The Perfect 60' to 65' Cruising Boat

[weavis]

Originally Posted by Kenomac

Dockhead,

The folks in the Oysters, Discoverys, Swans, Amels and HRs are the ones out cruising and doing the liveaboard thing, not the ones sitting dockside in condos. Everywhere we go, these are the people out in the anchorages living self contained mostly as a retired or semi retired cruising couple... primarily British in origin for the Oyster owners. It may seem contrary to what you'd imagine, but it's true. We also see an abundance of catamarans, the new over 50ft Lagoons look like floating condos, but I think most of them are charter boats.

I have a different view on floating condos.

"Why not?"

If the vessel sails well, is safe, has EVERYTHING that person could desire for comfortable living, and more importantly, the owner can afford it................then go for it.

Surely the idea of advancement in boat manufacture is to combine seaworthiness and comfort in a good looking package?

I love the Oyster, but for my choice, Id have a good safe condo 40 footer anytime......

And if you visit Dockhead, you can have the number 4 cabin with tub and HD Tv.........and use your own kitchenette.........

[noelex 77]

This was a custom 66 foot boat I saw recently.
The owner was a pilot and wanted to design his own electrical system with 10 gauges for everything. This was one of the many control panels.

Personally I would prefer something much simpler with less to go wrong, but that's the point you can get exactly what you want with everything.

You want good upwind performance? Perhaps deep bulb keel, narrow beam, tall carbon mast, water ballast, narrow sheeting angle, rod rigging, light ends. "Certainly sir."

[noelex 77]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

10. Nav station not set down in a cave like mine, but on the contrary raised up higher than the salon level so that one can see out over the bow from there and keep a watch from there. The Discovery 55 has this, but it screws up the salon arrangement IMHO – a better solution than this should be found. Plus the Discovery nav station is far too small. On the contrary, we need a full-sized chart table, adequate storage for a large collection of full-sized paper charts, panels for convenient mounting of full complement of instruments, radios, electrical and electronic controls.

Like you, this new owner wanted a comfortable, spacious helming station with clear views out over the bow (and in addition into the engine bay below. Notice the clear floor ).

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by bona2

Dockhead,

Have you looked at Hallberg-Rassy 64 ? It is very much like what you looking for.
Hallberg-Rassy - Yachts - Center Cockpit Boats

The HR 64 is closer to what I want than the Oyster 625, but it's still pretty far from the mark.

The interior layout is much more seaworthy and less condo-like -- that's a big plus. It has more technical space, and if the engine room is like other HR engine rooms, this is also better. The glass windshield is something I have always loved about HR's. The proportions are much better with narrower 17' beam and a longer hull.

But this boat has the modern fat a** which I don't like, and the entire aft end of the boat is spent on a cavernous dinghy garage. The deck storage is extremely poor, worse than what I have now on a boat which is 10 feet shorter! The rig is primitive (I guess you can order a different one). The boat is immensely heavy (nearly 40 tons). The hull is foam cored, which I think is less stable and strong than balsa blocks, and there is no Kevlar.

It is interesting to note that this boat has a 300 horsepower, six-cylinder main engine -- compared to 180 horsepower in the similarly sized Oyster. When sailboats get to be this size, I reckon serious motoring capability is a big plus -- with 300 horsepower, this kind of waterline length, and a relatively narrow beam like this, I bet you can achieve my magic 5 knots dead upwind on motor alone -- a big plus. I'd prefer to sail, but it would be really good to have that card up your sleeve in case of need.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by weavis

I have a different view on floating condos.

"Why not?"

If the vessel sails well, is safe, has EVERYTHING that person could desire for comfortable living, and more importantly, the owner can afford it................then go for it.

Surely the idea of advancement in boat manufacture is to combine seaworthiness and comfort in a good looking package?

I love the Oyster, but for my choice, Id have a good safe condo 40 footer anytime......

And if you visit Dockhead, you can have the number 4 cabin with tub and HD Tv.........and use your own kitchenette.........

Floating condo type spaces are ok on a catamaran, but not on a seagoing mono which is expected to do serious offshore passages. The reason of course is heel.

But I don't want floating condo spaces -- that's not my idea of sailing. It's a waste of hull volume which is needed for technical and storage spaces for a serious long-distance cruiser. The whole idea is to keep to somewhat more modest accommodation spaces but with greatly expanded technical and storage spaces.

[Snowpetrel]

For the sort of performance and punch you want to windward it would be hard to beat some water ballast tanks port and stb. Sail flatter, faster and with more momentum… maybe even a canting keel! Weight to windward is the racers dirty secret. Be it crew, sails or ballast.

[weavis]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Floating condo type spaces are ok on a catamaran, but not on a seagoing mono which is expected to do serious offshore passages. The reason of course is heel.

But I don't want floating condo spaces -- that's not my idea of sailing. It's a waste of hull volume which is needed for technical and storage spaces for a serious long-distance cruiser. The whole idea is to keep to somewhat more modest accommodation spaces but with greatly expanded technical and storage spaces.

Im sure you have seen the condomarans built in South Africa that REGULARLY cross to the USA and Europe on their delivery cruises...... This is serious off shore passage making........

But then you are right, the damn things wont heel and have all the technical stuff and storage spaces...........

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by noelex 77

You want good upwind performance? Perhaps deep bulb keel, narrow beam, tall carbon mast, water ballast, narrow sheeting angle, rod rigging, light ends. "Certainly sir."

Yes!! I should have mentioned water ballast, which was an idea of one of my crewman on my North Sea crossing last week. This is some kind of hull volume challenge, but if implemented with domestic water (rather than sea water as in racers) it might work, as domestic water tankage could be used. This is a great idea.

Otherwise, yes -- tall carbon mast, deep bulb keel, narrow beam, sheeting angle choices -- those are all in the brief.

[poiu]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

The new Humphreys Oyster 625 is just about the antithesis of my ideal cruising boat -- a big, fat, immensely heavy floating condo with uselessly cavernous living spaces and inadequate technical spaces. That boat has a beam of 18', and with its fat a** I bet the transom is wider than the beam of my present boat! It displaces nearly 40 tons! It doesn't solve any of the main issues in my list -- dinghy on the same crappy davits I have on my present boat, no sheltered watchkeeping station, no sail locker, no windshield, etc., etc. It has less deck storage than my present boat! With respect, that seems to me to be 90% lifestyle and maybe 10% sailing. Here is the master cabin:

Attachment 88012

Imagine being tossed around in that in a seaway! Bah! That's made for the dockside at Monaco, not for crossing the North Sea.


I much prefer the Holman & Pye Oyster 62 which, one has to admit, is one of the most beautiful sailboats ever put in the water. I also much prefer Humphreys' earlier designs, like your very pretty boat (the Oyster 53), drawn when he was still imitating H&P and before he started imitating Hanses.

What I'm looking for is very different -- much narrower (16' max), much lighter (25, maximum 30 tons), much stronger, much much faster, with a manageable sail plan, with modest interior spaces but very generous technical and storage spaces, and with a foredeck like that of a fishing boat's. Not a floating condo (catamarans are much better at that, if that's what I wanted), not a Gucci-esque lifestyle statement/status symbol, but a lean, mean, sailing machine. Something like Steve Dashew meets Bill Dixon.

It doesn't exist, I'm afraid. Good thing I love my present boat, despite her various flaws, because I'm likely with her for life.

A bit harsh. Can you say anything more severe to a nice girl than say she has a fat behind? I can see her halyards pinging loose in your direction.

I think you have underestimated the likely performance and I'm sure the performance will meet your requirements. I can do over 5kt vmg in 12kt in my 66 and I am sure the 625 is a bit quicker.

Weight isn't all a bad thing. In boats at least. You expect you will be tossed around in a seaway in a 625. Maybe in your dream ultralight bathtub you would be, but I'm sure not in the 625 and certainly not in my larger fat bottomed girl. She shoves the sea aside like a bulldozer and the motion is the opposite of tossed around.

These are semi custom boats and you can modify them in build very readily to accommodate all desires you mentioned, so dedicate a forward cabin in the build to a pipecot fitted huge sail locker where you can drop a large inflatible keel floor dinghy into. Solves the impossible dinghy problem too. That is the biggest difficulty in your spec list, but it will require accepting a non RIB dinghy. Then as you don't like the comfort of the owner's cabin you can make it into two twins. Put the crew there and sleep in the pipe cots yourself. Good solution - happy crew, happy owner.

A tribute:

Fat Bottom Girls

[noelex 77]

I agree that for your requirements, water ballast would be ideal.

If you go for an aluminium hull the tanks are integral with the hull sides and take up very little space because they utilise the areas where the the stringers and frames are located.

This is one of the tanks on a 53 footer I saw recently being built with 1.8T of water balast.

[HappyMdRSailor]

Originally Posted by minaret

I think you need to add 10 or 20 feet to make this happen. Draw it, write the check, and I'll build it!

I wish you were my next door bestie...

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Nice boats, but fall far, far short of fulfilling my list of requirements. A motor sailer??!! Bah! I must have 5 knot VMG to windward! For that I need a real sailing machine, bulb keel, probably carbon rig.

This boat is closer: Beowulf - 80ft Skip Dashew Design

Wow, what a beast. Just a bit too long, at about 80 feet. I just couldn't dock that anywhere where I sail, unfortunately. Otherwise, that's getting really close.

I've ogled over this boat forever... and do a drive by for guests whenever I see her in my marina...

Originally Posted by noelex 77

This was a custom 66 foot boat I saw recently.
The owner was a pilot and wanted to design his own electrical system with 10 gauges for everything. This was one of the many control panels.

Personally I would prefer something much simpler with less to go wrong, but that's the point you can get exactly what you want with everything.

You want good upwind performance? Perhaps deep bulb keel, narrow beam, tall carbon mast, water ballast, narrow sheeting angle, rod rigging, light ends. "Certainly sir."

Holee factory automation Batman! Just the panel itself I'll bet weighs 1k lbs...

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by weavis

Im sure you have seen the condomarans built in South Africa that REGULARLY cross to the USA and Europe on their delivery cruises...... This is serious off shore passage making........

But then you are right, the damn things wont heel and have all the technical stuff and storage spaces...........

I have always appreciated absence of heel in cats, and now I REALLY appreciate it, fresh off of 1500 miles sailed hard to weather at a 20 degree heel

I don't like cats -- again, matter of taste, and I don't say my taste is right or wrong.

HOWEVER, something like -- not a condomaran, but a Gunboat -- now, well, a Gunboat . . . hmmm, yes, that could be really, really nice. Such a vessel actually ticks more of my boxes than any existing design I know of except for Beowulf, maybe. Talk about light. Talk about boat speed. Would be much cheaper and less time-consuming than custom building my sleek mono. Hmmmm.

Drawbacks are pretty few -- load carrying capacity. The fact that it's a cat. Otherwise looks pretty damned good.

[Panope]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

If you can motor 5 knots dead upwind against 30 knots (a F7) in the typical F7 sea state, my hat's off to your boat. I've never seen a sailboat which could do this. My boat, with 100 horsepower, cannot.

To punch through F7 seas, you need a lot of power, which you can generally only get from sails, other than perhaps some very powerful motor sailers.

In trying to get nearly 1500 miles upwind last month, I tried everything in the book. Best VMG to windward occurred, in F6-F7, by motorsailing with tightly sheeted main, traveler up to weather, about 17 to 20 degrees off the apparent wind. Like that I could make about 6 knots of boat speed so something less than 5 knots VMG. Burned a lot of fuel AND still had to tack Got me across, but it was not fun.

O.K. maybe it was gusting 30. And was in a long, narrow (1 mile wide) channel so seas not able to fully develope. ( I did have another 700 r.p.m. of power available......)

But this discussion still amazes me as the cost of adding, say 2 knots of windward VMG by sail must be something on the order of 100 times as expensive as the same performance increase by engine.

I applaud people who shun engine use. But for this lofty goal (5Knot VMG), just double your engine power at your next repower and be done with it. I nearly tripled mine (15 to 40).

Steve

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by poiu

A bit harsh. Can you say anything more severe to a nice girl than say she has a fat behind? I can see her halyards pinging loose in your direction.

I think you have underestimated the likely performance and I'm sure the performance will meet your requirements. I can do over 5kt vmg in 12kt in my 66 and I am sure the 625 is a bit quicker.

Weight isn't all a bad thing. In boats at least. You expect you will be tossed around in a seaway in a 625. Maybe in your dream ultralight bathtub you would be, but I'm sure not in the 625 and certainly not in my larger fat bottomed girl. She shoves the sea aside like a bulldozer and the motion is the opposite of tossed around.

These are semi custom boats and you can modify them in build very readily to accommodate all desires you mentioned, so dedicate a forward cabin in the build to a pipecot fitted huge sail locker where you can drop a large inflatible keel floor dinghy into. Solves the impossible dinghy problem too. That is the biggest difficulty in your spec list, but it will require accepting a non RIB dinghy. Then as you don't like the comfort of the owner's cabin you can make it into two twins. Put the crew there and sleep in the pipe cots yourself. Good solution - happy crew, happy owner.

A tribute:

Well, it’s really a matter of taste, and I don’t assert that my taste is any more valid than anyone else’s. Everyone who likes them is welcome to his “fat-bottomed girls”, but I don’t like them, either in boats or in humans .

As to weight: in smaller boats, you have the devil’s choice between a boat which is light and fast, or heavy and seaworthy and comfortable. One of the very great luxuries of a big boat is that size by itself gives comfort and seaworthiness; so you can be more aggressive with the weight, and in the end, you can have both speed and stability. I don’t need a “bulldozer of the seas”; my present boat, although at about 200 D/L is rather light (due to full balsa core and Kevlar), is already very comfortable in all kinds of weather. That’s not “ultralight”; that’s in the middle of the “racer-cruiser” range, which is perfect for a big boat, in my opinion. If I were to have a bit longer boat, I would want all the extra length to go into speed and weatherliness, not more comfort, of which I already have enough. Pilots say “speed is life”; the same is true for boats, well maybe it’s not life itself. Boat speed is what gets you to weather, too – boat speed wipes out leeway, for example (and a loss of boat speed increases leeway). Light = fast, in boats as in other conveyances. Light means less wetted surface, less inertia, a smaller, more manageable sail plan. Light is all good, where performance is concerned -- just ask any racer.

So you can make 5 knots VMG to windward in 12 knots of true wind? Can you do it with 20? 30? This is very inspiring; details, please! If you can do it in that big barge, then surely it must be possible for me to achieve somehow.

[Scott Berg]

Fascinating thread... we shopped for years before buying our 1977 Seaton Ketch (made by the Windseeker Yard in Florida). Looked at newer boats but decided to buy a well built classic and do a complete refit. Tall rig, rolling furling sails, engine room AFT with V Drive giving more stateroom room amidship, good working galley, nice pilothouse/cockpit, flush desk... lives on solar and wind for ALL non HVAC needs. She works well for us but every boat is a compromise. I maintain all the systems myself, love how she sails, and really love the comfort at anchor. YMMV of course. Here she is off Key West.

http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/...0&d=1378260977