My boat's too big... I hear it all the time.

[Mike Banks]

It makes the most financial sense to buy the smallest vessel in which you can be comfortable and which will withstand the seas in which you intend to set sail.

Having said that--any fool can be uncomfortable, and if you can manage a larger vessel and can afford the maintenance and higher fuel costs etc--then what is the problem?

Perhaps it is just envy. In my old trimaran I was a bit like a pea in a whistle--there was far more room than I needed. I no longer own it--my next vessel will be much smaller--but it has more to do with maintenance and marina fees than anything else.

Bigger boats are more comfortable in a seaway--and one can always add crew as required for specific crossings if one needs to do so. Fifty foot plus allows for some privacy--and privacy is important. Especially with visitors aboard.

[KP44]

Forty or fifty years ago, a 36' was the max a couple would handle. Or maybe 40' with a couple winches.
Maybe all these people are reading old books.
Ours is 18 ton, 45', 60' mast. I have single-handed in squalls when no other boats were out. (Protected waters.) I single-hand it through the locks without issue.

If you are OK, just smile and let 'em carry on. It's your boat and no one knows it better than you.

[TJ D]

The US ensign angle is interesting, but I don't think that it has a lot to do with this. We got the same comments in the USA, too.

Our boat actually weighs the same as, say, an Island Packet 40, which is widely regarded as an appropriate boat for a couple. Of course, our SA/D is way higher than an IP40, but it's easy to fly less sail...

When I mention that, it seems to be meaningless to these folks. I guess that reinforces the consensus view here that it's mostly commentary rooted in ignorance.

Anyway, it's been a curious thing.

[KP44]

Originally Posted by Mike Banks

Bigger boats are more comfortable in a seaway--and one can always add crew as required for specific crossings if one needs to do so. Fifty foot plus allows for some privacy--and privacy is important. Especially with visitors aboard.

I thought a 36 to 40 foot boat would be large enough. My spouse insisted we get larger so our daughter and her husband can come with us. (Of course, they won't.) I am so happy we went larger. The extra room is luxury and well worth the slightly higher marina fees and the higher maintenance costs.

[captlloyd]

I built a 64ft. steel sailboat and would get the "too big" comment from time to time. My reply usually would be that if I told you I lived in a 60ft housetrailer you wouldn't think it was too big would you. Not a whole lot of difference.

[Hoodsail]

So TJ, if I am doing my math right, you have a 55 foot boat that is double-handed giving us 55 divided by 2 = 27.5 ft per crew member. I have a 35.5 foot boat that is single-handed giving us 35.5 divided by 1 = 35.5 ft per crew member...which boat is too big?? Would assume we might arrive at the same result given displacement, sail area, LOA, LWL, except for cost, there your boat is too big and congrats on it being so..

[TJ D]

Originally Posted by Hoodsail

So TJ, if I am doing my math right, you have a 55 foot boat that is double-handed giving us 55 divided by 2 = 27.5 ft per crew member. I have a 35.5 foot boat that is single-handed giving us 35.5 divided by 1 = 35.5 ft per crew member...which boat is too big?? Would assume we might arrive at the same result given displacement, sail area, LOA, LWL, except for cost, there your boat is too big and congrats on it being so..

Fine point.

Well, surprisingly, the cost of ownership is really not as different as I'd feared. My previous two boats were more conventional, 36 and 44 feet. Operational costs are close to the same, believe it or not. Sure, marinas cost 25% more than the did for the last boat, but this isn't a huge difference in the grand scheme of things.

Until it's time to buy sails or running rigging. Then it gets damned painful.

I actually can do pretty much anything on the boat by myself. I've only singlehanded her (besides a harbor shift) once, from Bimini to Ft. Lauderdale, and that was not a chore at all. That trip was in a very stiff breeze, too. I think the crossing took 4 hours and change! The dog and I had a blast.

And that, incidentally, is the entire reason for us owning a bigger boat. Speed. Interior space or owning the boat as some sort of a status symbol were not considerations at all, believe it or not. We were sick of our heavy, slow boats.

It's been implied a couple of times on previous posts that there might be some kind of a class envy thing happening. I'm not sure. Nobody has ever mistaken me for a snobby rich guy, I'm sure of that.

Oftentimes, folks think I'm the hired skipper on my boat. This amuses me greatly... I don't usually tell them otherwise.

[Rorzech]

So you say if you got 30 footers with five people, are you saying a 26 footer is too big for two people ? What size is your boat ? 22 feet or 222 ft ? You never did say. How can anyone give you a meaningful answer if they have no idea what size you boat is ?

[TJ D]

Originally Posted by Rorzech

So you say if you got 30 footers with five people, are you saying a 26 footer is too big for two people ? What size is your boat ? 22 feet or 222 ft ? You never did say. How can anyone give you a meaningful answer if they have no idea what size you boat is ?

Not sure if you're talking to me-but we're 55', as you can see in my profile.

The point of the thread isn't to determine whether or not a boat's too big or too small-that answer is different for everyone. It was more about looking for some insight into what makes folks think that there's a certain maximum size for an offshore sailboat for a given size of crew.

[Pizzazz]

TJ, you have an awesome boat and speed is an excellent reason to have such a boat. What would be your typical 24h average, broad reaching and beating? What would be the minimum wind speeds to hit hull speed?

[daletournier]

Originally Posted by RichandHelen

Who wouldn't envy an Oyster 53 ?

An Oyster 70 owner!

[TJ D]

Originally Posted by Pizzazz

TJ, you have an awesome boat and speed is an excellent reason to have such a boat. What would be your typical 24h average, broad reaching and beating? What would be the minimum wind speeds to hit hull speed?

We plan on 200 miles/day. The best 24 hour run we've done on RS is 260, and we've had many in the 220 range. She's done over 300 in the past, but we don't push for higher speeds when shorthanded. Pushing for max speed usually means hand steering, for one. Not our thing. We're really cruisers at heart, and we're sailing our home (our only home, by the way), so rule number 1 is 'Don't break the boat'. So, the 200/day figure is sailing the boat at probably 70% of its potential.

Upwind, we're not much different than good-sailing boats of similar size. We take the 'foot off the gas' upwind, anyway. I've got no time for really fast beating. It's just no fun at all.

Honestly-we very rarely sail upwind. I'd much rather wait in port until we have a favorable breeze and then boogie. I'd say in all of our cruising, we've been hard on the wind less than 5% of the time.

Off the wind, top speeds are dictated really only by what your nerves and wallet can handle. She's been up in the 35 knot range under a previous (richer) owner. We keep top surfing speeds under 20, but we have exceeded that mark a couple of times...

There isn't a hull speed, per se, (she goes non-displacement above about 12kts, but that takes a lot of power) but when we're beam reaching, we can usually manage 10 knots of boatspeed in 12 knots of wind. If we're deep enough to set a chute on a reach, I've had her at 10 knots in 8 knots of wind.

[daletournier]

Originally Posted by TJ D

We plan on 200 miles/day. The best 24 hour run we've done on RS is 260, and we've had many in the 220 range. She's done over 300 in the past, but we don't push for higher speeds when shorthanded. Pushing for max speed usually means hand steering, for one. Not our thing. We're really cruisers at heart, and we're sailing our home (our only home, by the way), so rule number 1 is 'Don't break the boat'. So, the 200/day figure is sailing the boat at probably 70% of its potential.

Upwind, we're not much different than good-sailing boats of similar size. We take the 'foot off the gas' upwind, anyway. I've got no time for really fast beating. It's just no fun at all.

Honestly-we very rarely sail upwind. I'd much rather wait in port until we have a favorable breeze and then boogie. I'd say in all of our cruising, we've been hard on the wind less than 5% of the time.

Off the wind, top speeds are dictated really only by what your nerves and wallet can handle. She's been up in the 35 knot range under a previous (richer) owner. We keep top surfing speeds under 20, but we have exceeded that mark a couple of times...

There isn't a hull speed, per se, (she goes non-displacement above about 12kts, but that takes a lot of power) but when we're beam reaching, we can usually manage 10 knots of boatspeed in 12 knots of wind. If we're deep enough to set a chute on a reach, I've had her at 10 knots in 8 knots of wind.

Is there a site we can look at your boat on? Sounds very cool.

[TJ D]

Originally Posted by daletournier

Is there a site we can look at your boat on? Sounds very cool.

Yes, Dale. svrocketscience.com. There is a technical details tab on the top which describes the boat in great detail. More than anybody really needs to know, it was written by Bill Lee. Some of the engineering that was done during the build is really staggering. We're incredibly lucky to own her.

[NevisDog]

Originally Posted by TJ D

... Oftentimes, folks think I'm the hired skipper on my boat. This amuses me greatly... I don't usually tell them otherwise.

Now that's hilarious, but why so? I mean, what is it makes them think you're not 'a snobby rich guy' owner?? (Just curious)