|
|
30-07-2010, 23:47
|
#1
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Cape Town
Boat: Maverick 400 Catamaran
Posts: 215
|
Launch of 'Catarina'
Catarina my Maverick 400 was launched yesterday. She was weighed on the loadcell when she was lifted and came out at 7.73ton. This is with 100m of chain and 200l of diesel onboard, bigger motors, electric winches, aircon, electric toilets etc. The only things to be put on still are the cushions, helm seat and the saloon table. Needless to say I am thrilled with that! All the hard work that went into optimising the weight was worth it. When she was put in the water I was wondering why they were still holding her up untill I realised she was floating! I reckon she is going to perform really well, cannot wait to go sailing! After she was launched we went for a drive around the harbour with 30 people onboard and it felt like there were only 10 people, her size is amazing. The volvo 40's were so quiet, at the bow I could not even tell when the motors started. Everyone was blown away by the finish and quality of the boat. I will post some more sailing feedback once we have been for some testsails
|
|
|
31-07-2010, 04:56
|
#2
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brisbane Australia [until the boats launched]
Boat: 50ft powercat, light,long and low powered
Posts: 4,409
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by paulrack
Catarina my Maverick 400 was launched yesterday.
|
Congratulations, always nice to finally splash a boat.
Quote:
She was weighed on the loadcell when she was lifted and came out at 7.73ton.
|
How about rig and sails?
fuel and water?
additional cruising gear?
food?
dinghy?
people?
Specs for maverick 40
Displacement 8500kg
|
|
|
31-07-2010, 06:44
|
#3
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Cape Town
Boat: Maverick 400 Catamaran
Posts: 215
|
Thanks for the good wishes.
I know the rig and sails still to go on, I am comparing to previous Mavericks, and Leopard 40's and lagoon 400's in the same state, ie just hull without rig. She has come out much lighter even with all the extra's I have onboard. That makes performance better and much more load carrying ability for cruising.
|
|
|
31-07-2010, 15:41
|
#4
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brisbane Australia [until the boats launched]
Boat: 50ft powercat, light,long and low powered
Posts: 4,409
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by paulrack
Thanks for the good wishes.
I know the rig and sails still to go on, I am comparing to previous Mavericks, and Leopard 40's and lagoon 400's in the same state, ie just hull without rig. She has come out much lighter even with all the extra's I have onboard. That makes performance better and much more load carrying ability for cruising.
|
Is there a Leopard 40?
Their website says 38 and 46
Leopard Catamarans
The 38 according to their pdf says it has a displacement of 8955kg, so it "may" have a few extra kilos of load carrying ability left
And the lagoon has a displacement of 10220, so even if it weighed a bit more than 7700kg on launch it still has 2500kg up it's sleeve to get to DWL, so it would appear this vessel was designed with all the "extras" in mind.
Specifications of catamaran Lagoon 400
I supose the point I am getting at is that
Quote:
100m of chain and 200l of diesel onboard, bigger motors, electric winches, aircon, electric toilets etc
|
is all very nice.................on a vessel designed to carry the extra weight.
Perhaps the 50ft version?
|
|
|
31-07-2010, 15:46
|
#5
|
Building a Bateau TW28
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Iroquois, Ontario
Boat: Bateau TW28 Long Cabin
Posts: 3,585
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by cat man do
people?
|
Stowaways?
Very nice looking boat. Doesn't look like it actually needs sails though!
__________________
Yours Aye! Rick
~^~^~^^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~~^~^~~^~^~^^~~^~^
"It's not the boat "you built" until you've sworn at it, bled on it, sweated over it, cried beside it and then threatened to haul the POS outside and burn it!"
|
|
|
31-07-2010, 23:18
|
#6
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Cape Town
Boat: Maverick 400 Catamaran
Posts: 215
|
Cat Man Do I think there are a number of inaccuracies in your post. I have learned never trust the figures from a manufacturer when it comes to weight. A lot of them either deliberately, or because they base their weight on designer programs instead, understate the actual weight of the boat. Not many people actually go to the trouble of getting a loadcell to weigh their boats when it is launched and the ones that do often get a surprise! There was a leopard 40 that leopard built, it was stopped last year I think. Its stated weight on the brochure was 7630kg, actual weight 9400kg (same state, no rig). The leopard 38 is stated as 8955kg, not sure of the actual. Leopard 46 11000kg, actual 13 650kg. I know most FP owners who weigh their boats also get a big surprise. I think lagoon were the same although now I think the 400 is probably more accurate as they say it weighs 10220kg. The Lagoon 500 is stated as 17000kg, actual weight of an empty one in CT was 20000kg. The figures quoted are normally lightship (or completely bare) and bear no link to the actual weight carrying ability of the boat. My designed weight carrying ability is 3500kg. (although it will be higher now). My point is I will have about a 2400kg better starting weight to a comparable size lagoon 400 as an example.
|
|
|
01-08-2010, 00:32
|
#7
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brisbane Australia [until the boats launched]
Boat: 50ft powercat, light,long and low powered
Posts: 4,409
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by paulrack
I have learned never trust the figures from a manufacturer when it comes to weight.
|
Obviously that includes Maverick as well?
Quote:
There was a leopard 40 that leopard built, it was stopped last year I think.
|
OK, but not according to the website
The website only shows a 38 and a 46
Quote:
Its stated weight on the brochure was 7630kg, actual weight 9400kg (same state, no rig). The leopard 38 is stated as 8955kg, not sure of the actual. Leopard 46 11000kg, actual 13 650kg.
I know most FP owners who weigh their boats also get a big surprise. I think lagoon were the same although now I think the 400 is probably more accurate as they say it weighs 10220kg. The Lagoon 500 is stated as 17000kg, actual weight of an empty one in CT was 20000kg.
|
Where did you get these weights from?
Quote:
The figures quoted are normally lightship (or completely bare) and bear no link to the actual weight carrying ability of the boat.
|
Really?
Where does the website state that?
I see some sites say lightship, but Maverick does not
They just show displacement which is how much water is displaced to get to the DWL (Design Waterline)
The website says that the Displacement of the Maverick is at 8500kg
Quote:
Displacement Volume (V): The volume of the underwater hull at any given waterline.
Displacement (W): The weight of water of the displaced volume of the ship, which equals the weight of the ship and cargo
* Displacement - (Boating): Definition
|
You say the weight now, is 7730kg
Quote:
My designed weight carrying ability is 3500kg. (although it will be higher now).
|
Right, so now you claim your boat actually has a displacement of 7730kg (load-cell weight at launch) plus 3500kg (claimed "additional" weight carrying ability) = Actual Displacement of 11200kg?
Its a shame they don't say that on the website
On the website they say the displacement is 8500kg
Specs for maverick 40
Displacement 8500kg
Quote:
My point is I will have about a 2400kg better starting weight to a comparable size lagoon 400 as an example.
|
How, magic?
The numbers say something different, as does the antifoul line on your pictures.
|
|
|
01-08-2010, 00:59
|
#8
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 92
|
Congrats on the launch Paul. Nice solid looking vessel.
What wing deck clearance have you measured in this lightship state and can you tell us the sinkage rate value. ( kg/cm will give us all a good idea)?
Cheers.
|
|
|
01-08-2010, 03:25
|
#9
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Cape Town
Boat: Maverick 400 Catamaran
Posts: 215
|
Hi Bayview, thanks very much for the good wishes, I will measure the clearance and post it. I also had the sinkage rate at one stage, I will get that again from the designer.
Cat man do, I am not sure what your point is, maybe you would like to just disagree with everything, I work on fact, weights are from owners, delivery skippers, leopard facebook page and owners websites. If you would like a brochure of the now discontinued Leopard 40 I have one saved and would be happy to send it to you. I hope you have a lovely day.
|
|
|
01-08-2010, 04:46
|
#10
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brisbane Australia [until the boats launched]
Boat: 50ft powercat, light,long and low powered
Posts: 4,409
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by paulrack
Cat man do, I am not sure what your point is, maybe you would like to just disagree with everything, I work on fact,
|
OK, lets look at those facts that you work on.
FACT
Quote:
Originally Posted by paulrack
Catarina my Maverick 400 was launched yesterday. She was weighed on the loadcell when she was lifted and came out at 7.73ton. (7730kg)
|
FACT
Quote:
Originally Posted by paulrack
My designed weight carrying ability is 3500kg. (although it will be higher now).
|
FACT
7730kg + 3500kg = 11230kg
FACT
Specs for maverick 40 Displacement 8500kg
paulrack, you claim your vessel has an 11,230 kg displacement
Yet the designer claims 8500kg displacement?
Those are the facts aren't they?
Please correct me if I am wrong.
|
|
|
01-08-2010, 07:15
|
#11
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Boston
Boat: 50' custom pilot house cutter
Posts: 115
|
Cat Man Do, I don't quite get it. At a time when paulrack should be congratulated and commended for the successful completion of a massive project, you're hassling him about his numbers. He's accomplished a tremendously rewarding and satisfying goal. Why not let him enjoy the moment for a week or 2, then ask questions?
And Paulrack, very nice job. Congratulations.
Best, Bob S/V Restless
|
|
|
01-08-2010, 07:31
|
#12
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hampton, VA
Boat: 45'=not anymore
Posts: 335
|
Who is this guy???
Quote:
Originally Posted by cat man do
Obviously that includes Maverick as well?
OK, but not according to the website
The website only shows a 38 and a 46
Where did you get these weights from?
Really?
Where does the website state that?
I see some sites say lightship, but Maverick does not
They just show displacement which is how much water is displaced to get to the DWL (Design Waterline)
The website says that the Displacement of the Maverick is at 8500kg
You say the weight now, is 7730kg
Right, so now you claim your boat actually has a displacement of 7730kg (load-cell weight at launch) plus 3500kg (claimed "additional" weight carrying ability) = Actual Displacement of 11200kg?
Its a shame they don't say that on the website
On the website they say the displacement is 8500kg
Specs for maverick 40
Displacement 8500kg
How, magic?
The numbers say something different, as does the antifoul line on your pictures.
|
This is what XXUXX means by pontificating "Ole Farts". This guy personifies what we don;t want here.....some rable-rousing jerk trying to steal the "Thunder" , the enjoyment of someone sharing their "splashing" of their new vessel. Go away!!
|
|
|
01-08-2010, 08:20
|
#13
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Cape Town
Boat: Maverick 400 Catamaran
Posts: 215
|
Thanks guys for the good wishes, I was wondering if it was just me or if one should not share stuff on the forum.
Bayview I checked the bridgeck clearance it was 75cm halfway from the front to the back of the bridgedeck (I measured through the escape hatch) and about 72cm at the back. There were 8 people on the boat when I measured. I will still get you the sinkage rate.
My last comment on the post of Cat man do. The displacement is NOT the maximum loaded weight of the boat. If that was the case all the examples that I gave means you would have to remove a portion of the boat to go sailing and could not have any fuel water supplies or people onboard. What you are referring to is full load displacement and no one quotes that on their websites.
|
|
|
01-08-2010, 08:55
|
#14
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: St. Georges, Bda
Boat: Rhodes Reliant 41ft
Posts: 4,131
|
Congrats Paulrack,
If you get here to 32N.64W, we got a mooring for ya.
__________________
so many projects--so little time !!
|
|
|
01-08-2010, 15:48
|
#15
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brisbane Australia [until the boats launched]
Boat: 50ft powercat, light,long and low powered
Posts: 4,409
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob kingsland
Cat Man Do, I don't quite get it. At a time when paulrack should be congratulated and commended for the successful completion of a massive project, you're hassling him about his numbers. He's accomplished a tremendously rewarding and satisfying goal. Why not let him enjoy the moment for a week or 2, then ask questions?
And Paulrack, very nice job. Congratulations.
Best, Bob S/V Restless
|
You are correct of course Bob and I did congratulate paul on his launch.
Having been their myself I know what an achievement it is.
I suppose having been in an industry that is somewhat notorious for making false claims (as Paul) has pointed out himself, makes me a little sceptical of the claims and numbers made.
Especially when the evidence they provide is in direct contradiction to the information on the designers website.
I think it is important in this day and age, especially when considering what has happened and is happening in the world presently (GFC) that there is more transparency and questioning, instead of blind acceptance.
|
|
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
Display Modes |
Rate This Thread |
Linear Mode
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
Advertise Here
Recent Discussions |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vendor Spotlight |
|
|
|
|