Old vs. New Style Cruisers

[ricwoz]

So, I posted a thread with a similar name a few years ago over on another forum, and it led to a pretty interesting discussion, albeit highly technical with people, including a very famous naval architect responding. And several of them were throwing out all sorts of formulas. My question got a bit lost in the process, but it was still interesting to read, and everyone had fun.

In the couple of years since then the differences and look, features and style of new vs. old cruising boats has accelerated. Rather than ask the question in a very generic way, as I did previously, I want to compare two specific boats of the same length the typify their respesctive types.

• Which do you prefer and why?

• (And of course: "neither this 40 ft cruiser is way better than both!" will be a frequent response. Please include the boat model if you post just a picture!)

• Are some characteristics of either show-stoppers for you?
• Which would you pick for crossing oceans?
• Which for island hopping?
• Which for sailing around your home waters on the weekend?

In the red corner the classic 1980s stoutly built "bluewater" double ender, here represented by the Pacific Seacraft 40

In the blue corner, the modernistic performance cruiser with the French flair, the Jeanneau Sun Odyssey 410.

Are these the best champions for their respective classes? Probably not, but they have the advantage of both being in current production.

The Jeaneau was launched in 2019, the Pacific Seacraft 40 was launched in 1996 (over 25 years ago), and was the last refinement of the designer (Bill Crealocks) even earlier 1976-vintage Crealock 37. (46 years ago!).

Tale of the Tape

Jeanneau 410
Length overall: 40'6"
Hull length: 39'4"
Hull Beam: 13'1"
Displacement: 17417 Lbs
Standard keel draught : 7'
Fuel capacity: 53 US gal
Water capacity:87 + 53 US gal
Cabins: 2 / 3
Available Engines:
•Standard: Yanmar 40HP / 23KW
•Option: Yanmar 45HP / 33KW
BALLAST 4,416lb
SAIL AREA 865ft2

Pacific Seacraft 40:

LOA 42'2"
LOD 40' 2"
LWL 31' 3"
Beam 12' 5"
Draft - standard 6' 1"
Draft - shoal 5' 2"
Displacement (lbs) 24,000
Ballast (lbs) 8,600
Sail Area (sqFt) 846

Now, some pictures:
PS40










Jeanneau 410











And, finally the price NEW (which I'll do my best on for new boats, but of course dealers, added equipment, etc. - these are best estimates).

Jeanneau 410: $390.000

Pacific Seacraft 40: $640,000 (with, of course a large used market at drastically lower prices: 1995 for $285,000.)

*****

Which?
Why?

[Bowdrie]

Apples to oranges.
The Jennie lacks any kind of berth on the port side. She also has a wide-open interior with little to prevent you being thrown around, or much to hang on to while moving around.
She's more of a floating condo, with the placement of "windows" to bring the outside in, no feeling of being able to "cocoon" yourself when you want to hide from what's going on outside.
The PS at least has a settee each side which can double as a sea-berth, and a much better galley for offshore work.
The PS has better crossflow ventilation. The overhead grab rails look nice, but give little real security, you end up being a swinging monkey, but you can hang stuff from them.
When the SHTF you can go below, (operative word "below",) and feel like you are "down in" the boat and have a more "snug" feeling.
The PS rig is much more versatile for open ocean work.
The Jennie will be faster.
The PS looks like a boat to take to sea, the Jennie looks like it would be at home going amongst the islands of the Caribbean.

[GordMay]

Greetings and welcome aboard the CF, ricwoz.

[letsgetsailing3]

I think that's a great way to ask the question.


Also, which style suits the way people ACTUALLY use their boats the vast majority of the time?

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by ricwoz

So, I posted a thread with a similar name a few years ago over on another forum, and it led to a pretty interesting discussion, albeit highly technical with people, including a very famous naval architect responding ...

Did Robert Perry explain how he came to design double enders?

"Double Enders According to Perry" ~ by Bob Perry
➥ Sail Far Live Free - Relent to Water Wanderlust!: Double Enders According to Perry (Guest Post by Bob Perry)


“A Thing of Beauty is a Joy Forever” ~ by Ted Brewer

Originally Posted by Brewer

“... Beauty is, of course, in the eye of the beholder, and this is just as true for boats as for other art forms. However, with boats, particularly sailing yachts, art must be balanced with function ...
... The short, double-ended North Sea stern has long been considered suitable for bluewater cruisers, but it has its faults. The buttock lines are usually well rounded up aft, which can produce a slow boat and also one that may be prone to being pooped when running in heavy seas, as it lacks reserve buoyancy above the LWL. The ever-popular Tahiti ketch is an example of this type (see illustration). My answer, when a client wants a double-ender for bluewater voyaging, has been to develop a "cruiser stern" with more fullness on deck, almost round when viewed from above, to provide additional reserve buoyancy and ease the buttocks (see illustration). It is a functional shape, but not the prettiest to my eyes. However, one New Zealand owner of a 46-footer has put 170,000 miles under her keel in all weathers and swears it's the best boat ever built, so the cruiser stern may have virtues other than function.

Long sterns, whether counter or canoe type, always look pretty and have the virtue of good reserve buoyancy. In effect, the stern tends to rise nicely as a big sea sweeps under it, thus reducing the chance of being pooped. The long counter also picks up waterline length as the boat heels and so adds to potential speed - perhaps its main virtue besides appearance. The prettiest sterns of all may well be the heart-shaped transoms with raised taffrails designed by LFH for his attractive Bounty, Tioga, and Ticonderoga designs (see illustration). This type of stern fits perfectly with the lovely Herreshoff clipper bow. Big Ti, as she is called, is one of the most beautiful yachts afloat, in my opinion...”

Here ➥ https://goodoldboat.com/a-thing-of-b...a-joy-forever/

[LittleWing77]

+1 What Bowdrie said.

An informative thread (link below) on the performance of these new generation downwind sleds that-aren't-really-monohulls-and-aren't-catamarans:

50ft Hanse, Beneteau, etc. Slamming
https://www.cruisersforum.com/forums...ng-254971.html

LW77

[Na Mara]

The SO41 will be a great boat for downwind cruising up to force 7 and upwind into force 4 or 5. It will be handful in conditions much worse than that for a cruising couple. For coastal cruising that’s fine. Pick your weather window and even if it gets dicey it’s only going to be bouncy and lively for a few hours. It can even be fun. But if you are going offshore there will be times, and I speak as a previous Hanse 370 owner here, where you will be miserable in this kind of boat. There will be seas that stop her to windward, slamming gets old, and endless hand steering in quartering seas that the autopilot can’t cope with due to that wide transom getting kicked around all add up to dreary and even dangerous cruising.

The PS40 is the opposite. She is a boat that will look after you in almost any conditions. She will make steady and reliable progress wherever you point her. She is specifically designed to not thrill as thrilling sailing is exhausting day after day.

In harbour, the SO41 will be very spacious and comfortable with great alfresco facilities. The PS40 can’t compete here.

So if you are coastal cruising and spend most of your time aboard stationary pick the SO41. If you are going offshore and spend 15% + of your time on the move, go for the PS40.

[Tetepare]

The use case is the most important, I'm sure it will be discussed ad nauseum.

One thing oft not discussed is longevity. 25+ YO PC40 may need some TLC. Let's see how that SO41 is in 25 years. If one selects a boat for long-term, I'll argue a used PC40 is a better investment with lower maintenance.

[Jammer]

They're different boats in more ways than just "old vs new style." For one thing then Jeanneau is much larger in terms of usable interior volume and space on deck because of the broader beam and the fact that the beam is carried further aft.

The PS40 is sort of an odd duck, few have been made compared to the PS37.

Originally Posted by ricwoz

• Which do you prefer and why?

• (And of course: "neither this 40 ft cruiser is way better than both!" will be a frequent response. Please include the boat model if you post just a picture!)

• Are some characteristics of either show-stoppers for you?
• Which would you pick for crossing oceans?
• Which for island hopping?
• Which for sailing around your home waters on the weekend?

I see these as bookends of a design continuum. The PS40 is too heavy and slow and the Jeanneau is built without sufficient regard to sailing in heavy seas and to things like ventilation. There are boats like the Sabre 426 and the Catalina 42 mkii that have good sailing performance, a more moderate beam, and a swim step on the transom, and portlights that open. These boats are also much lighter without any serious compromise in strength.

On the Jeanneau, I would find the saildrive, the total absence of operable portlights, and the excessively beamy cockpit without handholds and footholds to be disqualifying. On the PS, the canoe stern, while pretty, is not something I would actually want to have. Though some will disagree I would not want a cutter rig, because I want the foredeck to be clear, and because I don't want to maintain the additional sail and rigging.

[Linguini]

You compare apples and oranges. compare the PC40 against a modern 600k 40 feet yacht and not against a conveyor belt yacht.

I like the 410 layout and there is enough handles and the pantry is excellent to cook in waves. Also enough in the cockpit. With 10-15% sailing time I would focus on living! But I would not buy the Jenneau because of the bad quality ( I have the experience). But the same boat in higher quality. Why not. I don‘t know (have sailed) the PC.

Check out Grand Soleil LC42. Also new(er) Design. Spacey in real high quality and with NO!! limitations for long cruising.

[Cheechako]

I prefer older style hulls. Keel laminated as part of the hull.
Mainly I don't trust the new designs to be strong. If they would compromise when designing a new style boat I COULD gain more confidence. But they often don't. Radii to spread the load in lieu of sharp corners etc, supported rudders etc. Interiors that dont come loose from the hull.
They seem to broad brush what wins races into boats for normal people.

Boats are not as well engineered as people think. It's more architecture and rule of thumb. Too much faith put into numbers that haven't been proven over time. That's why America's cup boats break in half in light air. That's why keels fall off brand new Ericsons (was it Ericson?) That's why rudders fail or bend. That's why interiors and engine beds come loose from the hull after hitting a rock, when old boats just carried on..

You dont take too much of what is learned in Formula One racing and apply it to everyday drivers. A little goes a long way.

For local sailing, none of this matters though.

[hpeer]

Here is my immediate first response.

The boats are not comparable, not in the the same class

Unlike most folks who use LOD for comparative measures I use Displacement. It is a far better indication of a boats meaningful size.

So 24,000 vs 17,000 means Pacific Seacraft is 40% bigger than the Jeanneau.

Load each boat with 20% displacement in tools, supplies, etc. and it is 4,800lbs vs 3,400 lbs.

Which boat is better depends upon the use case as noted above.

But also as noted above “apples and oranges” or maybe “tangerines and grapefruit.”

[rslifkin]

Originally Posted by hpeer

Here is my immediate first response.

The boats are not comparable, not in the the same class

Unlike most folks who use LOD for comparative measures I use Displacement. It is a far better indication of a boats meaningful size.

So 24,000 vs 17,000 means Pacific Seacraft is 40% bigger than the Jeanneau.

Load each boat with 20% displacement in tools, supplies, etc. and it is 4,800lbs vs 3,400 lbs.

Which boat is better depends upon the use case as noted above.

But also as noted above “apples and oranges” or maybe “tangerines and grapefruit.”

The PS40 will likely carry more weight without issue, but that only matters if you don't run out of space first. The Jeanneau is a significantly larger boat by volume.

[DMF Sailing]

Originally Posted by Linguini

You compare apples and oranges. compare the PC40 against a modern 600k 40 feet yacht and not against a conveyor belt yacht.

Originally Posted by Tetepare

One thing oft not discussed is longevity. 25+ YO PC40 may need some TLC. Let's see how that SO41 is in 25 years. If one selects a boat for long-term, I'll argue a used PC40 is a better investment with lower maintenance.

I have to agree with the above posters. I can go out right now and buy a new Jeanneau SO389. For that money, I am 100 grand short of being able to purchase a new Pacific Seacraft 31!

I can say that you get what you pay for, having experienced equipment and structural failures on Jeanneaux that were new or close-to-new. A winch failing under normal load on a maiden voyage. A drawer (full of kitchen knives !!!) coming off its hinges and flying across the cabin on an ordinary heel in moderate chop. A stanchion snapping off at the deck (!!!) when someone put a little weight on the life line.

If I were to ask the OP's question--and welcome to the forum and sorry to nitpick but this is what you wanted, right?--I'd be asking you to compare a new Jeanneau SO41 to a commensurately priced used Pacific Seacraft 40, because I believe this is the choice a buyer who wants the latter will have to make.

Unless we want to postulate that people who like slower, sturdier, more seaworthy design and build by definition have at their disposal hundreds of thousand dollars more than people who prefer speed, entertainment, and space.

[ricwoz]

Originally Posted by GordMay

Greetings and welcome aboard the CF, ricwoz.

Thank you! I've been lurking here for a number of years, and finally decided that seeing as my interest in sailing is focused on cruising more than other aspects that I needed to join the forum and get involved.