Reasons to stay "Monohull"

[accomplice]

Originally Posted by Polux

This is your problem and of many that have biased opinions due to his own personal perspectives: "The Cigale 16 and the Pogo 50 are not cruising boats because they don't fit my criteria regarding a cruising boat and I would not like to cruise in them".

Wrong biased perspective: What makes a cruising boat is the use that is given to the boat and the goal of its design. Neither the Pogo 50 neither the Cigale 16 were designed as racing boats neither they are used to race.

Whether the design house claims a boat was designed for X or Y has no relevance. How is the boat used, and how it performs at that use are ways to assess whether a boat is X -- not what the designers or some boating industry media say about it.

They are not even cruiser-racers given their not optimization in what regards IRC rating (that is a terrible one) they are not designed to race at all but to be what you say your boat is (and it is not): a long rage cruiser maximized for fast passage making. That is for what they were designed for and the use their owners give to them.

It is interesting that you mention IRC -- we are all aware of how designers and builders distorted their designs to get favorable treatment under IRC rules. Do you think that designers and builders have stopped building to rules because a group called ARC instead of IRC gives the classification.

Given the boat you have it is obvious that you would hate to cruise on a boat like those but you can be sure that the sailors that would consider one of those boats for fast passage making, never would consider a heavy slow boat like yours and that, even if obvious, is a thing that is hard for you to understand. It seems that is even hard to understand that those are much faster boats than yours.

I'm sure I would enjoy cruising on almost any boat. I believe that outfitted for cruising, though, that either boat you mention would not, on average, offer any faster passages than well-designed full displacement hull. I also assert that the trade-offs involved with those designs would impose other costs.

Both boats are advertised and sold as what they are designed to do, for the sailors that buy them. On the words of the Cigale 16 designer (one of the major NA):

Here I think we have come to the root of the issue. I believe that boat designers, boat builders, boat dealers, and (advertising supported) boating magazines are not impartial in offering their opinions on boats, and therefore feel their opinions carry no weight. They may be a source of quantitative data (e.g. tankage, price, etc.), but not of subjective, qualitative assessment.

"Featuring a modern chine hull, the CIGALE 16 has all the ingredients it needs making it an exceptionally fast cruiser at all speeds and on all seas. With a maximum waterline length, reduced wetted surface, a light but very powerful.. hull..cut out for both upwind speed and for long schedules in tradewinds.

The inside reproduces the typical CIGALE formula which is often praised by many clients whose program is generally life on board and offshore sailing. The large aft cabin with rear and side seaviews, the kitchen and navigation table, advanced cabins, the omnipresent light and ventilation that have all been studied with care are the ingredients that makes the CIGALE 16 a really suitable boat for both fast cruising or for voyaging with the best comfort. "

Do you see a single word about racing? The boast is described as a voyage fast cruiser and that's what their clients want and that is for what it is used for by them.

If one wanted to sell an ocean-going race boat, this is a logical way to go about it -- make claims that it is good for cruising, race it in ARC and point to performance that will rarely be repeated under cruising conditions.

The Pogo 50 designer (another major NA) says about the Pogo 50:

Again, you quote the designer?

(Did you know that the word "gullible" isn't in the dictionary?)

Off course a sailor that likes to sail fast know that he cannot travel with a lot of stuff so these cruisers are also among the ones that enjoy life in a different way than the ones that sail with boats heavily loaded. The pleasure and fun of sailing are essential to them and they get the boats that maximize that sailing pleasure. Others are more focused not on sailing but mainly in cruising. Some even cruise in motor boats.

Sailing is but *one* of the things that a cruising boat needs to do.

It seems you did not understood the classifications that are given on the ARC files: they have the real time and the compensated time.

Whether average speed the average speed or not (are you saying it isn't?) during a race is only cursorily related to average speed while cruising. That engine use is penalized necessarily inclines a skipper towards different behavior than when it is not.

Regarding your boat not being slower than a Pogo 50 on that particular transat because you have made some passages with your boat averaging that speed (7.84K), using engine when the wind is not strong enough to move your boat at a decent speed, there is no logic in that.

When I say a cruising boat is a fast passage maker, I mean that it is a boat fitted for cruising making passages quickly. That is completely different from saying that a boat advertised or classified as a cruiser has a high top speed.

...

To see if you are right or not and since on that transat there were sailing boats of all types (two hundred) we can check out what were the boats that come immediately ahead and after that Pogo 50, (that as we have already seen on the compensated classification was only averaged sailed, far away than its sailing potential).
...

I suggest that if you want to learn more about cruising across oceans, that you put down the polar charts, put down the advertising brochures, put down the industry magazines, put down the racing results, and go cruising. Personal experience sailing beyond soundings provides greater understanding of cruising passagemaking than any glossy brochure. If you want to learn more based on the experience of others, there are many anecdotal sources, and there are large N statistical sources such as Voyagers Handbook.

And most of all we can see what was the time of the best sailed medium weight cruiser among all the 200 boats and compare it with the time the Pogo 50 took to make the passage.

Do you see any irony in claiming that a boat is not a racing boat, yet find need to support your arguments with racing results?

[accomplice]

Originally Posted by robert sailor

Sailboat races, real ones, do not use engines
therfore the ARC is not a real race.

When boats that start at the same point at about the same time, end at the same point, have timed passages, and compared results, that is a race. When they further penalize motor use, that is a sailing race.

Race is a commonly used word in the english language. It's meaning is clear
-- a competition between runners, horses, vehicles, boats, etc., to see which is the fastest in covering a set course.

It can be billed as a rally, but it is still a race.

(This is part of why my insurance company considers it a race too)

[accomplice]

Originally Posted by Polux

I can only laugh at that as most of the thousand cruisers that do that passage on the ARC will be laughing at that. You may say that only for lack of knowledge but you don't know what you are talking about.

Next year we will have to members of this forum making the ARC. Why don't you ask them if they are going to "race" the ARC?

Next week my friend is running in the Boston Marathon. He's running for fun, and to raise money for a charity. He has no intention of winning. By your logic, does that mean the Boston Marathon is not a race?

Yes, the ARC has a small racing division and those are racing. Last year they were 10 boats out of more than 200 and it was not from the racing division that I did take results but from the cruising division , and maybe you had not notice the difference but it is a easy one:

On the racing division they are racing and on the cruising division they are cruising.

What, in your opinion, means that someone is "racing" in a rally vs "cruising" in it? It is simply a function of which division they've been assigned to?

[Sandero]

This forum:

https://www.facebook.com/15619226874...4105127537191/

[robert sailor]

Originally Posted by accomplice

When boats that start at the same point at about the same time, end at the same point, have timed passages, and compared results, that is a race. When they further penalize motor use, that is a sailing race.

Race is a commonly used word in the english language. It's meaning is clear
-- a competition between runners, horses, vehicles, boats, etc., to see which is the fastest in covering a set course.

It can be billed as a rally, but it is still a race.

(This is part of why my insurance company considers it a race too)

Your confusing a race with a rally, the ARC is a rally. Like most rallies everyone starts out at the same place and ends up at the same place. If you engaged in any sailboat races you would know that engines are never used and if you used your engine in a real race you would be disqualified. Please tell me of real sailboat races you know of that allow you to use your engine for moving your boat in place of sails.

[barnakiel]

Originally Posted by accomplice

"..."

What, in your opinion, means that someone is "racing" in a rally vs "cruising" in it? It is simply a function of which division they've been assigned to?

But have you not answered your own questions by placing quotes where they belong?

;-)

In a rally, you are rallying. Racing is what racers do and cruising is what members of this forum do. Hence the Cruising Forum. We should start charging ARC members who want to Cruise a licensing fee. If they refuse to pay, we can sue Yachting Monthly for spreading untrue, biased and colorful version of reality. Not sure we can win the case, but we will get plenty of exposure and double perhaps triple our member count. We cannot lose the case because we are always right. We may end up in a draw though, and be forced to settle out of court. I have a gun, a hammer and a baseball bat here, call me up when it comes to blows.

I like the Boston Marathon counterargument though. I am a runner too. I think the athletic part of the running population race there. I think the rest of runners we just run it and hope to finish. You get a Finisher tee if you finish, not a Racer one.

Back to Cigale and Pogo 50, people who have never seen one should not vote. They are cruising boats allright. Not sure of Pogo but Cigale is a very very fine one too.



Cigale is a fine reason to stay mono. They have fabulous under cockpit lounge area. I have seen one with etched glass cockpit floor. Awesome.



b.

[barnakiel]

More reasons to stay quality monohull:



By now I am nearly convinced Cigale IS a cruising boat. If you say it is not please roll out heavier guns.

If I were to chose between a W32 and a Cigale 16, it would be a toss.

b.

[robert sailor]

Originally Posted by barnakiel

But have you not answered your own questions by placing quotes where they belong?

;-)

In a rally, you are rallying. Racing is what racers do and cruising is what members of this forum do. Hence the Cruising Forum. We should start charging ARC members who want to Cruise a licensing fee. If they refuse to pay, we can sue Yachting Monthly for spreading untrue, biased and colorful version of reality. Not sure we can win the case, but we will get plenty of exposure and double perhaps triple our member count. We cannot lose the case because we are always right. We may end up in a draw though, and be forced to settle out of court. I have a gun, a hammer and a baseball bat here, call me up when it comes to blows.

I like the Boston Marathon counterargument though. I am a runner too. I think the athletic part of the running population race there. I think the rest of runners we just run it and hope to finish. You get a Finisher tee if you finish, not a Racer one.

Back to Cigale and Pogo 50, people who have never seen one should not vote. They are cruising boats allright. Not sure of Pogo but Cigale is a very very fine one too.



Cigale is a fine reason to stay mono. They have fabulous under cockpit lounge area. I have seen one with etched glass cockpit floor. Awesome.



b.

Certainly not the cheap seats! What do those boats sell for?

[accomplice]

Originally Posted by robert sailor

Your confusing a race with a rally, the ARC is a rally. Like most rallies everyone starts out at the same place and ends up at the same place. If you engaged in any sailboat races you would know that engines are never used and if you used your engine in a real race you would be disqualified. Please tell me of real sailboat races you know of that allow you to use your engine for moving your boat in place of sails.

I understand what a sailing race is. I've participated in many, from winning my college division in 420s in the 80s to racing 44' monohulls. The rules of a sailing race are clearly different from the rules of a rally. I have not participated in a rally, but if finishing time/place were at all important to me, the penalties for engine use would figure into my calculation of when to motor and when not to -- and in this way it is different from cruising.

[accomplice]

Originally Posted by barnakiel

I like the Boston Marathon counterargument though. I am a runner too. I think the athletic part of the running population race there. I think the rest of runners we just run it and hope to finish. You get a Finisher tee if you finish, not a Racer one.

Would you agree that one's performance in the Boston Marathon is a poor predictor of how long it might take someone to hike the Appalachian trail with a 70# pack on their back?

[Sailor Doug]

Originally Posted by barnakiel

More reasons to stay quality monohull:



By now I am nearly convinced Cigale IS a cruising boat. If you say it is not please roll out heavier guns.

If I were to chose between a W32 and a Cigale 16, it would be a toss.

b.

How do you use the companion way stairs in a sea? Never cared for stairs without a wall to lean on.


Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[Polux]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

That's a really beautiful boat -- looks like Polux finally gets what kind of hull forms we like up here. The Swedes and the Finns know how to build them

The Wasa is a bit old fashioned even for me -- the modest draft keel lacks a bulb (very important). But the general approach is good, .....So a boat which is not "powerful" with huge sail area and huge stability, but which requires much less power to get up to speed, in this case to 10 knots (its hull speed minus one) and stay there for days on end and in all kinds of conditions, without stress or effort.

You men you like. Regarding what the forum likes, most like old designed boats since it is what they have and it seems to exist a strong bias regarding looking at other boats with the one that is owned as the best and sometimes only reference, ignoring different needs or different tastes.

On this forum there are sailors that like all kinds of boats for cruising and happily the taste is changing quickly towards contemporary designs for the same types of boats.

Regarding what I like, I like a lot of different types of sailboats that have in common to sail well or relatively well. Some 10 years ago I made some inquiries in what regards to buy a Wasa Atlantic 51 for myself (exchanged some emails with a Wasa dealer). They were not very expensive in 2th hand because at that time marinas charged more for length and less for boat area and marina costs for a 51ft boat that had the interior size of a 38ft boat were huge and very few wanted a boat like that clearly maximized for upwind work and with little interior space.

But regarding what you like, if what you like is a relatively fast passagemaker (not a boat maximized for fast passagemaking) with a good load ability than your taste for narrow monohulls makes no sense unless you have some strange desire to sail most passages against the prevailing winds.

What makes sense as a boat for that function is a boat designed with an optimization for downwind sailing but a boat capable also of a decent performance upwind, a beamy boat but with narrow entries with a hull with all beam pulled aft, a boat that will prevent rolling downwind and allow to sail with little heel angles, carrying a decent load.

That is why almost all contemporary designs for that use (by the best NA) have that type of beamy hull, from the Boreal, to the Allures, OVNI, Amel, Cigale, Halberg Rassy and so on. Even the new Rustler are like that LOL.

Originally Posted by Dockhead

By the way, and a bit of even further thread drift, but it occurs to me that we don't know much about L/B, compared to what we know about SA/D and D/L ratios. Is there a formula which tells us something about the difference in power required to drive the hull, with different L/B ratios? I'm guessing that there is more at play than wetted surface. What I mean is -- a narrow hull is a way to reduce wetted surface for a given waterline length.

But at some point, a narrow hull has a higher practical hull speed -- a la catamarans. When does that effect start to come into play?

L/B I suppose is a mistake? You mean D/L? Ballast is far from being an indicator of a boat stability and not even B/D ratio gives an acceptable reference.

I have been looking for years to the comparative performance between fast boats with very narrow hulls and fast beamy boats, with data taken by races, ARC and sail tests. It is for me a fascinating subject and many times completely different boats, one very narrow and other very beamy have very similar performances on most conditions but not in all conditions.

Basically since the performances are not very dissimilar, beamy boats are a much better option for cruising because they offer not only a much bigger interior but also because they sail with much less heel. That is why you see almost all cruising boats opting for a beamy hull.

Regarding downwind sailing fast beamy boats, with all beamy pulled back are not substantially faster downwind but they are much easier to sail at the point near the limit and that constitutes a big speed advantage, specially in what regards ocean sailing and short crews.

Regarding sailing upwind fast very narrow boats have not a substantial advantage and sometimes none regarding fast beamy boats.....unless waves are involved, special big or steep short period type of med waves.

Then when the wave passes the boat, the wet surface becomes much bigger on a beamy boat (what is called wave drag) and a beamy boat starts to become slower even if not slow because their bigger power allows them to pass in force, but not in a very comfortable way.

Regarding comfort is not as bad as it seems since while a narrow fast boat will have a better performance closer to the wind (and catching the waves more frontally) a beamy fast boat will have a better performance on a more open course (even if he can get closer to the wind) going considerably faster than the narrow boat (but not faster on VMG), precisely to avoid wave drag. In the end the difference in comfort are relative.

Besides LWL (with David Geer correction for lighter boats) the two main ratios to look at a boat power and speed are SA/D and D/L simply because SA/D is close associated with stiffness (boat power) and D/L closed associated with wet surface:

Displacement/Length ratio (D/L): "The significance of the displacement-length ratio is that the lighter a boat is relative to its waterline length, the higher its speed potential, especially when in displacement mode. If there is less water to push aside, wavemaking drag is reduced. Some ultralight-displacement boats, or ULDBs, are light enough to plane just like a powerboat, in which case a low D/L gives some indication how quickly and easily a design will transition out of displacement mode. (Although hull shape is also important.)"

Sail Area/Displacement: "The SA/D is analogous to an automobile’s horsepower-to-weight ratio, with sail area being a measure of power, and displacement being indicative of wavemaking drag. The principal components of drag are friction and wavemaking; since wavemaking increases disproportionally with speed, the SA/D is indicative of performance in moderate- to heavy-air conditions."

http://www.sailmagazine.com/boats/design-and-technology/comparing-design-ratios/

[robert sailor]

Originally Posted by accomplice

I understand what a sailing race is. I've participated in many, from winning my college division in 420s in the 80s to racing 44' monohulls. The rules of a sailing race are clearly different from the rules of a rally. I have not participated in a rally, but if finishing time/place were at all important to me, the penalties for engine use would figure into my calculation of when to motor and when not to -- and in this way it is different from cruising.

I don't think it is any different from cruising because it's exactly what cruisers do. They sail when they can and when they can't they often motor. No one asks what speed do you motor at do they, only engine hours. What if I motor at 7 knots and you motor at 5 knots? At the end of the day you will be ahead of me by 48 miles and if I motored a couple of days I'd be ahead close to a hundred miles. What will you learn about the sailing performance in a situation like that, answer "nothing" With your racing background you do know exactly what a race is so why not call the ARC what it is...a rally.

[Polux]

It seems I exceeded the time to modify a post and by mistake the explanation regarding those two images was not posted. Here it is:


Many do not know that the beam of a boat as little to do with the boat wet area, having almost all to do with D/L ratio. Regarding that and to better understand this look at the difference between beam on a IMOCA boat and actual wet area, or waterplane of the boat. The beam that counts for sailing performance is that one on the waterplane, not the one on the surface, out of water.

[Sandero]

......

This post may be interesting.... but it belongs in a different thread.