Heavy Monohulls vs Light Catamarans

[slug]

Originally Posted by thinwater

As Training Wheels said, "Uh, no." Not even close.


Tris can go fast, point high, tack on a dime, and have all the helm feel you could ever want.


Down sides? Yup. But not boredom.

All I ever see is catamarans motoring

Not even motor sailing

From a distance they look like oil platforms

[Paul Howard]

I made good a 42,000nm circumnavigation of the world on a heavy mono and then owned a medium weight catamaran that I did another 60,000nm and now own a light catamaran for a few years.
the most hated part of voyaging on a mono was the downwind roll in the Trade Winds. I got tired of hanging on.
The catamaran is at its most stable off the wind, stands up and runs like it is on tracks. I could put my coffee cup down on a table and it would stay there.
The lighter cat I have now, nearly the same waterline length, half the displacement of the earlier cat I owned for 16years, is great fun to sail. My wife and I spent a winter in Cuba and Bahamas on it and sailed back to Toronto. Still very comfortable, but was livilier in the Gulfstream that the previous cat. But I try to keep the lighter cat very light and not load it down like I did the previous catamaran. The monohull was loaded down like a donkey with raised waterline.

[chris mac]

Originally Posted by slug

All I ever see is catamarans motoring

Not even motor sailing

From a distance they look like oil platforms

All I ever see is slug complaining about catamarans
Not even trying them personally
From a distance he looks uninformed

[mikedefieslife]

Originally Posted by nuvaslacker

I think a case can be made for a motor-sailer catamaran with wider hulls not necessarily of semicircular underwater cross section. Most people daysailing will use their motors against the wind to get home, most on ocean voyages will use the old routing charts for favourable winds.

The 30ft Oceanic that rounded Cape Horn with a family of two adults and two toddlers found it important to keep the engines running when under bare poles in the forties so that way was kept in the troughs of the waves. The Swales found it a comfortable family voyaging vessel; they even flew a spinnaker on occasion. It was, of course, a heavy catamaran, even by the criteria of the time.

And made even heavier by their modifications in Aus and all the supplies they were carrying. Earlier in the voyage they were carrying barrels of diesel on deck. That's 158l for each barrel.

[zstine]

3 pages and nobody pointed out the BIG difference in comfort between a heavy slow mono and a light catamaran. The heavy slow mono will be at sea much more for a given distance sailed and is too slow to avoid bad weather.

So which is more comfortable? 13 days sailing 1500 miles, 2 of which you are caught in a tropical storm in your heavy mono. Or 8 days sailing in good weather and 5 days at anchor for the same passage??

Pretty clear in my mind!

[Chotu]

Originally Posted by zstine

3 pages and nobody pointed out the BIG difference in comfort between a heavy slow mono and a light catamaran. The heavy slow mono will be at sea much more for a given distance sailed and is too slow to avoid bad weather.

So which is more comfortable? 13 days sailing 1500 miles, 2 of which you are caught in a tropical storm in your heavy mono. Or 8 days sailing in good weather and 5 days at anchor for the same passage??

Pretty clear in my mind!

That’s a great point. Certainly some comfort to be had there.

I probably shouldn’t have put a vs in the title. Should have put an = sign.

My odd observation, just from personal experience, is that a heavy mono and a light cat are closer in comfort than one would expect.

[StuM]

Originally Posted by chris mac

All I ever see is slug complaining about catamarans
Not even trying them personally
From a distance he looks uninformed

Slug: Join date: 21-11-2019
First post: 10-04-2020, 22:04

SeaSlug Caravan: (A prolific poster of anti-catamaran posts with a very similar posting style)
Last Activity: 01-03-2020 18:05

Hmmm! Do we have a sock puppet?

[MartinR]

Basically the assumption is correct. A heavy boat is more comfortable in a seaway than a light one for the same size.

But it is not quite so simple. Shape and distribution of mass come very much into this.

The most important factor for motion comfort in a monohull is metacenter height. You want this to be as small as possible, but still acceptable for safety.

A Bristol Channel Pilot cutter is perfect in this regard. A Baltic Trader, though heavier is not. A narrow boat is better than a wide one, and that is the reason my current boat is acceptable, but not in the same league as a Bristol Pilot. But - fast:-)

[captlloyd]

Originally Posted by slug

All I ever see is catamarans motoring

Not even motor sailing

From a distance they look like oil platforms

Must be why no one wants to buy one !

[Paul J. Nolan]

Originally Posted by hpeer

The only constant is there no “perfect” boat.

And there is no perfect wife, but lucky is the man who finds one perfect for him.

Paul

[Factor]

Originally Posted by slug

If you enjoy sailing you choose a monohull

If you’re interested in a floating condo ,,,with maximum surface area for solar arrays, windmills, bbqs.... you choose a multihull

If you enjoy sailing buy a quality design multi or mono, if you like going slow and buy a poorly designed mono or multi. Anyway, welcome back

[Paul J. Nolan]

Originally Posted by Chotu

All the time I have chosen and been building my lightweight catamaran, I was after comfort. Comfort at anchor from chop and rolling, comfort of an enclosed helm, comfort of not having to worry about everything going flying when a 70ft sport fisher goes by, comfort underway in any weather, staying upright while sailing, comfort of space inside and plenty of light, comfort of feeling like you’re in a nice home while at sea.

Comfort aboard consists of being warm and dry and having a full belly and a dry bunk. If you have a warm, slender woman to share it with, so much the better.

Or maybe not.

Paul

[billgewater]

Get a good book full of sailing adventures. Sit under a shady tree and live the ocean life at a distance. Problem solved. Minimal maintenance as well.

Every boat will have its "ups and downs" which to some is why they like sailing.

Really, boats are such complex combinations of options in design and performance that everything is a compromise. Enjoy the benign moments and be a hero in the moments of discomfort or sheer panic. If you want blandness, stay ashore.

Besides how boring would it be if after 30 years sailing and you were spinning a colorful yarn to the gobsmacked grandchildren and when they asked how you managed the pirates and the raging storms you said "Oh I had such and such a boat. They don't roll!" You would instantly lose all credibility, particularly when you could spin a real adventurous story about how you confronted the challenges of a pitching rolling boat in a howling gale but still managed to evade the pursuing pirates. Aghh!

[GRIT]

I agree with Chotu. In simple terms, and generally speaking, a heavier monohull design is more comfortable than a ULDB, or other "more spirited" designs.

There may be more time at sea, on an ocean crossing, but in any given sea state, I find that a heavier design is more comfortable than a lighter design. I don't find that "more time at sea" to be much of a valid argument, as the time at sea will be more pleasant.

Weight isn't the only factor, but the other factors in the design either contribute to weight, or are a consequence of weight. So the simple statement that "heavier monohulls are more comfortable than lighter ones", in my opinion, is spot on. And a nice topic of discussion, as the heavier boats become more and more of a rarity.

As to Multihulls: I don't have enough experience to comment. I can speculate, but I find there's already too much of that on CF.

My 2 cents.

Paul.

[wingssail]

Originally Posted by Training Wheels

Umm.....no.

I am sure your tri is fun to sail, and I think I might have a hard time beating it on most passages, short or long, but I might be able to. I have a really good record beating multis of all sorts, excluding big cats on a reach, especially on point to point day sails.

However, the question is comfort at anchor. I sort of doubt that the light tri you pictured would have a great motion in a rolly anchorage, with one ama after the other touching. Seems like it might be sort of jerky.

Then there is the accommodation issue. Can you live on board with two people for extended periods? Can you even stand up? How about provisions and spares?

A good, heavy, monohull (such as my 18000lb sloop) is reasonably comfortable in a rolly anchorage, due mostly to a very tall mast and a very deep keel. I've yesterday gotten back from a three month cruise where ALL of the anchorages were exposed to the Pacific swell, and we were never thrown out of our beds. OK, twice we had to put our wine in tumblers instead of long stemmed crystal.

Yet, with all that, we are fast, and we have tons of room and load carrying capacity for cruising and living aboard.

So, comfort is not a simple multi vs mono discussion. There are more factors at play.

Which would you choose if you were going to sail and live on for twenty plus years?