Are Cats truly bluewater/long passage capable?

[BigCat]

Fuel Filter Article

As to the storm sail, I guess the questions are how much area does three reefs leave you with, and how strong and well reinforced is your mainsail? A loose-footed storm sail could be held on with lacings that go around the mast, instead of going on your track. Maybe not as weatherly, but how well are you going to go to weather in that kind of wind and seas, anyway?

The NZ to Tonga or Fiji route can be really, really bad-I'd go well prepared for bad weather- Speaking from personal experience as well as from reading accounts of others.

[Cheechako]

After having a TPI built Lagoon 42 it would be pretty hard to go back to a mono. Fast and comfortable. I would buy the Lagoon 37 if doing it again... almost as big. In sailing the entire carribean I dont think I ever pulled the windward hull more than 4" off the waterline... even with full main in 40 knots apparant (arghhh!) After the cat I would never buy a heavy built mono again. Light is dry and.....fast and easy to handle. It needs to be well built light though...
Advice on a cat... alot of them dont have much water to hull clearance in the center.... they bang like heck in a seaway. Get one with max clearance in that area!

[sundowner]

Cheechako,
So you would feel perfectly safe on a Lagoon 42 or even a 37 on a long offshore passage? How long of a bluewater passage have you been on with your Lagoon? I've sailed a Lagoon 380 and 410 and thought they were fine boats, and they would be on my short list of possible boats. I've only sailed them in the protected waters of the BVIs and don't know how secure I'd feel on the open ocean in a storm with big seas. Also, what's the hull clearance on yours and is it adequate? Would it be the same on the 37'? Is the Lagoon built very sturdy and rated for offshore standards? Would something like a Privilege or Leopard be any better/more secure for offshore/long passages?

[cat man do]

I found fuel filters like the Baja Fuel Filter Article impractical.

On a Vanuatu trip I ordered the largest of this brand Mr. Funnel and at best it would have allowed a couple of litres a minute into the tanks, so cant use a garage style fuel bowser pump as they are way to fast.

These couldnt even get close to handleing the flow of a 1 inch syphon hose , which is what we used to fill with, out of 44gallon drums on deck.

To use it for a full fuel fill would have taken forever, so we used it to check the first couple of litres for quality and then went full speed fill without it allowing the Racor 500fg's to do their job..

The Racors worked a treat, on the boat we were delivering.
The filler was below the side deck (screw out a bronze port in the deck for tank filler access) on a low wooded cray boat, so the decks always had water sloshing around and the fuel filling port always got large sploshes of water going down and there would have been some getting into the tanks.

Motors ran trouble free from Australia to Vanuatu non-stop and this was a 50+ year old boat from Bass straight, so I dare say it had seen water in the tanks on other occassion. 12 mths later they have still had no problems, Racors work and they will be what I will have in mine.

Some links to real fuel polishing/filtering systems

SENTOA.org

Ariel - Cape Dory 36 - Projects - Fuel Schematics

Diesel Panel

Hope this helps

Dave

[maxingout]

LEELEE: Regarding a storm jib or trysail for a catamaran sailing offshore from New Zealand to the South Pacific.

We never had a storm trysail on our passages north from New Zealand, and if we had one, we wouldn't have used it. We did have a storm jib that we could attach to our profurl, but we never used it.

If I get caught in a blow with my catamaran, I have four options.

1. Heave to with a triple reefed mainsail.
2. Run off with a small amount of roller furling jib.
3. Deploy drogues off the stern.
4. Lie to a parachute.

On our Privilege 39, all four options work well.

We used a parachute with good results 300 miles north of New Zealand.

We ran off under roller furler coming from Fiji to New Zealand, and also going through the Bab al Mandeb into the Red Sea.

We deployed a drogue while sailing from Gibraltar to the Canaries.

We heaved to in the Indian Ocean south of Sri Lanka.

Rules that mandate storm jibs and storm trysails have good intentions, but they overlook the fact that multihulls have other options that may work better than putting up sails in a storm. In our catamaran, when things get dicey, we don't put up sails. We take sails down. That's why we have drogues and parachutes.

[Cheechako]

Seems like this thread has multiple subjects! I only cruised from Annapolis to Trinidad in the cat. Part way back up the isalnds and back down again also. We had some rough weather in a few places but no actual storm conditions. I had a Passport 47 previously. Offshore conditions leave me very tired and sore after a few days and I think the comfort and not going up and down the companionway, (as well as navigating from the chart table when it's cold!) make the cat a better option for me. When tired, it's hard to make good decisions. The cat always felt more in control than the mono's to me. It can be deceiving though and you need to pay attention to the wind speed as you wont feel it so much in a cat. Severe conditions? Not sure, but my current feeling is a strong LIGHT boat is better than a heavy cruiser for that, but realistically, it's more about the skipper than the boat. Pitchpoling and rolling are possibilities for a mono for sure. A cat could turn turtle also. It's a nice life raft though! The Privledge are nice, but if I remember right they are very heavy. The 37 Lagoon appears to have great bridgedeck clearance like the 42.. but not sure. Many of the smaller cats, especially the older ones have low clearance.... but hey... whatever gets you there!

[44'cruisingcat]

This thread is like some kind of throwback to 30 years ago. Given that hundreds of cats have crcumnavigated, most cats sold in the US have sailed trans-Atlantic, and one brand of cat has possiby done more circumnavigations than any production monohull, I'd say the question has been well and truly answered.

[Southern Star]

Agreed 44'cc - can anyone with any knowledge really say that cats are not blue water capable? This is to say nothing about which one someone may prefer (and we already know what that leads to)... but is there really a debate here?

Brad

[Steve Rust]

Originally Posted by Blue Skye

Are Cats truly bluewater/long passage capable?

NO WAY! Don't believe ANYTHING cat owners have to say! It is a widely known fact that all cats are built with catnip infused hulls and the owners of these boats only think they are circumnavigating when in reality they are still on the hook!!!

That's pretty funny, and from a stinkpotter too.

I'm with you 44cc and Southern Star. I get a little tired of this debate being repeated again and again. There is still a part of the monohull crowd that holds onto their misconceptions and these get passed on to newcomers because these guys are all experienced and know what they are talking about, right. So Sundowner, listen to the advice of people who actually own and sail multihulls. If someone else wants to give you their opinion and they have little or no experience then take it for what it is.

bmanley
There is still that other multihull, the trimaran. With a smaller budget this may be an option to check out. In your price range it would be easy to find a good cruiser in the 40 foot range.

[soy_el_viento]

This is my first post (yay me!)... but I think the question is more one of specific design and construction. Talk to your surveyor about where you plan to go with the boat and tell them you are not interested in somehting that wouldn't stand up to bluewater cruising. That said, the great advantage to a cat (or a tri) is speed. Of course bad weather is not completely avoidable, but you can significantly cut down your crossing time in a multi-hull and thus limit your potential exposure. And, as others in this thread have already stated, there is no substitute for experience. If you can, at least go out for a daysail or two on a cat to see what you think. If that goes well, consider doing a longer bareboat charter. I don't know about you but $100-$200K is a pretty significant chunk and it seems wise to have some experience with a multi-hull before you decide to buy (if you don't already and if you are used to mono-hulls). Also, consider where you might want to go and whether a shipyard in some remote place would be equipped to do a haul-out if you need to. Perhaps that is not an issue, but I like to consider EVERYTHING. What about a place to tie up? Finding moorage for a craft with twice the beam of a mono is also something to consider. If you are not planning to go to metropolitan areas perhaps this would not be an issue for you. On the other hand, you can navigate much more shallow waters and you can beach a cat most anywhere. Just my $.02. I am just starting my research as well and I have many of the same questions. From what I have seen you can get a comparably equipped mono of like quality for quite an amount less than a multi... but man does 15 - 20 knots sound pretty attractive! At any rate, best of luck!

[Troutbridge]

Originally Posted by sundowner

Not just any cat, but something in my price range (used but in good condition, 32' to 43', and between ~$100k to ~$200k depending on year, length, config, and condition). Can a Lagoon 38 or 42/43, Prout 37 or similiar cross oceans "no problem"? Can they actually handle heavy seas, waves, and weather? Could a smaller PDQ 32? Are most modern/recent cats strong structually and very sound? If I buy a boat, I'd ultimately like to take 3 to 4 years and be able to go anywhere. Would you choose a nice monohull for the same price instead? Anyone know of any exceptionally good deals available? Thoughts?

Jeff

Jeff, multi-hulls cost more than monos so you could buy a bigger (LOA) mono for your money, but in terms of living space a shorter (LOA) multi may have more living space. Others have answered the seaworthiness question, but consider this: Cruising consists of approximately 85% of the time at anchor and 15% en route, so (in my opinion) you need to give comfort at anchor a higher priority than out and out performance. You don't say where you are planning on cruising, but MAXINGOUT has 'been there and done it' so I'd give a lot of weight to his opinion (whilst making up your own mind). Be wary of thinking you'll get more performance out of a cat. Ideas of 15-20kts are fantasy for the sort of boat you're talking about (OK, they might briefly touch those speeds, but think of a 24 hour average. Also, smaller cats are more susceptible to loss of performance due to 'overloading'. You will load up a cruising boat and cats carry less than the equivalent sized mono).
I'd go for as large as you can afford. 32ft INMHO, is a bit on the small size for longer trips, but having said that still do-able.

[donradcliffe]

Having circumnavigated in a monohull, and having raced cats for over 10 years, I would NOT consider a cat suitable for a circumnavigation. Its due to something I call the 'Pucker Factor (PF). The PF is that constant thought in the back of your mind about what COULD happen, given that you are out

[Southern Star]

Thanks Donrad for the self-fulfilling prophecy - create irrational (or at least excessive) fear of capsize in the owners of cats and then cite that fear as the reason they are not suitable for circumnavigating. Very helpful.

Brad

[donradcliffe]

Sorry, Microsoft sent that out before I got finished...

As I was saying, you are out there one your own, and you don't want to expose anyone to danger having to save you, even if they could.

You can do a circumnavigation and avoid a high PF most of the time, but occasionally the odds will catch up with you and you will be in survival conditions. What happens next is up to you and your boat. If you have a large and experienced crew, you can avoid disaster most of the time by ACTIVE management of the boat. However, most circumnavigations are taken by couples, where one partner is less experienced, more apprehensive, and less skilled at sailing.

It is an inarguable fact that catamarans are more likely to capsize than monohulls-- For at least the first 30-40 degrees of heeling, the more a monohull heels over, the greater the righting moment is, whereas the cat is exactly the opposite. I discovered the reality of this the first year I raced cats--if one hull starts to lift and you don't dump the sheet, you are likely to go over, and stay over. The same thing applies to burying a lee bow. No matter what the salesman tells you, these principles apply to cruising cats when things get hairy, as much from wave action as from wind forces. It is also a fact that, all other things equal, bigger boats are more comfortable and safer when things get rough, and out of control, and you are on the edge.

Now consider your choices--for $150,000 you can buy a 45 ft monohull or a 32 ft cat. When things get close to going out of control out there, your PF is going to be a lot higher on the cat, This translates to higher stress for you, which your partner picks up on. Even if your luck holds, she is much more likely to get off at the next opportunity.

[Southern Star]

Way to go Donrad - keep up the fear-mongering. What is your source for saying that it is "an inarguable fact that cats are more likely to capsize than monohulls? " Due to the beam and form stability, cats are actually much less likely to capsize. Stability curves show that even at 30 degrees of heel, a typical 45 foot Cruising Cat has TWICE the resistance to capsize of a typical 45 foot cruising monohull (Gregor Tarjan, Catamarans - The Complete Guide for Cruising Sailors, International Marine, Camden Maine 2008 at p. 78).

Furthermore, why do you suggest that cats can only cope with extreme conditions through active strategies? Cats are at least as likely to survive with a properly deployed sea-anchor or series drogue as a monohull. Indeed, there are as many proponents of lying ahull in a cat as a mono (although admittedly and for good reason, that technique has largely fallen out of favour with both camps).

Experience with 'racing cats' does not equate to experience with cruising cats anymore than experience with an America's Cup boat equates to cruising monohulls - "Gee, that 12 meter split it two in four foot waves, therefore all monohulls will do the same in similar conditions." And what kind of 'racing cats' are we talking about?

You may be frightened at the prospect of crossing an ocean in a cat, but the misconceptions at the heart of your 'PF' only prove that they are irrational fears.

Brad