Trimaran - Especially Searunner - Owners

[Mark Johnson]

My first cruising boat project was a Wharram, back in the 70s. I loved the boat, it's beachability, ease of building, etc. Only when I later crewed on a Searunner, did I really see the difference in windward ability. My Wharram pointed high, but didn't go where it was pointing. It side slipped it's way along soo much, that I got in the habit of heading 15 or 20 degrees upwind of that island on the horizon, if that was to be my landfall. It was the only way to get there...

Narrow hulls', providing enough lift to be considered "good windward boats", is a myth!

Also,from a "windward performance" point of view... The problem with small low aspect keels, on SMALL trimarans, is that they are terribly inefficient, operating in disturbed water at the surface, rather than down deep, where they can do some good.

Many long narrow multihulls do "OK" with keels that are about as tall as the hull, (from their bottom to WL), but long, "shorter" keels on a deeper hull, (like Searunners), lack the same windward ability, and ONLY work on boats that were designed for them in the first place.

While deep daggerboards are the MOST efficient, they lack the same level of forgiveness to a grounding, as our centerboards, (IF one uses a "fuse" line). I don't therefore, consider daggerboards to be a viable cruising option either. Centerboards are the best "performance cruising" option, as well as for easing the motion of the boat considerably.

In no design could this be more true than in a Searunner. Searunners are utterly unsuited to anything but the centerboards that they were drawn with. Adding to their long, shallow minikeel, (Which is for rudder/skeg protection in a grounding, and for sitting the boat on, NOT going to windward), would ruin the boat as a practical cruiser.

Being the wrong shape, (fat, long, and shallow), it would be a poor substitute for the centerboard, as drawn. Even more disturbing would be the loss of "variable draft". We have sat out a low tide grounding, with tolerable heel, as the water disappeared from around us. We have also touched bottom in 7 of water', the fuse popped & board kicked up, (without damage), then we turned around and sailed out of our blunder.

Being locked into deep draft, loosing it's "variability", and accepting poor windward ability as well, would leave you with something far less than a real Searunner! If one wants a keeled multihull, there are many designs to choose from that are designed for it in the first place. They would be a much better choice than retrofitting a Searunner with a keel large enough to do any good.

I wouldn't even think about it! If I wanted the simplicity of low aspect keels, I would get a catamaran, with shallow draft hulls, that was designed for it.

[Cavalier MK2]

A LAR would work on a Searunner hull as well as most others. It is not a unique hull form. Many designs give you the option with a board selected for performance and variable draft- 2 things I also think worth haveing. However the strength and ease of maintenance of a LAR make them a viable option for many. I agree that in most cases a Searunner should be chosen because of the centerboard not in spite of it. I also think in a special situation getting on the water sooner to recuperate makes more sense than recovering in a boatyard.....

A well built daggerboard trunk is a wonderful simple thing with more efficiancy and far less maintenance which make them a viable cruising option for many. A short slot puts far less strain on a hull than a loooong slot which doesn't add support to the aft end of the board. Thomas Firth Jones used them on his boats and wrote about their cruising benefits in his book "Multihull Voyaging".

Now la Searunner built without a centerboard could have a on centerline engine......They are great boats, the 34 is my favorite as well but if I built one I'd implement some changes.

[Boatguy30]

[QUOTE=I wouldn't even think about it! If I wanted the simplicity of low aspect keels, I would get a catamaran, with shallow draft hulls, that was designed for it.[/QUOTE]

Hmmm....... Sounds like my new boat!!!

[Mark Johnson]

What is different about Searunners', like my 34s, hull form... is their depth, (not counting the keel). At 3' draft already, if you add a minimal 2.5' keel, you have a 34' trimaran that draws 5.5', ALL the time, will lean 45 degrees, or more, if left dry on a falling tide, and haulouts would be a beast. A Searunner would NOT be a candidate for a keel, unless one likes white elephants that are a poorly conceived pain in the ass.

Daggerboards are indeed more efficient, due to the turbulence of a centerboard's open slot. Our turbulence is minimized by having the forward half of the slot faired in with a rubber flap. The efficiency difference is probably less than 5%, well worth it for the safety advantage...

A centerboard is not really more maintenance than a daggerboard. All I do is wipe out the slime when wiping down the hull. Barnacles are not interested in living there, due to lack of food & light. I did have an octopus once though...

About strength...
The Searunner centerboard trunk, IF built & glassed right, is like a tank! The stress at the top half, is born by TWO different horizontal floors, at TWO different levels, that bear against the trunk walls. It is the strongest point in the boat, and this is why the mast sits here as well. There is a doubler against the CB trunk wall, about 8" wide & 1" thick. This makes the trunk wall 1.5" thick where needed to bear the load, with a vertical frame that divides the trunk in half for & aft, and the half that is the ONLY loaded half, "the front", has the previously mentioned sub floor in the middle. As the trunk leaves the hull, the wall is 2" thick, due to a 2X4 on edge at its base, and the bottom CB load is born by the MASSIVE mini keel, with the inside radius' bearing surface glassed 3/16" thick! ALSO... On the bottom of the mini keel is a 3/8" thick glass "worm shoe" to take groundings and sit on in the boat yard, (Like right now). Other than the control blocks, which indeed needed to be much larger, I have had "0" problems in tens if thousands of miles, over 16 years or cruising. (12 were as full time liveaboards). I cleat the board down with a 1/8" piece of parachute cord, tied with a rolling hitch onto the CBs down control line. IF I hit something, the board has 3/8" to 1/2" of glass, (just on the striking surfaces), so it might only get a ding. Then the cord pops, and the board comes flying up. Since the CB trunk's forward wall has a 4" long section of 3" rubber exhaust pipe, (at the top athwartships), it cushions the blow to a dull "thud". It has only happened twice, but that is how many times I would be repairing MAJOR structural damage, if I had a cruiser with a daggerboard. The stories I've heard from daggerboard disasters!!!

Daggerboards are fine for really performance oriented boats, owned by folks who don't go far and hire their repairs done, but for a good wholesome, FORGIVING "cruiser", that is trying to strike a perfect balance between performance, seaworthiness, accommodation, and overall ruggedness, a centerboard is hands down the way to go. This is why the Searunner series, is likely the most "proven & successful" trimaran series ever designed. (This is if you consider over 1,000 boats, & 40+ years of successful voyages, "in the thousands", by husband & wife crews, ALL over & many around the world voyages, with VERY few disasters that were not the skippers fault)...

Many refinements have indeed been tried with Searunners, over the decades. The best are endorsed as real "improvements" by the designers, and passed on... Our Delphys has a cutter rig, but always sails as a sloop, with either the "lapper" headsail, (up to mid 30 knot winds), or the staysail, which is good up to VERY high winds.

We have also opted for the preferred engine position, "on center", with the "engine box" taking the place of the lower companionway step.
M.

[Cavalier MK2]

The 34 is pretty deep with a 27.5" depth sans mini keel so a keel 18" deep would be plenty. Add a couple of sturdy float fins to help with leeway and grounding and your all set to sail. Chris White has suggested the deep forefoots have contributed to some broachings, hence the need for the big skegs.......

Daggerboards are far easier to pull and repair than centerboards.....I think both are fine for cruising as are LAR keels. I don't think people will be hacking the trunks out of Searunners but it is certainly doable and could produce a good sailing craft. My responses have been for a special need situation. While going by the book can be important there are times when one needs to write the book..... As a design they are good boats but there is room for improvement for sure. Wharrams are great low cost craft that with a board added can be transformed. Smart guys like Ian Farrier realize everybody has their own prejudices and designs his boats so they can be built with Center or Daggerboards. Really why take sides when you can sell to both, with the same design.

[Mark Johnson]

Major cases of a client "being creative" with Searunners, almost always end up as less of a boat, NOT more! I've seen these abomonations tied up in the mangroves all over the Keys & Caribbean, half full of water, rotten, and forgotten.

The worst "clever changes" that I've ever seen done to a Searunner, was a 37'er made REALLY light, of 1/4" ply, with radically raked out transoms, and a high aspect daggerboard that drew about 8 or 9'! It was a REAL flyer, but otherwise, a sack of ****!

With any impact, the whole mess would self destruct, and when raised, the daggerboard occupied the entire space from the wheel to the mast, all the way up to the boom! It was no longer the practical cruiser it was meant to be, nor a true racer, nor commodious, nor rugged, nor seaworthy, nor good for anything that a Searunner is good at... Variable draft & a properly built centerboard, are at the heart of the Searunner design.

I don't say this to Cavalier, as he apparently thinks he knows more than the boat's designers do, and I will reason no further about his point.

To other folks, however, considering "drastically changing" a design, in it's overall concept, DONT... I don't mean small things, like I did, but things like the overall type of rig, changing the hull shape, choice of lateral resistance device, etc., Talk to the designer first.

Boats are very integrated machines, and you may very well NOT know the reasoning behind the designers choices. In Searunners, for example, the trunks dual role is also to support the mast, so, even with a larger keel, (which is a ridiculous idea), OR worse, a daggerboard, you'd still need the full sized CB trunk, to properly support the mast.

The suggestions made by Cavalier are a good example of what gets so many people in trouble. "All ya gotta do is"... It's just not that simple. There are a lot of such monstrosities out there, but it would be better for these "would be designers", to start from scratch, then design and build their own creations, rather that bastardize someone elses work... At least then, they can "own" the results, rather than call it something else, pulling down the designers good name with them.
M.

[Cavalier MK2]

Arrrr matey ye must find it hard to anchor when ya can't tell yer chains been yanked...... Apologies to Jim but the boat was designed by people who weren't boatbuilders and some of the trial and error show. They were developed by self proclaimed beach bums who had an ideas and tried them out. They stopped developing them as the came up with newer approaches which worked better. Which is what you would expect of people who are continuing to develop their craft. Check out Chaack a NW icon from Kurt Hughes Special Projects section of his web site. And Jim did a good job in basic respects because like VWs many were built hence their lack of sacred stature when people began hotrodding. For most people a stock bug is best but only a fool assumes others don't know what they are doing.

[HapaPops]

Hi All - Looks like I sold my trailerable trimaran - and will be looking for the next ride. Budget is solid enough to get a nice boat in good nick.

The reason we sold the trailerable is the girls are getting bigger, and are looking for their own "space" if you will - and it's cold here in Northern Cali so a center cockpit with either a good hard or soft dodger will be key (and can be added afterward)

My question is: Searunner 34 or 40, or wait till a Marples CC 40 comes on the market(really like the CC panels)

I think the Searunner 34 is actually all I "need" and there's a pretty nice one on the market at the moment But there is a very sweet 40 for sale in Washington that is actually a whole lot easier to figure out how to get home. However, I don't want to "overbuy" and find the boat sits at the dock as it's too hard to get out and sail in. My current Contour 34 is very easy to get underway. How is the 40 to single hand? Does the 40 provide a much smoother ride? My wife and youngest girl suffer from Mal de Mar. I realize docking will be a much tougher task in a cross wind for the 40.

Basically - just looking for a feel as to how the 2 boats compare for intended use - which is up to 2 weeks a summer onboard as a family of 6, monthly weekend trips, beer can and shorthanded racing in the summer, including offshore. We expect to do the Coastal California thing in bites as well over the next few years. It's 10 years till I can pack up and take significant time and get "out there"

Just looking for opinions - thanks!

PS - i'm through page 20 of this thread and will tackle more tomorrow.

greg

[rossad]

I gotta come in here..... as a carpentry sea kayak ski instructor water man pro: My Searunner makes me have to pinch myself sometimes cause of its genious design from the very back to the front point. For 37ft with its very clever combinations in design. Built of ply. I am starting to think they might be better than the new CC's. (thats saying something) For me their only change would be to have a longer arma (float) they would be quicker and better in all angles to the wind, but let me say it again Searunner design is a genious......... must have been a fluke .....
Reasons why i like searunners
Outside rudder
mini keel
centreboard on a pin
Arma design and rocker
flat under-area at the stern and sheer.
floatation with the underwing
Arma virtical side walls and deep water penetration.
flat decks
10 living area's.
Vertical ply for strength (nothing comes stronger for weight)
large changing area forcastle
sterncastle emotional stectrum
storage
speed
the many sail combinations
Boat width and length seems just right.. get up a narrow creek
and the logo

Beat that......

I have seen one big searunner change by an american whom sailed his over here to NZ.. His idea he put it past Marples and John said it could be done.
He got rid of the mini keel cause he liked being able to beach and pull the boat up without the hassles of the mini keel... in remote places in the pacific.
But what was most amazing he rebuilt the boat by placing the cockpit at the stern and made the complete inside livable without the centre cockpit. the centreboard remains and one would walk around it both sides... It was amazing to see actually. Credit to him too but i wouldnt cross an ocean with it cause these changes where not proven... but after 2500 plans of Searunners or more sold and over many years like 35... the searunner has a record second to nothing for offshore..... thats a fact... dont change these boats.... the design must have been a fluke.

[Mark Johnson]

Originally Posted by HapaPops

Hi All - Looks like I sold my trailerable trimaran - and will be looking for the next ride. Budget is solid enough to get a nice boat in good nick.

The reason we sold the trailerable is the girls are getting bigger, and are looking for their own "space" if you will - and it's cold here in Northern Cali so a center cockpit with either a good hard or soft dodger will be key (and can be added afterward)

My question is: Searunner 34 or 40, or wait till a Marples CC 40 comes on the market(really like the CC panels)

I think the Searunner 34 is actually all I "need" and there's a pretty nice one on the market at the moment But there is a very sweet 40 for sale in Washington that is actually a whole lot easier to figure out how to get home. However, I don't want to "overbuy" and find the boat sits at the dock as it's too hard to get out and sail in. My current Contour 34 is very easy to get underway. How is the 40 to single hand? Does the 40 provide a much smoother ride? My wife and youngest girl suffer from Mal de Mar. I realize docking will be a much tougher task in a cross wind for the 40.

Basically - just looking for a feel as to how the 2 boats compare for intended use - which is up to 2 weeks a summer onboard as a family of 6, monthly weekend trips, beer can and shorthanded racing in the summer, including offshore. We expect to do the Coastal California thing in bites as well over the next few years. It's 10 years till I can pack up and take significant time and get "out there"

Just looking for opinions - thanks!

PS - i'm through page 20 of this thread and will tackle more tomorrow.

greg

Except for accommodating 6 for 2 weeks... you would be better off with the 34, due largely to maintenance. If well built, these boats are only "more maintenance" because compared to a wood epoxy composite monohull, of the same loa, they have several times the surface area to keep painted, with a more complicated structure, and nooks & crannies galore. The larger the boat, the more this is true. The 40 is a "lifestyle", not just a weekender!

As far as the differences, otherwise... The 34 is considered to be the best "proportionately", as it was the last of the series, and incorporates many refinements.

Having said that, and putting the maintenance issue aside, you have two contradictory needs. The need for LESS than a FULL TIME liveaboard / cruiser, and your occasional use, clearly vote for the 34.

On the other hand, your need for less motion, and room for 6, (at times for weeks), votes for the 40. Roy's is probably the best one out there, but as far as I know, its not for sale...

Both boats are a handful to dock in a >15 knot side wind, because their straight "tracking" attributes makes the turning radius surprisingly large, and when going really really slow, they become sluggish to respond and quick to start going sideways. The 40 would be a bit more of a handful, with more mass to pull in, and more windage to resist. Otherwise, they would behave similarly. One thing that helps a lot, is that given a deep enough marina basin, coming & going with the CB down really helps. It minimizes side slip @ "0" knots, and by giving the hull a deep "pivot point" to revolve around, it cuts the turning radius and response time almost in half! Our marina basin allows us to come in with it "half way" down, & when we hit bottom, it kicks up!

I would not consider this extra difficulty in docking a deal breaker. Perhaps keeping up with maintenance is??? You need to be knowledgeable and highly skilled at boat work, to own ANY old custom trimaran, OR you need to have access to a professional who is. (Being able to afford him, goes without saying) More than anything, it is a big hit when it comes time to do big things, like re-paint, re-rig, or buy a new engine or sails. The larger boat might cost twice as much at these times, as well as more in dockage. Otherwise, regarding the day to day expenses, (IF you don't average in those occasional BIG hits), they aren't that different.

The other issues are motion & space. The 40 is huge by comparison. It has literally TWICE as much space, (plenty for your family), and I suspect... HALF as much motion. When spending years on the hook & when out cruising, I often wished I had a 40! Now that I'm in the boatyard, however, I'm glad that we have a 34. As I near "the hill", I don't think I could maintain a 40.

In your situation, the biggest dealbreaker may be space. (Motion tolerance can be acquired... My wife did). The 34 can comfortably cruise with a couple, and for a short cruise, an additional "small" person. It can also daysail with 6, by spreading them out on deck.

The thought of a two week cruise with 6, is out of the question on the 34, however, unless it is a family of desperate Haitian refugees! (A weekend maybe)...

If you really want a Searunner, and can afford the short & long term expenses, It looks like the 40 would be best, in spite of its huge size, because the 34 is just too small for cruising with 6.

Hope this helps.
M.

[HapaPops]

Hi Mark - you certainly capture the dilemma nicely. I've owned a few boats now and am very familiar with matching the boat to the majority of needs. All of my boats have been major rehab projects, and I've build a couple small composite boats, and a house, so I've got the basic skills. Time is always a challenge.

Possibly a 37 fits right in the middle? We did camp out 6 on my little Contour 34 (little in comparison to the SeaRunners) which basically required living on the deck - which in California in the summer is a very reasonable thing to do.

[Cavalier MK2]

The Searunner 40 in WA is a well sorted out boat if it is the one I'm thinking of. It takes less work to keep a boat in condition than get it there but you have to stay on top of it. I think the extra mass would help in docking as it would carry its way a little better. Our 37 Nicol is predictable to handle and good at slow speed approaches but we use an OB that can be turned to assist when necessary. Room wise there are lots of possibilities. We can take 12 daysailing using the deck without anyone tripping over each other. This opens up a boat for school or club use etc....We also used ours to take injured Army troops from the Warrior Transition Battalion sailing as one of my sons school projects. Now a crafty sailor could probably involve some others from group activities in maintenance. Working solo I'm glad the Nicol isn't any larger. Set up properly single handing should be easy, docking can be done with planning, including dropping a anchor and warping to the dock. A 37 is still a lot of boat, if possible you should try to see all the sizes.

[HapaPops]

I agree - time to start looking at real boats, not just photos. Anyone how Searunner owner contacts near San Francisco? I know one guy with a Cross 40, but of course not the same boat.

Last question - Diesel vs. outboard - how is the outboard on long, upwind deliveries like a Baha Bash + the coast of california?

[Nemo55]

I'll be at my 31ft JB Searunner in San Rafael Harbor in June,,

Originally Posted by HapaPops

I agree - time to start looking at real boats, not just photos. Anyone how Searunner owner contacts near San Francisco? I know one guy with a Cross 40, but of course not the same boat.

Last question - Diesel vs. outboard - how is the outboard on long, upwind deliveries like a Baha Bash + the coast of california?

[Cavalier MK2]

With decent wind we sail faster to windward than we can motor, a inboard would be more suitable if you want to power into the waves instead. We try not to use the motor at all.....