Why Do Catamarans Motor Nearly 100%

[monte]

Regarding the leopard, I was chatting with a friend a few days ago that owns an older leopard 47 (circa 2002)as well as a newer leopard 46 (circa 2009). He dislikes the newer models sailing performance comparatively, especially to windward where he finds the 46 doesn't track as well . I also spoke with the skipper of the 46 and he likes it. Just two guys opinions. I quite like the design, layout and helm of the L46.

[beiland]

Originally Posted by Bulawayo

However, several years ago we took part in the upwind Dar-es-Salaam to Tanga yacht race with variable winds; 10-40knots.
We were one of only two cats taking part. The other cat turned back when the wind reached over 30 knots as they were inexperienced. There were several decent mono hulled boats also competing, including a semi flush decked >42ft Oyster.
We finished second despite being a cruising loaded cat. Frankly, I cant be ar*ed with trying to establish how we achieved this with various diagrams. I know my boat and I believe I know how to to sail her - and despite the howls of protest that cats cannot go to windward the evidence was very apparent - we arrived second.

What kind of catamaran was that you were sailing? And what does the sail plan look like, and/or your deployment??

[monte]

Yesterday we had a good sail from st Lucia to Martinique. Small craft advisory with 8' waves and ENE 20-30kn wind. The waves off st Lucia were pretty atrocious with around 6 second period. Atrocious as in the kettle fell of the galley bench!
Those sort of conditions I pretty much have to stay at the helm to avoid losing my breakfast. The wind ranged from 30 -50 AWA so we were close hauled most of the way with a reef in the jib and main. Once into deep water things things settled down and I always love the flat water behind the islands arrivals with good wind. It was only 20 odd miles and took around 3hrs with SOG ranging 6.5-8.5kn. We left at the same time as this little boat, which I didn't think we would see for dust. She also had a reef in the main although by her angle of heel at up to 45 degrees I think she may have preferred another reef at times. We arrive at exactly the same time as well and she tacked up the channel as we anchored outside. I was a bit surprised her angle hard on the wind was the same as ours, but then I think she is more a DW speed machine by her design.
The good news - I didn't see any yachts motoring in either direction 😀

[YARGESOL]

Originally Posted by Kenomac

Certainly the best possible answer provided so far regarding the comparison between the Leopard and Belize. Thanks Stu.

Our present mainsail on the Oyster only allows us to sail 30 degrees to windward because it's very stretched out, so we're having a new tri-radial cut DYS mainsail made for us by Dolphin Sails this winter. It'll be interesting to see how much windward performance improves.

I wonder :" 30 degrees to winward" is the AWA on the instrument,or actual course logged? What about drifting,or what is your tack angle?

[Factor]

Originally Posted by tuskie

Lagoon? The two boats whose performance was being compared were manufactured by Fountaine Pajot and Leopard (R &C).

But let's not let those facts get in the way of another "Lagoon Bash".

Its not a lagoon bash, its a comment on their marketing where they describe mast aft sail plans and wide hulls as breakthroughs in catamaran design. I just wish people accepted certain inalienable facts about multis, like light and long and skinny equals quick. The heavier, fatter and shorter you get the more performance suffers, thats all. No amount of pretending by Lagoon's marketing folk can change that. Come do a Wags or a Sags, and you can measure against some known quantities.

[44'cruisingcat]

Originally Posted by YARGESOL

I wonder :" 30 degrees to winward" is the AWA on the instrument,or actual course logged? What about drifting,or what is your tack angle?

Probably the amount of heel.

[tuskie]

Originally Posted by Factor

I just wish people accepted certain inalienable facts about multis, like light and long and skinny equals quick. The heavier, fatter and shorter you get the more performance suffers, thats all.

No one is denying this. It's just that "quick" catamarans start out "light, long and skinny" and in real cruising life they end up " heavy, long and skinny". This makes them worse than the catamarans designed to carry weight. Real life cruising weight. If you are buying a "cruising" catamaran to use for a couple of hours racing in protected waters on a Wednesday afternoon, different story.

When people such as Monte and Stu contribute hard data to illustrate this point you seem to denigrate these posts with cynicisms such as; (Factor quote)

"Lagoon has beaten the laws of physics they tell us, but everyone else has to comply."

If this is not a Lagoon Bash, I don't know what is; especially in response to a post that doesn't even concern this brand.

[Factor]

Again, its not a criticism of the boat, its a criticism of the marketing by Lagoon. I am not attacking your first born just think that Lagoon's marketing verges on deceptive.

[smj]

Originally Posted by Factor

Again, its not a criticism of the boat, its a criticism of the marketing by Lagoon. I am not attacking your first born just think that Lagoon's marketing verges on deceptive.

Would this mean the Lagoon rep was pulling my leg when he told me the 420 would average 15 kts.?


Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[monte]

Originally Posted by smj

Would this mean the Lagoon rep was pulling my leg when he told me the 420 would average 15 kts.?


Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

Maybe he was talking about the road trip from the factory to the launch?

Actually I haven't read much if the pre sale boat show guff but I doubt it would be any different to any other boat builder/car manufacturers etc glossy advertising.

[44'cruisingcat]

Originally Posted by tuskie

No one is denying this. It's just that "quick" catamarans start out "light, long and skinny" and in real cruising life they end up " heavy, long and skinny". This makes them worse than the catamarans designed to carry weight. Real life cruising weight.

We estimate we're cruising at around 6 tonnes all up, with 100% provisions, water and fuel. I suspect this is probably lighter than "catamarans designed to carry weight" when they are in fact carrying nothing.

We can still sail reasonably well.

Probably not "real life" cruisers though.

[tp12]

Originally Posted by 44'cruisingcat

Probably not "real life" cruisers though.

Chuck Norris once went to a potluck and was referred to as not a 'real life' cruiser. He roundhouse kicked their face off.

[D&D]

Originally Posted by 44'cruisingcat

We estimate we're cruising at around 6 tonnes all up, with 100% provisions, water and fuel. I suspect this is probably lighter than "catamarans designed to carry weight" when they are in fact carrying nothing.

We can still sail reasonably well.

That's impressive...probably half (or even less!?) of our weight for about the same length of vessel. No wonder you're so quick...and still obviously v much a cruising vessel too.

If we ever find ourselves on the same course, we'll be quick too...with this...

[downunder]

Originally Posted by monte

Yesterday we had a good sail from st Lucia to Martinique. Small craft advisory with 8' waves and ENE 20-30kn wind. The waves off st Lucia were pretty atrocious with around 6 second period. Atrocious as in the kettle fell of the galley bench!
Those sort of conditions I pretty much have to stay at the helm to avoid losing my breakfast. The wind ranged from 30 -50 AWA so we were close hauled most of the way with a reef in the jib and main. Once into deep water things things settled down and I always love the flat water behind the islands arrivals with good wind. It was only 20 odd miles and took around 3hrs with SOG ranging 6.5-8.5kn. We left at the same time as this little boat, which I didn't think we would see for dust. She also had a reef in the main although by her angle of heel at up to 45 degrees I think she may have preferred another reef at times. We arrive at exactly the same time as well and she tacked up the channel as we anchored outside. I was a bit surprised her angle hard on the wind was the same as ours, but then I think she is more a DW speed machine by her design.
The good news - I didn't see any yachts motoring in either direction 😀
Attachment 114466

I chartered a L400 owners version for 8 days in the Whitsundays 2 years ago. Whilst the Whitsundays are essentially fairly sheltered there is plenty of tide and we found a couple of heavy squalls. Enough to tell me the 400 is a very seaworthy vessel and can handle descent seas.

Certainly very comfortable as well as seaworthy although I was not impressed by the standard refigeration. Beds you don't have to crawl into or struggle to change helps as full time liveaboard. Always compromises.

Cheers

[DotDun]

Originally Posted by 44'cruisingcat

We estimate we're cruising at around 6 tonnes all up, with 100% provisions, water and fuel. I suspect this is probably lighter than "catamarans designed to carry weight" when they are in fact carrying nothing.

We can still sail reasonably well.

Probably not "real life" cruisers though.

We're at least twice that. We're 7 tons of fiberglass.