Changing upper bound of boat size considered suitable for couples

[DeValency]

Originally Posted by iLean

My husband and I are in our 60s, good sailors...especially him, and bought a 46 Beneteau Sense a few years ago. Given our location on Lake Michigan, the size makes sense (sorry!) given the wind/chop we routinely experience. Three steps from cockpit to salon makes it easy for our guests to get to in/out/around. We have electric wenches, a furling jib, great auto pilot and the boat's wide beam offers great stability. We've been caught in 60 knot gusts and don't like them, but easily survived. We wouldn't go smaller, ever.

Great and smart choice for any waters! Wish I had the extra budget for a 45-50' Sense. While still working full time with my ventures, traveling abroad 10-12 times a gear (on some wings...), depreciating $600-800K with a boat that wouldn't cruise for more than a day here and there makes less sense () for me... but maybe in 10 years!...

For now, depreciating $100K on a used 42-46' very part time cruising would work better for me... (while maintaining a 40' racing sails killer... )

[JOALEB]

No
Yes
No
No
No

[Karel Deppe]

What I wish to share with you is that my wife and I found that handling a bigger boat is a lot easier than the smaller boat. We changed from 42 feet to 53 feet, same yard, in almost the same execution. Many buttons to push. Staying aboard for months we love the space and comfort. It is the comfort in our case that keeps my lady to come sailing with me. We do find the handling in waves superior and at anchor bigger is always better, especially when people are playing around with outboard dinghies and small power boats. The one disadvantage ? Depreciation is also "superior "

[Discovery 15797]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

There is no doubt that technology has made the tasks of sailing a boat easier. It’s probably also made it safer (although arguments abound on this point).

I think the real reason boat size has increased is due to affluence. Middle class generations following the New Deal, and especially following WWII, got noticeably and significantly richer. Wealth drives affluence which allows for more … in the case of cruising boats, more means bigger and more luxurious.

I’ve said it before, but I predict we’ve hit the peak of “more.” The middle class generations following the Baby Boomers are poorer, and smaller in number. I think we will see a decline in the number, and size of cruising boats going into the future.

i agree with your first and second statements. But to suggest the number of cruisers will decline due to newer generations being "poorer " is a folly notion. Young people today have more expendible income than past generations by far. The reason for the decline in the number of true cruisers is multifold, including desire for instant gratification, competing interests, social circles, etc. Kids today by and large are ill prepared for the challenge of open water, isolation, and self sufficiency. There is always the exception,

[Nicholson58]

Originally Posted by Jammer

Most husband-wife couples who undertake a cruising lifestyle select the largest boat that they believe they can handle safely. The size of boat so chosen has gradually increased over the course of years with 37' being something of a standard starting in the late 1980s. Many couples are now choosing boats in the 42-44' range, and there are notable examples of yet larger boats being sailed on passages by husband-wife couples.


So what's going on here? Sails, masts, booms, and lines aren't any lighter than they were 30 years ago. I can think of some explanations:

1. The original thinking was unnecessarily conservative, and with time, we've figured that out.
2. The availability and reliability of power assistance has improved enough to change the perceived limits, with electric winches, bow thrusters, and power sail handling becoming common.
3. People are sailing in boats larger than what they can handle safely because they insist on vessels large enough to provide creature comforts that previous generations of cruisers lived without.
4. Today's cruiser is more able bodied and therefore able to handle a larger boat.
5. Cruisers are no longer engaging in voyages to areas remote enough to require the level of self-sufficiency previously considered necessary, and are bringing on crew for the rare passage they undertake that takes them beyond the sheltering wings of Sea Tow

Your thoughts?

Live aboard in the Eastern Caribbean. 58 foot Camper & Nicholson ketch. 1984 build, 40 tons, mast 80. Electric primaries and main. Portable power winch drives. Modern electronics and backups. SSB, watermaker, AIS, two chart plotters, LED lighting, new bottom, new decks, modern large batteries, solar charging, three VHS radios. Fridge and freezer each with dual cold plates and 24 volt refrigeration. 660 watts solar and MPPT controller. Generator, two alternators. Very large modern anchor. Sailright and lockers full of tools and materials.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by Discovery 15797

i agree with your first and second statements. But to suggest the number of cruisers will decline due to newer generations being "poorer " is a folly notion. Young people today have more expendible income than past generations by far. The reason for the decline in the number of true cruisers is multifold, including desire for instant gratification, competing interests, social circles, etc. Kids today by and large are ill prepared for the challenge of open water, isolation, and self sufficiency. There is always the exception,

It’s not folly. It's fact. There’s plenty of economic data that shows this. The generational wealth levels past the Baby Boomer is falling. It’s a bit vague with Gen-X, but the data is clear with Millennial.

The causes of these kinds of social/societal changes is never a single factor, but I think economics is the principle driver here. The numbers already show it, with significant declines in new cruising level boats being sold.

[James Mackey]

I am at present having delamination repairs. Have a 38 foot catamaran and in 2013 in Raiatea, French Polynesia electrifying on a mooring with nobody aboard was struck on both port and starboard by a 68 foot Irwin who had lost stern propulsion, dropped the hook. Could not get anchor dug in ,swung around hit starboard side then dragged back wards. Wind 36 knots. Motored forward to hang onto out port side to wait for help. No fenders and no crew to help stop damage. Repaired scratches, star cracking and two holes at deck level. Stainless sanctions guard lines, etc.

Yard advised that you will find hull delamination in a few years time because of the pounding on both sides.

Middle aged owner and wife on heavy displacement ketch in virtually a Gale that was far too large to safely handle. Should not have been out.

[Gingersnap]

It seems more and more marinas are requiring 40’ for liveaboards in Ca. We got grandfathered in with our 36’ when the new harbormaster changed rules. I have no idea why. Maybe boats under 40’ are not well maintained for their marinas? I don’t know what I don’t know.

[Greg Mason]

I am closer to Mike OReilly's views. Here in Mexico I have seen a British couple double handing a 108' sloop. Sure everything is power, but they are also very experienced sailors. Each of our choices, whether boating or life is relevant to our own comfort level, not someone elses. When my wife and I went in 96, our sail maker vowed not to make a sail heavier than with of us could lift. So, we had spectra, and dutchman main handling, self furling everything, self tailing everything, and although we were younger, we witnessed many who where with us every step with older more manual equipment. I don't think the experience changes whether you have all the latest equipment, or bare bones.

[Bill Streever]

Houses also have become way bigger in the States.

Another factor brushed upon by other responders: Larger boats are much less expensive than they were in the past once inflation is considered.

And regarding self reliance versus automation: It seems to me that the median age of cruising couples has probably increased along with the size of boats.

We're in a 44 LOA, 37 LWL. Truth be told, it is more space than we need. We might go smaller if there is a future boat. -bill

[DeValency]

Originally Posted by Bill Streever

Houses also have become way bigger in the States.

Another factor brushed upon by other responders: Larger boats are much less expensive than they were in the past once inflation is considered.

And regarding self reliance versus automation: It seems to me that the median age of cruising couples has probably increased along with the size of boats.

We're in a 44 LOA, 37 LWL. Truth be told, it is more space than we need. We might go smaller if there is a future boat. -bill

Right!
* The 40-50’ are the new 30-40’ boats
* Age increase is probably associated with the +5 years added to retirement age (or at least for a more financially secured retirement) and also, in general, older people are now generally healthier than the same age range 40 years ago.
* New technologies, power systems, nav, communication etc. expands abilities to safely operate larger boats, safely and rather conveniently.

I’m all for it! Maybe except to pushed retirement age to 67...

[Scaramanga F25]

# 5. The "remote" areas of 1975 are now no longer "remote".
GPS and so many more boats.

[hpeer]

Originally Posted by Bill Streever

Houses also have become way bigger in the States.

Another factor brushed upon by other responders: Larger boats are much less expensive than they were in the past once inflation is considered.

And regarding self reliance versus automation: It seems to me that the median age of cruising couples has probably increased along with the size of boats.

We're in a 44 LOA, 37 LWL. Truth be told, it is more space than we need. We might go smaller if there is a future boat. -bill

We too are 44 LOD AND 37 LWL, but 49 LOA. It’s an old heavy boat, not the interior volume of a new one but very comfortable and surely big enough.

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by DeValency

Couldn't agree more!

Also, except those who really like to cruise solo (would never do that! - except in emergency...), it is much nicer cruising with 4-6 (good people!) on board. But even for just a couple, a boat smaller than 42' or so can't provide, IMO, enough comfort, space and storage capacity for a real nice cruise - just my own comfort zone... I know I'm very spoiled...

No.. spoiled is when you can sail solo and appreciate the bliss.. Awesome..

[Achernome]

How long was Sir Francis Chichester's Gypsy? I think it was near 55 ft and he singlehanded across the Atlantic and around the world with no electrical assists (and no GPS).



1-yes
2-yes
3-no
4-no
5-yes

I would propose in addition to your list of five reasons that you add:

6. Affordable larger yachts are now available as well as a more affluent purchasers, lower maintenance costs and reduced skill sets required compared to wooden vessels allow more people to own and sail them.

7. Better Weather forecasting lends attractiveness to a longer waterline to take advantage of weather windows when short handed.

Having said that, I find that there are disadvantages of a larger vessel, mostly in finding suitable moorings and dock space at reasonable prices.


Handling in an emergency is an issue for larger boats but a forty footer dragging into you does almost as much damage as a 50 footer when the harbor is rough and the wind is up.

Disclosure: I sail a 48 ft Sparkman and Stevens Sunward Ketch from Maine to Florida and the Bahamas every year, I am over 70 years old now.