Visit our Popular Forums

Snowpetrel · 18-05-2016, 04:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Polux

The fastest monohull is the Comanche and id designed with a big beam and all the beam brought back because... (snip)

Comanche was soundly beaten by the very narrow (and very old) Wild Oats in the Sydney Hobart Race.

malbert73 · 18-05-2016, 08:08

Yes, narrower beam boats often can do better with light or moderate air and non surfing conditions due to reduced wetted surface and more easily driven hull form.

Broad brush strokes of course... But pizza wedge hulls really shine in race boats with high ballast ratios or moveable ballast, and powered up conditions. I routinely sail by bigger beamier big sterner "modern" boats in light air on Chesapeake. I assume downwind in big air they will be faster. They certainly are faster under power which suggests the benefit of broad stern sections at/above hull speed

Sent from my iPhone using Cruisers Sailing Forum

malbert73 · 18-05-2016, 12:17

And to further discussion, boats with finite, limited horsepower like rowing shells, canoes and kayaks still are long and narrow hulls.
Long and narrow is still the most easily driven hull form, which translates into non- planing non heavy air sailboat design.

Just a thought for those on this forum that insist that fat broad sterned hulls are somehow superior in every way. In fact if recent evolution in hull shape in race boats somehow hindered interior space on cruising boats rather than opposite, I doubt we'd see this evolution...

Sent from my iPhone using Cruisers Sailing Forum

Cadence · 18-05-2016, 13:50

Does any of this have anything to do with the average Joe and his boat?

Polux · 18-05-2016, 14:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dockhead

I'm not going to google, download, and post all the different images because everyone can easily find the images themselves.

If you look at the whole current product lines of Oyster, HR, Contest, Discovery, Hylas, and any other builder of higher end, non mass produced cruising boats, with only a few exceptions, the hull form is the same, and in fact is exactly the same as my boat, although mine was designed way back in 2000 -- moderate rake in the bow, moderately tapered aft sections, reverse counter transom quite a bit narrower than maximum beam, flared topsides, and a moderate aspect ratio, wide-based bulb keel. You see no torpedo keels, no plumb bows, no tumblehome or flat sides, no full width transom, no flat aft section.
...

You have to sharpen your eyes

. Regarding your boat, 16 years of development of yacht design is not the same as 30, but if you cannot find differences regarding new designs and the design of your boat is only because you are not looking well even if the design of your boat was very contemporary regarding 2000.

Your boat, the 2000 Moody 54:

You can compare it with the Garcia 52:

OVNI 52:

Boreal 52:

Cigale 16:

Adventure 55:

Salona 60:

X6:

Solaris 58:

Italia yachts 15.98:

Euphoria 54:

Advanced 60:

I could go on and posting many contemporary 50/60 ft yachts sharing common design characteristics (as well as some differences) than will show clearly the differences to your hull regarding a contemporary design. I will not point out those differences since they would be obvious to you or everybody that decides to make a fair comparison but I would say: look at bows, transoms and the place where max beam is.

Yes you can find some brands, mostly conservative ones, that still had not modernised their hulls, some having old designed hulls (MKII) that were not designed much after the one of your boat. But on brands like HR or Oyster the last designs ( last 2 years) clearly show that they also have decided to modernise their designs bringing them to the state of the art.

Polux · 18-05-2016, 15:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snowpetrel

Comanche was soundly beaten by the very narrow (and very old) Wild Oats in the Sydney Hobart Race.

Not on the last one where Wild Oates was way behind till it blew its main sail. Comanche is the one that has the 24 hour speed record too. Besides Wild Oates has been continuously modified, including new bow, new transom and hull upgrade design not to mention the introduction of state of the art systems like DSS.

Not saying that Comanche is faster on all sail conditions but certainly on most of them but that was not the point. The point was that someone was saying that modern boats have only more beam (and the beam brought aft that equates big transoms) only because cruisers want more living space at cost of performance and sailability. Clearly not the case in what regards performance.

malbert73 · 18-05-2016, 18:19

Yawn. Same posts over and over with pictures of beamy boats in strong wind. Show me a picture of a beamy cruising boat sailing well in light air.

Also, if you recall, winged keels were considered state of the art after the famous Americas cup 20 years ago. Every cruising boat suddenly had to have them as well as they were the hot thing.

Wonder where all the wing keels are now? Now only as a shoal draft compromise.

Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

Snowpetrel · 18-05-2016, 18:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Polux

Not on the last one where Wild Oates was way behind till it blew its main sail. Comanche is the one that has the 24 hour speed record too. Besides Wild Oates has been continuously modified, including new bow, new transom and hull upgrade design not to mention the introduction of state of the art systems like DSS.

Not saying that Comanche is faster on all sail conditions but certainly on most of them but that was not the point. The point was that someone was saying that modern boats have only more beam (and the beam brought aft that equates big transoms) only because cruisers want more living space at cost of performance and sailability. Clearly not the case in what regards performance.

True, though we will not know until next time the two boats meet which one is faster. Wild Oats seems significantly faster in light winds. I was pointing out in an oblique way that beam doesnt always equal allround speed. These wide boats would be much faster if some of that material added to the beam was used to make the boat slightly longer. Except that once again racing rules (in this case the 100 foot supermaxi limit and in the Imoca the box rules and 10 deg movable ballast limit) come into play and drive these distorted, overly wide boats.

I am not saying these trends are bad, or slow, or unseaworthy. Just that one has to look at all the factors, and often the trends in racing boats don't always apply to cruising boats, othertimes there is a synergy but for different reasons, ie wide stern equals space.

**s/v Jedi** · 18-05-2016, 19:33

Jedi is our first pilothouse boat and I must admit it is one of the most awesome features that I never expected to have such an impact on life aboard. I can't imagine doing without it; it is a must have.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Snowpetrel · 18-05-2016, 23:19

She looks lovely Jedi, I like the way you put the hardtop over the pilothouse with the solar panels on it. At least the windage is further forward and it provides some useful cockpit shelter. The ketch rig really reduces the size of your headsail. I bet its smaller than a lot of 45 footers. Cheers

Sent from my SM-G930F using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

**Dockhead** · 19-05-2016, 09:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Polux

You have to sharpen your eyes

. Regarding your boat, 16 years of development of yacht design is not the same as 30, but if you cannot find differences regarding new designs and the design of your boat is only because you are not looking well even if the design of your boat was very contemporary regarding 2000.

Your boat, the 2000 Moody 54:

You can compare it with the Garcia 52:

OVNI 52:

Boreal 52:

Cigale 16:

Adventure 55:

Salona 60:

I could go on and posting many contemporary 50/60 ft yachts sharing common design characteristics (as well as some differences) than will show clearly the differences to your hull regarding a contemporary design. I will not point out those differences since they would be obvious to you or everybody that decides to make a fair comparison but I would say: look at bows, transoms and the place where max beam is.

Yes you can find some brands, mostly conservative ones, that still had not modernised their hulls, some having old designed hulls (MKII) that were not designed much after the one of your boat. But on brands like HR or Oyster the last designs ( last 2 years) clearly show that they also have decided to modernise their designs bringing them to the state of the art.

No one disputed that such designs exist. What was disputed was that there is only one "state of the art" and only one direction, only one "modern" and "not modern" hull form, and you have not made a case that there is. Nor could you make such a case, because this idea is false. One type of hull form does not suit all uses, and there are different directions in hull form evolution. Why even among the boats you posted, there are very different types of hull form, and not a unified "modern" movement.

The "Wedgie", or as someone on here called it, the "Pizza Wedge" hull form, is only one design direction, and is still used by a minority of yards for a minority of world boat production. It is not clear that this type of design will even increase -- it could well be just a passing fashion, as many professional boat designers say. The Wedgie has absolutely not made other hull forms obsolete, and is unlikely to do so. It has a few advantages but also a few significant disadvantages.

The very last Oyster designs, at least among there regular prodution boats -- the 475 and 545 -- introduced just last year, have exactly the same hull form as the Moody 54, except that they have full skeg rudders. Same can be said for the latest Hallberg Rassy designs. I could go on. That is not to say that this hull form is perfect or fabulous or anything like that -- every hull design has disadvantages. But it is absolutely not obsolete.

Fashion and progress are NOT the same thing and do not always correspond.

K_V_B · 19-05-2016, 09:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snowpetrel

I said the only length that really matters for a cruising boat is the length the marina and slipyard charges for. and normally they use LOA, including bowsprits and the like.

Which is why one designer came up with this: