Modern Production Cruisers at Sea

[sailorboy1]

Originally Posted by settingsun

I was anti-Hunter when we first started looking.

Yeah I was like that once and even part of the anti posters. But it turns out that once I stopped getting "facts" from internet forums, all of which except for 1 is anti modern production boat, the real story was apparent.

[S/V Illusion]

Originally Posted by Don L

Yeah I was like that once and even part of the anti posters. But it turns out that once I stopped getting "facts" from internet forums, all of which except for 1 is anti modern production boat, the real story was apparent.

If you want the real story, you won't find it on some obscure forum like this one filled predominantly with Internet experts.

Cruisers forum does serve a purpose if only to entertain.

[Liam Wald]

Major Danger Ranger...
Getting "facts" from the internet.

I forget who coined the phrase as follows, no doubt someone much smarter than I, but I find it so very hard to dispute...
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion but they are not entitled to their own facts".

[Weyalan]

I guess I must have the worst boat ever... it has all the "disadvantages" of a modern boat (fin keel, small exposed rudder, bendy glass / kevlar construction, spaghetti noodle mast) but none of the advantages (horrible IOR hull shape, low internal volume, relatively complicated to sail, etc). Given all these irredeemable faults and the complete lack of mitigating advantages, what a fool I must have been to buy it. The amazing thing is that it manages to even leave the marina.

It has managed, somehow, to complete several Sydney - Hobart Races (across the infamous Bass Strait). My wife and I now seem to manage to cruise it pretty well - we can handle it 2-up in 50 knots of wind without too much trouble (although I'd most likely spill my martini in these conditions.

I'd speculate that:
i) Less than 1% of sailboats ever make a long offshore passage, and
ii) Less than 0.1% of sailboats ever make multiple / regular offshore passages.
iii) Those that do make muliple / rugular offshore passages probably spend less than 1% of their time actually sailing offshore.

It is hardly surprising, then, that in today's market-driven economy, that producers may not choose to put offshore, heavy weather sailing comfort at the top of their list of design criteria. I still reckon that any boat's seaworthiness, in most any conditions, is more of a reflection of its crew that its design and that most modern production cruisers are perfectly reasonably choices for offshore passage making, provided you have a good idea of the strengths and weaknesses of your chosen platform and plan accordingly.

[tropicalescape]

Originally Posted by JK n Smitty

Come on! You know he didn't mean a boat was like a car but that like cars, technology can improve safety at higher speeds and lower weights. Talk about a straw-man!



Lower wetted surface means less friction which means faster speed. But it also means better immersion curves which means more carrying capacity. Most of these modern boats we are talking about have pounds per inch of immersion numbers close to 2,000 pounds and generally in the neighborhood of 500 or more pounds better than the traditional designs. That means they can carry two drogues, a sea-anchor, gale sail, tri sail and rodes and additional control lines for these safety items, along with 4-7 anchors with rodes, big ss backing plates on cleats and still make better speed than the big, old heavy cruiser. This could mean getting into port before the storm and riding it out safely at anchor. If the goal is safety, you have to remember that there are several ways to achieve a safe passage. Just because someone makes different safety choices from you or from what was considered traditional choices doesn't mean they don't consider safety to be important.

If you want to talk extremes leave the silly beach cat analogies at home, let's compare to the Volvo Ocean Race carbon fiber rocket ships. These boats have very low B/D ratios, low wetted surface, are capable of high speeds and sail through some of the worst conditions this planet has to offer.

And if you are not willing to accept that material science and computer aided design has improved our understanding of what makes a seaworthy boat there is "no need to argue because you wil never understand".

They do sail thru some of the worst conditions,but lets see what it can handle 10 ,20,30,40,50 years from now! Those things are like desposable cig lighters(they get the job done for now ,but what kind of vaule later?)wonder what condition a 2003 yr model bene will be in 40 yrs from now?

[Thackaringa]

I have an axe in my garden shed. It is the best axe I have ever owned. It belonged to my Great Grandfather. It is over 100 years old. All I have ever had to do with it is replace the heads and handles. This axe will last forever and I will hand it down to my Grandson.

[JazzyO]

Originally Posted by Thackaringa

All I have ever had to do with it is replace the heads and handles.

Ship of Theseus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I do have to say that this thread has been informative in getting a better sense of what the characteristics of boats are that I haven't sailed, so thanks for the input.

But I haven't seen anyone add to the debate for many pages. Time to hang up that axe...


Onno

[robert sailor]

I thought the Gal talking about her Hunter was a good post. She hit the nail on the head in several areas. She's not kidding herself into thinking that her Hunter can measure up to something like a Valiant because of course it can't but she also knew that her Hunter was more than needed to sail an area like Mexico. I think she made a good decision because for the money she has a lot more space to live in and as she says, everything is new. Many owners buy a boat that is often more than they need. As another poster suggested very few boats are actually taken offshore so production builders don't build to that market. Most of the high end sailboats are no different in that very few are ever taken offshore. Friends of ours are sailing a Trentella and an Oyster 60 and they have their boats shipped across the ocean and then they do their local cruising without ever having to do any offshore sailing. I think these days with excellent weather reporting, shipping available for your boat etc. you can get by with the least expensive options out there for a boat choice. There are a handfull of serious long term offshore cruising types out there and they tend to make choices that are different than our friend on the Hunter for good reasons as well.

[I.Grind]

Originally Posted by tropicalescape

They do sail thru some of the worst conditions,but lets see what it can handle 10 ,20,30,40,50 years from now! Those things are like desposable cig lighters(they get the job done for now ,but what kind of vaule later?)wonder what condition a 2003 yr model bene will be in 40 yrs from now?

Which is more important getting out on the water now on a boat you can afford, or how much your grandchildren can sell it for after you are dead and gone? What if you don't have kids?

It's a totally different story if you are retiring at age 20 to pursue your sailing dream and never ever want to upgrade. In that case I agree with you 100%.

[Liam Wald]

Originally Posted by tropicalescape

They do sail thru some of the worst conditions,but lets see what it can handle 10 ,20,30,40,50 years from now! Those things are like desposable cig lighters(they get the job done for now ,but what kind of vaule later?)wonder what condition a 2003 yr model bene will be in 40 yrs from now?

Does it really matter?
I don't know about you but I am 62 years old. I don't really care what anything I own looks like 40 years from now.
But since you asked, I don't think that it will be any worse off than all the 40 year old Cals, Islanders, Pearsons and other production boats from the 70's that fill the marinas and seem to still be sailing just fine.
Anyone who thinks that the production boats of the 60's and 70's were better than what is presently being built probably doesn't have the experience to know what they are talking about.

[S/V Illusion]

Originally Posted by I.Grind

Which is more important getting out on the water now on a boat you can afford, or how much your grandchildren can sell it for after you are dead and gone? What if you don't have kids?

It's a totally different story if you are retiring at age 20 to pursue your sailing dream and never ever want to upgrade. In that case I agree with you 100%.

Had to laugh. A 50 yr old boat is 50 years old regardless of the nameplate and will require a lot of duct tape and luck to keep it afloat.

[Liam Wald]

Here is what I don't get...
My guess is that 99% of the people reading this drive a production line car, live in a production home, wear production line clothing, eat produced food, are sitting in a chair that was made on a production line and are reading this text on a computer that was made on a production line in Asia.
Think about it. What percentage of the things that you own or use daily are custom made items? Look around you. Other than maybe that painting hanging on the wall, how many of the things that you see were artisan produced?
How many of them were built to last until the next giant meteor hits the planet?
So what's the big frickin' deal?

[sailpower]

Originally Posted by gjorgensen

As a note to toss into this thread, stating "Beneteaus sail like blah blah blah" or "Beneteaus are built like blah blah blah" is utterly pointless. I did a huge number of miles in First 42's (Randy's boat) in the 80's and 90's, and have owned a First 40.7 for nearly a dozen years. The two boats sail vastly different in general, and the way to trim them out and the amount and type of sail area to have up in various different conditions is very different. There are also substantial differences in build between the two, both good and bad in either direction.

In all seriousness that right there is worthy of its own thread.

I for one would be very interested in hearing your comments comparing these two models.

[barnakiel]

To say mass production boats are worse would be like to say one offs are the better boats. But read Hiscock's book - the part they had their one-off built in NZ, e.g.

There are many good things about boats that can be had customized or built to order, but possibly only when the ordering party is NOT a typical mass customer (a person ignorant to many aspects of sailing and boat design/production).

And, as others noticed above, HR, OYSTER, Rustler, Valiant, Morris, or Hinckley are all mass production boats. They share materials and techniques with bendies.

I love many of modern mass production boats' features, and hate some. And the same applies, in my case, to our ole school sailing tubs.

b.

[Jim Cate]

Originally Posted by barnakiel

To say mass production boats are worse would be like to say one offs are the better boats. But read Hiscock's book - the part they had their one-off built in NZ, e.g.

b.

I believe that ALL of the Hiscock's boats were one-offs and they managed to do pretty well with them.

Cheers,

Jim