"speed" vs "comfort"

[bob perry]

Well sorry for the hijack Don but it worked for me.

[Amgine]

::grumbles about non-clickable link in sig::

Must be that my boat is neither fast nor exceptionally comfortable.

Edit: the link works now, Amgine.

[Stephen Phillips]

Don, I would prefer comfort to speed, and speed to discomfort. We could both be on the same boat at the same time and experience different levels of discomfort, even though I could not actually experience your discomfort.

I have learned that you are not likely to get a specific answer to a general question. The comfort factor, or comfort ratio, is apparently a general number.

Since the Alberg 35 has been mentioned and we have a CD25 sailor on board, can we say that for their LOA that the Alberg designs tend to be comfortable? I believe that would include the Pearson 35 and all the Cape Dory's. The Cape Dory 30's and 36's are popular on the East Coast. Comparing boats of similar LOA to these two boats, what common boats might be both faster and and more comfortable? What boats might be slower and more uncomfortable? I mean under the typical conditions that you have or would sail these boats, not hypothetical conditions someone else might sail them. This is all somewhat futile, but it serves to somewhat define comfort relative to speed, which is the subject of this thread.

[sailorboy1]

I don't mind that we went off course (really didn't but instead with deep into it). Seems from what I can remember from the postings that the lean is toward the "speed" end. I admit that I've been leaning that way, but then I've never gotten sick even in my Navy days (I'm sure my time will come). The general thinking is that it is better to get in to reduce time out in the weather. But that I think assumes that the weather is bad and I would assume this would mean there is enough wind to be at hull speed regardless. Maybe I'll post a new thread with a different version of the question.

[Tempest245]

Originally Posted by Don Lucas

The general thinking is that it is better to get in to reduce time out in the weather. .

I believe , that time in or out of weather, is a function of speed and distance. It would seem to me that intended cruising grounds/use play a key factor in decision making in selecting a proper vessel. Just like vessel draft would be a consideration in cruising the Bahamas or the Chesapeake etc.

What are the anticpated length of passages? If your longest open water passage is 4 days you have a better chance of picking your weather window and avoiding major systems. As passages get longer the greater the odds are of experiencing adverse weather conditions.

The longer the passages the greater need you have for tankage, storage or the ability to replenish water and power underway. The amount of human effort required to keep a vessel sailing well in adverse conditions can be exhausting. If the motion of the vessel in a seaway is so lively that you can't cook, eat, stay dry or rest then the need for comfort beomes more critical imho.

Are we selecting a vessel to cruise the East Coast of the US from Maine to Florida? A vessel to cruise the Caribbean? The West Coast of the United States and Canada.The Mediterranean Etc? ... Or are we crossing oceans?

I've enjoyed this discussion/ debate on the general merits of speed vs comfort. But don't we generally have more specific intentions when we
select our vessels?

My 34' shoal draft, limited tankage, vessel suits me fine for coastal cruising on the East Coast of the US as would many other vessels... Would it serve me as well getting to and cruising the Caribbean, is a big question mark in my mind.

Unless your intentions are to cruise the planet, I think it could be productive to narrow the speed vs comfort discussion to the particular cruising grounds/range that you are considering. Narrowing the range may broaden the suitable selections; broadening the range may narrow the selections , if that make sense.

[bob perry]

One of the key elements in the success of the Valiant 40 is that it combined reasonable offshore speed with a slow roll. This was due to the deep deadrise section, i.e. V shape, I used for that hull and probably also due to the double ended hull form that reduced the volume aft further reducing initial stability. The first V-40's were initially tender. We then aded 1,000 lbs. of lead and stiffened the boats up but the motion changed very little, ballast really does not have much effect on initial stability as discussed earlier. Later on thru two keel shape changes we further increased the V-40's stability but I don't recall anyone complaining about the boat's motion.

[Tempest245]

Boats.com - Boat Review/Test: Valiant 40

for further reading pleasure. " A Young and Ambitious Robert Perry"

Aren't we all STILL young and ambitious??!!! :-)

[dcstrng]

Originally Posted by Stephen Phillips

Since the Alberg 35 has been mentioned and we have a CD25 sailor on board, can we say that for their LOA that the Alberg designs tend to be comfortable? I believe that would include the Pearson 35 and all the Cape Dory's...

On the speed versus comfort continuum, I don’t find my likes consistent – varying from heavy to light as length increases… while having neither the huge volume of experience of some hereabouts, nor having ever been caught in a blow that a reef or two wouldn’t satisfy, I nonetheless find that of the boats I think I like, the D/L seems to be at the heavy (Alberg-esque) end as the LWL gets down around 20 feet, while being decidedly on the light end (120 or less, Perry-esque…?) as the LWL approaches 33-38 feet. This has been my proclivity for a quarter century at least…

Partly I suppose because I rarely ever assume a need for load-carrying ability for more than two folks (Aunt Gertrude can get her own boat), and one is more like it, and my needs are generally fairly Spartan… so it is more an attitude predicated on expediency – and the fact that for lazy sailors (such as me), the sheer sail size can be smaller if I keep the mass down… sailed a 15-ton tank for several years, but am cured of that I think…

[sailorboy1]

Originally Posted by sailorboy1

So many boats, so many "numbers". Not counting extremes and given that light air is more common than heavy air; what is the group preference between the boat design that is faster with a rocker ride (but probably only a lot of difference at seas beyound full reefing points), or the boat with "comfort" soft movement but slower (all the time but still going to be rough beyound the same fully reefed point)? In this I am asking about cruising boats overall and not race designs.

With 5 years since I asked the question I'm going to say - speed.

For the most I have found you can mostly chose the conditions to avoid the rough weather, but that catches you out in light wind.

[a64pilot]

I'll take comfort over speed, always. Think it may be an aging thing, twenty years ago I would have sacrificed most anything to go fast, fast is fun. Now I want to be comfortable first.

Hasn't anyone pointed out that with enough money, you can have both?


Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[colemj]

Speed. Comfort in bad conditions is illusory and gained only in degrees of minuteness. When it is snotty, the only thing that matters is waterline, and any "comfort" you feel from a slow, heavy boat vs. a slowed down speedy boat is splitting hairs.

When it is light, the rolling, pitching and yawing of a slow heavy boat at the mercy of the seas is far more uncomfortable than a steady fast boat adjusted to be more in tune with the seas.

Particularly downwind.

Mark

[sailorboy1]

Originally Posted by a64pilot

Hasn't anyone pointed out that with enough money, you can have both?


Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

Even if they tried it's a lie. Those that think so just have neither for a longer period.

[Cheechako]

If I've got it right, you are asking light air.... I motor or motorsail in light air so it probably doesn't matter to me.
Other than that .....speed is dictated by waterline... except for the time to accelerate to hull speed.
Sooooo.... hmmm... I lean toward a more jerky motion than a slow roll actually. But probably somewhere in between, stout built, protected rudder but long waterline and beamy.

[robert sailor]

Originally Posted by Cheechako

If I've got it right, you are asking light air.... I motor or motorsail in light air so it probably doesn't matter to me.
Other than that .....speed is dictated by waterline... except for the time to accelerate to hull speed.
Sooooo.... hmmm... I lean toward a more jerky motion than a slow roll actually. But probably somewhere in between, stout built, protected rudder but long waterline and beamy.

I look for the middle ground, decent speed and a nice motion at sea. This is mono hull thinking only but the motion is very important to the comfort of those aboard, especially on long passages. On the shorter stuff give me speed.

[a64pilot]

Even the speed thing is relative, strong wind and decent waves, I'm faster than many, but light air I'm motorsailing while some are still sailing.


Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum