The Perfect 60' to 65' Cruising Boat

[minaret]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Yes. That is what I realized this summer. Purely mathematically, taking any random destination and any random wind direction -- the true wind is ahead of the beam in 50% of cases, and the apparent wind more than that. Your destination will be too much upwind to lay in one tack in what percentage of cases then? If you tack through 100 degrees (COG), which is really good for a cruising boat, then that's 27% of all cases.

Add to that the fact that in stronger conditions you can't realistically motor upwind (in a normal sailboat).

It means the following: If you are a long-distance sailor who wants to get places, you have only two choices: (a) a powerful motor-sailer; or (b) a sailboat which can make meaningful progress to windward over a reasonable range of conditions. I've defined this for myself as 5 knots VMG to windward, or 120 miles per day, in 12 to 30 knots of true wind.

If you can't get to windward one way or the other, then you can't go where you please, and this is a serious flaw in a vessel for a serious, long-distance sailor who can't just wait around waiting for the wind to change.

So the discussion of the ideal large cruising boat started to concentrate on this because it is that part of the performance specification which is hardest to fulfill.

One thing I have taken away from thinking about this is that powerful motor sailers like Nauticats start to make a lot of sense. I think it's far easier and far cheaper to solve this problem with brute force engine power, than it is with high sailing performance.

So another logical consequence is that even if your primary way of making miles to windward is high sailing performance (the way I would do it), it probably makes sense to equip the ideal 65' cruiser with a powerful engine, more powerful than you would typically put in a normal sailboat. A boat of this size won't notice the weight of a bigger engine, if it's a modern turbocharged engine. I think this is the idea behind German Frers' Halberg-Rassey 64, which has 300 horsepower versus 180 horsepower in the similarly sized Oyster. And in a more easily driven hull with 17' beam, compared to 18' in the fatter Oyster. I think you could power your way through quite a significant sea state with that setup, and it would be great to have that option. The boat doesn't actually need to be a motor sailer to have this kind of capability -- just a big enough engine.

This was exactly the concept of the Nauticat 52. Great sailing boat, big engine, big tanks.

[poiu]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Yes. That is what I realized this summer. Purely mathematically, taking any random destination and any random wind direction -- the true wind is ahead of the beam in 50% of cases, and the apparent wind more than that. Your destination will be too much upwind to lay in one tack in what percentage of cases then? If you tack through 100 degrees (COG), which is really good for a cruising boat, then that's 27% of all cases.

Add to that the fact that in stronger conditions you can't realistically motor upwind (in a normal sailboat).

It means the following: If you are a long-distance sailor who wants to get places, you have only two choices: (a) a powerful motor-sailer; or (b) a sailboat which can make meaningful progress to windward over a reasonable range of conditions. I've defined this for myself as 5 knots VMG to windward, or 120 miles per day, in 12 to 30 knots of true wind.

If you can't get to windward one way or the other, then you can't go where you please, and this is a serious flaw in a vessel for a serious, long-distance sailor who can't just wait around waiting for the wind to change.

So the discussion of the ideal large cruising boat started to concentrate on this because it is that part of the performance specification which is hardest to fulfill.

One thing I have taken away from thinking about this is that powerful motor sailers like Nauticats start to make a lot of sense. I think it's far easier and far cheaper to solve this problem with brute force engine power, than it is with high sailing performance.

So another logical consequence is that even if your primary way of making miles to windward is high sailing performance (the way I would do it), it probably makes sense to equip the ideal 65' cruiser with a powerful engine, more powerful than you would typically put in a normal sailboat. A boat of this size won't notice the weight of a bigger engine, if it's a modern turbocharged engine. I think this is the idea behind German Frers' Halberg-Rassey 64, which has 300 horsepower versus 180 horsepower in the similarly sized Oyster. And in a more easily driven hull with 17' beam, compared to 18' in the fatter Oyster. I think you could power your way through quite a significant sea state with that setup, and it would be great to have that option. The boat doesn't actually need to be a motor sailer to have this kind of capability -- just a big enough engine.

I find when bashing to windward and I find myself in a hurry (which is not often) then I get the best result by motorsailing at low engine revs just a bit closer to the wind. It has the effect of improving the vmg actually to about what you would get by applying high power, removing most of the sails and taking the waves head on. It is also much more comfortable and economical. Fuel consumption at high power levels will only please the oil sheiks. I have a 225hp engine and I have never used anything near full power when cruising.

Originally Posted by Dockhead

By the way, here are the polars for the HR 64:

Attachment 88163

It shows a lot of boat speed in all kinds of different situations. I wonder if the boat really achieves this.

At 32 degrees (apparent I guess?) in 20 knots, 7.5 knots of boat speed.

I reckon that should easily amount to 5 knots VMG to windward. If the boat really achieves its polars.

It is actually for true wind. At the bottom of the HR web page you can download the spreadsheet version. So the claimed performance is even better than you calculated. I don't believe the figures though. Far too good for example with an optimum TWA of 38deg at 20kt wind it gives a vmg of 6.6kt They also have the data for the HR 55 so could compare it to your experience for your fairly similar boat and pro-rata the "error". I get a knot less and much less below 12kt.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by poiu

I find when bashing to windward and I find myself in a hurry (which is not often) then I get the best result by motorsailing at low engine revs just a bit closer to the wind. It has the effect of improving the vmg actually to about what you would get by applying high power, removing most of the sails and taking the waves head on. It is also much more comfortable and economical. Fuel consumption at high power levels will only please the oil sheiks. I have a 225hp engine and I have never used anything near full power when cruising.



It is actually for true wind. At the bottom of the HR web page you can download the spreadsheet version. So the claimed performance is even better than you calculated. I don't believe the figures though. Far too good for example with an optimum TWA of 38deg at 20kt wind it gives a vmg of 6.6kt They also have the data for the HR 55 so could compare it to your experience for your fairly similar boat and pro-rata the "error". I get a knot less and much less below 12kt.

Yes, best VMG to windward for me has likewise been motorsailing with the main alone, tightly sheeted, traveler up to windward, and relatively low revs. I find I can go 25 to 30 degrees AWA, or even less and keep up 6 or 7 knots of boat speed. But I still have to tack, AND I'm using the motor -- worst of both worlds.

Maybe it's better than motoring hard to windward but, on the other hand, I think even pure motor boats trying to get to windward will motor slightly off the wind and tack, in order to get through the waves more efficiently.

[DoubleWhisky]

Originally Posted by poiu

I find when bashing to windward and I find myself in a hurry (which is not often) then I get the best result by motorsailing at low engine revs just a bit closer to the wind. It has the effect of improving the vmg actually to about what you would get by applying high power, removing most of the sails and taking the waves head on. It is also much more comfortable and economical. Fuel consumption at high power levels will only please the oil sheiks. I have a 225hp engine and I have never used anything near full power when cruising.

Exactly the same works the best for us

Originally Posted by poiu

It is actually for true wind. At the bottom of the HR web page you can download the spreadsheet version. So the claimed performance is even better than you calculated. I don't believe the figures though. Far too good for example with an optimum TWA of 38deg at 20kt wind it gives a vmg of 6.6kt They also have the data for the HR 55 so could compare it to your experience for your fairly similar boat and pro-rata the "error". I get a knot less and much less below 12kt.

Any published polars are derived from Velocity Prediction Programs and are not based on empirical data.
Such a programs generally assume: ideal shape of sails, ideal sails configuration, ideally stable wind, flat water surface (at the best ideally rhytmical wave pattern, ideally coordinated with wind direction), no leeway, no surface flow of water, sometime even no standing rigging influence...
They are very useful to make some design decisions, and to compare the designs, but the real world performance is much less.
Generally the modelling software used by leading sail lofts (like North) is much more advanced (and inevitably much more expensive) than general purpose software used by yacht designers (generally part of Maxsurf package) but does not cover hydrodynamics, only aerodynamics.
Polars for HR 55 give You VMG of 5 - 6 kts for the winds between 12 and 20 kts (and increasing with the wind). But there is not magic here and HR 55 just can not have significantly better performance than Moody 54.
The boats are just too similar to differ radically

Cheers

Tomasz

[William King]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Someone posted a question about what is the best 55' to 65' cruising boat. I thought to post on that thread, but then lost it, and then decided it would be best to start a new one. I have been actually thinking about this question a lot lately, having lived on my 54' boat (about 60' LOA) for the last four months and having sailed her 3000 miles this summer. This gave me plenty of opportunity to reflect on her virtues and shortcomings.


While we’re fantasizing, I actually have a list of qualities I would want on a boat of this class. To my knowledge no boat has ever been made which nearly fulfills them, although this class is crowded with beautiful designs built by Oyster, Contest, Hylas, Discovery, and others. This is based on considerable experience on board my own boat which is nearly in this class – 54 feet on deck, about 60 feet LOA – with all of her plusses and minuses. Here is the list of issues I came up with:

1. Dinghy storage. The plague of cruising boats, I think. I have powered davits which have been extremely troublesome. Plus they look like ****, add windage, etc, etc, etc. This is not the way. If one were designing a 60 to 65 foot yacht, I think a better solution could be found. I don’t like the dinghy garages of Hanses and others, because (a) they occupy an enormous amount of hull volume needed for other purposes; and (b) they require a big fat stern, which I don’t like and don’t think is best for seaworthiness. I think the best compromise for this is probably storage on deck in chocks– on an extended afterdeck with a deck crane. If the boat were designed for this, I think a really good solution could be devised which does not interfere with lazarette or swim platform access.

2. Walk in engine room with workshop. With fully designed rational storage for a full complement of tools, spares, and supplies. Nice workbench with vice. With fully designed installation, giving excellent access, for charger/inverter, fuel polishing, watermaker, central heating, and all the other gear which otherwise gets stuck in inaccessible nooks and crannies.

3. Deck storage adequate for a decent sail inventory, ropes, etc. Modern cruising boats, especially for some reason large cruising boats, don't have any room at all for storage of any extra sails -- this is crazy (result of maximizing living space at the expense of storage and technical space). Life raft locker in the afterdeck like on my boat.

4. A separate space with a couple of pipe cots and a small heads compartment where professional crew could live. This could be combined with (3) in a space between anchor locker and forepeak cabin, as I have seen on some larger Swans.

5. Much more storage below. Storage for linens. Plenty of hanging locker space. Storage for life jackets and safety gear. Galley with plenty of storage for food for a long voyage. Dedicated storage for grab bag and EPIRB. If I started with my own boat as the starting point, I would gladly reduce interior spaces by 20% and rededicate these to storage. For a boat 10 feet longer than mine, I would devote practically all the additional hull volume to storage, increased engine room, etc.

6. Anchor chain storage not in the bows, but lower down and closer to the center of the boat. Like in the Sundeers. Chain runs through a naval pipe. This prevents the bow from being weighed down by the chain like the situation I have now. One question, however – how do you then keep the bilges separate?

7. Deck storage in much larger proportion to what modern boats have. Enough to store bicycles, fenders, and all the other stuff we need on extended cruises. Thinking about my own boat – if there were a separate sail locker forward, and if my lazarette were lengthened by a meter or so (which might happen when the deck storage for dinghy is created), then this would be fulfilled automatically.

8. Watertight bulkheads and separate bilges in forepeak and lazarette. And maybe get all the through hulls out of the main hull volume like the Sundeers have.

9. Well-engineered electrical system. My boat actually has this, very close to ideal. The main engine should have a high capacity, continuous-duty school bus alternator, and there should be a heavy-duty continuous-duty diesel generator – ideally a Northern Lights. All run through a charger-inverter or bank of them with functionality like Victron (but more reliable), and with all components highly accessible and with room for expansion.

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. Panels should be hinged, with latches, not screwed in place like mine, with plenty of space behind them for future modifications to the systems. Dedicated wall space for handheld VHF’s in their own chargers, hand bearing compass, rigging knife, etc., ready to hand.

11. Ground plane for SSB radio bonded into the hull. I think the Sundeers have this.

12. Raised salon with excellent views from the main salon. Opening (!) front-facing windows which allow one standing in the salon to see out over the bow. As in many Oysters. Views from the salon are just extremely important – the designer should spend a few days on some good catamarans for inspiration.

13. Excellent light and ventilation – six or eight large dorades and plenty of hull ports and hatches. Every cabin deserves at least one hull port (my forward cabins have only hatches), and cross-ventilation.

14. Hull form should be oriented to performance with bulb keel and spade rudder or at least partial skeg rudder, but should not be too beamy, and should not have the fat stern which many modern boats now have. I imagine something like my hull, except 10 feet longer, without any increase in beam (I’m 54 feet on deck and 16 foot beam). Should be an easily driven, somewhat narrow, fast shape. Forefoot not too flat to avoid pounding. Should have nice spring to its sheer and a highish bow for a dry deck, but without excessive freeboard midships. Keel should be deep enough for really good upwind performance (about which more below) – up to maybe 2.80. Keel should be lead, and hull should be fully cored with encapsulated balsa blocks and skinned with Twaron or Kevlar, for very, very high strength, impact resistance, and lightness, for performance and strength. I imagine an easily driven hull with D/L ratio of around 200. Structure should be very massive with particular attention paid to chainplates and bulkheads.

15. Rig should be designed for enough performance to allow the cruising sailor to make meaningful progress dead upwind in strong conditions. This for me is now the sine qua non, after sailing 3000 miles this summer, mostly upwind. The boat should not be overcanvassed – SA/D about 16.5 would be about right for the easily driven hull. Maybe a little more if the rig is carbon. The boat should be designed with extra headsail tracks to allow a blade jib (maybe) to be sheeted well inboard. The boat should be capable of at least 5 knots VMG to windward in any conditions from 12 knots to 30 knots true wind, which means it will need to be capable of plenty of boat speed in a wide range of conditions, and will need to have a tacking angle of well under 100 degrees. This is beyond the capabilities of normal cruising boats, but if I ever buy or build another boat, this will be a firm requirement.

16. The rig might be a lot like what I have now. Towable jib cars (but there should be alternative tracks), wide range mainsheet traveler with dedicated winches. End-sheeted boom. In-mast furling, but with electric or hydraulic furling. Eight to ten cockpit winches with at least four powered. Self-tacking staysail but with some way of shaping the sail – multiple clew attachment points, alternative regular sheets or barber haulers, something. Jumper stays so that running backs are not needed in moderate conditions. Chainplates for code zero or furling gennaker. Carbon whisker pole.

17. Getting around the deck safely at sea should be thought through thoroughly. There should be granny bars at the mast. There should be jack stays in positions which allow one to clip on short enough that you can't fall over the side. Side decks should be wide enough to crawl down safely.

18. Much thought should be invested into livability below on long upwind passages on a heel. No smart-ass remarks from cat sailors here -- we know cats are far superior on this particular point. Bunks should all be arranged with long lee cloths. Handholds everywhere. Maybe a gimballed counter in the galley. Maybe a curved seat at the nav station, with cushioned bracing points or foot rests or something. I have never seen a boat where this was really well worked out. A Swan 90 I spent some time on was a disaster. My own boat has superb handhold rails in the salon, and the galley is well designed to allow you to wedge yourself in, but getting to the heads is a disaster.

19. Cockpit should be designed so that sailors can sail, and guests can lounge, without interfering with each other. Not like mine. A Swan-like dual cockpit is ideal for this, but eats up afterdeck space, so would be incompatible with a good dingy storage solution, I guess. So I don’t know how this would be solved, but the designer should work on it. Maybe dual helm stations would help (on my boat, you can’t get around the wheel in the cockpit without walking over the seats).

20. Glass windshield like a Hallberg Rassy, with a windshield wiper. My boat has a plastic one, which is ok, but not as good as glass. With a large spray hood over that creating a place of shelter in the cockpit.

21. Glass counterweighted sinking washboard and glass scuttle. My boat has this and it is fantastic. Adds a significant quantity of natural light in the salon.

22. Steering should be designed to be practically fail-safe, in every regard. Should be actuated by rods, maybe, or a chain, rather than with cables. Redundant hydraulic rams and pumps for autopilot. Massive rudder bearings, that non-binding spherical type (forgot what they’re called). Probably a partial skeg is required for total reliability, despite performance hit compared to spade (have to think about this tradeoff). Easy access to all steering components. Wind vane incorporating backup rudder, with well-designed control mechanism. Designer should write a manual with detailed emergency procedures for various steering problems.

23. Heavy-duty horizontal windlass with warping drum. Massive Samson post. Proper fairleads for shore lines. Massive cleats and plenty of them. All this is contrary to modern practice to make all this gear sleek and cool looking, but usually undersized and poor in operation. The foredeck on my ideal large cruising boat will not be sleek and chic and cool; on the contrary, it will look like the foredeck of a fishing boat.

24. Central hydronic heating system capable of using and storing waste heat from main engine and genset as well as from a hydronic diesel-fuel powered furnace. Central heating system should also have an electrical resistance heating element powered by a separate shore power connection (which can be used for AC too if that is fitted).

25. Chainplates for Jordan drogue.


OK, well, we can dream, can’t we?

I have all that on my 52' I have cradle and winch for 12 Bostom Whaler above cabin trunk, even has a washer dryer

[DoubleWhisky]

Hi Dockhead

I sent to my friend - yacht designer - an e-mail:

"Chris, can You may be give me several examples of the yachts in the 60 - 65 ft LOH bracket, which could be regarded as cruisers or cruiser-racers, able to keep (sails alone) sustained VMG of 5 + knots to windward in 12 - 30 knots of true wind and the accompanying wave pattern for Baltic, North Sea, Channel, Western Approaches, Biscay?
Exclude lifting keels, side boards, chined hull with full beam carried to stern"

His answer:

"Tom, what the heck are You up to???

I'm really not sure, the boats are normally not optimized for windward work in such a broad range of wind and sea conditions.
I think J/65 (Rod and Al Johnstones), Lyman Morse 62 (Reichel Pugh) or Sundeer 64 (Steve Dashew) are able to do this - or close to.
May be Shipman 63 (Japec Jakopin), but I'm not so sure.
From more extreme boats have a look at Marten 65 (Owen Clarke) and Guardian 60 (Simonis Voogd). Guardian will exceed Your demand for sure. But You asked mainly for cruiser and I think for relatively short handed crew Sundeer, J/65 and Shipman are most suitable."

Of course it is my not the best translation - private matters excluded.

Cheers,

Tomasz

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by William King

I have all that on my 52' I have cradle and winch for 12 Bostom Whaler above cabin trunk, even has a washer dryer

ALL that?? All 25 points? Please let us see plans of your boat -- for inspiration! Or maybe Ill just make you an offer!

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by DoubleWhisky

Hi Dockhead

I sent to my friend - yacht designer - an e-mail:

"Chris, can You may be give me several examples of the yachts in the 60 - 65 ft LOH bracket, which could be regarded as cruisers or cruiser-racers, able to keep (sails alone) sustained VMG of 5 + knots to windward in 12 - 30 knots of true wind and the accompanying wave pattern for Baltic, North Sea, Channel, Western Approaches, Biscay?
Exclude lifting keels, side boards, chined hull with full beam carried to stern"

His answer:

"Tom, what the heck are You up to???

I'm really not sure, the boats are normally not optimized for windward work in such a broad range of wind and sea conditions.
I think J/65 (Rod and Al Johnstones), Lyman Morse 62 (Reichel Pugh) or Sundeer 64 (Steve Dashew) are able to do this - or close to.
May be Shipman 63 (Japec Jakopin), but I'm not so sure.
From more extreme boats have a look at Marten 65 (Owen Clarke) and Guardian 60 (Simonis Voogd). Guardian will exceed Your demand for sure. But You asked mainly for cruiser and I think for relatively short handed crew Sundeer, J/65 and Shipman are most suitable."

Of course it is my not the best translation - private matters excluded.

Cheers,

Tomasz

For sure Sundeer can do it. And my idea is similar -- narrow, easily driven hull, high performance rig.

I'm not familiar with the other boats mentioned -- I'll have a look.

[estarzinger]

I would go here:

Bestevaer 56ST Tranquilo / K&M Yachtbuilders

Add 10' if you must, but leave it for 'light storage' (sail locker, empty Jerry jogs and such) and workshop/mechanical space

[robert sailor]

Jeeeze! Rear end is narrow compared to a production boat and it has only one wheel....me likey!

[K_V_B]

You can even have them with a tiller. Imagine that, a 56 footer with a tiller...



Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[robert sailor]

It is hard to imagine a 56 footer with a tiller, my only comment is that to pull that off you need a boat that is extremely well balanced....and I like tillers as well.

[DoubleWhisky]

Originally Posted by estarzinger

I would go here:

Bestevaer 56ST Tranquilo / K&M Yachtbuilders

Add 10' if you must, but leave it for 'light storage' (sail locker, empty Jerry jogs and such) and workshop/mechanical space

K&M build also Bestevaers 60 and 65, so no need to "adding" the length

[estarzinger]

^^ except I believe the 60's and 65's look quite different - more "traditional" with relatively long overhang. I really like the look and functionality of the 50'ish range. We saw a 60 (I believe) in iceland and while it was attractive it was not to my taste (boat named 'Guadeloupe" I believe - had carol Hasse dacron sails, which were nicely made but looked a bit odd on the boat).

These boats also sail very well - you can even have water ballast - which dockhead WOULD dramatically improve your upwind VMG.

[noelex 77]

Originally Posted by estarzinger

^^ except I believe the 60's and 65's look quite different - more "traditional" with relatively long overhang. I really like the look and functionality of the 50'ish range.

They produce Bestevaer in sizes from 45 to 66 feet. There are several transom and bow and stern options known a S, ST, C. (For Spoon, Straight, Clipper). Guadalupe is a C. Any option can be made in any size.

I visited factory in April. Very impressive.

I still think a Stadship (also built by K&M) would probably suit Dockhead's requirements better, but personally I would prefer the Bestevaer.