Maintenance - Cat VS Mono

If there is any lesson that should have been learned a long time ago, it is there is nothing that can be made, that some genious can't break. Consider the Titanic. Mono or Multi, Cat, half cat, or cat and a half, they will all sink if run over by a ship, or the bottoms are torn out on a reef. Each has it's benefits, and it's draw backs. There is no real reason to debate the issue because they are all the perfect boat for someone. I have never heard of anyone changing from a multi to a mono, but I personally have changed from a mono to a multi, as have many others. This does not mean I think multis are better, it just means I believe a multi will suit my needs better. The laws of physics dictate that anything that relies on bouyancy to stay on the surface will sink if that bouyancy is removed. You could fill everything with foam, but then you would lose much of the space advantage of the boat.
Since the question here is a comparison of maintenance, not a question of which design is better, whether a cat is unsinkable is really a moot point. There are only two issues here that have shown a cat to cost more than a mono to maintain. The second engine, where benefits outweigh the cost, and the additional plumbing and wiring. On this issue, I still contend that it is a matter of want more than need. The cost of a few more feet of hose or wire is minimal, and the cost of maintaining that few extra feet is only a factor if it fails. The likelyhood of having more systems on a cat than on a mono is a matter of "I have the room, so why not?"

[Canibul]

Well, some of the math is simple. If you are in a catamaran and you loses exactly one engine, there you is. If you are in a monohull and loses exactly one engine, where is ya?

Under sail

[Canibul]

Well, thats constant for both boats.

[Strygaldwir]

Cat's are lots more exensive than monohulls! There really should be no arguements there. But, for liveaboard cruising there are so many benefits! Having an extra engine is costly, but it did come in handy when I burned out one of my starters. It was an annoyance not something I had to worry about. For sundowners at the anchorage, folks like to come over to our boat, we sat nine for dinner (Almost had enough plates!)

For sailing, it is rather dull. No sense of speed, just mostly comfortable, level, easy sailing. Definately bumpier in choppy waters though. Turn on the autopilot, grab a book, lay on the tarp and watch the ocean go by.

Way easier managing a dinghy. We pull it up every night, just attach it to the davits. I haul on the aft, Eva the front, simple. Getting in is just a matter of walking down the steps and stepping into the front of the dinghy, releasing the snap shackles and we're off. Some of our friend store theres on the deck and it is an ordeal to put it back in the water and put the motor back on. It is also something of a challenge getting in and out of the dinghy. Cat's win hands down.


Fair winds,

Keith

[RandyAbernethy]

Keith, I find many catamarans exhilarating to sail and I think there are important alternative views to consider regarding expenses. JT said it all when he indicated that you can't compare a 40' cat and a 40' monohull. A 40' cat has the equivalent space of a 50-60' mono hull and the speed as well (if not over loaded). If you compare apples to apples the expensive cat myth (to buy and to maintain) fades rapidly.

If you compare the maintenance of a 40' cat to a 60' mono I doubt you'll find fault with the cat and if anything it will be noticeably cheaper. The only possible exception is that you have two diesels on most cats, but you should consider the fact that it is easier to drive a 40' cat than a 60' mono. Thus the equivalent mono packs more horse power than the sum of both of the cats engines, closing the cost gap (perhaps not quite to the level of a dual engine boat) and the rig is typically more expansive by a substantial factor. A Broad Blue 385 comes with two 20hp engines and about 850 sq ft of sail, an HR 48 comes with 145hp and 1,400 sq ft of sail and they are comparable when it comes to space and speed.

Lauderdale Marine Center charges me my LOA * 1.5 the mono rate, or exactly what the equivalent square footage in mono hull would pay. Hauling a 40' cat will run about the same as a 60' mono also. Bottom paint is more expensive on the deep keeled mono, as Kia notes, due to greater wetted surface.

Regarding the market for cats, I have heard from three different dealers who carry mono and cat lines that the mono market is bigger but not growing and the cat market, while smaller now, is growing quickly. One of these dealers was the San Diego Beneteau dealer who just picked up Lagoon to cover their bases. This speaks to resale value. Also of note, a great new 60’ mono hull will cost more than a great new 40’ cat (compare a Najad 511 at $1mm to a PDQ 44 at $775).

Captain Bil also makes a good point which I endorse, it is easier to maintain a cat. Cats lack the deep bilges of mono hulls making it far easier to manage issues below the floor boards. The engine rooms are typically easier to operate in, and everything is level, even if you are underway.

I love monos and I love cats, and in my experience thay are more similar than different when it comes to maintenance if you compare apples to apples.

[Canibul]

"Improvements to the monohull design have only increased sailing efficiency about 20% over 100 years, whereas by changing from a monohull to a multihull a much greater increase in sailing efficiency is realized." -Richard Boehmer

[Tropic Cat]

I'll be the first to admit that doing maintenence on twin diesels is time consuming and certainly not enjoyable.

On the other hand when the weather turns nasty, and with no where to hide; hauling down the sails and motoring at 6 knots through a thunder storm cell with 25 - 30 knots of wind on the bow with my twin diesels is a definite benefit.

At my age, I wouldn't have it any other way!

Rick in Florida

[Vasco]

Originally Posted by Strygaldwir

Way easier managing a dinghy. We pull it up every night, just attach it to the davits. I haul on the aft, Eva the front, simple. Getting in is just a matter of walking down the steps and stepping into the front of the dinghy, releasing the snap shackles and we're off. Some of our friend store theres on the deck and it is an ordeal to put it back in the water and put the motor back on. It is also something of a challenge getting in and out of the dinghy. Cat's win hands down.

Keith,

How is this different from a modern monohull? Most have walk through transoms and davits or arches. I carry my 10'06" AB with 15 hp motor on the arch. I do agree cats are great for partying. Spent a bit of time on a Leopard 43 last season and it certainly was great for partying, especially in lousy weather, the hardtop, side curtains and patio doors to the galley/dining area (I guess you don't say "down below" on a cat unless you're going into one of the hulls) did the trick. Also spent some time an a Catalina 40 which has two wheels and seems to have been built for partying. I think we got 16 people in that cockpit.

[Canibul]

16 real friendly people, I bet...

[Vasco]

It got friendlier as the night wore on but for pole dancing you really need a ketch.

[gosstyla]

Originally Posted by Kai Nui

I have never heard of anyone changing from a multi to a mono, but I personally have changed from a mono to a multi, as have many others. "

Well, I guess we could start with the Dashews..

[GordMay]

I’m not aware of any Multi-Hulls in Steve and Linda Dashew’s past, tho’ they have recently gone from auxiliary-sail to power-sail.
http://www.setsail.com/dashew/dashoff.html

[Tropic Cat]

When did the Dashews have a multihull? They've had the Deerfoot, Sundeer, and Beowulf series of cruising mono's, and are now traveling around in a 70ft+ power boat.

Rick in Florida

[Tropic Cat]

Gord, ya beat me by a minute or so.

Rick in Florida