Production Boats Fit For Blue Water

[Polux]

Originally Posted by Jon Eisberg

"Recently I’ve come to admire the fast, though aesthetically pleasing boats. J/Boats fit this example, as do the newer Swans. I loved the Outbound 46 I sailed to Tortola. Specific to offshore, the standard production boats are awful. I’ve delivered plenty of them, and while fast off the wind, they’ll pound your brains out going to weather and make for a miserable trip"
Oh, well... What would a guy like Andy Schell know about Bluewater Cruising anyway, right?

:-))

It seems he take time to understand how good are some modern performance cruisers for offshore sailing...but wait a moment, Jboats are also production boats

Talking about "Standard" production boat makes no sense at all. There is no such thing and there are lots of different types of sailboats and hulls in what concerns production boats, not to mention the difference through the decades in what concerns design.

Even in what regards mass production boats the hulls of boats like a Beneteau Sense 48, a Jeanneau 409, a RM 1260, A Salona 44 or Xc 45 are very different. Broad generalizations like the one he made rarely makes sense and that is the case with that one: meaningless

[Kenomac]

Originally Posted by colemj

So you do not know if the coupling was DZR brass or yellow brass?

I hope you referred to "naval bronze" generically, because real naval bronze is a zinc-rich brass. Silicon bronze is usually used for underwater fittings, and people might refer to that as "naval" because of its usage.

Curious as to why you didn't use the Marelon thruhulls that are provided mated with Marelon seacocks?

Mark

I used "real" Naval Bronze manufactured at a USA plant where I could speak to the company metallurgist who provided the compound data sheet. My father is a retired metallurgist. I also researched a reputable plant in Italy at the time. I chose interior Maralon fittings for corrosion resistance and exterior naval Bronze for it's impact strength and longevity. You can choose whatever you like for your boat, these were the best informed choices I felt for my boat. Others, may choose differently for their boat.

But I didn't feel comfortable with the choices most European builders were making for customer boats 12 years ago. So I switched everything out for new to be safe.

[Jon Eisberg]

Originally Posted by colemj

I don't see where he said things break or that they are unsuitable. I only see where he, personally, is uncomfortable upwind in them.

I'm uncomfortable downwind in most old "blue water" boats because they roll their guts out - does that count?

Mark

Well, I won't presume to speak for Andy, you'd have to take that up with him... And, although I don't have any time offshore on J-Boats, myself, I too am a bit mystified by his seeming exclusion of them from the category of boats likely to pound a bit going to weather in a seaway...

nah, just having a bit of fun, contrasting the view of someone who has crossed oceans on a wide variety of boats, with that of one who has yet to actually do any significant amount of Bluewater Cruising...

:-))

Pretty good interview, at any rate... I always enjoy Andy's take on things, he gives it to you unvarnished...

[Suijin]

Interesting interview. I think it points up that this whole debate is very subjective. He mentions the Saga 43 as one of his favorite offshore boats. I agree that they are not lookers (they take "functional" to the extreme), but inside they are remarkable in terms of layout and the amount of space you get. They are relative speed demons and really, really fun to sail but going to weather in one can be pretty rough. The same goes for JBoats, depending on which model you're on.

I think the whole bluewater boat debate is like a sphere with attribute points place all around it's perimeter, like a 3D SWOT chart. There are infinite points inside of the sphere where that represent a given sailor's "bluewater boat" based on their wallet, priorities, conservatism, experience, etc.

Throwing out that such-and-such boat has done a circumnavigation, or that the ARC proves anything in terms of reliability, ruggedness, or sailing qualities is pointless and proves nothing other than that someone did it. Matt Rutherford went through the arctic in his Albin Vega but that does not mean it's a good choice for bluewater sailing and that anyone can hop in one sail the world with confidence. The debate should focus on boat design and construction, and cruising requirements, not "But plenty of <name> have done it."

[SwissMocha]

Originally Posted by colemj

They are dangerous and not suitable for even inland lake sailing. There have already been many threads with experts proving this. It is a closed case - no point rehashing it.

Mark

Haha

[scuba0_1]

Originally Posted by SwissMocha

Haha

Oh I thought you were excited because they were closing this. The amount libel going on here and is at a all time high.
.

LAW

a published false statement that is damaging to a person's reputation or product; a written defamation.





Sent from my SM-N910V using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[Polux]

Originally Posted by Jon Eisberg

Well, I won't presume to speak for Andy, you'd have to take that up with him... And, although I don't have any time offshore on J-Boats, myself, I too am a bit mystified by his seeming exclusion of them from the category of boats likely to pound a bit going to weather in a seaway...
....

One of the characteristics of many modern boat designs is that they have finer entries than older designs and massively bigger transoms. Among the cruising boats that have finer entries are performance boats because if pounding or wasting a lot of energy knifing through the waves (wave drag) they will be slow upwind.

So yes, if you want to find the modern designs that pound less on a sea way look for performance cruisers (also known as cruiser-racers) designed to have a very good performance upwind. Jboats are a good example as most Italian performance cruisers (Grand Soleil, NM, Sly, Comet...). On the Med the conditions grant lot's of upwind sailing on the Med nasty short waves. Those conditions are also frequent on the Baltic and many Nordic performance cruisers (Xp, Luffe, Swedestar...), are also designed with a maximized upwind performance.

Most cruisers motor upwind or don't sail much upwind so it is normal that the modern main trend in what concerns cruising boats (trade wind an all) favors boats more maximized for downwind performance, that, has Mark pointed out, are more comfortable and easier to sail on that sail position then upwind maximized boats.

Mark, have a look at my blog, I think you are going to like the last boat I posted there.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by Suijin

...
Throwing out that such-and-such boat has done a circumnavigation, or that the ARC proves anything in terms of reliability, ruggedness, or sailing qualities is pointless and proves nothing other than that someone did it...

No, if it is not just one or two but dozens and dozens certainly prove the ability of those boats doing that on a routine basis meaning they are suited for it. Many boats of the same type (recent mass production boats) that circumnavigates for several years without significant problems proves they have the reliability and the ruggedness to do that.

Certainly that does not prove that they would still be able to do that when they are old boats, with 30 years or more (that seems to be Neal's major point), but who cares about that? Certainly not the one that are sailing in them that bought them because they cost the same while recent boats as an old "quality" boat and certainly they have a much better sail performance then the old one.

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by colemj

They are dangerous and not suitable for even inland lake sailing. There have already been many threads with experts proving this. It is a closed case - no point rehashing it.

Mark

Is there the kind of "blue water bias" in multi brands that you see with the monos? If so, which are BeneHunterLinas of the multi world? Geminis?

Honestly, I'd love to see examples of "production multis" in this thread.

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by Jon Eisberg

Based upon our debate elsewhere re the comparative merits of the Caribbean 1500 vs. Salty Dawg Rallies, I gather you have considerable respect for Andy Schell, correct?

He would appear to disagree with your assertion above... From the excellent interview with SFLF, here:

Sail Far Live Free - Sailboats, Sailing News, and Gear: An Interview with Andy Schell from 59-North

Oh, well... What would a guy like Andy Schell know about Bluewater Cruising anyway, right?

:-))

A delivery skipper prefers heavier, higher-end Swans and Outbounds over production boats? This is a surprise to you...a delivery skipper?

Are you now equating upwind deliveries to "bluewater cruising"? I've done a couple of those multi-day upwind deliveries - in a Pacific Seacraft 37 and a Pearson 365. Not nearly as fun as bluewater cruising in ANY boat.

[SwissMocha]

Originally Posted by smackdaddy

Is there the kind of "blue water bias" in multi brands that you see with the monos? If so, which are BeneHunterLinas of the multi world? Geminis?

Honestly, I'd love to see examples of "production multis" in this thread.

FoPaLagoLeo?


Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[colemj]

Originally Posted by smackdaddy

Is there the kind of "blue water bias" in multi brands that you see with the monos? If so, which are BeneHunterLinas of the multi world? Geminis?

Honestly, I'd love to see examples of "production multis" in this thread.

A bit, but it mostly comes down to performance camp vs accommodations camp - so it is different than what goes on in these threads.

There really isn't the "BeneHunterLina" thing so much, although Gemini's are often debated as for correct usage - with even most of the Gemini proponents recognizing some of the issues with size, etc of that boat.

Even in those debates, they usually go like "you might be better off in the same size and for the same money with a PDQ or Prout" - and not like "you need an Oyster instead of a Hunter".

In general, any multihull threads will be filled with BWC monohull proponents screaming at the top of their lungs about how bad and dangerous multihulls are, and how often and easily they flip.

It is a relief when threads like this appear because they all go stampeding out of the multihull threads, trampling over themselves to get into these threads.

Which, of course, proves that production monohulls are more dangerous than all multihulls.

Most of us learned to ignore them ages ago - we just smile and wave at them as we pass.

Mark

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by Suijin

Throwing out that such-and-such boat has done a circumnavigation, or that the ARC proves anything in terms of reliability, ruggedness, or sailing qualities is pointless and proves nothing other than that someone did it.

Actually this does absolutely become statistically valid when people are saying it can't or shouldn't be done in such-and-such boat.

The rest of your post was pretty well reasoned. Beyond this point above, it's all a very subjective debate.

[smackdaddy]

Originally Posted by SwissMocha

FoPaLagoLeo?


Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

Heh-heh. That sounds like a Swiss yodel.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by smackdaddy

Is there the kind of "blue water bias" in multi brands that you see with the monos? If so, which are BeneHunterLinas of the multi world? Geminis?

Honestly, I'd love to see examples of "production multis" in this thread.

I think it will be basically Lagoon mostly and then Fountain Pajot and then probably Leopard catamarans. It seems to me that Gemini are less suited for bluewater sailing due to their very small beam (for a cat) and smaller size.

FoPaLagoLeo is a good one, but I think it would be more Lagofoupaleop