What Catamaran: Suggestions from the Community

[mdsilvers]

Mark

The Furling Mainsail is an option on the 44i. Not one I selected. I prefer the full battens, sail shape, roach, etc...it sails better than a Furling Mainsail. A number of posts has discussed this on cats.

However, for some folks there is a desire to have easier 'push button' sailing...and this is a nice option. For the 44i it is not incremental in price over the standard rigging. It isn't for me, but that is what is great about boats, you can rig them the way you want to sail... :-)

I am aware of a couple of 44i owners that selected the furling mainsail...most are sticking to the regular Seldon rigging.

[Cotemar]

Mdsilvers,

I love my new fully batten and roached sail, but to be totally honest. If in mast furling was offered on my cat last year. I would have purchase in Mast Furling. I had in mast furling on our Catalina 380 monohull and really liked how fast and easy it was to use. Yes, it's not a true sailors sail, but boy it was convenient. We used to furl it in and out at the drop of a hat when the wind was finicky without even thinking about it. Now with a fully batten and roached sail you tend to leave it down in finicky conditions or possibly leave it up longer than you should have, hoping more wind will come your way.

Mark

[mdsilvers]

Mark,

Understood. There is a difference in performance with a mono using in mast furling and a cat. I am not an expert...and frankly it really boils down to performance when sailing and when reefed.

Here is a quote from a dialog from one of the Antares engineers when I was evaluating the in mast vs. standard rigging. Interesting read.

"Aeronautical engineers have often referred to the Spitfire airplane's wings as being the most efficient shape with its elliptical plan form. Transferring this concept to a sailboat's sails means that we want to try and create as elliptical as possible a top to the sail plan. The bottom end of the sails are "capped off" by the endplate effect of the deck (and even more locally by the Maintamer) to keep the higher pressure air from bleeding off to the low pressure side of the sail just as the fuselage of an airplane would do, but the "wing tip" at the top of our mast is a different condition and we look to reduce drag by trying to achieve as best we can with cloth and sticks that elliptical shape. Picture in your mind the shape of sailboard sails with their bendy masts, square tops and rounded leaches... or modern racing keelboats with their fractionally rigged foresails blending into a tapered and flexible topmast that supports a "fat headed" main sail: both close the door at the bottom in different ways by either leaning the whole rig back until the foot of the of the sail approaches the board or by keeping the boom low to the deck and using deck sweeping head sails respectively, and they both use combinations of flexible masts and stiff battens to optimize the profile. Obviously, we aren't going to go to such extremes on our cruising cat, but the theories still hold true and deliberately contradicting them just doesn't seem wise to me. It is a game of balancing compromises.

So, why don't we go with a sexy square-top main and a deck-sweeping genoa? The highly peaked battens needed in a square top make the sail virtually impossible to stow on the boom because the batten keeps the top portion of the sail from being completely lowered without removing and replacing the batten every time, and our wide (spacious!) cabin interferes with the sheeting angle of any attempt at a deck-sweeper. The sales pitch, of course, is that it would interfere with your visibility from the helm...

Other issues? The mast itself is a larger extrusion (more turbulence at the leading edge of the main) and heavier (more pitching motion in a seaway).

Is it safer to reef? I don't think so, as either version can be reefed from the protection of the cockpit; one by easing a halyard and taking-up on reefing line, and the other by easing the outhaul and pushing a button.

Is it easier to reef? In either case you are easing a line with one hand and pushing a button with the other. What it does make easier is the fact that it eliminates the need for you to monkey around to cover the sail at the end of the trip.

What happens when things go wrong? The in-mast version gains a safety advantage here because it can be furled manually while standing at the base of the mast (the outhaul is accessible and controllable from that position as well) if there is an electrical problem. The conventional set-up would likely require you to climb up on top of the bimini to sort out any problems which may not be a very nice place to be in conditions that are requiring you to reef in the first place.

How well does it sail whilst reefed? The conventional sail removes sail area from the bottom when reefed, maintaining its roachy (efficient) top profile. The furling version becomes even more triangular as it disappears into the mast becoming less efficient and because of the amount of rake in the mast and upward pitch of the boom, the clew wants to lift away from the boom as it is furled making it less controllable and the sail will tend to become more full in shape which creates more heeling force and less forward drive. Just because we need to reef is no reason to give up efficiencies in performance; we want to increase our safety, not reduce our speed because being able to cover ground relatively quickly is a cat's greatest inherent safety feature.

How much more does it cost? I won't step on the salesman's toes, but I think the two options are quite comparable in price considering that the Maintamer can be eliminated to help offset the added cost of the rig and electrical equipment. The main sail as well would likely be slightly less expensive than a conventional main simply because of the reduced sail area.

I'm trying hard to not sound biased and just let the comparisons make their own arguments. There are definitely merits to the in-mast furling feature, primarily the ease of stowage, so it is just a matter of deciding which suits the manner of sailing that you intend to do. Regardless, the rest of the boat beneath it is the same....

... but hey.... fast is fun, right?"

[SeaKing]

WhataWorld,

we have had our Voyage 470( charter version)for over 5 years and love it. We owned a PDQ 36 previously. We are very interested in the new 520(owners Version), I just got a few pictures today of the first one being built, it is a stretched and refined version of what we have. VERY APPEALING. The boat had a very good design only made better by the changes to the 50' and now the 52'. My wife is dying to have that 520 owners version. Now to find an easy bank to rob.

Do have a look at the Voyage boats, go sail one, heck come here for a visit and we can go for a nice daysail in the Chesapeake

[tsmwebb]

Originally Posted by Cotemar

Wow I have never seen “Mast Roller furling main” on a Catamaran before.
I wonder why Antares 44i went with that design. Most catamaran sails are very heavy duty with full battens, because they can not lean over to relieve the gusting pressure on the sails.
I wonder if this my start a trend?

Mark

Not my cup of tea and for an offshore boat I'd rather go behind the mast than in the mast because I've seen serious jams with in-mast. Also kinda hate the singing when the wind blows on the slot. Too, vertical reefing reduces the heeling moment more quickly. But, better in-mast than just leaving the main on the boom. Fact is setting a big full battened main can be fiddly, even hard, work. For the person doing a lot of short sails or maybe just looking for very relaxing sailing roller furling on the main makes sense. IMO, cruising cats should have short, powerful rigs. The fully battened big roach main helps with that. In mast mains are less than ideal but better than no main at all.

I think the full batten thing on most cats is primarily to get the maximum sail area for a given mast. I don't think they make the sail particularly stronger. The do make the sail flex less so it will last longer but then again the batten pockets are vulnerable to chafe and a PIA to fix...

Tom

[tsmwebb]

Originally Posted by mdsilvers

"Aeronautical engineers have often referred to the Spitfire airplane's wings as being the most efficient shape with its elliptical plan form. Transferring this concept to a sailboat's sails means that we want to try and create as elliptical as possible a top to the sail plan. ..."

Maybe too wonky but for sail boats with conventional rigs an elliptical spanwise lift distribution is not ideal. Here's a good paper on it for any that might care Minimum Induced Drag of Sail Rigs and Hydrofoils.

Tom

[Karl_in_Chicago]

Originally Posted by mdsilvers

And just in case...here are some pics of the boat delivered a couple weeks ago...

Great pictures, thanks for posting. I wish Antares had more (large and detailed) pictures like these on their site.

That galley is larger than the kitchen in my first apartment (and much better appointed)!

[WhataWorld!]

Originally Posted by Therapy

I would suggest some time invested before plunking down any dough.

Definitely.

[Therapy]

Originally Posted by Karl_in_Chicago

That galley is larger than the kitchen in my first apartment (and much better appointed)!

Where does all the heat and steam go from the stove?

[Sailor-Gene]

Hi All
I have had 2 very comfortable and well built in the USA. First was a Manta 40' Sail Cat for 10 years, then a Manta 44' Power Cat. Loved them both but have bought a land condo. Pangaea PC is available to a loving new owner. see tethys-society.org
Gene

[JR1of9]

Originally Posted by WhataWorld!

I am very strongly leaning towards the Lagoon 440. Thoughts?

WhataWorld,
I'm so envious, and excited for you ! No answer required, but I assume the 700K
is not your total budget, as you'll need $ to live on while cruising, maintenance, etc.
Anyway, thought you might find the piece in this link informative. Lots of good observations from an experienced live aboard/cruiser.
Indigo Moon - For Sale

Whatever boat you decide on, if you ever passing by north Florida, and spending a day or two in port, get in touch.
JR1of9

[Mustang Sally]

I love the experts here who say "trust me" PDQ were built in Canada and went bankrupt a few years ago. Someone is now miserably trying to build them in South America but not having much luck.

[malovich]

bob oram 39c/44c/48c/50c and with your budget custom designed for single handing and a spacious owners suite.

[Ozbullwinkle]

I would strongly advise against your thought of passagemaking long distances single handed and this applies to either experienced or inexperienced sailors.

Before youi jump into your first boat and depart on an extended cruise involving lengthy passages I would suggest that you read the post about the Chris White 57 named "Anna" that rolled over earlier this month on passage from Auckland to Tonga. You will find the post on the main portal home page and it is in the Multihull section. I think from memory the post is called "Large Cat Flipped near Niue" or something along these lines, you will also see a video of their rescue on Youtube They had only 2 people on board and I am a strong believer that their lack of crew and fatigue on a very large and complex cat were contibuting factors to the loss of the vessel as it was just too much to handle in the conditions.

Don't get me wrong I'm not trying to turn you off purchasing a cat as I just love them but you must have a good crew with experience to accompany you on any extended voyage. I believe that anything over 45 feet is just too much to handle safely for a crew of at least 3 taking in the need for a proper watch system which will leave you with 2 at most times while one is resting.

The first selection criteria in your search should be a cat that is not built primarily for the charter market and are designed more for ocean crossings. Hull performance is the number one selection criteria and not the internal fitout as a comfy fitout will do nothing for you when the chips are down and you are in heavy weather. It needs to be a compromise between both but I do not like the raised flybridge steering configurations as this takes the centre of gravity much higher and of course the boom so oberall performance is affected. I would give them a miss for a serious ocean crossing cat.

The Catana's have quite a good reputation but I do not really like the exposed helm stations.

[mdsilvers]

Originally Posted by Mustang Sally

I love the experts here who say "trust me" PDQ were built in Canada and went bankrupt a few years ago. Someone is now miserably trying to build them in South America but not having much luck.

I find it interesting Mustang Sally that you are commenting on Antares and clearly have no idea what you are talking about. I am not sure if you have an axe to grind with someone at Antares - as it appears you do. It is unfortunate that people like yourself make unfounded/negative comments that are not based in fact.

As I stated previously in this thread I have been to Argentina,helped provision 4432, am the owner of 4437 - and can let you and everyone else know that the production is moving along nicely. There were delays as they expanded the operations and added more space. Not uncommon, and frankly expected.

Antares is not a mass builder of boats - they don't slam hulls off the line every month. It shows in their quality & detailed joinery. You will get a chance to read first hand about the Antares 44i in the next Cruising World. Not too bad for a company that is 'miserably building boats...and not having much luck'.

It would be appreciated if folks in this Forum (Mustang Sally & Charter Magic) would base their comments on facts vs. conjecture.

This forum deserves better.

Mark