Jeanneau vs Amel

[Jim Cate]

Regarding storage, we live on our boat for the better part of the year and we have absolutely (too much) everything with us. We have used about half the storage area. Amel boats, due to their dry bilge, have TONS of storage.

In this statement lies a categorical division: you live aboard part of the year. This implies that you have a home base, one where you can store "stuff". For those of us who are full timers, EVERYTHING we own in the world must be stored somewhere... and that means on board for us.

It's a different world!

And I am forced to admit that I am a packrat... a bad condition for a yottie!

Jim

[Sojourner]

Originally Posted by boom23

I think the topic of this thread was “Jeanneau vs Amel” and not older vs newer Amel...

Haha yes, I do drift, but another poster was asking why I dislike the 55s vis a vis the older ones, so I thought I'd share

[daletournier]

Originally Posted by Sojourner

Well, I have no experience or opinion of the 50 because it isn't a ketch. Very pretty as all new amels are, and i'm sure very quick.

I didn't mean to sound like I'm putting down the other Amels at all. I just think since the original Henri died, the design has been radically shifting toward what probably in all fairness the market wants: beamy, wide stern, slick open floorplans with lots of windows, marina life, wanting to sail on the weekend or at most a few months out of the year. Which might be perfect for the OP, after all.

As for the comment about who needs more storage, anyone who lives on their boat [emoji3]

Wants more storage and needs more storage are two different things.

Just because boats are now maximizing living comfort dosent mean they're not fit to cross oceans.or are just marina queens. Design briefs have changed, this dosent make a boat less. Boats went away from the Atkins canoe stern, thank God or your Amel may have one.

Stuff evolves.

[boom23]

Originally Posted by daletournier

Wants more storage and needs more storage are two different things.

Just because boats are now maximizing living comfort dosent mean they're not fit to cross oceans.or are just marina queens. Design briefs have changed, this dosent make a boat less. Boats went away from the Atkins canoe stern, thank God or your Amel may have one.

Stuff evolves.

I agree! Things evolve...

I have more than I need, or want, on my boat. Everything else can stay home or in storage.

[daletournier]

Originally Posted by boom23

I agree! Things evolve...

I have more than I need, or want, on my boat. Everything else can stay home or in storage.

Does the Amel 50 have the blooper system the older amels have, ie pulling the Genoa and blooper up the same foil on separate halyards?

I really like that system for long trade wind passages.

Traveled with a Amel 54 across the Atlantic, I'd argue I'm a faster boat mostly BUT when in the trades on a long passage I cant keep up with him due to how much sail he gets forward and the easy in which he uses it.

[daletournier]

Originally Posted by boom23

I agree! Things evolve...

I have more than I need, or want, on my boat. Everything else can stay home or in storage.

One more thing.

I would of once been very against twin rudders, that's just not the way you do.....apparently.

I've now come around and really like the idea. Modern boats sail differently, they surf more and are generally more responsive, I think the French have really nailed it when it comes to the "upgrade to twin rudders".

My friend that has the 54 cruised for many years prior on his Super Maramu, his main observation is the 54 hull design tracks better (his french words ,stern doesn't move around as much), I realise the 54 dosent have twin rudders but its hull is certainly wider in the stern department.

This makes me wonder how much, if any improvement to sailing the 50 has over the previous models, I wonder if anyones compared the 2?

[hpeer]

Since the OP asked for specifics I copied this out of the relative advertisement pages.

Jennaue 51
Length overall 15.38 m / 50'6"
Hull length 14.98 m / 49'2"
Hull Beam 4.7 m / 15'5"
Light displacement 14400 kg / 31747 Lbs
Standard keel draught 2.28 m / 7'6"
Fuel capacity 240 l / 63 US gal
Water capacity 640 l / 169 US gal
Cabins 2 / 3

AMEL 50
COQUE / HULL
Longueur coque / Hull length 15,51 m (50-10”)
Longueur flottaison / LWL 14,51 m
Bau max. / Beam 4,79 m
Largeur flottaison / Width at water line 4,06 m
Tirant d’eau / Draft 2,15 m
Tirant d’air / Air draft 22,5 m
Lest / Ballast 5,36 t
Moteur diesel / Diesel engine 110 CV/HP
DÉPLACEMENT / DISPLACEMENT Poids à vide / Weight unloaded 18,75 t (41,337lbs)
Déplacement en charge / Displacement fully loaded 22,2 t (48,942lbs)
CAPACITÉ / CAPACITY Eau / Fresh water 600 litres (158)
Carburant / Fuel tank capacity 675 litres (178)


So look at, for a start these three parameters:
Hull length 49’2” vs 50-10”
Light displacement 31,741 vs 41,337
Fuel 63 vs 158

Dispute advertising the Amel is actually a little longer, not much.
But the Amel is significantly heavier. That’s because there is more material in the hull and the components are probably of better quality.
And because the Amel has more displacement it can carry that much more stuff. Including a lot more fuel.

These are important differences when living aboard and sailing long distances.

[B23iL23]

Not available on the 50 (it was a 70's thing!). As the 50 has a sprit you get an Asymmetrical spinnaker and/or a code 0. Both can be on furlers for easy handling.


You could also get the same setup on a Jeanneau if it doesn't already come with the option.

Originally Posted by daletournier

Does the Amel 50 have the blooper system the older amels have, ie pulling the Genoa and blooper up the same foil on separate halyards?

I really like that system for long trade wind passages.

Traveled with a Amel 54 across the Atlantic, I'd argue I'm a faster boat mostly BUT when in the trades on a long passage I cant keep up with him due to how much sail he gets forward and the easy in which he uses it.

[daletournier]

Originally Posted by hpeer

Since the OP asked for specifics I copied this out of the relative advertisement pages.

Jennaue 51
Length overall 15.38 m / 50'6"
Hull length 14.98 m / 49'2"
Hull Beam 4.7 m / 15'5"
Light displacement 14400 kg / 31747 Lbs
Standard keel draught 2.28 m / 7'6"
Fuel capacity 240 l / 63 US gal
Water capacity 640 l / 169 US gal
Cabins 2 / 3

AMEL 50
COQUE / HULL
Longueur coque / Hull length 15,51 m (50-10”)
Longueur flottaison / LWL 14,51 m
Bau max. / Beam 4,79 m
Largeur flottaison / Width at water line 4,06 m
Tirant d’eau / Draft 2,15 m
Tirant d’air / Air draft 22,5 m
Lest / Ballast 5,36 t
Moteur diesel / Diesel engine 110 CV/HP
DÉPLACEMENT / DISPLACEMENT Poids à vide / Weight unloaded 18,75 t (41,337lbs)
Déplacement en charge / Displacement fully loaded 22,2 t (48,942lbs)
CAPACITÉ / CAPACITY Eau / Fresh water 600 litres (158)
Carburant / Fuel tank capacity 675 litres (178)


So look at, for a start these three parameters:
Hull length 49’2” vs 50-10”
Light displacement 31,741 vs 41,337
Fuel 63 vs 158

Dispute advertising the Amel is actually a little longer, not much.
But the Amel is significantly heavier. That’s because there is more material in the hull and the components are probably of better quality.
And because the Amel has more displacement it can carry that much more stuff. Including a lot more fuel.

These are important differences when living aboard and sailing long distances.

Weight dosent always mean stronger layup, it may in this case but more information is needed to come to that conclusion. Cored not cored, hand laid , infusion etc, interior weight ie solid timber or not, boat volume etc etc etc....some of the older boats that were built using chopper guns were very heavy, very strong?? and then the question is ,at what point is a boat strong enough? is stronger at the cost of more weight better or nessacary?

[daletournier]

Originally Posted by B23iL23

Not available on the 50 (it was a 70's thing!). As the 50 has a sprit you get an Asymmetrical spinnaker and/or a code 0. Both can be on furlers for easy handling.


You could also get the same setup on a Jeanneau if it doesn't already come with the option.

I'll often float the code zero out one side and have a poled out 110 genoa on the other but it has limitations. The Amel rolls them both in at the same time reducing sail nicely. On mine the code zero is in or out, no reducing partially. Also the pole out system on the super Maramu is very functional, the 54 had a different system, huge heavy poles that aren't as easy to set.

[boom23]

Originally Posted by daletournier

Does the Amel 50 have the blooper system the older amels have, ie pulling the Genoa and blooper up the same foil on separate halyards?

I really like that system for long trade wind passages.

Traveled with a Amel 54 across the Atlantic, I'd argue I'm a faster boat mostly BUT when in the trades on a long passage I cant keep up with him due to how much sail he gets forward and the easy in which he uses it.

I understand what you're talking about. Unfortunately, the new Amel boats don't have this system. I don't know why.

Regarding twin rudders, it is my understanding that after certain width at the stern, they are needed. If only one rudder is used on a wide stern boat, it would aerate and stall at higher heel angles.

On my boat, the lazarrete is watertight and each rudder tube ends above the waterline. Also, the rudders can be disconnected if one fails. The negative is that the rudders are less responsive at lower speeds and when backing up. The very strong bow thruster makes up for this.

[boom23]

Originally Posted by daletournier

Weight dosent always mean stronger layup, it may in this case but more information is needed to come to that conclusion. Cored not cored, hand laid , infusion etc, interior weight ie solid timber or not, boat volume etc etc etc....some of the older boats that were built using chopper guns were very heavy, very strong?? and then the question is ,at what point is a boat strong enough? is stronger at the cost of more weight better or nessacary?

I can't compare the Jeanneau layup with the Amel. I know that Amel has solid hull bottom (no chopper guns) and foam core above waterline and deck. Wherever there is a something installed, it's solid glass and it has a backing plate. I have pictures and more info in my "Amel 50 built" thread.

The hull, deck and bulkheads are glassed together and the furniture is stick built and glassed to the hull. All of this is much more labor intensive than the way Beneteau/Jeanneau are built, but it makes for a solid boat.

[B23iL23]

Theo,
Add in one more thing on twin rudders - As boats get bigger, so does the depth of the rudder to give you control. Deep rudders and stern to med moorings don't mix well. Twin rudders are considerably shorter than a single.

Originally Posted by boom23

I understand what you're talking about. Unfortunately, the new Amel boats don't have this system. I don't know why.

Regarding twin rudders, it is my understanding that after certain width at the stern, they are needed. If only one rudder is used on a wide stern boat, it would aerate and stall at higher heel angles.

On my boat, the lazarrete is watertight and each rudder tube ends above the waterline. Also, the rudders can be disconnected if one fails. The negative is that the rudders are less responsive at lower speeds and when backing up. The very strong bow thruster makes up for this.

[daletournier]

Originally Posted by boom23

I understand what you're talking about. Unfortunately, the new Amel boats don't have this system. I don't know why.

Regarding twin rudders, it is my understanding that after certain width at the stern, they are needed. If only one rudder is used on a wide stern boat, it would aerate and stall at higher heel angles.

On my boat, the lazarrete is watertight and each rudder tube ends above the waterline. Also, the rudders can be disconnected if one fails. The negative is that the rudders are less responsive at lower speeds and when backing up. The very strong bow thruster makes up for this.

I agree with the above regarding rudders and have envy

Newer boats also tend to surf abit more this amplifies the rudder stalling problem, I've surfed a couple of times at 16knots, way to fast. If you start coming of a wave wrong and at speed the rudder can do what you describe, lose grip to some degree, mine is a very big rudder, I'd assume for this reason. With twin rudders the rudder on the outside (I have no better description) gets more efficient as the boat heels, as it gets deeper and straighter in the water, it also acts as a drogue to some degree for that corner (I think).

I'm no naval architect, far from it ,but I've passed many hours at sea running in the trafes thinking about this ......I want twin rudders.

[Medved]

Was watching one of the Delos videos and I think I now understand the difference: https://youtu.be/PvNHBboinYg