Sailing vs Power Catamaran - Time, Cost and Enjoyment

[pir8ped]

Yeah, the hype of the media - but I've seen the changes on the coral reefs in the Caribbean over the last 35 years. That's not media hype. I've seen the deforestation in Malaysia to make way for palm oil plantations. I actually own some oak forest in France, which is in fact dying. It was 42 degrees there this summer. Last summer there was drought for months - June to November, not normal at all. My springs and stream dried up. This year I'm planning to build some water storage there, a little lake. But it feels like mitigation, that didn't used to be necessary. But there you go, if you want to write off a big load of scientific data off as hype, and can't see what's going on around you, go ahead, laugh it off.

[wingssail]

Originally Posted by HSV Sailing

Assuming full live-aboard, with around 4,000nm traveled per year, for 5 years. Mostly around the Bahamas, Caribean and the East coast. Sub $300k cat.

Maintenance Cost: Cheaper to sail or power?
4k nm yr in a efficient powercat traveling at 6 knots, getting 3.8nm per gallon (pulled from Lepoard 43) 1,052gallons of gas at $5 a gallon. $5,260yr for just Diseael for the Powercat. $26,300 minimum for Diseal in those 5 years.

Large sailing maintenance seems to come in the form of rigging and sails, but with everything else combined would it be close to the fuel cost above?

Any ideas on engine maintenance costs for power vs sail over 5yrs? I imagine the powercat maintenance cost has to be more, just because of engine size.

Bridge Clearance: How long waiting for bridges vs powering under them?
With the idea of travel the East coast, I've waiting on bridges could be a huge time sink.

Insurance Cost: Any savings going sail vs power?
I've read insurance is typically 1%-1.5% on a sail cat, but questioned if it was any cheaper on a powercat.

Experience: How's the enjoyment of going from a sail to a power or the other way around?
I've read of sailors switching from to a powercat as they've gotten older because it was easier on them. With that, how is the enjoyment of it? How is it running the engines at 6knots for 3 days straight, vs sailing?

It seems like powering gives you a large time saving, without having to line up with the wind, and spend nearly as much time weather watching, but is that ultimately what makes it enjoyable?

Thank you for everyone's feedback.

The one consideration which changes everything is "What are you getting a boat for?"

If it is for the fun of sailing, then you must have a sailboat, and one which can really sail.

If it is for simply transportation to some place, then you'll probably settle for a motorboat. Even if you get a sailboat you'll be motoring it most of the time anyhow. If you don't just love sailing, you'll find it too much bother.

The costs, if you amortize the replacements of the sails and rigging, or the cost of new motors, factor in fuel, etc, I'd bet, in the long run, the difference in cost is less important then the enjoyment you'd get if you're a sailor vs the work you have to do if you're not. If you'd rather be sedentary, don't bother with the sailboat.

Actually, fly to your destination, that's the easiest, and probably the most cost effective.

[CatNewBee]

Originally Posted by pir8ped

Yeah, the hype of the media - but I've seen the changes on the coral reefs in the Caribbean over the last 35 years. That's not media hype. I've seen the deforestation in Malaysia to make way for palm oil plantations. I actually own some oak forest in France, which is in fact dying. It was 42 degrees there this summer. Last summer there was drought for months - June to November, not normal at all. My springs and stream dried up. This year I'm planning to build some water storage there, a little lake. But it feels like mitigation, that didn't used to be necessary. But there you go, if you want to write off a big load of scientific data off as hype, and can't see what's going on around you, go ahead, laugh it off.

Everything is changing always. Deserts become green, and green landscapes desert. Continents disappear, the earth magnet field flips, new islands rise from the bottom. It is the circle of life on earth, some changes are quick, some take time, we had ice ages and hot periods with palmes in the north, all the coal were large forrests and swamps, there was a shallow sea in the heart of Europe, you can see the fossiles everywhere, even ar the Alpes peaks. Just look at the bigger picture, and you will see, that climate change is nothing to worry about, and nothing and nobody can stop it..

[pir8ped]

No frothing. I was asking why don't people generally consider the costs more generally, rather than just to the hole in the bank account. You missed my point that I sailed in a boat that was headed for landfill without quite a bit of repair. I wouldn't consider buying a new boat or building one because of the environmental cost.

I appreciate I have a dirty great footprint behind me, but I understand that I can't go on like I used to.

[Chotu]

Back to the topic for a moment.

What pitch prop should I be trying on a 50' cat that currently weighs in at 14,000lbs or so with a maximum finished displacement of 18,000lbs?
.
We are talking about a pair of 30hp outboards right now. I'm not getting good top speed. RPM limits way before boay geys up to any speefs discussed here.

I usually run only 1 engine at a time.

[daydreamer]

We have a sailing cat (Privilege 42), with twin diesels (40 hp Yanmars). We sail when we can, but have no issues with motoring if we can't. No genset and we don't run the engines just to make electricity -- we live off solar.

When cruising the Caribbean we averaged an hour per day of engine time (a half hour on each engine). Typically, we burna half gallonper hour per engine. So, $1100 or a bit more year on fuel, oil, and filters. (At your $5/gal. $8/gal in the DR was highest we saw.)

[daydreamer]

If I were cruising only the Florida keys and the Bahamas, a power cat would be fine. My sailing friends always cringe when I say that, but sailing our 42 ft cat by myself is a lot of work and not especially safe if there is any weather. (My wife is a tremendous help with anchoring and watches, but I'm on my own with the sails.) In the Caribbean, it's probably worth it to me to have sails, but it would not ruin the trip if I were on a power cat.

[tomfl]

Originally Posted by wingssail

The one consideration which changes everything is "What are you getting a boat for?"

If it is for the fun of sailing, then you must have a sailboat, and one which can really sail.

If it is for simply transportation to some place, then you'll probably settle for a motorboat. Even if you get a sailboat you'll be motoring it most of the time anyhow. If you don't just love sailing, you'll find it too much bother.

The costs, if you amortize the replacements of the sails and rigging, or the cost of new motors, factor in fuel, etc, I'd bet, in the long run, the difference in cost is less important then the enjoyment you'd get if you're a sailor vs the work you have to do if you're not. If you'd rather be sedentary, don't bother with the sailboat.

Actually, fly to your destination, that's the easiest, and probably the most cost effective.

Glad you finally posted that if transportation is what you are looking for a boat is not the best choice be it sail or power. Especially if money is a consideration.

[tomfl]

Originally Posted by daydreamer

If I were cruising only the Florida keys and the Bahamas, a power cat would be fine. My sailing friends always cringe when I say that, but sailing our 42 ft cat by myself is a lot of work and not especially safe if there is any weather. (My wife is a tremendous help with anchoring and watches, but I'm on my own with the sails.) In the Caribbean, it's probably worth it to me to have sails, but it would not ruin the trip if I were on a power cat.

My take is that the Keys and Bahamas are great places to sail. Distances are short enough to be day sails. Easy to pick up weather reports on the VHF, smart phone, or even TV.

While I don't consider myself a top tier sailor I have no problems single handing my Seawind and the windless makes anchoring trivial.

[daletournier]

But what have my 'green credentials' got to do with anything?

Absolutely everything when you claim the moral high ground.

[CatNewBee]

Originally Posted by daletournier

But what have my 'green credentials' got to do with anything?

Absolutely everything when you claim the moral high ground.

Nothing I would say, it is your private choice.

As long as you not not shame others for their choices, it is OK. We live also an economic life, reusing as much as possible, recycling, avoiding plastics if we think they are unnecessary, using wind and sun, but we respect others choices of different lifestyles including burning 4000l per hour and jetting around the world for climate change congresses, eating insects instead of steaks, or plants, they have feelings too.

The green or CO2 footprint is not our primal consideration and never will be, because we believe CO2 is a good thing, it is THE primary food along the foodchain, CO2 plus H20, plus sunray, end up on your plate as salad, plants eaten by a cow even as steak or algae as sushi leaves, eaten by fish, and another fish... You get the concept. Someone needs to burn this stuff back to CO2 to keep the circle of life going. This is our contribution to save the planet and our moral high ground.

[malbert73]

Originally Posted by CatNewBee

Because it is a hoax. Climate changes with or without you. Has been changing as the dinos were around before they find their way in the tank. And when we are one day crude oil, some intelligent ant will ask the same question.

Best to stop exhaling when breathing, to not increase CO2.

Umm. Do also believe the earth is flat? [emoji3]

I probably can’t change your mind but it makes me sad that many folks who actually enjoy the environment spout this same nonsense which is only supported by pseudoscience originally funded by oil companies et al.
Any semi-informed consideration of actual scientific evidence will show climate change fueled by increased greenhouse gas emissions to be real and terrifying, and not possibly due to “natural variation” in global patterns.

The contrarian view really exists just to justify kicking the can down the road to future generations so that the current generation can continue to accumulate wealth.

That said, global commerce (shipping, planes, trucks) emits many orders of magnitude more CO2 than small diesel burning displacement boats. So keep your boat and stop using amazon I guess.

[pir8ped]

--As long as you not not shame others for their choices, it is OK.

What's so precious about causing shame? We live on a planet with a limited size. We can only use resources at a certain rate without buggering things up for future generations. I think people who are trashing the planet without a care for future generations (or even ours) should think again, and shame might be a good result, the start of something better.

--We live also an economic life, reusing as much as possible, recycling, avoiding plastics if we think they are unnecessary, using wind and sun, but we respect others choices of different lifestyles including burning 4000l per hour and jetting around the world for climate change congresses, eating insects instead of steaks, or plants, they have feelings too.

What are you? A snowflake? Gotta let anyone do whatever they choose because personal freedom and the right not to have hurt feelings is more precious than the environment we live in?

-The green or CO2 footprint is not our primal consideration and never will be, because we believe CO2 is a good thing, it is THE primary food along the foodchain, CO2 plus H20, plus sunray, end up on your plate as salad, plants eaten by a cow even as steak or algae as sushi leaves, eaten by fish, and another fish... You get the concept. Someone needs to burn this stuff back to CO2 to keep the circle of life going. This is our contribution to save the planet and our moral high ground.[/QUOTE]

I have a degree in microbiology, which included a lot of biochemistry learning. I can just tell you that painting a picture suitable for a 5 year old isn't exactly convincing. There's much more to CO2 than it being a 'good thing'.

[CatNewBee]

Ever heard something about nature striving for maximum entropy?

Humans destiny is to free the carbon accumulated over millions of years to enable the next evolution step on the planet.

We make the planet green again.

Btw, ressources are not lost, no matter how much you consume, not a single atom leaves earth due to gravity, any following generation will have the same set of ressources, maybe in a different combination or location. Our trash is the ressource for future industries. Once it becomes cheaper to excavate a dump ground than blow a mountain...

Nature is changing, you can't stop it.

[daletournier]

Originally Posted by pir8ped

--As long as you not not shame others for their choices, it is OK.

What's so precious about causing shame? We live on a planet with a limited size. We can only use resources at a certain rate without buggering things up for future generations. I think people who are trashing the planet without a care for future generations (or even ours) should think again, and shame might be a good result, the start of something better.

--We live also an economic life, reusing as much as possible, recycling, avoiding plastics if we think they are unnecessary, using wind and sun, but we respect others choices of different lifestyles including burning 4000l per hour and jetting around the world for climate change congresses, eating insects instead of steaks, or plants, they have feelings too.

What are you? A snowflake? Gotta let anyone do whatever they choose because personal freedom and the right not to have hurt feelings is more precious than the environment we live in?

-The green or CO2 footprint is not our primal consideration and never will be, because we believe CO2 is a good thing, it is THE primary food along the foodchain, CO2 plus H20, plus sunray, end up on your plate as salad, plants eaten by a cow even as steak or algae as sushi leaves, eaten by fish, and another fish... You get the concept. Someone needs to burn this stuff back to CO2 to keep the circle of life going. This is our contribution to save the planet and our moral high ground.

I have a degree in microbiology, which included a lot of biochemistry learning. I can just tell you that painting a picture suitable for a 5 year old isn't exactly convincing. There's much more to CO2 than it being a 'good thing'. [/QUOTE]Preaching never goes down well, missionary comes to mind regarding shame.