Why Do Catamarans Motor Nearly 100%

[monte]

yeah Don. I have to hand it to her, conditions were rough as guts for a while, but she handled them well, and yes id imagine 20+ kn downwind fairly easily

[Polux]

Originally Posted by DotDun

This thread is a lot of real-world experience, a lot of theory, and a lot of imagination.

Polux,

Please state your experience sailing catamarans, include make, model, size, and how far you sailed.

It is very funny that you think that having a big experience sailing catamarans, or having one is needed to know the potential sailing ability of them, or even that is more important than not to be biased about that.

After Monte implying that there is not a big difference between a Lagoon 400 and an Outremer 45, in what regards sailing ability, particularly to upwind sailing, it is obvious that a huge experience sailing catamarans does not give you much knowledge about different sailing boat's potential, not even among different types of cats, obviously less in what regards comparing different types of cats and different types of monohulls.

For doing that what you need not to be biased regarding any type of boats and have a lot of information regarding different types of boat's performance.

You can collect on sailing passages with a huge number of boats, like the ARC, and specially on boat ratings for compensated racing that are elaborated by hugely experienced technicians having as base VPP and race results.

Individual experiences are not of any value since they are just that, individual ones that take in no account the crew experience, that is hugely important in what regards taking a boat to its sailing potential.

Regarding that I guess that there is no possible better example than Monte saying that he made with a Lagoon 400 a passage in the same time of an Outremer 45 (factory extended to 48) and trying to imply with that there is no big difference between the sailing potential of the two boats, particularly upwind.

You need averages to get conclusions and you don't get that with individual experiences. The best idea you can get regarding the overall potential of a sailing boat (upwind and downwind) is given by the IRC rating of the boat, not by any individual experience sailing them, no matter the experience you have sailing any type of boat.

Regarding the performance of condo cats a and a generic good information you can also take the words of an expert designer with both types of boats, Nigel Irens or a test sailor with a huge number of sail tests of all types of boats like Toby Hodges.

" People think multihulls should be able to do all sorts of things to all sort of people: Clearly it is not, they can be very fast and very spartan or they can be very comfortable...these cats are not high performance boats and it is clear that the compromise is quite pointed."

"It was immediately evident that the multihull reputation for performance should not be extended to cruiser cats like these."

This were statements produced by the well known multihull designer and the main sail tester after a 3 days test with a Lagoon 400, Fontaine Pajot Lipari 41 and the Broadblue 43. They got from light winds to 40k winds. A very curious sail test. Here is the movie. Full test on Yachting World magazine.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cTbAYhbDMJk

[Boatguy30]

It's been noted many other places that the outreimers "look" much faster than they actually are. The need to "factory extend" any design is basically proof the design wasn't right to start with.

Check out the PDQ 34 or the Manata 38 as further examples.

[belizesailor]

Originally Posted by Polux

It is very funny that you think that having a big experience sailing catamarans, or having one is needed to know the potential sailing ability of them, or even that is more important than not to be biased about that.

After Monte implying that there is not a big difference between a Lagoon 400 and an Outremer 45, in what regards sailing ability, particularly to upwind sailing, it is obvious that a huge experience sailing catamarans does not give you much knowledge about different sailing boat's potential, not even among different types of cats, obviously less in what regards comparing different types of cats and different types of monohulls.

...

Looks like you guys can safely paraphrase that long reply as ... "None".

The conclusion that Lagoons are not performance boats is obvious, but they sail plenty good for cruising use...and yes I have actually sailed many days on Lagoons from 38 to 50'.

[DotDun]

The original question:

This thread is a lot of real-world experience, a lot of theory, and a lot of imagination.

Polux,

Please state your experience sailing catamarans, include make, model, size, and how far you sailed.

My conclusion based on your response below:

You have no experience sailing catamarans, you are simply regurgitating the theory of others and mixing it with what you imagine are the desires of the crew.

If your only interest is performance, why post on a Cruiser's Forum?

The only conclusion one can take from the ARC is that no one will finish faster than their boat is capable. You can not draw any other conclusions.

Originally Posted by Polux

It is very funny that you think that having a big experience sailing catamarans, or having one is needed to know the potential sailing ability of them, or even that is more important than not to be biased about that.

After Monte implying that there is not a big difference between a Lagoon 400 and an Outremer 45, in what regards sailing ability, particularly to upwind sailing, it is obvious that a huge experience sailing catamarans does not give you much knowledge about different sailing boat's potential, not even among different types of cats, obviously less in what regards comparing different types of cats and different types of monohulls.

For doing that what you need not to be biased regarding any type of boats and have a lot of information regarding different types of boat's performance.

You can collect on sailing passages with a huge number of boats, like the ARC, and specially on boat ratings for compensated racing that are elaborated by hugely experienced technicians having as base VPP and race results.

Individual experiences are not of any value since they are just that, individual ones that take in no account the crew experience, that is hugely important in what regards taking a boat to its sailing potential.

Regarding that I guess that there is no possible better example than Monte saying that he made with a Lagoon 400 a passage in the same time of an Outremer 45 (factory extended to 48) and trying to imply with that there is no big difference between the sailing potential of the two boats, particularly upwind.

You need averages to get conclusions and you don't get that with individual experiences. The best idea you can get regarding the overall potential of a sailing boat (upwind and downwind) is given by the IRC rating of the boat, not by any individual experience sailing them, no matter the experience you have sailing any type of boat.

Regarding the performance of condo cats a and a generic good information you can also take the words of an expert designer with both types of boats, Nigel Irens or a test sailor with a huge number of sail tests of all types of boats like Toby Hodges.

" People think multihulls should be able to do all sorts of things to all sort of people: Clearly it is not, they can be very fast and very spartan or they can be very comfortable...these cats are not high performance boats and it is clear that the compromise is quite pointed."

"It was immediately evident that the multihull reputation for performance should not be extended to cruiser cats like these."

This were statements produced by the well known multihull designer and the main sail tester after a 3 days test with a Lagoon 400, Fontaine Pajot Lipari 41 and the Broadblue 43. They got from light winds to 40k winds. A very curious sail test. Here is the movie. Full test on Yachting World magazine.

[colemj]

Originally Posted by Boatguy30

It's been noted many other places that the outreimers "look" much faster than they actually are. The need to "factory extend" any design is basically proof the design wasn't right to start with.

Check out the PDQ 34 or the Manata 38 as further examples.

Seawind 1000, Catana 401, Admiral 38, Island Spirit 35, Voyage 38, PDQ 42, Leopard 43 - the list is almost as long as the number of catamaran manufacturers.

I don't agree with your premise that their extensions are proof the design wasn't right to start with.

Instead, some of them were extended purely for marketing reasons ("new, bigger boat" for little outlay), and others were extended as the buyer demographic changed away from the original designs (requiring bigger dinghies, washing machines, water makers, etc).

Pretty much all of the above perfectly hit their original design marks. Maybe the Seawind 1000 and PDQ 42 were exceptions.

Mark

[belizesailor]

Originally Posted by StuM

But they all look like you are sailing downwind. That just proves that cats can't go to windward!

Hey, wind forward of beam counts as windward!

[Polux]

Originally Posted by monte

..
... 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

That is a 26ft mini. Yes those boats are not maximized to sail upwind. The performance upwind is poor and the angle to the wind big. They are designed for the mini transat, a downwind race, in fact that one has made the mini transat that finished not much time ago.

The photo you posted is from the 2013 Transat. It was really that boat or a similar one?

[Polux]

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. 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.

It seems it is not only Monte that believes that an Outremer 45 with a normal cruising load (that can be a lot on a Outremer 45) can be remotely as fast as a Lagoon 400, specially upwind as it was the case, I mean sailing, not motoring.

I guess it is another one that talks based on real live sailing experience with cats particularly on a Lagoon 400 so he know for sure what he is talking about.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by DotDun

T...
If your only interest is performance, why post on a Cruiser's Forum?
...

Who said my only interest was performance? If it was the case I would be racing not cruising.

But like many I like to enjoy sailing while cruising and having fun while sailing is linked with sail performance. Nobody will have fun sailing a slow boat that sails badly, at least not me and that is why I sail a performance cruiser.

It seems that around here, and particularly on the multihull forums, many like to do the same and that is why they have and sail performance multihulls.

[admiralslater]

Originally Posted by Boatguy30

It's been noted many other places that the outreimers "look" much faster than they actually are. The need to "factory extend" any design is basically proof the design wasn't right to start with.

Check out the PDQ 34 or the Manata 38 as further examples.

Boat guy, as the son of Alan Slater the designer of the PDQ36 and the one of the builders of the molds for the Pdq 34 I can tell you exactly why the hull on the boat was extended .The When we arrived at the Annapolis boat show for the first time in 90 it was the start of the development of transom steps .In order to be able to accommodate this very popular feature with out interfering with the steering the extra length was added . There will be a bunch of bla bla bla regarding water line length and volume but it was the transom steps that were the real reason .
On a recent trip to the Outremer factory I saw an old style 45 stretched to 48 when I asked the plant manager why it was done he said that the owners wanted the bottom step long so they could land the dingy more easily at anchour. by having the bottom step with out the topside rising on the inside it makes kind of a little dock which from experience is a very nice at anchour .The same reasoning happened on the PDQ42/44
I'm not sure how adapting to new ideas and design features makes the the original design wrong as you state. Cars are updated every year

[Polux]

Finally some data regarding the subject of the thread.

It regards the comparative the average use of engine by cruisers between monohulls and multihulls, comparing the engine hours that were used by each type of sailboat on the ARC+ (between Cabo Verde and Santa Lucia) that was made by 43 monohulls and 15 multihulls.

The average engine hours on multihulls was 15 hours.

The average engine hours on monohulls was 5 hours.

I believe that if this was not a downwind passage the difference would be bigger.

If we compare the number of boats that used the engine for 3 hours or less that difference is not so big and 61% of the monohulls had done that while regarding multihulls only 40% managed that.

This means probably that there is a bigger percentage of monohull sailors that like to use very little the engine while a considerable number of cat sailors have the same will, while many others use much more the engine than monohull sailors.

[smj]

Originally Posted by Polux

Finally some data regarding the subject of the thread.

It regards the comparative the average use of engine by cruisers between monohulls and multihulls, comparing the engine hours that were used by each type of sailboat on the ARC+ (between Cabo Verde and Santa Lucia) that was made by 43 monohulls and 15 multihulls.

The average engine hours on multihulls was 15 hours.

The average engine hours on monohulls was 5 hours.

I believe that if this was not a downwind passage the difference would be bigger.

Were those engine hours used for motoring or possibly charging the batteries? Some things we just don't know.


Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[smj]

Originally Posted by admiralslater

Boat guy, as the son of Alan Slater the designer of the PDQ36 and the one of the builders of the molds for the Pdq 34 I can tell you exactly why the hull on the boat was extended .The When we arrived at the Annapolis boat show for the first time in 90 it was the start of the development of transom steps .In order to be able to accommodate this very popular feature with out interfering with the steering the extra length was added . There will be a bunch of bla bla bla regarding water line length and volume but it was the transom steps that were the real reason .

On a recent trip to the Outremer factory I saw an old style 45 stretched to 48 when I asked the plant manager why it was done he said that the owners wanted the bottom step long so they could land the dingy more easily at anchour. by having the bottom step with out the topside rising on the inside it makes kind of a little dock which from experience is a very nice at anchour .The same reasoning happened on the PDQ42/44

I'm not sure how adapting to new ideas and design features makes the the original design wrong as you state. Cars are updated every year

These are the 4' stern extensions we did on our Seawind 1000. As you say, it's like a little dock!




Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[44'cruisingcat]

Quote:
Originally Posted by DotDun
This thread is a lot of real-world experience, a lot of theory, and a lot of imagination.

Polux,

Please state your experience sailing catamarans, include make, model, size, and how far you sailed.

Originally Posted by Polux

It is very funny that you think that having a big experience sailing catamarans, or having one is needed to know the potential sailing ability of them, or even that is more important than not to be biased about that.

So, none then. But an expert anyway.