Blue water boat vs modified coast cruiser

[Discovery 15797]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

“ Blue water “ disappear too.

There’s no such thing as a inherent “ blue water “ boat , it’s largely a term connected by those trying to justify why their bust cost multiples of their neighbours.

There are blue water sailors

THIS!

[sneuman]

Originally Posted by AKA-None

If I may make an observation
Having spent some time repairing steel ships

I’ve fixed ships where welded on stanchion pipes were ripped off simply from wave action and every frame was visible due to steel plate being smashed by waves

And I don’t mean little ships

So if you think that build alone is what will save you from the ocean then you may wish to reconsider

And I've had very large cyclone-induced waves that swept my 28' boat in the South China Sea -- and the stanchions held, even when the mast didn't. I can't say for sure that backing plates on the stachions were the reason. But faced with those conditions, I'd rather play the odds than cling to the outlying data out of laziness or lack of preparation.

[Discovery 15797]

Originally Posted by sneuman

Of course this is a discussion that's going to devolve into the "bluewater boats" vs. "there's no such thing as bluewater boats" thing. It's a bit silly on both sides. But, I think the people in the second camp (i.e., "a bluewater sailor can cross an ocean in a bathtub") are missing something important. It's not just the design, but the build quality, too. Here's an example: a friend of mine who owns a newish French boat (no, not that French boat) recently ripped out a stanchion, leaving a gaping hole in the deck. I'm helping him fix it now. In the process, I discovered that his stanchions are all installed without any backing plates. None. Also, none on any of the cleats. This is just one example of the light-duty install on a boat that could eventually bite you in the arse. Ripping off a stanchion at sea may not seem that likely, but it could happen. And if it does, there'll be a hole to plug. Maybe not the end of the world, but in bad weather it could be the first problem in a cascading series of events. What if it isn't noticed for a while? How much water will be in the bilge by then? And the stanchions make me wonder what else on the boat was installed with the same minimal philosophy. Some boats are just better built than others. Given a choice, I'd rather cross oceans in the better ones.

This is a really good point. However, IMHO it's foolish for anyone to sail into the deep blue without explicitly knowing every square millimeter of their boat. I would never depend on a particular boat brand. Even some the popular brands have stock builds and custom builds.

So, I am hoping that when the OP states, "upgrading" a boat for ocean sailing the OP is implying things like checking for backing plates (on every piece of deck mounted hardware), properly bedded deck hardware (e.g core removed & filled with epoxy filler at mounting point), chain plates, beefier standing rigging, etc.

[Jim Cate]

My faulty memory can't provide the citation, but some years ago I read a biography of Illingworth (perhaps an autobiography?) in which GMIV was discussed at length. IIRC, Illingworth incorporated many design features at Sir Francis's insistence, features that he did not endorse himself. He felt pretty abused by the accusations made by Sir F, as would most designers whose work was publicly dissed so harshly and without a chance at rebuttal.

There are always two sides to such stories...

And as to the comparison of the ARC and the Pacific: Using a Biscay crossing in winter to show how tough the ARC is seems a bit farfetched. Kinda like using a Coral sea cyclone to show how tough the milk run is. IMO, any ocean can create conditions that will overwhelm a yacht, blue or not. The prudent skipper avoids passages during seasons where such conditions are likely, and fine tunes things once at sea.

I am not a fan of the mass produced French designs and their imitators, but the undeniable fact is that they successfully cross oceans in big numbers. As we cruised around the South Pacific we met dozens, nay, hundreds of such boats in distant anchorages. Every one of them had managed to cross at least a portion of the Pacific and lived to tell the tale... and were carrying on with their adventures.

Very few of us amateur sailors have experienced ocean crossings in a wide variety of yachts. Mostly we pick a design and sail it for years, and only have personal knowledge of a very small spectrum of yacht design. When looking for advice about choice, I would suggest that any tyro sailor seek out professional delivery skippers, for they routinely sail a variety of vessels, often in the off-season and more risky times of the year, and on the uncomfortable passages. They have the experience that could guide one in choosing a yacht, and their opinions are more valuable than those of even experienced owners... at least IMO.

Jim

[sneuman]

Originally Posted by Discovery 15797

This is a really good point. However, IMHO it's foolish for anyone to sail into the deep blue without explicitly knowing every square millimeter of their boat. I would never depend on a particular boat brand. Even some the popular brands have stock builds and custom builds.

So, I am hoping that when the OP states, "upgrading" a boat for ocean sailing the OP is implying things like checking for backing plates (on every piece of deck mounted hardware), properly bedded deck hardware (e.g core removed & filled with epoxy filler at mounting point), chain plates, beefier standing rigging, etc.

I agree. With the fixes/upgrades on my "new" boat, I'm making them with the knowledge that she probably WON'T be crossing any oceans. So, when I weigh up what I'd ideally do vs. the cost of said fix/upgrade, the cost factor often wins out. "Good enough" is often going to be "good enough." With my old Tayana, which we cruised, we had a higher standard. Builders make these same choices and weigh these same considerations. If a boat is billed as a day sailor or a coastal cruiser, it's likely to be more lightly built, to keep costs down and make the boat competitive on the market. That's not to say that cost considerations don't come into play on a boat billed as "Bluewater" -- most certainly they do. But in theory, at least, it's going to be a bit harder for the manufacturer to get away with cheaper materials/less than solid construction. Caveat emptor for damn sure, but competitors are more likely to point out weak spots and people who buy boats expecting to get a certain level of build quality are likely to point out those flaws/shortcuts, too.

Ultimately, any "Bluewater" boat that's been around very long is going to be stress tested by the ocean, i.e., people sailing them in nominal and more than nominal conditions. Problems will be apparent and anyone looking at boats is going to have no problem finding out about them on forums such as this one.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by sneuman

I agree. With the fixes/upgrades on my "new" boat, I'm making them with the knowledge that she probably WON'T be crossing any oceans. So, when I weigh up what I'd ideally do vs. the cost of said fix/upgrade, the cost factor often wins out. "Good enough" is often going to be "good enough." With my old Tayana, which we cruised, we had a higher standard. Builders make these same choices and weigh these same considerations. If a boat is billed as a day sailor or a coastal cruiser, it's likely to be more lightly built, to keep costs down and make the boat competitive on the market. That's not to say that cost considerations don't come into play on a boat billed as "Bluewater" -- most certainly they do. But in theory, at least, it's going to be a bit harder for the manufacturer to get away with cheaper materials/less than solid construction. Caveat emptor for damn sure, but competitors are more likely to point out weak spots and people who buy boats expecting to get a certain level of build quality are likely to point out those flaws/shortcuts, too.

Ultimately, any "Bluewater" boat that's been around very long is going to be stress tested by the ocean, i.e., people sailing them in nominal and more than nominal conditions. Problems will be apparent and anyone looking at boats is going to have no problem finding out about them on forums such as this one.

The point is that these days given the common size of cruising yachts has exceeded 40 feet , is that almost anything can be regarded as “ blue water “ capable. The basic boat might need some minor upgrades, solar , maybe water maker etc.

Issues like keel type and rudders are totally irrelevant.

You can take a Bav 50 around the world and through rough weather too.

Ive taken French production boats through F10 Atlantic storms. The basic boat is well up for it.

These discussion are angels on a pin types. A good sailor can bring any well prepared boat through most things within reason

As to the strength of your cleats mid ocean !lol , I know the overnight mcDonalds stop over mid Atlantic does get a bit boisterous !!

The fact is many coastal cruisers have to handle much more difficult weather and seas then mid ocean crossings. The whole idea of a coastal cruiser nonsense is just that

( I was once asked where you pulled in at night crossing the Atlantic , I explained there was a series of marinas , she seemed happy with the answer )

[Searles]

The Catalina 38 mk2 is a verry good all round cruiser racer of the older school as is the cat 42 mk 2 have safely sailed many many offshore miles in these yachts,.some friends in there late 70 s sailed a cat 38 mk 2 from the Great Lakes to Sydney australia Australian ,no worries .⛵️⚓️

[Retirement home]

Originally Posted by Tetepare

With all due respect, ARC doesn’t come close to what the Pacific can dish out. When boats on the same course as I simply disappeared forever I got a whole new respect for the Pacific.

I believe him.

37 years ago I argued with a skipper.
He said strength of a full sail was sails ability to windward.

He showed us how later during a practical and argument of highest point vessel with me is a square sail yardstick.
That is a bluewater vessel if used properly.

Sound of Silence
https://youtu.be/u9Dg-g7t2l4
"Fulls that argue do knot know"

Similarly, another master showed us advantage of heel with tiller of 3/4 keel. Torque about brakes; so gentle on our eyes.

I only guess that leads to me believing an offshore rig is a full sail on a full keel. Ability to run up mountains and Ability to comfortably hold broach with natural brakes of light tensions should vessel need avoidance of broken water.

Since then, I'm lesser a sailor than most of you, I've a handful of broken spar steps from a handful of various partial rig partial keel sail boats and see benefits of in-between rigs instead of coastal rigs or offshore rigs.

Offshore rigs carry barometer, admire C and sea and I ain't fluent and I agree with him.
Because even if engines are prop torquing; such ain't the horsepower of an uphill reaching rig and cavitation loses a lot of traction with that lesser horsepower.
Yet to you, to me, maybe knot to some of you, those production boats aren't strong. They're natural keel won't even wright them if their stabilising weighted bolted on boards fell off plus it strengthens reflection of man rather than argument with gentle.

Coastal. I'd rather a dagger board type, yes. It'd be fun and easier in sum ways to manage leverages and enjoy making wind.

[nortonscove]

Originally Posted by Scubaseas

John Vigor's "Seaworthy Offshore Sailboat..." would be worth a read to answer your question. The answer is "it depends.". He has a numerical rating system to help determine "blue water" ish capability. And suggestions of how to modify a boat to be more open ocean capable. I found it extremely helpful when comparing different boats.

It's not a problem until it's a problem. And the Captain has more to do with it than the boat does.

If you listen to old writings about older boats you will live with issues of biblical proportions.

[Retirement home]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

My faulty memory can't provide the citation, but some years ago I read a biography of Illingworth (perhaps an autobiography?) in which GMIV was discussed at length. IIRC, Illingworth incorporated many design features at Sir Francis's insistence, features that he did not endorse himself. He felt pretty abused by the accusations made by Sir F, as would most designers whose work was publicly dissed so harshly and without a chance at rebuttal.

There are always two sides to such stories...

And as to the comparison of the ARC and the Pacific: Using a Biscay crossing in winter to show how tough the ARC is seems a bit farfetched. Kinda like using a Coral sea cyclone to show how tough the milk run is. IMO, any ocean can create conditions that will overwhelm a yacht, blue or not. The prudent skipper avoids passages during seasons where such conditions are likely, and fine tunes things once at sea.

I am not a fan of the mass produced French designs and their imitators, but the undeniable fact is that they successfully cross oceans in big numbers. As we cruised around the South Pacific we met dozens, nay, hundreds of such boats in distant anchorages. Every one of them had managed to cross at least a portion of the Pacific and lived to tell the tale... and were carrying on with their adventures.

Very few of us amateur sailors have experienced ocean crossings in a wide variety of yachts. Mostly we pick a design and sail it for years, and only have personal knowledge of a very small spectrum of yacht design. When looking for advice about choice, I would suggest that any tyro sailor seek out professional delivery skippers, for they routinely sail a variety of vessels, often in the off-season and more risky times of the year, and on the uncomfortable passages. They have the experience that could guide one in choosing a yacht, and their opinions are more valuable than those of even experienced owners... at least IMO.

Jim

Yeah. Each to their own. My more successful friend in my eyes sailed a bolt on tapered edge out above deep water. He lived years on that. I bashed his ears many a time regarding keel bolts, handling, etc.

I have no sailboat. Just a marina berth and patience as best I can supply. At marina, my beautiful neighbours exist and we chat. 1 old girl is a junk rig. Every neighbour I meet doesn't understand how she can purchase propulsion; they are just hanging there, there are no stays and fore mast has forward rake.
She looks like a beauty aye is my usual reply. A big slow old girl until energy supply is surplus is my guess.

Ideally to me, a cruiser is a vessel agile enough to survive.

With a near true wind point berth and at least a couple of hundred of feet fairway, lots more on beam in space, I see that as a bluewater berth because when wind gets up, easy to lift line and leave. Coming in could be an easy phone call for land mates, some quick lines and a pub lunch 200 metres away.

I think cavitation is a force that isn't respected and I wait until a moulded keel suits my budget. Cut out or length. I get stuck with propeller hole anyhow and do understand I will loose traction during sail because of that. I ain't seeking storms other than to grasp tail ends of such for quick exits anyhow.

Argument best is when a sail is allowed to torque with our winds true nature. Simply amazes me how some friends are talented sailors and they know that by spilling wind they can steady their horsepower on partial sail sets such as Bermuda. I'd rather lose performance when light winded and torque of a full sail is unstable and wait until wind strength to beyond requirements of such torque development. This allowing excess to fork the leading edge of sail, lift the spar towards our stars and on opposing force show a wind to edge that is higher than true. Thus in times of need, rather than battle a storm, just hold on and rev that torque to develop enough power to run up the steepening slopes.
That to me is an important fact of a yardstick and why I'd love to take my neighbours out when I'm founded, floated and rerigged in my hopefully last vessel.

Hopefully they enjoy it too, smoothing out a river in a white wash mess. Then add to a solo ride some haul and brace lines.
Difference with my eye is most sail systems are designed to be forceful yet mother nature can get forceful enough so to me a bluewater sail preferred is a system that argues with nothing but wattever old lady Gale is telling us.
I ain't seen big, biggest I've seen is about 10-20foot of vertical and I thought stuff that, imagine if you were a cork? That water is tonnage.

Older men are quicker than me.
Reflection with knowledge or heave on and use strength.

Sails best invention ever was yard.
Bowsprit, mast, boom, gaff, yardstick, tiller..
I don't understand how to coordinate them all neither

[Bowdrie]

This book should be on the reading list of every sailor.
https://www.amazon.com/Desirable-Und.../dp/0393337189

The sea hasn't changed since Biblical times, (that I know of).
What's newer is not necessarily good, what's older is not necessarily bad.

[donradcliffe]

Take a look at Sailing Parlay Revival Episode 156. Two identical boats on an overnight passage. One is blue water capable, and the other is not. Its not the boat, its the sailors.

[argonauta1]

Racing design features should not be a preoccupation. The cruising vessel needs to be able to sail the passage without breakages. A beefed up rig on a production boat will do this as well as one can expect. Chafe, inappropriately rigged preventers, too much sail will nevertheless cause breakages but perhaps not catastrophic. We experienced all of the aforementioned except the latter category and we arrived! I recall upon departure from the Galapagos for the Marquesas those in our gaggle, with racing background got their spinnakers up by day two and many had blown them by day three. On a long passage, one knot is meaningful but in strong conditions rig survival means slow down and await lighter conditions to go for hull speed. Objective is to arrive!

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by argonauta1

Racing design features should not be a preoccupation. The cruising vessel needs to be able to sail the passage without breakages. A beefed up rig on a production boat will do this as well as one can expect. Chafe, inappropriately rigged preventers, too much sail will nevertheless cause breakages but perhaps not catastrophic. We experienced all of the aforementioned except the latter category and we arrived! I recall upon departure from the Galapagos for the Marquesas those in our gaggle, with racing background got their spinnakers up by day two and many had blown them by day three. On a long passage, one knot is meaningful but in strong conditions rig survival means slow down and await lighter conditions to go for hull speed. Objective is to arrive!

This.!!!

[MJH]

Originally Posted by Roland01

I am at a crossroads on what boat I am going to buy in a few years time. I want to do things like cross the Atlantic/Pacific/Hawaii and the milk run in the Pacific, but also do the Great Loop, which is the first major expedition. I'll have the luxury of being able to choose the weather window of all my expeditions, and I'll be able to go during the trade winds. I'm interested coastal cruising/Keys/Caribbean/Bahamas as well.

If I go during a good weather window can I get away with a modified Catalina 38 for ocean crossings since I'm also interested in the Great Loop/coastal cruising or due to safety,comfort and other variables or am I better off buying an ocean cruiser like the Tayana 37. My budget for a sailboat will be around $100,000. Is some sort of hybrid between blue water boat and cruiser the way to go or due to logistics and safety am I better off just getting a blue water boat and buying a cheap loop boat and selling it after I'm done. Any help would be much appreciated.

No boat does everything well for all waters. Tradeoffs are called for and your plan mixes very different waters/weather for a single boat selection. My advice would be to begin planning your routes and then do a thorough analysis of the waters you would be traversing including depths and significant land features. Some locations will prefer a short keeled boat while others prefer either a deep keel or full keel. Either choice will incur some operational limitations; I would not recommend a swing keel.

Particularly for your limited budget I would favor making a single boat choice and planning to make operational adjustments when required but being prepared for them even if it meant eliminating a voyage, i.e. Great Loop.

Lastly, a mild warning. I don't care how much experience one may have sailing inland/coastal waters, sailing lengthy offshore/passage-making is a greater challenge that requires deeper study, planning, and experience.

Good Luck.