Jeanneau vs Amel

[Tillsbury]

Originally Posted by Medved

So as a car and a motorcycle enthusiast I can explain exactly what the difference is between a fiat and a Mercedes, I am looking for help to understand this in sailboats. It’s is my understanding that most systems come from other manufacturers anyway... Masts come from Selden, winches from Harken, engines from Yanmar, etc...

I don't believe the Fiat/Mercedes analogy works. It's more Toyota/Ferrari, I'd say. The Ferrari will be worth more in the long term, and it will deserve and get the maintenance to keep it going forty years. Only you can decide whether the cost of getting there is preferably to a volume production car that you replace when you want a new one. This analogy also comes closer to the reason people will happily pay three times the price of the "good enough" boat, in order to get that feeling you get when you get into your new Ferrari.

[Tillsbury]

Originally Posted by Medved

This is precisely what I am trying to understand. In addition, many posts I read said that the captain and crew have a much larger impact than the boat itself (within a reason). So I am better off saving a million and investing in training?

There's no question that a well-trained experienced and capable skipper in a Jeanneau would be far safer than an idiot in an Amel.

[bluesphere]

Amel all day long.

[Medved]

Originally Posted by Tillsbury

"Quality" relates to the intentions of the builder, and the budget they have. With a premium name like Amel, and the price of them, they can afford to up-spec a lot of things and buy the best accessories. Some of these come through to the quality of the final boat. Production builders have to make more accurate selections of equipment, as the final "quality" will tend towards the lowest quality component. There are plenty of examples of boats built in the 70s and 80s, and low-budget boats, where mistakes were made and the result is a poor quality boat overall. But the big production builders are much better at this nowadays, and tend to get the balance of components right.

I'm not sure that "more build hours" carries through to "better fitting together". Boats that are entirely CNC-cut can be unbelievably accurate in their fit, particularly of the major components. As an example, I have swapped doors in my current boat (because I wanted to change the handing of two of them), and it was an extremely simple job because each door and frame is an independent module and each is exactly the same size. I watched my Westerly being built (their larger boats are probably considered slightly above mid-range in terms of quality). Experienced carpenters spent their days fiddling with little bits of wood and ended up with a lovely finish. However, the hidden fit and glassing-in of these components wasn't to the same standard as it would have been had they all been pre-cut to exactly the correct size. It certainly took a whole lot longer, though..

I think you nailed it... There are people that can afford 2 mil for a boat and they will look for the custom woodwork, etc. I am good with the “plastic” boat, as long as it sails well and can last 1o years. I also have learned that a well maintained boat with upgrades is much better than a known named boat that has been sitting for sale 3 years in a row.

[Medved]

Originally Posted by wingssail

You are on the right track, but with a slight adjustment needed.

I don't think you will be able to purchase "training" to make you a great captain or sailor. Achieving that level takes a long time. The most talented of people get it in a few months of frequent (weekly) sailing in lots of conditions. Me, it took years to get any kind of decent skills. That is the beauty of sailing, you never stop learning and getting better.

To my way of thinking you will be better off buying a moderate boat and start sailing, sailing, sailing. Often I recommend that people join a racing crew and that is a fast way to acquire knowledge and skills.

Save the extra million or so until you have some years of experience and know exactly what you are doing and what you want.

Good point. To that end I just completed ASA 103/104 and signed up for an offshore trip next May delivering a Swan 58 from the Caribbean to CT. My plan is to continue to crew until I am ready to “invest” in my own boat.

[Snore]

Originally Posted by Medved

I think you nailed it... There are people that can afford 2 mil for a boat and they will look for the custom woodwork, etc. I am good with the “plastic” boat, as long as it sails well and can last 1o years. I also have learned that a well maintained boat with upgrades is much better than a known named boat that has been sitting for sale 3 years in a row.

Comes down to final cost of a ‘ready to sail’ boat (purchase + refit).

Also a highend boat will deprecate less. Check the cost of a 10 YO plastic boat vs a 10 YO highend boat. Then again my personal boat is a 39 YO Tartan.

Many choices and many variables.

In the end I tell folks a boat should be like a wife, seeing her should put a smile on your face.

[Training Wheels]

Originally Posted by Tillsbury

I don't believe the Fiat/Mercedes analogy works. It's more Toyota/Ferrari, I'd say. The Ferrari will be worth more in the long term, and it will deserve and get the maintenance to keep it going forty years. Only you can decide whether the cost of getting there is preferably to a volume production car that you replace when you want a new one. This analogy also comes closer to the reason people will happily pay three times the price of the "good enough" boat, in order to get that feeling you get when you get into your new Ferrari.

I’m confused, which boat is the Ferrari? An Amel is certainly no Ferrari, so it must be the Jeanneau, as I would think it would be the quicker boat.

[daletournier]

Originally Posted by barnakiel

You can hit anything 3 times harder with an Amel than you could with a Bene ...


;-))))))


b.

You know that for sure?, I assume your correct because that is what's commonly believed by the herd, is it true? I dont know.

[daletournier]

Originally Posted by Tillsbury

I don't believe the Fiat/Mercedes analogy works. It's more Toyota/Ferrari, I'd say. The Ferrari will be worth more in the long term, and it will deserve and get the maintenance to keep it going forty years. Only you can decide whether the cost of getting there is preferably to a volume production car that you replace when you want a new one. This analogy also comes closer to the reason people will happily pay three times the price of the "good enough" boat, in order to get that feeling you get when you get into your new Ferrari.

Boats are only as good as the maintaince they receive, regardless of who built them, below is a dead or dying Amel I currently walk past each morning.

Amel Super Maramu prices have come down along way over recent years, just like the prices of other boats. You can now purchase a super Maramu for under 200k.

[wingssail]

Originally Posted by daletournier

You know that for sure?, I assume your correct because that is what's commonly believed by the herd, is it true? I dont know.

I don't buy this and anyway, you could buy a concrete block house which could withstand any hits, but it wouldn't be a sailboat. What is your focus, sailing or block house?

Now, as to the analogy, Fiat vs Mercedes? More like Citroen vs Opel, a cult car vs an average road car. For a Mercedes you must look at Swans or Wally or such.

[wingssail]

Originally Posted by Medved

I think you nailed it... There are people that can afford 2 mil for a boat and they will look for the custom woodwork, etc. I am good with the “plastic” boat, as long as it sails well and can last 1o years. I also have learned that a well maintained boat with upgrades is much better than a known named boat that has been sitting for sale 3 years in a row.

My plastic boat is 40 years old and still going strong and winning races, built by rednecks in New Orleans, God bless their red neck ways.

[Sojourner]

As most on here know, I'm a zealot for old amels. I wouldn't trade our 26 year old super maramu for any other boat I've been inside or sailed so far (including new 50s and 55s). But that is because of our particular quirky needs and as liveaboards. I dislike the new amels designed after Mr Amel died. They are more like, well, jenneaus etc, and they lost many of the design features long ranging liveaboards loved about them. But reading the posts, if all you want is a short range sailor and caribbean cruiser, then they'd be fine, if expensive I think.

[B23iL23]

Ok Sojourner, I'll bite.

What is it with the new Amels (50 & 55) that you don't like or think has been lost from the previous models ( and that makes them "only good short range sailor and caribbean cruiser") ?

- Ketch rig. The 55 has that
- Skeg rudder. The 55 has that
- U shaped galley. 55 has that
- Sheltered helm (like it or love it). Both have that
- Great engine room. Both have that
- All sails/controls from the cockpit. Both have that.
- Watertight compartments fore and aft. Both have that.
- Great aft cabin. Both have that.
- Good Tankage. Both have that.
- Amel furling mast (like it or love it). Both have it.
- On deck storage (forward/aft/deck lockers). Both have them

Now granted you may not like the cosmetics, the styling and so on, and that's perfectly fine, but that doesn't impact their sailing qualities or them being less seaworthy.

Originally Posted by Sojourner

As most on here know, I'm a zealot for old amels. I wouldn't trade our 26 year old super maramu for any other boat I've been inside or sailed so far (including new 50s and 55s). But that is because of our particular quirky needs and as liveaboards. I dislike the new amels designed after Mr Amel died. They are more like, well, jenneaus etc, and they lost many of the design features long ranging liveaboards loved about them. But reading the posts, if all you want is a short range sailor and caribbean cruiser, then they'd be fine, if expensive I think.

[daletournier]

What I find interesting and not spoken about is , the stuff I see failing on boats isnt usually what's built by the boat company, I dont see hulls and interiors failing, keels falling off etc let's face it, that's really what the company actually builds. Often even ruddersxare out sourced and yes theres sometimes some issues there.

Once the hull and interior are built nearly all else is made by someone else, lewmar, sparecraft,seldon,yanmar,Volvo,raymarine edson etc etc.......its this stuff I see failing around the world over time, and I can assure you all boats are equal regarding stuff breaking, the real difference is how well the owner maintains the boat.

Now Amel I believe has alot of propriety stuff , but it still breaks. I traveled with 2 in the last 18 mths and both were fixing their boats as much as anyone else, I could argue maybe a little more as they tend to be abit more systems intensive. I'm not suggesting they aren't good boats, but they certainly weren't created by God like some owners would have you believe.

Amels stand out for me is its functionality, eg engine room.

[daletournier]

Ok, not trying to pick on Amel, I do like them ,particularly the 54, but heres something I noticed a while back.

The Super Maramu isnt particularly heavy for its size, approx 16 metric tonne according to sail boat data. Keep in mind this is a 53 foot boat and is solid glass, not cored.

I'm not saying heavier is better but the belief that the Amel is heavier built ie you can hit something 3 times harder isnt represented by the data regarding the build. Now I understand heavy lay up dosent necessarily mean stronger ,quality lay up is far more important BUT most here would assume the Amel is heavily built. Comparatively I dont see the super Maramu more heavily built than my C470, considering numbers, size, mine being core above the waterline etc, is it better layed up? Maybe, but most wouldnt know, but of course they'll have an opinion.