I agree strongly with what Roy has said here, and might add...
I did know of a "sort of" Searunner that had a daggerboard rather than a centerboard. It was sailed by a guy that I got to know in my anchorage, when I lived on the hook a mile or so out from Key West
This boat was a SR 37 that had it's transoms stretched out in a looong slope, about 4 or 5', making it a 41 or 42'er. The amas too, were seriously raked out.
It was mostly built of just 1/4" plywood
and TOTALLY empty, so was FAR lighter than ANY SR 37, even considering it's being about a 42'er.
was totally dominated by a high aspect daggerboard, that when raised, occupied the entire space forward of the wheel
to the mast, and up above eye level. When lowered, this efficient but very fragile daggerboard made the boat draw about 9'!
I was out sailing my hot little SC 28 one day, and had become used to "smoking" all of the competition.
Then, along comes this radical Searunner, (Which I had previously looked all over and knew well), and he flew past me like I was still anchored.
It was VERY fast. It was also a goofy, ill conceived, white elephant! It could not come close to being a 42' racer
, and with it being built under spec out of 1/4" ply, and having a radical daggerboard, it was incredibly fragile and no longer "practical". Combined with the daggerboard's dominating the cross over cockpit when raised, and 9' draft
when it was down, it was a total waste of time and money
, AS FAST AS IT WAS!
The boat's proud owner had sailed her to Key West
, ALL the way from CA, where John Marples had surveyed her, saying: "She's not fit to go beyond the Golden Gate Bridge". Since the boat had successfully been on such a long voyage, he concluded that John didn't know what he was talking about. Imo... This intrepid skipper
had merely been "lucky". It was not a safe sea boat!
These Searunners are "right down the rational middle", practical cruising boats, not racers. Trying such major changes as these to the designers' concept
, is like installing a V-8 engine in a VW Beetle. (It would be faster, but "dangerous" and a really sorry car)!
Except for the rich and famous who can afford "extreme boats" like Chris White's Atlantic 42, then pay for others to repair the occasional damage, Daggerboards do not belong on a "practical cruising boat" design.
Roy pointed out the centerboard's advantages, as have I in the past. THERE ARE NO "SERIOUS" CB MAINTENANCE
HEADACHES DESIGNED INTO THESE BOATS! The Searunners that have had problems with their centerboards and/or trunks, had these issues due to underbuilding and/or years of neglect. They don't take to either of these well at all.
We do loose perhaps 4 or 5% of windward ability over a high aspect daggerboard, but that is a small price
to pay for the centerboard's superior utility.
I too would probably choose a Cross if I were not "Searunning". Size for size, with their having keels, they may loose 4 or 5% of windward ability over our Searunners, but overall, they take to underglassing and/or neglect better than Searunners do. This is due to their having fewer parts
and much less complexity of the entire structure.
It was my penchant for really shallow anchorages
in places like the Bahamas
, that made the choice clear for me. Otherwise, a Cross with a less troublesome keel
would do just fine. I would not choose to "cruise" on a daggerboard design, however.