Forum's prejudices..

[David M]

Finally...someone explains what "FP" means. Must every last thing on this planet be described by an acronym? Thank's Tao

[Morgan Paul]

<IMG height=1 alt="" width=1><IMG height=1 alt="" width=1><IMG height=1 alt="" width=1><IMG height=1 alt="" width=1>Fountaine Pajot

[S/V Antares]

Hang on there, Yeloya started the thread with several questions that are mono realted also. My last three boats were compleatly paid for by chartering and a few bucks to boot. It taks a lot of work but it is a viable alternative if you can be hands on not absentee mangment

Reb, Breath in , breath out, The bad man will go away....

[S/V Antares]

Sorry about the spelling. Should have gone past the 3rd grade.

[44'cruisingcat]

Originally Posted by yeloya

Unlodaded displacement of FP range (from supplier's web)

Lavezzi 40 6.000 kg (13.250 lb)
Belize 43 8.600 kg (19.000 lb)
Orana 44 8.000 kg (17.650 lb)

Lagoon 38 7.120 kg. (15.600 lb)

For others, I don't have a precise data but I assume they are at least 20-30% heavier for the comparable size.. Obviously, extreme designs/carbon kevlar structures, etc. are not considered.

Yeloya

An Oram 44C displaces 5200 kg. Not an extreme design, no exotic materials. A Schionning Wilderness 1340 (around45 feet) displaces 6200kg. Nothing extreme or exotic about that either. Just sensible use of good materials.

[44'cruisingcat]

Originally Posted by rebel heart

For whatever it's worth:

- I don't like multihull boats that much.
- I don't care about chartering either way. Seems like a great idea if you're into it; doesn't work for me. We're planning a circumnavigation in four years, so every place I'd consider chartering, we just say "oh yeah... we'll get there on our trip".

You said yourself that no everyone has the opinions you're referencing, so I'm not implying that you're stating otherwise. Just wanted to throw another random prejudice out there. Since I'm writing, here are some of my prejudices:

- Boats are not condos and people should stop confusing the two.
- Most idiot sailors I know have chart plotters.
- The fancier the boat, the more likely it is to stay in its slip forever.
- Anchors should be judged by more than their marketing material.
- Propane is dangerous, but kerosene and alcohol are really terrible.
- All sailors should use a drifter.
- Sailors should focus as much energy and learning on "light weather" sailing as they do "heavy weather" sailing.
- Mainsail furling is rediculous.
- With a cutter, a hanked on yankee with a downhaul is superior to a roller furler.

So there you go. There's my prejudices.

You don't like multihulls. Thanks for sharing that with us here in the multihull forum. I hope you dont think any of us gives a rats arse.

"Boats are not condo's." But some are. if that's what people want to use them for. Some of those only have one hull too.

Most idiots have chartplotters. Presumably you will never own one then? How about GPS? "Idiots only" too?

One thing I have learned about light weather sailing. Good cruising cats do it much better than cruising mono's. We'll be sailing long after they give up and start motoring.

[muskoka]

Originally Posted by TaoJones

What is the difference? Many consider the "lightly built" FP cats as not stiff enough to stand up to the torquing stresses the structure suffers. This is due to the fact that a catamaran is essentially two different vessels, often subjected to different sea states, but joined by a bridgedeck to make them a single craft.

TaoJones

Actually, we jacked up the starboard bow of my Lavezzi and the port hull rose by exactly the same amount - ie there was no measurable torsional flexure. This came to light inadvertantly whilst jacking the alternating bows up 1" at a time. Lo & behold when the starboard jack was raised 1" the port bow sat 1" above it's previously tightened jack.

Modern cats are engineered by people who know what they're doing and it's not hard or expensive to build a very strong glass hull. The hull is a fraction of the final cost of the boat after all. They'll flex under working loads but they sure aren't floppy.

Take a look at an aircraft wing - a man standing on the end of a 747 wing can bounce it up & down yet this marvel will support a massive aircraft. In fact, lack of flex under working loads is often more likely to result in structural failure.

Non-production cats like the Schionning boats eschew heavy joinery in favour of light fibreglass finishes and many use more exotic hull lay-ups to reduce weight. But these are semi-custom boats and not comparable.

Much of the weight differences in production cats has to do with non-structural items. Just look at the millwork in a Broadblue or Privilege and therein lies a lot of weight - there's more of it, it's beautifully made, and it's heavier. I would agree they're built to a better spec in terms of fit-out and hardware.

[Lancerbye]

Just another mono user reading these posts. Just looks like a cat fight. Sorry LOL

[44'cruisingcat]

Originally Posted by muskoka

Actually, we jacked up the starboard bow of my Lavezzi and the port hull rose by exactly the same amount - ie there was no measurable torsional flexure. This came to light inadvertantly whilst jacking the alternating bows up 1" at a time. Lo & behold when the starboard jack was raised 1" the port bow sat 1" above it's previously tightened jack.

Modern cats are engineered by people who know what they're doing and it's not hard or expensive to build a very strong glass hull. The hull is a fraction of the final cost of the boat after all. They'll flex under working loads but they sure aren't floppy.

Take a look at an aircraft wing - a man standing on the end of a 747 wing can bounce it up & down yet this marvel will support a massive aircraft. In fact, lack of flex under working loads is often more likely to result in structural failure.

Non-production cats like the Schionning boats eschew heavy joinery in favour of light fibreglass finishes and many use more exotic hull lay-ups to reduce weight. But these are semi-custom boats and not comparable.

Much of the weight differences in production cats has to do with non-structural items. Just look at the millwork in a Broadblue or Privilege and therein lies a lot of weight - there's more of it, it's beautifully made, and it's heavier. I would agree they're built to a better spec in terms of fit-out and hardware.

I wasn't saying FP's are excessively heavy. I was just indicating my surprise at hearing them described as "too light"
There was a Eluthera 60 at the recent Multihull Rendezvous and it went extremely well I thought, for such a big roomy boat.

[yeloya]

Isn't it interesting to see that sometimes (actually most of the time..) a specific thread is ending nowhere ?..
Just to clear up..

-Thx for very valuable views/suggestions. I'll bear those in mind.
-I have already ordered my Orana 44 owners version to be delivered late March 2008. This is going to be my first ever boat. I have sailed with 52 ft Jeanneau DS for a while, then chartered 2-3 times a cat. It didn't take me long to decide that the cat was for me. (It may not be for others and I appreciate that. I don't want to initiate endless mono Vs. cat debate again)
-She is also committed to charter for at least the first year and she's already booked in +20 weeks for 2008 season. If they take a good care of her, she could stay there maybe couple of more years. We'll see.
-My primary objective is coastal sailing. I have a plan of circumnavigating later, whether it will be with this boat or with another one is yet to be decided. I didn't even see my boat yet. (just a few pictures..)
I don't think anybody on this forum sailed with her anyway. So, how can we say that "it's not suitable for circumnavigation?"

The catamarans in general, maybe FP to a greater extend, has evolved much over time. Take a ride on Venezia and then on Belize; the difference in terms of performance, architecture, lay out, material utilisation, rigging is huge. Orana is supposed to be much more seaworthy than ever. Will it be so ? Only time will tell..

It's true that most of cats todays are made up to charterer's needs. In Orana, owner version costs 15.000 USD more Vs. charter version. I would therefore expect to see some more attention to details. Will it be so ? We'll soon see..


Thx again for constructive feedbacks.

Yeloya

[TaoJones]

Originally Posted by muskoka

Actually, we jacked up the starboard bow of my Lavezzi and the port hull rose by exactly the same amount - ie there was no measurable torsional flexure. This came to light inadvertantly whilst jacking the alternating bows up 1" at a time. Lo & behold when the starboard jack was raised 1" the port bow sat 1" above it's previously tightened jack.

Modern cats are engineered by people who know what they're doing and it's not hard or expensive to build a very strong glass hull. The hull is a fraction of the final cost of the boat after all. They'll flex under working loads but they sure aren't floppy.

Take a look at an aircraft wing - a man standing on the end of a 747 wing can bounce it up & down yet this marvel will support a massive aircraft. In fact, lack of flex under working loads is often more likely to result in structural failure.

Non-production cats like the Schionning boats eschew heavy joinery in favour of light fibreglass finishes and many use more exotic hull lay-ups to reduce weight. But these are semi-custom boats and not comparable.

Much of the weight differences in production cats has to do with non-structural items. Just look at the millwork in a Broadblue or Privilege and therein lies a lot of weight - there's more of it, it's beautifully made, and it's heavier. I would agree they're built to a better spec in terms of fit-out and hardware.

Points taken, muskoka. I think what you've written reflects what Jeannius observed in his post; i.e. the present-day Fountaine Pajot cats are superior in almost every way to the range of FP cats the company built its reputation on.

Originally Posted by yeloya

-I have already ordered my Orana 44 owners version to be delivered late March 2008. This is going to be my first ever boat. I have sailed with 52 ft Jeanneau DS for a while, then chartered 2-3 times a cat. It didn't take me long to decide that the cat was for me. (It may not be for others and I appreciate that. I don't want to initiate endless mono Vs. cat debate again)
-She is also committed to charter for at least the first year and she's already booked in +20 weeks for 2008 season. If they take a good care of her, she could stay there maybe couple of more years. We'll see.
-My primary objective is coastal sailing. I have a plan of circumnavigating later, whether it will be with this boat or with another one is yet to be decided. I didn't even see my boat yet. (just a few pictures..)
I don't think anybody on this forum sailed with her anyway. So, how can we say that "it's not suitable for circumnavigation?"

The catamarans in general, maybe FP to a greater extend, has evolved much over time. Take a ride on Venezia and then on Belize; the difference in terms of performance, architecture, lay out, material utilisation, rigging is huge. Orana is supposed to be much more seaworthy than ever. Will it be so ? Only time will tell..

It's true that most of cats todays are made up to charterer's needs. In Orana, owner version costs 15.000 USD more Vs. charter version. I would therefore expect to see some more attention to details. Will it be so ? We'll soon see..

Congratulations, yeloya, on your new vessel! I hope it is everything you dreamed it would be, and that the charter company you have chosen is diligent in maintaining it. If it is returned to you in "like-new" condition, you will have made an excellent investment.

Again, yeloya, it's good to have you here. Every new multi-huller represents a positive step up the evolutionary ladder.

TaoJones

[S/V Antares]

Ditto's yeloya, glad you are here. Chartering will bring in a good bit of income as a rule. A year or two will pay it down nicely. I think your plan is sound and hope you will keep us all posted.

[Lucky]

Strange to see that so many people on this tread has been led to believe that FP's are on the wrong side of "lightly built"! I have owned two FP's the first an Athena 38, which behaved excellent and never had ant breakages in the two years I had her. This included a stormy delivery from the Med up to Sweden. The flexing of the forward deck was rectified after the millenium, the previous owner of mine had that done prior to me buying her so no problem. If you crawl into the confindes of nearly any boat you can see daylight, generally comes down to how much topcoat is applied.

Sailing in high latitudes is something you tropical guys don't fully understand! This comes down to sailing in low temperatures when the density of air is fast dropping and the effect of the wind increases substantially. To pichture this effect - 15 knots of wind @100 deg angle in 30 deg C will give an Athena approx 7-8 knots of speed, drop that temp to 5 deg C and you'll be doing 10 knots!

I'm doing a trip from Norway down to Denmark with some friend starting Friday morning, distance 100 nautical miles. Forcast is for 3-5 deg C and wind up to 40 knots. And I own a Belize 43! It will be a very fast and fun sleighride, but thanks to the very well built boats from FP it will be all safe and comfortable!

I think most cats can do this with a competent crew, but i would not prefer to do trips like this in the " condo bricks" like a prout or an old heavily built cat. I believe you could have an even better(more comfy) ride on a racing cat with proper interior. Good speed potential is always good, you can control the boat better in the sea condition!
A slow heavy boat will see massive loads on the boat and the rigging. The smaller the resultant speed between the boat and the true wind - the less the loads!

A few of my points tossed in, but I don't think these treads give anybody all that much value in any sence! But don't blame the boat type for someones shart plotter being on board, thats downright stupid argumentation.

I'm closing this tread for my part.

Happy lead free sailin!

[sundog]

So where did FP get this "bad reputation" from to begin with? I keep reading posts from owners of older ex-charter FPs filled with enthusiasm for their boats. So why the bad rep? Did a bunch of them break up and kill people in the past?? Their boats are all over the world, this has got to be some indicator. So will someone please tell me where this all started? The Athena is after all on my short list for a full time liveaboard circumnavigator and I haven't come across a shred of evidence that the vessel is not worthy (non critical, personal issues aside...like layout and accomidation).

thanks for your input!

[yeloya]

Sundog, I honnestly don't know the reason for a bad reputation of FP's..Concerning yr plan on Athena, I can only tell you that one of my friend has bought an Athena that was 3 years in charter, completed his circumnavigation in 3 years and came back with her boat in excellent shape. The boat is now back to charter for 3 years now, still in excellent shape..
I haven't sailed with Athena, hence, cannot comment on her overall performance but from reliability/seaworthyness point of view, she clearly is a proven one..

Cheers

Yeloya