Ideal Dimensions of a Proper Sailing Craft

[Jim Cate]

Originally Posted by picklesandjesse

Didn't know you could have a boat and a bank account together.

Ever hear of "overdraft", John? Doesn't always mean that you are aground... sometimes is a description of a yotties bank account!

Jim

[Dooglas]

Originally Posted by capn ken

thanks for the help .I cant seem to figure out how to post ?

Pick an appropriate category. Then select the tab labeled "new thread " to the upper left. Then enter a title and your question or discussion.

[Searles]

Most modern productions boats are built o a price ,I e the manufacturer profit ,no mater wot production boat you look at there will be compromises ,it’s wot you will accept for your buck ,⛵️⚓️

[Junk Viking]

Originally Posted by Z.Burn

If price was not an issue though I probably would buy a brand new Reinke S11. Most of the boats I have been looking at fall into the 35' range and I am especially partial to the Colvic Victor 34 but finding a DS boat that is a bit of a project but doesn't need extensive structural repair has been proving difficult in the US so I'm just trying to stay as open minded as possible and just keep learning so when I do finally get my boat my plans and the continuous life forward on the it won't seem quite so ambitious.

The Reinke series is like a poor mans Ovni but with a DS.
Built like a tank - but interiors and outfitting of highly varying quality.
You can make a real find if you shop carefully, as many Reinkes has seen the 7 seas and comes suitably equipped.

The smaller S10 and S11 should really be aluminium to keep weight down, and they often go for the production price of a new raw hull.

Inspired by the Sirius 35DS, I put a center cabin under the raised settee on my own alu S10.
At 10,6m she is short and fat, but extremely liveable.
Look again, you might get lucky of you are willing to travel for a gem.

[Z.Burn]

Originally Posted by Junk Viking

The Reinke series is like a poor mans Ovni but with a DS.
Built like a tank - but interiors and outfitting of highly varying quality.
You can make a real find if you shop carefully, as many Reinkes has seen the 7 seas and comes suitably equipped.

The smaller S10 and S11 should really be aluminium to keep weight down, and they often go for the production price of a new raw hull.

Inspired by the Sirius 35DS, I put a center cabin under the raised settee on my own alu S10.
At 10,6m she is short and fat, but extremely liveable.
Look again, you might get lucky of you are willing to travel for a gem.

She is a beaut! I keep looking and I've been finding some great boats spread out as of recent, it is just the constant struggle of both saving and shopping at the same time while pushing aside the tall grass. What are your opinions on a 90's era steel version of the s11 or s10 assuming it has been fairly well taken care of and isn't suffering from major rust? I constantly get told steel is better than aluminum always and vice versa making it hard to imagine an accurate theoretical comparison. If I am traveling to more remote areas do you think a decent steel Reinke would still be a good purchase do to the ease of maintenance in other countries, or would the benefits of aluminum outweigh the cost difference due to less corrosion/maintenance work?

[TrentePieds]

Z:

You say: "I constantly get told steel is better than aluminum always and vice versa making it hard to imagine an accurate theoretical comparison. "

I am not surprised :-)! The choice between these two materials seems to be made, generally, on the basis of ideology rather than reason. That is why you should NOT be guided solely by opinions expressed by owners of boats of either material. Take their views into consideration, of course, but do not act on them until you understand the pros and cons of each material fully.

It may interest you to know that here on the West Coast of British Columbia, where the salmon fishery once thrived, Sam Matsumoto, who had been building wooden fishing boats since the end of the Kaiser's War, began in the late 1960s to build his boats entirely from aluminum. I do not know what alloy he used, but I recall his saying that he could cut it with wood-working tools and that it was really, really easy to weld. Sam built dozens and dozens and dozens of aluminum fishing boats, and a great many of them are still around this half century later. They required no painting above the waterline because the natural oxidation of the aluminum was self-limiting. Once oxidation reached a certain extent, it would cease. The "bare metal" appearance of the boats was unusual for the time, but actually rather pleasing. Now we see such boats every day, and their appearance has become part of the "Salish Sea Look"

I had the honour of being invited to the launching of Simon Fraser University's archeological research vessel, Sisiutl, at Sam's yard (Matsumoto Ship Yards, in North Vancouver) in 1972. Sisiutl was 37 feet and accommodated a dozen archaeology students and a prof or two on "field trips" on the West Coast of BC including the difficult, dangerous Pacific side of Haida Gwaii. The university sold her "out of service" in about 1995, and she has gone through a number of owners since. She is still active, owned AFAIK by a lady in a distant suburb of Vancouver.

From MY perspective, therefore, having seen so many aluminum boats last a half century and still be going strong, it is no contest. The aluminum boat wins hands down against the steel boat EVERY TIME, because, when built from the right alloy, they simply DO NOT RUST. In consequence a second hand ally boat is a far safer bet for a novice seafarer than is a steel one! Less risk, less maintenance required, thus less costly to maintain.

A couple of other points:

The material that a boats hull is made from is of no consequence for the boats performance. Two hulls having the same lines and having the same displacements will perform identically regardless of their being built from different materials.

The construction cost of a boat's hull amounts, generally, to something like 10% (perhaps a little less) of the "fully found" cost, i.e. of the cost of the boat ready to go to sea. Assume now that materials and labour costs are 50/50. This means that the materials cost for the boat is only 5% of the "fully found" cost. If, now, ally is twice the cost of steel for the quantity required, the impact on fully found cost is only 2.5%. This should have no influence on the asking price of a "mature" boat.

Finally, I see no reason to eschew "frozen snot" - "fiberglass". Impact resistance obviously only comes into play for such as cannot navigate well enuff to stay off the rocks! So, IMO, the argument that "steel is stronger" is entirely spurious. Ditto aluminum!

However: Anyone can learn to do a tolerable repair of fibreglass. Perhaps not a pretty one, but at least a tolerable one. It is not true that anyone can learn to do a decent weld. But recognizing that, I would think that if you really mean to do what you say you wish to do, and do it in a metal boat, you should learn, if you don't know how already, to do a decent weld. In my opinion, tho' I've only tried my hand at it a few times, ally welding is easier than steel welding. And I would think that welding supplies, including the gas, are available in even the most remote corners of the inhabited world these days.

All the best to you.

TrentePieds

[Junk Viking]

Originally Posted by Z.Burn

She is a beaut! I keep looking and I've been finding some great boats spread out as of recent, it is just the constant struggle of both saving and shopping at the same time while pushing aside the tall grass. What are your opinions on a 90's era steel version of the s11 or s10 assuming it has been fairly well taken care of and isn't suffering from major rust? I constantly get told steel is better than aluminum always and vice versa making it hard to imagine an accurate theoretical comparison. If I am traveling to more remote areas do you think a decent steel Reinke would still be a good purchase do to the ease of maintenance in other countries, or would the benefits of aluminum outweigh the cost difference due to less corrosion/maintenance work?

Honestly, every material comes with pro's and con's.
I wouldn't shy away from steel any more than aluminium.

However, the S10 is a fatter construction than it's bigger sisters, so I'd look at something a little larger if going with steel.

I see lower weight and thus higher stowage as the main benefits of aluminium over steel.
Maintenance is different, but not necessarily lower. Paint has a tendency to peel off aluminium, worsened if you have stainless stanchions and other hardware.
The hull is susceptible to pitting at the water line, if cupper based antifouling is used.
And I'd say welding is more difficult.

What ever you do: get a solid well maintained boat, and preferably well kitted out for what you wanna do.
It's by far the least €€€ / work / frustration / depression / divorce

As always: you pick your poison and roll with it
And good luck!

[Deep Blue Water]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

Ever hear of "overdraft", John? Doesn't always mean that you are aground... sometimes is a description of a yotties bank account!

Jim

I always thought overdraft was when your keel cleared the reef by 6 inches...

[LargeMarge]

I like the gorgeous Derecktor Shipyard Frers-designed aluminum 150x29 sloop:
.
http://www.yachtcharterfleet.com/lux...-150-sloop.htm
.
Although incomplete since 2001, I think this holds the potential for incredible performance... leading to fulfilling your 'Ideal Dimensions' criteria.
.
And I honestly truly believe 'Ideal Dimensions' must absolutely include space for at least one twenty-person hot-tub...

[Enfant Du Vent]

Ahoy Z.Burn:
You've gotten lots of good advice/opinions about the boat.
What I'm curious about is what exactly you're activities/goals are related to "study marine wildlife".
That info could help us all chime in on the space required for the gear, sample storage, etc. required. The research vessels I crewed on were never away from port for long, so only the collecting gear needed was significant.

[chewi]

boats without a bow overhang can trip over their anchors in wind over tide positions. the overhang can keep the anchor away from the hull.

boats with vertical transoms make the most of the cockpit space. and provide stern buoyancy to ride over waves from aft. some ease entry with an uphill aspect to their stern, others \have an overhang that extends the LWL when heeled to cheat their handicap. Wide flat bottomed sterns can be noisy all night with waves slapping beneath

look at the shapes and see what effect you would expect. A book could be written about it, but not by me.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by Greatest Lakes

There is no perfect boat. Everything about or on a boat is a compromise in one way or another. Jim was closest to correct mentioning cost. Personally, I think the best boats are the ones where everything works like it should.

As far as LOA/LWL is concerned, a water line closer to the LOA is a faster boat, but likely more wet, as the hull shape is not going to permit overhangs which deflect water as well as increase comfort by dampening motions. Additional trade off of the plumb bow, wide stern seen on most modern boats, aside from how water seems to slap the hull, is often the keel attachment. Most will have fin keels that focus a lot of stress where they are mounted to the hull. Not always a problem, but the forums have plenty of cases of people fixing damage from grounding that damage the hull. They react to windage a bit more and the bilge often can't contain much water, not that they usually have to.

Older boats with canoe sterns would deflect following seas and were favored for this ability for a long time. The more pointed bows, and some sterns, LOA a good bit longer than LWL, tended to keep the deck dryer, and softened the motions at sea. The hull shapes also tended to be more favorable to strong keel attachments that were more integral to the hull, rather than a bolted on slab. Deeper bilges, so you could get a handle on small leaks without damaging the floorboards.

The modern hulls are mostly designed for interior space and ease of manufacture. They know most boats spend most of their time at the dock, so that's what they build for. Older boats tended to still assume you were actually going sailing, so they were designed to be comfortable underway.

That's my 2 cents. Use what you will...

Of course nothing built after 1980 or maybe 1880 should be considered in your view

Funnily all over the world fin keel spade rudder modern yachts are crossing seas and oceans.

[Greatest Lakes]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

Of course nothing built after 1980 or maybe 1880 should be considered in your view

Funnily all over the world fin keel spade rudder modern yachts are crossing seas and oceans.

I'm not saying it can't or shouldn't be done, I'm just pointing out the difference. The modern boats are more often quicker, just often not as comfortable, particularly in a following sea. My dad has the Jeanneau 57. It has the wide, flat stern and hull shape seen most commonly now. It is a fast boat, and comfortable enough in motion, mostly due to its size. The cockpit coaming seems short and does not seem to be as comfortable at sail as it could be if it were only 2-3 inches taller to provide more support. Most of the DS versions were this way. In order to make more room inside, they raised the seated position. When at anchor or in a slip, wake or small waves from behind make a considerable slapping noise due to the shape of the hull. The one bit of weather bad enough to give it a good work out put the pounding of the hull on display. The boat is plenty strong, and suffered no ill effects, but even modest waves could send disconcerting reverberations through the hull. He also had the 54. It performed very similarly. Both were a blast once you got them going, but neither were comfortable in heavier seas.

[rossdv8]

For a Monohull, Approximately 3:1 L:B

As long as it fits reasonably into approximately that ratio, everything else just needs to be adjusted for the type of sailing you want to do.

(Let's see if that opens up a bag of rattlers . .)

[Adelie]

Originally Posted by rossdv8

For a Monohull, Approximately 3:1 L:B

As long as it fits reasonably into approximately that ratio, everything else just needs to be adjusted for the type of sailing you want to do.

(Let's see if that opens up a bag of rattlers . .)

Sorry that doesn’t work so well.
Stability does not scale linearly to longer boats tend to be “narrower”, 4:1, 5:1 or even 6:1
J/65 & Cal48 are 4:1
Columbia 56 is 4.34:1


Short boats tend to be wider. A Flicks is 2.5:1