Cruisers Forum
 


Join CruisersForum Today

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 05-12-2009, 17:43   #46
Registered User

Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,062
Most of the boats mentioned in this thread are not very well suited for cruising. Some are probably good performance boats, while others are just too big to handle by a short-handed couple. Some are huge boats without even any visible anchors or provision for anchor windlass. Most cruising boats need to give anchoring a very high priority, and with all that windage -- big anchors are a must when away from the home mooring. (Guest moorings that would be suitable for a 50+ foot tri in a storm are scarce.) Other boats mentioned just wouldn't be very comfortable, such as the Antrim. Definitely a racing pedigree.

Nobody's mentioned the Dragonfly 1200, but I can't think of a better cruising tri.
__________________

__________________
SailFastTri is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2009, 18:54   #47
Registered User
 
Jmolan's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Mexico/Alaska/Oregon
Boat: 34' Searunner Tri
Posts: 712
Sailfasttri...you make some good points. I would guess we could have a discussion on the anchor loading of windage vs. displacement. Is a 50' 10k displacement Tri harder on the hook than a 50' 40k mono? Does one take bigger gear? I know conditions vary, and once all you have is current, or another all you have is wind. But in the real world, in general, what is the dynamic?
I looked for info on the Dragonfly 1200. I did not realise it got boat of the year in Cruising World in 2000. I was only able to find one page that quoted a price...holy guacamole'! I think it said 700k. Could that be right? For a 39' sailboat? If that is true that is pretty amazing!

Specifications of trimaran Dragonfly 1200
__________________

__________________
Jmolan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2009, 03:43   #48
CF Adviser

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Aug 2009
Boat: Custom Van De Stadt 47 Samoa
Posts: 3,750
Quote:
Originally Posted by SailFastTri View Post
Most of the boats mentioned in this thread are not very well suited for cruising.

Nobody's mentioned the Dragonfly 1200
My personal thinking is that if you are looking for a load-carrying live-aboard cruising boat you should get a mono-hull (like Hawk).

If for some reason you want a Multi with all the comforts of home, I think a Cat seems to make more sense. You then get the wonderful deckhouse saloon space and two motors.

I think for a tri to make sense you have to be looking for something different than that. You have to want and be able to keep it very light/very minimalist and very fun/challenging to sail. Your objective needs to be brilliant exciting challenging blue water capable sailing with a minimalist style of cruising. This is the mission where I think a "cruising" tri makes sense - and is superior to all the alternatives. That's why the Tri's I mentioned above are what they are . . . perfectly suited to the mission that they will excel at.

I don't think the irens boat is 'too large for a couple', but I guess that is a matter of sailing style and judgement. All these boats could carry satisfactory ground tackle, but like everything else on a multi it will need to be designed with more attention to weight and placement than on a mono.

I have never sailed a dragonfly, but what I have seen makes it an odd duck in my mind. "cabins offer the finest Danish furniture design", "dinette area easily seats 8 persons and . . . offering a total of 7 berths", "150hp engine".It seems to be a tri attemting to appeal to the houseboat crowd.

This is just me, but if I want a houseboat I will get a mono (for the load carrying) or a Cat (for the deckhouse saloon). The mission/design window for a cruising tri (IMHO) is "fast and fun and and challanging blue water capibility" and I would want the tri to be designed to that objective and not some sort of compromise house boat.
__________________
estarzinger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2009, 07:15   #49
Registered User

Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,062
Evans I generally have the utmost respect for your opinions, but anyone who's ever been aboard a DF-1200 and especially anyone who's sailed it would not think to call it a "houseboat". Yes it has "systems" and a very nice finish. On a performance scale it is heavier and slower than a stripped out racing tri but still far above the typical charter type cruising condomarans or cruising monos.

As for your bottom-line conclusion that a cat or monohull are better for long-term cruising -- I agree with you, especially for the type of world-cruising you and Beth do, but with those you need to go much bigger to be on the same performance level as the DF-1200. The interior volume and load carrying of the cruising cat and mono are the reasons, but in designing-in load carrying you design-out performance, unless you offset by going larger. You and Beth have embraced "go simple, go large" and I respect that.

But this thread was about cruising tris, and for a coastal cruiser or island hopper I think the Dragonfly 1200 has a good mix of speed, comfort, size and space/capacity for a family of 4.

Also, being able to fold the boat from 28 down to 14-feet beam has occasional advantages -- you can fit in marinas and haul/store the boat wherever monohulls go, at monohull prices.
__________________
SailFastTri is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2009, 08:16   #50
CF Adviser

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Aug 2009
Boat: Custom Van De Stadt 47 Samoa
Posts: 3,750
Quote:
Originally Posted by SailFastTri View Post
anyone who's ever been aboard a DF-1200 and especially anyone who's sailed it would not think to call it a "houseboat".

No offense intended I believe I clearly said I had not sailed a DF (but Beth has when she was a boat show tester for the magazines), and I did not say it was a "houseboat" but rather that it's marketing seemed to be trying to appeal to that crowd.

But this thread was about cruising tris, and for a coastal cruiser or island hopper I think the Dragonfly 1200 has a good mix of speed, comfort, size and space/capacity for a family of 4.
Yes, and you would not know it, but I happen to have spend quite a bit of time recently thinking about cruising tri's. When we get done with our "go now, go large" monohull, I want to move to a "go fast, go minimal" tri. I have talked to Irens and Farrier about designs. I have not yet talked with Antrim but that's on my to-do list. Our mission for this boat would be fast cruising to Maine/Bermuda/Bahamas, with perhaps a trip to Scotland.

I am happy the DF is a suitable compromise for you, but for me I just don't see it. If I am going to go with a tri I just don't see compromising its basic nature with 'scandinavian furniture' and a 150hp motor.

I agree with you that 40' is an interesting length, so while I really like it, I have put the irens design on the side. The Antrim is my current pick. But we are not done with Hawk quite yet, and Beth is not thrilled by Multi's, so this is a slow work in progress.
__________________
estarzinger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2009, 08:16   #51
Registered User

Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Florida Keys
Boat: Corsair F31"Susan C" & Sea Pearl 21"Maggie"
Posts: 261
Evans, I,too, need to jump in here. Trimarans are such an excellent platform that they lend themselves to develope extreme performance but at a cost. Some are willing to absorbe the compromises while others are not. The only reason tris are limited in weight carrying capacity is finness ratio needed to achieve higher speeds. If one is willing to accept a fuller hull form you can get the weight capacity needed but sacrifice speed. That is exactly what the cruising cat market has done and they have a good market share even though in my mind they are a less attractive design than the tri of the same design perameter. We all have our favorites and I have said mine is the Horstmans. Let's look at the Tristar 36. 21.5 ft beam,26 inch draft, launch weight 7300lbs, load capacity 3300lbs,diesel inboard, 743sq ft of sail, speeds in the low teens, un ballasted sailing with 10-15 degrees of heel and a proven ocean crossing design with a pilot house. 3 double berths and 2 singles. This design certainly doesn't appeal to a large segment or they would be everywhere but is a wonderful option for someone who wants to see the world without heeling, rolling, grounding, still do 10 knots and not sink if holed. Cats are not my first choice because they have too much windage, suffer from bridgedeck pounding in many cases, a cabin you can't see over from the cockpit, too many motors and heaven help you if they are sail drives. If you want to see cruising tris you have to shut off the computer, lay down the glossy magazines and drive down to a coastal marina or ride through an anchorage. Dave
__________________
DaveOnCudjoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2009, 08:39   #52
CF Adviser

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Aug 2009
Boat: Custom Van De Stadt 47 Samoa
Posts: 3,750
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveOnCudjoe View Post
Trimarans . . If one is willing to accept a fuller hull form you can get the weight capacity needed but sacrifice speed.

Cats are not my first choice because they have too much windage, suffer from bridgedeck pounding in many cases, a cabin you can't see over from the cockpit, too many motors and heaven help you if they are sail drives.

If you want to see cruising tris you have to shut off the computer, and drive down to a coastal marina or ride through an anchorage.
Dave,

I am honestly not sure what your point is?

I know tri's can be made to carry load and that will slow them down. What I am saying is that for me that is not the direction of compromise I am looking for from a Tri. If I wanted a load carrying vessel I would stick with my mono.

We have friends with Cats that do not suffer the problems you mention . . . and they do have wonderful deck house saloons where you can sit and watch the anchorage.

I have actually been to a few anchorages in my life I honestly can't remember the last time I saw a cruising tri. They are few and far between.

But I seemed to have missed your point.

My point was that, I am in fact looking seriously at cruising tris, and I have a strong personal feeling about the sort of compromises that I think make sense (for me). And as I explain above, I think (for me) the minimalist performance end of the tri spectrum makes sense - something that maxmizes the pure joy of sailing. Again as I said above, if I was looking for some other compromise I would probably look at a cat or a mono.

But that's just my own opinion about the sort of compromise I think make sense and I would be looking for. I fully expect other people to think other compromises make sense.
__________________
estarzinger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2009, 08:47   #53
Registered User

Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,062
Quote:
Originally Posted by estarzinger View Post
Yes, and you would not know it, but I happen to have spend quite a bit of time recently thinking about cruising tri's. When we get done with our "go now, go large" monohull, I want to move to a "go fast, go minimal" tri. I have talked to Irens and Farrier about designs. I have not yet talked with Antrim but that's on my to-do list. Our mission for this boat would be fast cruising to Maine/Bermuda/Bahamas, with perhaps a trip to Scotland.

I am happy the DF is a suitable compromise for you, but for me I just don't see it. If I am going to go with a tri I just don't see compromising its basic nature with 'scandinavian furniture' and a 150hp motor.

I agree with you that 40' is an interesting length, so while I really like it, I have put the irens design on the side. The Antrim is my current pick. But we are not done with Hawk quite yet, and Beth is not thrilled by Multi's, so this is a slow work in progress.
Thanks for clarifying Evans.

I agree 150HP is too much. Mine has the 59-hp "base" motor and we average about 1.5-1.7 gph with a cruising speed under power about 7.5-8 knots at 80-85% of rated RPM. That's more than enough, and we have enough power to battle ordinary headwinds.

The furniture helps -- you need someplace to store things, and why not have it look good and "yachty"? (They use cored veneered panel material where practical for weight savings, although it is still not a light boat by racing standards).

In looking at lighter designs one thing to consider is the interior acoustics and noise level of bare interior fiberglass. Our center hull is quiet, but if one lies inside an ama (which has no interior acoustic deadening) the drum-like effect is quite intense. Also, different hull designs will behave differently -- especially in a chop. The Antrim does not look like a comfortable boat. In a choppy sea offshore -- I expect that as a cruiser you will focus more effort slowing it down than making it go.

With your wide circle of industry contacts I'm sure you would have the opportunity to sail these boat types before you buy. I'd be interested to learn more about how your impressions evolve as you explore this further.
__________________
SailFastTri is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2009, 08:54   #54
Registered User

Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 2,313
Evens, it has been interesting watching your search for speed and minimalism in a cruising multi. I'm curious what type of speed you are looking to achieve?
__________________
Joli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2009, 09:40   #55
CF Adviser

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Aug 2009
Boat: Custom Van De Stadt 47 Samoa
Posts: 3,750
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joli View Post
Evens, it has been interesting watching your search for speed and minimalism in a cruising multi. I'm curious what type of speed you are looking to achieve?
I have been looking for the "next boat" for about 5 years now

to your question . . . hmmm . . . . when you ask it that way, it is really not about raw speed . . . after all, if it was, I would just get a 600cc Kawasaki ZX-6R . . . its about responsiveness and joy. I really enjoy sailing.

Irens told me the 50'er "could do 400 miles days even if you don't know what you are doing, and I can tell you don't . . . but it will not be pleasant ride" (love an honest and blunt designer).

When we give up the whale killer (I really love that description from jon) I want something that while still 'blue water' is more about sailing than about cruising. The step from Silk (centerboard ketch) to Hawk (fin/bulbed keel/fractional) taught me a lot about sailing and I would like to think the next step will make an equal leap in that direction.

The practical answer to your question is whatever Beth will let me have She talking about horses right at the moment

>>The furniture helps -- you need someplace to store things, and why not have it look good and "yachty"? <<

I really am thinking more backpacking style than yachting style. Each person gets one duffle bag, the boat gets two tool boxes, and the galley gets two deep mugs and two spoons. I have a bit of curiosity how little 'stuff' we need to still live comfortably - I suspect quite little and this would certaintly test that theory.
__________________
estarzinger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2009, 10:16   #56
Registered User

Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 2,313
Well, given that, since you are basicly unencumbered by time obligations. Why not take a year and sign up with a V 70 campaign?

Quote:
Originally Posted by estarzinger View Post
when you ask it that way, it is really not about raw speed . . . . . its about responsiveness and joy. I really enjoy sailing.
__________________
Joli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2009, 10:21   #57
Registered User

Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Florida Keys
Boat: Corsair F31"Susan C" & Sea Pearl 21"Maggie"
Posts: 261
Evans, My point, with examples is simple, a load carrying, live aboard cruising boat that is comfortable and seaworthy can be found in numerous trimaran designs that are about as far from house boats as you can get and preferable to monohulls for many. The last time I saw one in an anchorage was yesterday and I saw 3 from one waterfront bar and they appeared to be in sailaway condition. With cats the view at anchor is great but I want to see where I'm going in close quarters or an approaching sea while under sail in open water.
I don't want to come across as hostile, my writing style was developed from scientific, matter of fact reporting and lacks the grace others have mastered. I fully appreciate what you're looking for as exampled by my choice of the F-31 I currently sail. It's so far removed from my Piver as to be nearly unrecognizable in pedigree. To it's credit the Piver sailed wonderfully and tacked crisply albeit at 81/2 to 10knts. Were I in your shoes the F-39 would be a serious consideration.
SailfastTri makes an often overlooked observation in that the problem is sometimes slowing the damn things down, even my 31 suffers here.
Where anchoring is concerned my experience is that windage is the greater influence over current. With rudder and dagger up current is a minimal force yet against only 8knts of wind I must use a winch or the motor to take up the rode. As this thread clearly demonstrates "cruising" means differant things to differant people.
Dave
__________________
DaveOnCudjoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2009, 10:56   #58
Registered User

Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Anacortes, WA
Boat: Maine Cat 41
Posts: 325
Have you considered smaller? For tris, it seems that they do better when kept small. Also Peter Johnstone of Gunboat fame has been considering 'smallish' tris, you might check with him. This one, the Trinado intrigues but I'd 'just want it slightly bigger' dang 2-4' itis...

Trinado
__________________
cchesley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2009, 11:08   #59
CF Adviser

Cruisers Forum Supporter

Join Date: Aug 2009
Boat: Custom Van De Stadt 47 Samoa
Posts: 3,750
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joli View Post
Well, given that, since you are basicly unencumbered by time obligations. Why not take a year and sign up with a V 70 campaign?
gee . . . can I just sign up for a V70 campaign? I figure I am too old and too unskilled to be wanted on one of those. And I do like having Beth around But it would be both fun and a great learning experience to be involved with one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave View Post
Were I in your shoes the F-39 would be a serious consideration.

I have the drawings. It's certaintly a good possibility, but there is something about the shape that is not as attractive as some other designs.

SailfastTri makes an often overlooked observation in that the problem is sometimes slowing the damn things down, even my 31 suffers here.

Yes, something to learn, but its true even on Hawk - we use a drogue to good effect.

As this thread clearly demonstrates "cruising" means differant things to differant people.

That's for sure.
Re: The Trinado - I do want ocean capaibility and I figure 30' is the minimum size for that - anyone of you experienced multi guys want to comment on that? I have a good french friend who we met cruising Patagonia in a plywood mini !! He is now building a plywood 12m tri - be interesting to see how it comes out.
__________________
estarzinger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2009, 11:16   #60
Registered User

Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,062
Quote:
Originally Posted by estarzinger View Post
snip

I really am thinking more backpacking style than yachting style. Each person gets one duffle bag, the boat gets two tool boxes, and the galley gets two deep mugs and two spoons. I have a bit of curiosity how little 'stuff' we need to still live comfortably - I suspect quite little and this would certaintly test that theory.

Fresh water tankage (weight) is one of the big decision factors -- a gallon of water is 8.35 pounds. So you could carry that third tool box and only give up about 5 gallons...

Many multihull cruisers deal with it by installing a water maker -- but that's a slippery slope. It leads to more power generation, more batteries, and more spares. It's also in conflict with back-packer mentality. So it's either big heavy tanks or complexity, or limt oneself to cruising where fresh water supply is predictable.
__________________

__________________
SailFastTri is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
trimaran

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Identify This Boat: 1980 Cox Marine Trimaran catsailor1 Multihull Sailboats 11 12-06-2011 13:01
3M 5200 (IMHO) Christian Van H Construction, Maintenance & Refit 44 17-08-2009 22:07



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:08.


Google+
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Social Knowledge Networks
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

ShowCase vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.