Adventure 40

[Na Mara]

I like the idea of a true KISS boat but I think the mass production aspect of the adventure 40 was a mistake. The sailors who appreciate the KISS philosophy are rare people, there is no mass market for this type of boat. I myself can see the attraction as my boat is complex in her systems and there is always something breaking or needing replaced. The idea of a really robust simple, minimal voyaging boat is very attractive.

It would have been far better to design the boat from the ground up for economic one off building. Perhaps epoxy glass sheathed multichine plywood? Then someone, maybe even me, would almost certainly take the plunge and build one. The extra costs of custom build could be offset by reduced system complexity and lower running costs.

Imagine a boat with a dedicated machinery space and walk in lazarrate, genuine water tight bulkheads, a true monocoque build of incredible rigidity, interior optimized for a cruising couple, minimal but top quality systems, that sails like a witch. Sign me up for that! The adventure 40
promises much of this, the problem is that it is vaporware and will remain so because people like me are rare in the sailing world.

Basically, I love the concept but I find the execution wanting.

[sinna2too]

Originally Posted by Na Mara

I like the idea of a true KISS boat but I think the mass production aspect of the adventure 40 was a mistake. The sailors who appreciate the KISS philosophy are rare people, there is no mass market for this type of boat. I myself can see the attraction as my boat is complex in her systems and there is always something breaking or needing replaced. The idea of a really robust simple, minimal voyaging boat is very attractive.

It would have been far better to design the boat from the ground up for economic one off building. Perhaps epoxy glass sheathed multichine plywood? Then someone, maybe even me, would almost certainly take the plunge and build one. The extra costs of custom build could be offset by reduced system complexity and lower running costs.

Imagine a boat with a dedicated machinery space and walk in lazarrate, genuine water tight bulkheads, a true monocoque build of incredible rigidity, interior optimized for a cruising couple, minimal but top quality systems, that sails like a witch. Sign me up for that! The adventure 40
promises much of this, the problem is that it is vaporware and will remain so because people like me are rare in the sailing world.

Basically, I love the concept but I find the execution wanting.

Interesting thoughts. Yep, it's a fantasy until they start building and delivering boats. I feel like I've waited forever for this project to bear fruit. Meanwhile, I need to find a used boat because I'm landlocked. If&when they start building these, I'll be able to check them out and reassess the boat.

I remember the discussion on the A40 website talking about how expensive the molds are, so that would be one impediment to a custom or small quantity of hulls.

You said "The extra costs of custom build could be offset by reduced system complexity and lower running costs." As you point out, they are expecting to leverage lower costs "by reduced system complexity and lower running costs".

John Harries also said having a single build without options is expected to simplify the build and keep costs lower.

They have always planned to have a "mechanical room in the aft starboard area instead of a third cabin. It's the same approach as the Outbound 46. You could build out a workbench , storage or add other mechanical items in there.

[TrentePieds]

I'm with you on the basic philosophy, Na Mara, but unfortunately, we already have experience that boats, however simple, cannot be built cheaply :-)

Your plywood hull idea was tried many, many years ago by Ben Seaborn in Seattle. He designed the Thunderbird sloop, 26 feet. We had quite a fleet of them in these waters, and they were marvelous little weekend cruisers and racers. They were all "owner-built" and their hull finish was marine enamel since poly-resins were not commonly available. Some were subsequently "sheathed" in GRP, whence we gained the knowledge that sheathing really doesn't work due to the inevitability of absorption of water by the plywood and its consequent expansion tearing it apart as the GRP moves in an entirely different manner depending on temperature.

Then there was the "Ferro" craze. Some boatw were successful, many were not. Dozens - yes dozens - sat abandoned on the shores of the Mighty, Muddy Fraser River because their owners had bitten off more than they could chew. In the end the D9 Cats got busy :-)

All such schemes founder on the fact that if you work 3 hours a night on weekdays and 10 hours on Saturdays, taking Sundays off, then, in a year, you can get in about 700 manhours. On a 15K hour project, you obviously cannot go it alone!

Furthermore, the old rule of thumb is that the cost of the bare hull is about ten percent of the total vessel cost. All the "bags hung on", right from the ships compass to her auxiliary engine, cost what they cost and cannot be "owner built"

The market has also changed, of course. A half century ago America was swept by
yet another of her periodic enthusiasms, and the desire of every lubber to shape-shift into a sailorman created a market for pleasure boats. For reasons that we may not expound on here because we may not discuss politics, there was plenty of buckshee money about to support an industry catering to the enthusiasm.

And that historic dislocation of basic economic factors is what today, these many years later, enables thee and me, along with many others, to indulge our own personal enthusiasm for sailing at affordable cost.

It is certainly the case that there is a market for yachts with price tags so exorbitant that they are out of reach for all but the Bezos of this world. The Adventure 40 obviously misses that market by a country mile.

Equally certainly, there is a market for EXISTING boats that are affordable for thee and me and others who still entertain our enthusiasm. But that market is not only not the target market for the Adventure 40. It is also glutted.

IMO a new market for NEW, factory-built pleasure boats cannot open up until the vast majority of the fleet now afloat has either gone to the bottom of the sea or into landfills.

TrentePieds

[Bowdrie]

Originally Posted by Na Mara

It would have been far better to design the boat from the ground up for economic one off building.

You make a valid point.
It's not just the molds, the property/buildings/tools/infrastructure, are all very expensive, not to mention a skilled workforce to pay, (and benefits).
Add in the costs for inventory/storage/shipping, and things can easily get out of hand.
There is an old saying;
Question, "Do you know how to make a small fortune in boatbuilding?"
Answer, "Start off with a large fortune".
For those who would rather write a check instead of picking-up tools, there are still many small "Mom-and-Pop" boatyards in the US, (primarily in the NE,) that can build a simple one-off boat in a manner that you describe.
High tech has a high price.

[Bowdrie]

Originally Posted by TrentePieds

A half century ago America was swept by
yet another of her periodic enthusiasms, and the desire of every lubber to shape-shift into a sailorman created a market for pleasure boats.

Yes, back then I was totally immersed in the "Happening" of fiberglass boatbuilding that took place in SoCal in the '70s>mid '80s.
Not only were hundreds of factory boats being churned out, but everyone and their brother had a fiberglass hull in the backyard that they planned to finish and "sail around the world".
Many years ago, I read something to the effect that the average "homebuilt" boat went thru ~1.6 marriages and ~3>4 owners before it was finished, (if it ever was).
The market would not support the numbers being produced and virtually all of those builders went out of business.
It was fun while it lasted.

[malbert73]

Originally Posted by TrentePieds

I'm with you on the basic philosophy, Na Mara, but unfortunately, we already have experience that boats, however simple, cannot be built cheaply :-)

Your plywood hull idea was tried many, many years ago by Ben Seaborn in Seattle. He designed the Thunderbird sloop, 26 feet. We had quite a fleet of them in these waters, and they were marvelous little weekend cruisers and racers. They were all "owner-built" and their hull finish was marine enamel since poly-resins were not commonly available. Some were subsequently "sheathed" in GRP, whence we gained the knowledge that sheathing really doesn't work due to the inevitability of absorption of water by the plywood and its consequent expansion tearing it apart as the GRP moves in an entirely different manner depending on temperature.

Then there was the "Ferro" craze. Some boatw were successful, many were not. Dozens - yes dozens - sat abandoned on the shores of the Mighty, Muddy Fraser River because their owners had bitten off more than they could chew. In the end the D9 Cats got busy :-)

All such schemes founder on the fact that if you work 3 hours a night on weekdays and 10 hours on Saturdays, taking Sundays off, then, in a year, you can get in about 700 manhours. On a 15K hour project, you obviously cannot go it alone!

Furthermore, the old rule of thumb is that the cost of the bare hull is about ten percent of the total vessel cost. All the "bags hung on", right from the ships compass to her auxiliary engine, cost what they cost and cannot be "owner built"

The market has also changed, of course. A half century ago America was swept by
yet another of her periodic enthusiasms, and the desire of every lubber to shape-shift into a sailorman created a market for pleasure boats. For reasons that we may not expound on here because we may not discuss politics, there was plenty of buckshee money about to support an industry catering to the enthusiasm.

And that historic dislocation of basic economic factors is what today, these many years later, enables thee and me, along with many others, to indulge our own personal enthusiasm for sailing at affordable cost.

It is certainly the case that there is a market for yachts with price tags so exorbitant that they are out of reach for all but the Bezos of this world. The Adventure 40 obviously misses that market by a country mile.

Equally certainly, there is a market for EXISTING boats that are affordable for thee and me and others who still entertain our enthusiasm. But that market is not only not the target market for the Adventure 40. It is also glutted.

IMO a new market for NEW, factory-built pleasure boats cannot open up until the vast majority of the fleet now afloat has either gone to the bottom of the sea or into landfills.

TrentePieds

Maybe you are right TP?
But I think you haven’t really read or processed the project and concept.

I think the A40 is aiming for a major gap in the new boat market- a new, turnkey passagemaking caliber boat of a high quality build. This, at a price point that is only matched by inferior build quality “dock queen type” new boats.
Did you read how they will achieve that? No options, no frills, no middleman marketing etc.

I have no vested interest. I have my boat. Your doubts are good to spark debate- but they reflect superficial knowledge of the project.

[jmc42]

I really like the idea of the Adventure 40. I would love to be able to buy a new boat that is designed to be a good ocean sailor. I don't think there is anything else on the market in that niche being sold new at the price the Adventure 40 is aiming

Most boats are coastal cruisers and sailors adapt them for ocean sailing. I like the hull and rig stats and I like the lead keel. I agree that its all vaporware for now but I am glad people are trying to make it happen. I'll be more interested in criticism and praise when and if they get a prototype on the water.

[sinna2too]

Bowdrie,

I'm sipping on a beer and wanted to answer your questions.

B: How big of a market is there for a "Model T" boat?
Sinna: What do I know?!? ;-) I like the ideas that the boat concept is based on and I'm critical of a lot of boats. I've always appreciated and sought out good gear that I can rely on when my life is on the line.

I get the strong impression from reading John Harries' writing that he's trying to guide the design of a boat that is "simple", strong, reliable and not slow …..at a reasonable price.

Bowdrie: Virtually everything that goes into a boat costs pretty much the same no matter the make/model of boat, (assuming roughly equal sizes/weights).
So, where do you save the money?

Sinna: The premise is that they aren't going to do any marketing which could save $. Their goal is to produce one build with no options. I think that's where the term "Model-T" comes in. Hopefully having only one build will save money.

In my industry, different builds and customizations were difficult to cost out and full of risk.


Bowdrie: Weight/labor costs money.
If the designers have already spent 10 years on this project perhaps they already "missed the boat", (what's been the cost increases over the last 10 years?)

Sinna: Initially this was an almost personal project that John Harries' built out on his website. He wanted a minimalist cruising sail boat incorporating a proven offshore design. He wanted very reliable equipment including mast, engine, transmission, steering and etc.

This project has evolved over the last 10 years and seems to gaining momentum. I think good offshore boat at a moderate price is a good goal and not necessarily time sensitive.

Bowdrie: You keep talking about "seaworthiness/performance".
What aspects of that design lead you to believe that it is any better in those areas than any one of a few score of other boats?

Sinna: I don't think the design is intended to be better for "seaworthiness/performance" than any other individual boat. The focus is to have a strong, fast and reliable boat incorporating the proven attributes of "any score of other (good) boats".

[sinna2too]

TP:
Thanks for that recap of boat building history. I missed the "Ferro Cement" era.
I forgot who or what documentary it was, but one couple had a Ferro Cement boat in the ….70s or so and they circumnavigated Antarctica and most of the pacific . What a great story.

[sinna2too]

I apologize for saying this earlier. I mistyped it.

I know you are very experienced in the sailing world.

I said:
"It's not very interesting for me to discuss this boat with you if you've already decided you don't like the boat.

I haven't seen anything to indicate that you or Don C Lin know anything ( i should have said 'know any details about the the A40') nor have read anything about the boat."

Here i sit next to my computer typing when I should take another english composition course.

I'd appreciate it if everyone will keep pointing out issues you have with the boat.

[Tommo]

Originally Posted by jmc42

I really like the idea of the Adventure 40. I would love to be able to buy a new boat that is designed to be a good ocean sailor. I don't think there is anything else on the market in that niche being sold new at the price the Adventure 40 is aiming

Most boats are coastal cruisers and sailors adapt them for ocean sailing. I like the hull and rig stats and I like the lead keel. I agree that its all vaporware for now but I am glad people are trying to make it happen. I'll be more interested in criticism and praise when and if they get a prototype on the water.

Agree with you. Very few economical boats designed for this niche. You are forced to adapt boats designed for Mediterranean marina-hopping charter market at considerable expense and still end up with a fat-arse boat with a dangerously wide exposed cockpit and ridiculous twin wheels that force the helm person to sit exposed right at the back of the boat. And if you mostly cruise on wind or electronic pilot, what is the point of those daft expensive heavy complicated wheels? On a moderate sized boat tiller is way better- the helm sits forward in the cockpit for better weight distribution, protected by the hard dodger, and with winches and electronics at close hand.

I also really like the cutter-rig and design philosophy of the hull, and the general layout of the deck and cockpit.

The interior layouts still seem to be evolving but I hope they end up with a design with a separate shower compartment (to double as a wet locker), a U-shape galley, a sensible small saloon table, a decent sea-berth amidships and a comfy forward cabin for anchorage/marinas. Definitely like the massive storage spaces under the cockpit - hopefully one will have a direct access from the cockpit.

[Tommo]

Originally Posted by Na Mara

I like the idea of a true KISS boat but I think the mass production aspect of the adventure 40 was a mistake. The sailors who appreciate the KISS philosophy are rare people, there is no mass market for this type of boat. I myself can see the attraction as my boat is complex in her systems and there is always something breaking or needing replaced. The idea of a really robust simple, minimal voyaging boat is very attractive.

It would have been far better to design the boat from the ground up for economic one off building. Perhaps epoxy glass sheathed multichine plywood? Then someone, maybe even me, would almost certainly take the plunge and build one. The extra costs of custom build could be offset by reduced system complexity and lower running costs.

Imagine a boat with a dedicated machinery space and walk in lazarrate, genuine water tight bulkheads, a true monocoque build of incredible rigidity, interior optimized for a cruising couple, minimal but top quality systems, that sails like a witch. Sign me up for that! The adventure 40
promises much of this, the problem is that it is vaporware and will remain so because people like me are rare in the sailing world.

Basically, I love the concept but I find the execution wanting.

Agree too that epoxy-plywood would be a good material for this boat. The French “Randonneur” design (which later evolved into the rather good RM1200) was somewhat similar in concept to this design (tiller steering, winches/electronics at forward end of cockpit under the dodger).