK n Smitty

I think this is a very poor analogy (I own a Jeep by the way, so I get your point). The example of a Corvette would be better if we were talking about some of the one design rocket ships. No interior, just some sea births, carbon sticks, planning hull, etc.

For Benny, Catalina, Hunters, etc. I think a Ford Explorer or Chevy Tahoe would be a better analogy to the Jeep. No, they are not the off road beasts a Jeep or Defender 90 would be, but they could get across the creek in the right area, over the hill and up the rocky trail.

Your right ,corvette is not the correct anology ,I didnt want to say something like a ford escort,or a chevy vega,or even an Aires K frame car,but it would have been better as I didnt want to lump them in with 4-wheel drive vehicles,more like a front wheel drive 4 cylinder with curb feelers,disco ball and dingle berries hanging from the roof!! That will get them going!

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by tropicalescape

Come on now ,I was thinking how to answer the question when I thought that he does give the impression(illusion) of a person with knowledge! I wasnt picking on you or trying to be childish..I dont know anything about this guy other than his books, and you made a valid point about folks that write books ..The guy that made more money than anyone in the Motorized Paragliding business was a 19 yr old kid that didnt even know how to fly!!He wrote a silly little book(Going up in a powered parachute) and some plans and made a small fortune(to this day),so I get your meaning, But I dont think Don Casey is a little kid with an angle,I think he is legit from what I can tell , his work is good and those mags he writes for think so too,If hes a real sailor i dont know for sure ,but once again he gives the illusion that he is ...

The simple fact is you could go out to tomorrow and take a standard Bavaria 46 , fit some solar panels ( same as the oyster ) and sail the Atlantic. Absolutely no problem. The scratches on teak table will not worry you as much as those you get on the fancy interior of the oyster.

Don cases ignores stability , AVS on,y play a small part in real life stability as any Ovni owner knows

He ignores materials science and exotic materials engineering like SCRiMP , closed mould resin infusion , pre-preg, carbon , knotted fabrics 4" of chopper sprayed CSM is definitely not better then 3" of high tech carefully controlled infusion systems etcetc

He ignored modern glass material ,laminated windows are now stronger then the surrounding GRP.

He ignores the superior underwater modern appendages , faster boat speed , better sails , better dynamic controls , better pointing ability etc.

He ignores then lower heeling angles of modern boats.

He focuses on nonsense ratios like capsize screening as of 1.98 is really better then 2.02

Its just a biased piece , looking for an AVS of 180 !!!! ( actually he means no AVS not 180 ) he talks about essentially wooden boat features ( like flush decks etc ) , yet monocoque GRP is far stronger then wood and cabin tops are a major factor in improving AVS.

He makes silly statements like high freeboard raises the centre of gravity. , I believe he actually means the metacentric height , yet freeboard has little effect compared to either weight up high or weight down low , like engines , tankage etc. freeboard in itself is basically air. !

Sorry its a piece full of dis information , design ideas and engineering out of the 19 th century

I agree that good handholds are importantly, sea berths are important , tankage , storage as well as a sea kindly , yet fast and responsive hull. But these arnt in a modern HR or oyster yacht either.

Dave

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by tropicalescape

Your right ,corvette is not the correct anology ,I didnt want to say something like a ford escort,or a chevy vega,or even an Aires K frame car,but it would have been better as I didnt want to lump them in with 4-wheel drive vehicles,more like a front wheel drive 4 cylinder with curb feelers,disco ball and dingle berries hanging from the roof!! That will get them going!

If you take a modern 4x4 what you have is the fragile engineering of a car with enough technical extras to attract the cross country wanabees, marketing with lots of hills in the ads, a high cost to set the price point , actually take any of these cross country and all the gear fails, needs high tech servicing and parts and all costs a fortune.

Just like an oyster ! , yet a fiat panda 4x4 is just as good , can be repaired with a screwdriver and parts are cheap.

Money does not buy function , proper engineering and design does. Separate luxury from capability from cost.

Dave

[sailorboy1]

Originally Posted by neilpride

Wow Don, relax man, you will have a heart attack if you dont calm down a bit, Question Don? who is a idiot in this forum ?

Me? I was completely calm and if you can not understand any humor because you are too interested in some new way to insult me please send me a PM so I can take the apparently required private action,

[tropicalescape]

Originally Posted by S/V Illusion

Anyone else see the incredible irony in a bunch of people expounding on an obscure Internet site about the concept of offshore sailing and even citing another 'expert' about whom no one can attest to his qualifications?

I suspect that, like a few others here, I have sailed across the Pacific and learned only one thing relevent to this subject -that I don't even know everything I don't yet know.

These type discussions about what is the 'best' boat seem to occur only on this forum and serve only to mislead anyone who is actually seeking objective info. If any value arises from this brilliant example of wasted time, it is entertainment and a study in the frailties of human nature to criticize in order to sound knowledgeable.

Hell this aint nothing,try getting concise informative info from the USHGA(US Hangliding association)We used to call the group in Sauertown NC the "Sauertown fighter pilots association" those bung holeeos were always a fighting and cussing each other,no sooner than one would launch than another would start talking about how that person was going to kill himself because he was flying a Sensor and not a Wills Wing!! The bad thing is that there is always a new pilot or a want-to-be pilot standing on launch and they hear this mess and realize that there is no "united front" or a "sense of commraderie"(sp) and that was one of the biggest reasons for the sport never being able to grow,someone always scareing off the new kids with ugly remarks and despairiging(sp) comments,we keep it up here and we may experiance the same thing!!

[maersi]

If modern designs were inherently unsafe and dangerous, they would be capsizing and breaking up. People would stop buying them, but it seems that hasn't happened to any significant degree. The "rules" for calculating stability only apply the boats built in the era that the rules were invented. Take an old boat with a 50% ballast ratio, rebuild it and use half as much ballast. It will be lighter, it will sail faster, but it will be much less stable, because here you are comparing like with like. What is the ballast ratio of the many cruising cats out there? Zero, so are they dangerous? of course not, the same rules don't apply.
Modern designs have much more form stability, so don't need as much ballast. Are they more likely to remain inverted if rolled? Yes, but they are less likely to be rolled. If the weather becomes really bad, can you just go below and leave the boat to lie ahull? No, they need to be sailed, but they will sail.
Racing improves the breed. I can't remember who said it, but it is true. People who race boats (or anything else) are always trying to find an edge. Some ideas work, some don't. The ideas that do work are adopted by the other racers, and eventually filter into production designs. Computers allow designers to calculate exactly how thick the hull should be to give the required strength, in the old days it was more a case of let's add another half inch to be sure. Lighter means faster, and even less ballast needed.
Maybe you cannot heave to, the sailing is different. Modern designs will not look after themselves, they need to be sailed.
People who buy new boats often want them to look like new boats. There is fashion to consider. Plumb stem maximum beam carried well aft. That is how modern boats look. Anything else is old fashioned. The old boats with long overhangs only had long overhangs because that was the way racing boats were designed then, not because long overhangs had any advantages.

So what is my next boat going to be? Yep, an old heavy slow ketch, because that is the way I like to sail. If I wanted to get somewhere fast, I wouldn't go by sailboat. ;-)

[Udacha]

Originally Posted by tropicalescape

They sell in large numbers but ,most people dont sail around the world or down the coast of continents and across oceans, but if they do I think the things he mentioned make excellent sense, I have never ever read a book about ocean cruising that suggest that you could do it with a mass produced coastal cruser right off the shelf,not one person that writes books for a living is advocating doing such a thing..They will say things like "if" you do decide to use such a boat you should first change this ,modifie that, add this, change that and so on,where as some boats come of the line and do advocate that you could take the boat out to sea right off the shelf, companys like PSC,Oyster etc

Liza and Andy Copeland have over 120,000 miles under the keel of their 38 Beneteau. They have several books about cruising and do many seminars. After reading her books and talking with Liza by e-mail and on the phone I have decided on a "production Boat "

Regards

Mike

[Bash]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

(B) don caseys piece is quite frankly nonsense

Agreed. I don't think I've ever read one of his pieces that didn't give me heartburn. He discovered long ago that dire warnings about capsize ratios sell magazines, and hasn't had much else to say ever since.

[neilpride]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

The simple fact is you could go out to tomorrow and take a standard Bavaria 46 , fit some solar panels ( same as the oyster ) and sail the Atlantic. Absolutely no problem. The scratches on teak table will not worry you as much as those you get on the fancy interior of the oyster.

Don cases ignores stability , AVS on,y play a small part in real life stability as any Ovni owner knows

He ignores materials science and exotic materials engineering like SCRiMP , closed mould resin infusion , pre-preg, carbon , knotted fabrics 4" of chopper sprayed CSM is definitely not better then 3" of high tech carefully controlled infusion systems etcetc

He ignored modern glass material ,laminated windows are now stronger then the surrounding GRP.

He ignores the superior underwater modern appendages , faster boat speed , better sails , better dynamic controls , better pointing ability etc.

He ignores then lower heeling angles of modern boats.

He focuses on nonsense ratios like capsize screening as of 1.98 is really better then 2.02

Its just a biased piece , looking for an AVS of 180 !!!! ( actually he means no AVS not 180 ) he talks about essentially wooden boat features ( like flush decks etc ) , yet monocoque GRP is far stronger then wood and cabin tops are a major factor in improving AVS.

He makes silly statements like high freeboard raises the centre of gravity. , I believe he actually means the metacentric height , yet freeboard has little effect compared to either weight up high or weight down low , like engines , tankage etc. freeboard in itself is basically air. !

Sorry its a piece full of dis information , design ideas and engineering out of the 19 th century

I agree that good handholds are importantly, sea berths are important , tankage , storage as well as a sea kindly , yet fast and responsive hull. But these arnt in a modern HR or oyster yacht either.

Dave

I cant understand that.


1.Material science, You know Dave that the vast majority of mass production boats are still using Polyester resins and glass for their hulls, and in some instances foam core or balsa, nothing new, vinilester resins are introduced to avoid osmotic blistering, when you talk about Carbon and other exotic materials is something not related to the low cost production boats. The vast majority of Beneteaus or Bavarias are using Poly and glass , balsa or foam, and for blister prevention, vinilester as a bonus, Science??

2
Please define modern glass material for portholes and windows , you mean lexan and polycarb? I remind you that in the vast majority of new fresh production boats with that windows in the topsides have a label from the builder saying, FENDERS HERE.... Lol... ask any Lagoon 380 about that,,.Hard to believe that a window is stronger than the deck or hull .


3 Lower angle of heel, Don realize that if you pass that angle , the capsize is far more faster and violent, and in some designs prone to be turtle.


4 Freeboard is basically air? really?
In Don article that make sense, beamy flat sections dont have much low interior volume, how shilly is to get water in the bilge in a flat bottom boat and see the water sloshing around the cabin sole .


With all the respect Dave, Don Casey write many books about many things , maybe you cant agree with that point of view, but a lot of things make sense to me...

[muskoka]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

He ignores materials science and exotic materials engineering like SCRiMP , closed mould resin infusion , pre-preg, carbon , knotted fabrics 4" of chopper sprayed CSM is definitely not better then 3" of high tech carefully controlled infusion systems etcetc

He ignored modern glass material ,laminated windows are now stronger then the surrounding GRP.

Dave

Good point about materials technology. Vacuum bagging has increased the Glass-to-Resin ratio to about 70% whereas an old hand layup would probably be 45-50%. The glass is what provides strength so a vacuum bagged hull can be about 2/3 rds the thickness. And that's without even considering the better glass/carbon/kevlar fibres available and the much more sophisticated resins. I'd rather have a 12mm modern hull than a 25mm hand laid / chop strand build up.

Secondly, glass technology is improved but what has really improved are the plastics. Lexan is far stronger than anything available years ago - they use it to stop bullets.

And finally the snot. All these things are held together and bonded with wonder-goops which simply didn't exist 20 years ago.

All of these production boats are built with CAD structural analysis, modern materials and production line economies of scale. They are built with methods and materials that simply didn't exist until recently.

Many of the larger production boats are delivered across oceans to their customers on their own bottoms. So even if you the Owner never take them offshore, many of them have already done some serious sea miles. And given the volumes of production boats delivered, if they were truly crap you'd hear about these deliveries foundering regularly.

I'd take one to sea.

[Bash]

Originally Posted by Kenomac

To deny there's a difference between high end ocean going boats and production coastal cruisers as so many have done on this thread is just plain dumb.

I don't even know where to begin... so I won't.

Here are the primary differences between an Oyster and the higher end HunterBeneLinas:

Oyster: Light switches in the bulkheads, teak decks, a bow that tends to go underwater in square waves, mostly center cockpits, costs twice as much as a HunterBeneLina.

HunterBeneLina: Light switches on the lights; fiberglass decks, bows that tend to pound in square waves, mostly aft cockpits, costs half as much as an Oyster.

There, that wasn't hard, was it?

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by neilpride

I cant understand that.

1.Material science, You know Dave that the vast majority of mass production boats are still using Polyester resins and glass for their hulls, and in some instances foam core or balsa, nothing new, vinilester resins are introduced to avoid osmotic blistering, when you talk about Carbon and other exotic materials is something not related to the low cost production boats. The vast majority of Beneteaus or Bavarias are using Poly and glass , balsa or foam, and for blister prevention, vinilester as a bonus, Science??

2
Please define modern glass material for portholes and windows , you mean lexan and polycarb? I remind you that in the vast majority of new fresh production boats with that windows in the topsides have a label from the builder saying, FENDERS HERE.... Lol... ask any Lagoon 380 about that,,.Hard to believe that a window is stronger than the deck or hull .

3 Lower angle of heel, Don realize that if you pass that angle , the capsize is far more faster and violent, and in some designs prone to be turtle.

4 Freeboard is basically air? really?
In Don article that make sense, beamy flat sections dont have much low interior volume, how shilly is to get water in the bilge in a flat bottom boat and see the water sloshing around the cabin sole .

With all the respect Dave, Don Casey write many books about many things , maybe you cant agree with that point of view, but a lot of things make sense to me...

Ogh I've read plenty of dons work. But his stuff on stability is dated inaccurate or mis leading.

Modern yachts have very carefully controlled resin ratios , add exotic materials in places , increasing use of knitted rovings as against CSM , Airex and others closed cell foams. Finite stress analysis allows better understanding of where the stresses actually are. Unnecessary weight is just that

Modern laminated glass is what I meant. Modern windows are such that they are actually stronger then GRP.

Capsize is a dynamic process , AVS etc plays only a part. Form stability allows hulls to be sailed more upright which is more efficient resulting in better speed and more comfort. Simply saying a boat with an AVS of 140 is more seaworthy then one with an AVS of 120 is to mis understand the while stability process. The violence of a capsize had little to do with AVS , or beam , and a lot to do with the roll moment of inertia. ( for example )

Water sloshing around is a function of shallow canoe bodies. It has no effect on seaworthiness or ability to cross oceans. There are trade offs for all advances. In a modern boat there's never a need to have water in the bilges anyway.

[tropicalescape]

Originally Posted by Udacha

Liza and Andy Copeland have over 120,000 miles under the keel of their 38 Beneteau. They have several books about cruising and do many seminars. After reading her books and talking with Liza by e-mail and on the phone I have decided on a "production Boat "

Regards

Mike

All those miles offshore on a stock version without any mods or refabbing? Hell of a boat if so...

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by Bash

Here are the primary differences between an Oyster and the higher end HunterBeneLinas:

Oyster: Light switches in the bulkheads, teak decks, a bow that tends to go underwater in square waves, mostly center cockpits, costs twice as much as a HunterBeneLina.

HunterBeneLina: Light switches on the lights; fiberglass decks, bows that tend to pound in square waves, mostly aft cockpits, costs half as much as an Oyster.

There, that wasn't hard, was it?

There the truth

Dave

[neilpride]

Originally Posted by muskoka

Good point about materials technology. Vacuum bagging has increased the Glass-to-Resin ratio to about 70% whereas an old hand layup would probably be 45-50%. The glass is what provides strength so a vacuum bagged hull can be about 2/3 rds the thickness. And that's without even considering the better glass/carbon/kevlar fibres available and the much more sophisticated resins. I'd rather have a 12mm modern hull than a 25mm hand laid / chop strand build up.

Secondly, glass technology is improved but what has really improved are the plastics. Lexan is far stronger than anything available years ago - they use it to stop bullets.

And finally the snot. All these things are held together and bonded with wonder-goops which simply didn't exist 20 years ago.

All of these production boats are built with CAD structural analysis, modern materials and production line economies of scale. They are built with methods and materials that simply didn't exist until recently.

Many of the larger production boats are delivered across oceans to their customers on their own bottoms. So even if you the Owner never take them offshore, many of them have already done some serious sea miles. And given the volumes of production boats delivered, if they were truly crap you'd hear about these deliveries foundering regularly.

I'd take one to sea.

Windows and portholes glued to the sides are glued in some cases with Sika, and the proper primers,,, and i redone a bunch of this windows, funny is the builder dont use any kind of mechanical atachment , no screws , relying only in the glue, included Catana in the list, in the north climates are holding fine, here in the tropics Lexan spand and contract making the glue work hard, and eventually fail, one solution we found is to tape or paint the side corners of this windows to let the sun dont heat to much the borders and use the best glue avalaible, even one customer want the dam windows screwed because dont believe in the glue alone, Science?

There is a bunch of reports in the net from delivery skipers pointing structural problems in some production boats.

Glass technology Musoka, ask the Fountaine Pajots owners and their problems with some kind of shity osmotic blisters in new boats, or the 2 lagoon owners loosing their bottoms complety in hungry reefs....Internal Grid liners is the only thing keeping this structures together, another blue water feature i guess, in case of hull rupture or collision there is no way to reach nothing....
Cheers.