NEW 47? ok, nice, but what's the diff' ??

[cwjohm]

The maximum displacement reference by Outremer is a guide at which performance does not suffer considerably. You can certainly load them more but performance deteriorates such that the performance improvement beyond a production boat is questionable.

I have spoken to a couple of Outremer owners who are disappointed with performance but they acknowledge they have added some 4 ton or so to the boat.

In my humble view you really need to move up to a performance 60ft boat to get the load carrying capacity of a production 45 footer. Maybe in a tri you may get away with a 50 footer.

Of course many people simply offload when they want to race their boats i.e. they have a racing mode and a cruising mode.

[owenrms]

I think this new 47 ticks a lot of the boxes. We had looked at the Saba but did not like the fact there was no three cabin version. Leopard 48 also on the list. Love the hydraulic platform on the stern as well as the quasi flybridge for island sailing while still having the safer helm position for ocean crossing. Only thing the admiral says is missing is the forward cockpit like the Leopard. Annapolis is going to be interesting this year though I doubt they will have a real 47 there.

[Factor]

Originally Posted by cwjohm

In my humble view you really need to move up to a performance 60ft boat to get the load carrying capacity of a production 45 footer. Maybe in a tri you may get away with a 50 footer..

I take that by production you mean the FP/Lagoon/Leopard boats?

On the issue of performance, certainly bigger is always better, Two 5X owners who are world cruisers with their families on their boats both talk to targeting 9-12 knots as their cruising boat speed, both consider day runs of less than 200 miles as unsatisfactory.

One has an excellent blog here:WILDLING

Many of the 49/51 owners however report similar performance in real world cruising mode. As a percentage of boats launched outremers are probably one of the most cruised boats in the market.

[44'cruisingcat]

Originally Posted by cwjohm

The maximum displacement reference by Outremer is a guide at which performance does not suffer considerably. You can certainly load them more but performance deteriorates such that the performance improvement beyond a production boat is questionable.

I have spoken to a couple of Outremer owners who are disappointed with performance but they acknowledge they have added some 4 ton or so to the boat.

In my humble view you really need to move up to a performance 60ft boat to get the load carrying capacity of a production 45 footer. Maybe in a tri you may get away with a 50 footer.

Of course many people simply offload when they want to race their boats i.e. they have a racing mode and a cruising mode.

Why on earth would you need to carry 4 TONS of crap with you?

And if you really MUST, then forget performance. It's not gonna happen.

[Factor]

I do have to say that after reading that I added up the weight of everything in my house that I would or indeed could take on a boat, it doesnt come to 4 tonne.

[tuskie]

Originally Posted by Factor

I do have to say that after reading that I added up the weight of everything in my house that I would or indeed could take on a boat, it doesnt come to 4 tonne.

Do you have 600 litres of diesel, 700 litres of water, a 3000w inverter or 700AH of batteries in your house? Probably not, but that would add up to approximately 2 tonne. Half a dozen people and their gear is another 0.5 to 1.0 tonne. So not really much carrying capacity left for tools, spares, extra sails, diving gear, etc. After all, these boats are designed to accommodate 10 people sleeping and over 20 people for day trips. Yes, that's a lot of "crap", but for my money a 45 to 49 footer should carry it. My 40 footer will.

4 tonne would probably be OK for a liveaboard cruising catamaran, but not sure where that figure came from? The new FP47 has no stated carrying capacity or maximum displacement; the Outremer 49 example that I inspected only had a carrying capacity of 2.6 tonnes, not 4 tonnes. By comparison, the Lagoon 440 has a carrying capacity of 6.5 tonne.

Sure people overload Outremers; the one I looked at was probably overloaded before anyone moved aboard with their drilled out carbon fibre toothbrush. It was equiped, from memory, with a lot of cruising "junk"; extra batteries, watermaker, inverter, dive compressor, etc. All crap, no doubt.

However, I strongly disagree with cwjohn implying that it's OK to exceed the maximum displacement (ie. overload). Maximum displacement is more than just a "guide". If something breaks or goes wrong onboard your overloaded "performance" cruiser, how will the manufacturer or an insurance company view your claim? Exceed the carrying or towing capacity of a motor vehicle and you automatically void insurance in case of accident. I'm sure marine insurance is just as unforgiving or worse. Not only does legal liability and performance suffer in an overloaded "performance cruiser", but so does comfort due to reduced bridgedeck clearance.

[Andrew Grace]

Originally Posted by tuskie

Do you have 600 litres of diesel, 700 litres of water, a 3000w inverter or 700AH of batteries in your house? Probably not, but that would add up to approximately 2 tonne. Half a dozen people and their gear is another 0.5 to 1.0 tonne. So not really much carrying capacity left for tools, spares, extra sails, diving gear, etc. After all, these boats are designed to accommodate 10 people sleeping and over 20 people for day trips. Yes, that's a lot of "crap", but for my money a 45 to 49 footer should carry it. My 40 footer will.

4 tonne would probably be OK for a liveaboard cruising catamaran, but not sure where that figure came from? The new FP47 has no stated carrying capacity or maximum displacement; the Outremer 49 example that I inspected only had a carrying capacity of 2.6 tonnes, not 4 tonnes. By comparison, the Lagoon 440 has a carrying capacity of 6.5 tonne.

Sure people overload Outremers; the one I looked at was probably overloaded before anyone moved aboard with their drilled out carbon fibre toothbrush. It was equiped, from memory, with a lot of cruising "junk"; extra batteries, watermaker, inverter, dive compressor, etc. All crap, no doubt.

However, I strongly disagree with cwjohn implying that it's OK to exceed the maximum displacement (ie. overload). Maximum displacement is more than just a "guide". If something breaks or goes wrong onboard your overloaded "performance" cruiser, how will the manufacturer or an insurance company view your claim? Exceed the carrying or towing capacity of a motor vehicle and you automatically void insurance in case of accident. I'm sure marine insurance is just as unforgiving or worse. Not only does legal liability and performance suffer in an overloaded "performance cruiser", but so does comfort due to reduced bridgedeck clearance.

Agree that water + fuel is often 2 ton with just these 2 item added so eats quickly into most performance boats payload capacity, the real issue is that most manufacturers seem to speed by this issue with cats and continually focus marketing at pre optioned weights which are fairly meaningless.

[tuskie]

Originally Posted by Andrew Grace

Agree that water + fuel is often 2 ton with just these 2 item added so eats quickly into most performance boats payload capacity, the real issue is that most manufacturers seem to speed by this issue with cats and continually focus marketing at pre optioned weights which are fairly meaningless.

Thanks Andrew. Most people may not realise that the unladen weight doesn't include a whole bunch of necessities.

Factor wants to load his lounge suite but forget the fuel and water.

[cwjohm]

I think like many issues on cruisers forum the discussion comes down to the definition of "cruising".

For some people "cruising" can be from Brisbane to Tangalooma or Grande Motte to St Tropez. For others it is crossing the Atlantic. The weight requirements for each are very different.

Clearly, for long distance cruising water, fuel, batteries, solar panels, watermaker, generator will easily get to 2 tonne. Then you add a dingy with a 15HP motor, fishing gear, scuba gear, swimming accessories at another half tonne. Then you add additional fridge and freezer stuffed with long term food supplies, as well as microwave, toaster, coffee machine, washing machine etc, etc, as well as bedding and clothing - another half tonne or more. Then you add people, safety gear, spare sails etc. etc and you max out between 3 and 4 tonnes.

For a trip from Brisbane to Tangalooma or Grande Motte to St Tropez you need none of that stuff. That is why many French boats are bought with nothing equipped. You can probably get away with a payload of half a tonne.

I also disagree with Tuskie in regard to Outremer's guidance on carrying capacity. I have been looking for a 49/51 for a while now and frankly I do not think I have seen one that would carry less than 2.6 tonne with full water and fuel on board. As Andrew says Outremer is a highly long term cruised boat so there are many very highly equipped boats out there. I cannot believe exceeding these guidances would void insurance. However, unquestionably it does reduce performance in a big way.

The question therefore comes back to the old triangle of comfort, cost and performance. I truly believe that if you want comfort (or carrying capacity) and performance then 60ft has to be the go. Of course this brings up a whole host of other issues.

[tuskie]

Originally Posted by cwjohm

I have been looking for a 49/51 for a while now and frankly I do not think I have seen one that would carry less than 2.6 tonne with full water and fuel on board.

2.6 tonnes IN ADDITION TO full fuel and water on board may be OK, but the Outremer 49's carrying capacity is a total of 2.6 tonnes INCLUDING fuel and water. "Carrying capacity" being maximum displacement minus unladen displacement. No thinking or matter of opinion involved; this is a fixed measure of mass. It is not as you again repeat, a "guidance". On Australian commercial vessels, the owner and the operator face hefty fines for exceeding maximum displacement, otherwise known as "overloading".

How about ringing your insurance company and asking: "Is my overloaded boat covered in the event of breakage?" I wouldn't trust any answer, other than "No".

[smj]

Originally Posted by tuskie

2.6 tonnes IN ADDITION TO full fuel and water on board may be OK, but the Outremer 49's carrying capacity is a total of 2.6 tonnes INCLUDING fuel and water. "Carrying capacity" being maximum displacement minus unladen displacement. No thinking or matter of opinion involved; this is a fixed measure of mass. It is not as you again repeat, a "guidance". On Australian commercial vessels, the owner and the operator face hefty fines for exceeding maximum displacement, otherwise known as "overloading".



How about ringing your insurance company and asking: "Is my overloaded boat covered in the event of breakage?" I wouldn't trust any answer, other than "No".

I guess it depends on your definition of cruising.


Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[44'cruisingcat]

Originally Posted by tuskie

Thanks Andrew. Most people may not realise that the unladen weight doesn't include a whole bunch of necessities.

Factor wants to load his lounge suite but forget the fuel and water.

I do believe the unladen weight would include batteries. They're part of the boat, IMO.

Water and fuel, yes, but maybe if you had a boat that sailed, you could carry less fuel? And 700 litres of water, plus a watermaker? Why?

I struggle to come even close to 4 tonne of "necessities". In fact when we moved house there wasn't 4 tonnes of stuff, including all the furniture, enough tools to rebuild a car, etc. Even a ride on mower.

I doubt if our load on board, including full water (400 litres) and fuel (300 litres) would go much over 2 tonnes.

Maybe I just don't realise all the "necessities" we're doing without. I do enjoy sailing the boat when others are motoring though.

[44'cruisingcat]

Originally Posted by tuskie

How about ringing your insurance company and asking: "Is my overloaded boat covered in the event of breakage?" I wouldn't trust any answer, other than "No".

Not much point ringing them then is there?

But honestly, have you ever heard of an insurance company insisting a boat be WEIGHED as part of a claim assessment? I certainly haven't.

[tuskie]

Originally Posted by 44'cruisingcat

Not much point ringing them then is there?

But honestly, have you ever heard of an insurance company insisting a boat be WEIGHED as part of a claim assessment? I certainly haven't.

I'm not the one inferring that its Ok to overload.

[Factor]

Originally Posted by cwjohm

I think like many issues on cruisers forum the discussion comes down to the definition of "cruising".

Very true. Some people "need" more some people "need" less. You need what you need to be happy.

Clearly, for long distance cruising water, fuel, batteries, solar panels, watermaker, generator will easily get to 2 tonne.

A good light performance cruiser will sail better - need less fuel and water. equally batteries are part of a standard displacement on (most?) boats, as are solar panels (again most? but certainly not all) And if you have a water maker you don't need 700 litres of water. I have spent 6 weeks aboard (as a couple) with 400 litres, had I had a water maker I would have carried less. Just about any passage can be done on 200 litres of water for a couple, as a safe if not luxurious amount. And I see no need for a Genset on any boat - but then again I see no need for aircon, whereas I absolutely accept that some find it mandatory. So of your list I would carry 200 litres fuel 200 litres water, and batteries and solar come on the brands I would be buying and I wouldn't have a genset, so that 2 tonne figure is down to half a tonne.

Then you add a dingy with a 15HP motor, fishing gear, scuba gear, swimming accessories at another half tonne.

I would have a smaller motor on the dinghy dinghy and motor are less than 100k Ancillary sports gear ( I cant dive anymore sadly due to an ear rupture many years ago),

Then you add additional fridge and freezer stuffed with long term food supplies, as well as microwave, toaster, coffee machine, washing machine etc, etc, as well as bedding and clothing - another half tonne or more.

We dehydrate our own food and have a lot less need for refrigeration, and again on the boats I would buy the included systems are big enough. I dont do microwaves on boats,I dont do 240 at all. But I accept many do. I dont do washing machines either. But many do. I do plunger coffee on the boat.

Then you add people, safety gear, spare sails etc. etc and you max out between 3 and 4 tonnes.

So I go simpler and lighter and thus the boat sails better and I need less and thus the boat goes better etc etc.

But I am not criticising those who carry more, - BUT if you want to carry that much stuff, then you either go slower, or you get a bigger boat. I absolutely agree - on a boat you will sail on in light breezes and carrying a huge amount of stuff you need long.

Carry less you dont need as long. 44C carries everything he owns on a 44 footer and it will sail quicker than most boats here.

I truly believe that if you want comfort (or carrying capacity) and performance then 60ft has to be the go

. Agree. But ultimately it comes down to what each of us define as comfort.