40' Bluewater Cruiser Choice

[Likato]

I appreciate all the input. I do consider it all - I think a lot of you are on the same page. I’ll try to be brief in describing where I’m coming from and what I am looking for in a boat: The boat will be primarily for my wife and me as liveaboards with the occasional guests – never more than six total on board. We are both fit and agile, we don’t emphasize comfort or roomy accommodations, and we don’t want a sluggish beamy cruiser or a teaky classic with overhangs. We don’t mind small sleeping quarters as long as the public quarters are large. We plan to sail in the Bahamas and Caribbean for a couple of years but aspire to a transat or transpac crossing. We are outdoor people and would like a large comfortable cockpit – especially one that can be shared with friends in the tropics. I lean towards a fast design with good shape, not too beamy, and full keel and skeg hung rudder that can allow us to heave-to and avoid loss of rudder in case of an unfortunate collision. As for the rig, I like to be able to have plenty of sail and the option to reef as needed – two headsails would be good. I’m not a fan of too much electronics – especially not for the sails. A cutter with roller for fore sails, hank on for staysail, and stack pack for main is ideal. In actual numbers I look for Length/displacement ratio around 250 and a sail area/displacement ratio around 18 - mid-range figures suited for long distance passage making. Of course solid construction is a plus (bulkheads tabbed, stringers, hull and deck through-bolted), all deck hardware with backing plates, keel stepped mast, accessible and solid chainplates).
To help in this search and to get out and see some boats in my area I contacted a broker in Ft. Lauderdale - he sent a sample of local (Florida) boats that included an Endeavor 40 (I think it’s too beamy), Morgan 43 (good shape with partial skeg), Allied 42 XL-2 (I don't like overhangs and I do not want the electric stow-away main it has installed), Bristol 40 (too classic and overhangs), Tartan 40 SD (looks good but don't know about the Scheel keel).
Apart from the local search I am also scouring the web looking at boats in the US and Caribbean. As for models that have piqued my interest: Nordic 40, Albin Nimbus 42, Avance 40, and Wauquiez (Hood or Centurion). And I may be open to sleeker designs – Beneteau First 456 - if I can convince myself that the fin keel and spade runner are safe.
Anyhow - plenty to think about but I would like to avoid any analysis paralysis because I would like to buy within the next few months - and I know that once I decide I will be content - cause she's mine.
Paul B. – I agree - brand name not important – that’s how I arrived at Albin Nimbus and Avance which apparently were not familiar to many – and I absolutely agree that the 1981 teak deck gives me cold feet. You should see the pictures I got from the Nimbus in Tortola – it is a project boat – but the specs and lines are great – event R. Perry gave it a great review back in the day (thank you Gerhard).
Adelie – I looked at the Cascade 42 – it is definitely bullet proof but all of them are on the Westcoast – I’ll have to keep looking for some in the area.
Newt, Curmudgeon and Bill are all faithful Valiant supporters – and I agree with a lot of what you say – Annapolis Book of Sailing is always a good reference (I have had mine for more than 20 years) – but I am also trying to be open to some of the newer designs (sugar scoop versus double ender?; spade and fin versus full keel and skeg hung rudder) and lighter displacement. I find it interesting, though, that the new Norstar 40 which uses the same mold as the Nordic 40 from the 80s has the same displacement. I thought that modern synthetics/fiberglass and other slight modifications would have resulted in a lighter boat form the same mold.
Dave of goboatingnow – the advocate for French brands and newer designs – would like to hear some specific boat recommendations
Captain BW – the IP 40 and Caliber 40 LRC are definitely bluewater tanks – pricey and I question their maneuverability but they do give a solid sense of safety.
Thanks

[Kay Koudele]

We did 4 years of cruising in a Southerly 115 (about 37 feet)and made in England. We loved it. We chose it in part because of the reputation of the builder for sea-worthy boats. For the Bahamas and the Caribbean (especially in Belize), it was terrific, due to a Swing Keel. Smaller cockpit, but we wanted that for blue-water safety. You can see one at the Miami boat show. Enjoy the search. It's an affair of the heart!
www.kaykoudele.blogspot.com

[Curmudgeon]

To be clear, there are some new designs I really like, starting with Rob Humphreys' Southerly 42RS with the swing keel. There are also some great semi-custom boats coming out of Holland or premium U.S. builders like Morris. But none of these boats is even vaguely within your price range (or mine, unfortunately).

[MJH]

Likato,

I am with you now on this monohull forum. Your intro gives a better view of your thinking but I see some disconnects. As I said previously, it is all about compromise AND availability at your price.

As you both are "fit & agile" the entire spectrum is available but if you are going to be "liveaboards" I would error on the comfort side. The tradeoff for a "large cockpit" is a smaller cabin and the storage that goes with it.

Your goal of "...Bahamas and Caribbean for a couple of years but aspire to a transat or transpac crossing" or further Pacific adventures might be better suited to different boats, i.e. shallow keel in the former and deeper keel for the latter. Why not just say worldwide and be done with it?

"..fast design with good shape, not too beamy, and full keel and skeg hung rudder that can allow us to heave-to..." A full keel would never be considered a fast design but long and narrow can be more easily found in older designs. Newer designs by the major manufacturers cater to the charter market which is defined by many short stays aboard during the best weather. The ability to heave-to is generally found to be more successful in older full keel designs than newer fin keel, spade rudder boats. Additionally, a cutter rig is not generally considered a fast design but very well suited for cruising the world.

I looked into my data base of 3,175 boats with your S/D=18 and L/D=250 and found one 40 footer that was very close, the 1963 designed Cal 40 with an acceptible "comfort ratio" of 29.8 but unacceptible "capsize ratio" of 1.77. An acceptability range would provide more options. By the way, I caution you not to take the S/D figures from manufacturers in most cases but rather to compute them yourself from the boat's I, J, P, E measurements. I found them to be often inflated by providing a larger than 100% jib as standard gear; that is not the proper way to measure S/D and not good for an apples-to-apples comparison. If you give me a "range" for the ratios of interest, I would be happy to run a sort and give you the findings to narrow your search.

~ ~ _/) ~ ~ Mike

[barnakiel]

How fast is fast?

In this size bracket, boats are fast anyhow. Even a long keel design like a Westsail 42 will be fast - the actual ocean conditions tend to even out the boats theoretical advantage coming from flatter hulls and finer foils.

I bet that a well trimmed and well sailed heavy displacement boat can beat a lighter design that has been overloaded with 'indispensable' cruising gear.

I would always put safety and comfort (and ease of maintenance) above the speed POTENTIAL of a boat chosen for cruising.

A heavy displacement 40 footer will not catch up with a Class 40 boat. But are we, cruising people, this much in a hurry?

barnie

[Likato]

Mike - you are right - I am looking for a boat that can go anywhere and it can't be two boats. I don't believe in transition boats and I can't afford two boats. I am verifying most of the data I see in listings - I mostly check sailboatdata.com which seems to have good information. They have listed SA and calculated SA and there are some discrepancies. The Avance 40, Tartan 40 SD, Albin Nimbus 42, and C&C 40 are giving me decent D/L and SA/D (240-260 and 17 or more). I am still trying to understand the importance of the capsize calculation - (Beam / ((D/64)^(1/3))) - all the Wauq's give me dangerous 1.68 or so but the Beneteau First 456 is safer with 1.89

[Likato]

"I bet that a well trimmed and well sailed heavy displacement boat can beat a lighter design that has been overloaded with 'indispensable' cruising gear.

Good point - and you're right - it's the cruising I love, I'm not racing, and I'm in no hurry to get there....but it is exciting to tally up your miles at the end of the day and see how much you covered in one day...a 200 mile day is more exciting than a 75 mile day

[Curmudgeon]

Originally Posted by Likato

Mike - you are right - I am looking for a boat that can go anywhere and it can't be two boats. I don't believe in transition boats and I can't afford two boats. I am verifying most of the data I see in listings - I mostly check sailboatdata.com which seems to have good information. They have listed SA and calculated SA and there are some discrepancies. The Avance 40, Tartan 40 SD, Albin Nimbus 42, and C&C 40 are giving me decent D/L and SA/D (240-260 and 17 or more). I am still trying to understand the importance of the capsize calculation - (Beam / ((D/64)^(1/3))) - all the Wauq's give me dangerous 1.68 or so but the Beneteau First 456 is safer with 1.89

Errr.... Isn't the lower number safer in the capsize screening ratio? Over 2 is not supposed to be very good.

[Pblais]

I bet that a well trimmed and well sailed heavy displacement boat can beat a lighter design that has been overloaded with 'indispensable' cruising gear.

You just don't use a sports car like a pickup truck. All the number go out the window cruising. The ratios and indexes mean a lot less (I never though much of them) when loaded up full. No boat cruisers light. I've owned two tanks and for the most part the being a little slower never bothered me. The Gozzard is faster than the last boat but it is also a bigger tank too and when it is nasty out you want a bomb proof tank. There are a lot boats without great numbers that are fantastic tanks and sell cheaper.

On any tight budget you go for the tank to win. You'll never afford enough water line to get performance too. Performance without tonnage is can racing. Some folks really like can racing. It's not like cruising.

[barnakiel]

Originally Posted by Likato

Good point - and you're right - it's the cruising I love, I'm not racing, and I'm in no hurry to get there....but it is exciting to tally up your miles at the end of the day and see how much you covered in one day...a 200 mile day is more exciting than a 75 mile day

You will not have that many 200 mile days in any 40 footer, cruising mode (water, diesel, cruising indispensables, your personal stuff) anyway, will you.

Note that most 40 footers will have 36 ft waterline at best. A 36 ft waterline implies roughly 8 knots hull speed LIGHT SHIP (this makes for a 190 mile day, at hull speed). Now how much of the 8 knots potential will a cruising boat attain ???

I may be wrong in the exact numbers, but I believe the general rule is you are cruising or you are racing.

So, personally, I get the adrenaline sailing a racing dinghy (way beyond the hull speed if weather co-ops), and I go to places without counting the miles.

But it IS true that making a high mile day is one of the pleasures. Just it should not (well, why not) be THE factor that counts most when picking up your cruising home for the next couple of years.

b.

[savoir]

The boat you seek does not exist. It is time to take the shears to either your parameters or your budget. Similarly, 200 mile days don't exist for 40 footers unless you want something like an Olson 40, which is not what you have described.

Your new boat will cost 150 by the time you cast off. Here's one that matches your requirements.

1984 Nordic 40 Cutter Sail Boat For Sale - www.yachtworld.com=

[Likato]

oops...got it Wauq more stable than Beneteau - makes sense

[Likato]

Thanks - Nordic 40 has been on the list - great boat - bulkhead/mast step displacement but fixable.
Don't read too much into my 200 mile days - maybe with favorable current and wind? I think even Motessier got a couple in the 60s RTW

[sailorboy1]

Seems there is too much listening to your head in the choices and little listening to your heart. I suggest now that your basic list is done as far as "requirements" that you visit a couple of boats and listen to your heart.

Sometimes it seems we spend too much time looking at the numbers like we think we know better that whoever designed the boat to start with.

[Adelie]

Originally Posted by MJH

I looked into my data base of 3,175 boats with your S/D=18 and L/D=250 and found one 40 footer that was very close, the 1963 designed Cal 40 with an acceptible "comfort ratio" of 29.8 but unacceptible "capsize ratio" of 1.77.

Mike:
I confirmed the capsize ratio of 1.77 for the Cal40 per the CCA Technical Committee formula (Ratio = Beam / [Displacement/64]^.3333). Accordingly 1.77 should be well into the acceptable range.

Or are you using a different formula?

Adelie