True blue water boat extinction a fait accompli?

[letsgetsailing3]

Originally Posted by barnakiel

Think draft, mate, draft.

Look at Aitutaki entrance depth and you get your weird coincidence explained.

Cheers,
b.

I think his point is that they all made it there.

[lifeofreilly57]

Personally I'm going to boat shows these days to shop for boats I will be able to afford in 20 years, and by that I don't mean I'll have enough money to purchase one new in 20 years, just that I might be able to afford one of them in 20 years when the boat is 20 years old. If it needs some TLC of course.
Boats are better than they've ever been, there's not much truth to the statement "they built them better in the old days", it's really that the crap ones died off and were scrapped, most of the better quality boats survived and in most cases were better cared for since they had higher value throughout their useful life cycle.
These days there are plenty of well built BWB's, their just different, they've been built to today's design developments. They also tend to be more expensive, just like the better boats built 30 years ago. I couldn't afford one new then and still can't afford a new one now, that's why I own an older, better quality boat, this isn't to disparage the newer, affordable production cruisers, there are many capable models out there but since I'm pretty technically astute and can do the majority of the work myself it usually works out in the long run, I can get an older better quality boat and do the upgrades within a reasonable budget.
Many people can't, so that, buying an older, better quality boat that needs work would be a losing proposition all the way around for them, a money pit that would never come close to getting a return, in that case, a sturdy, conservatively designed, moderate displacement boat from a production builder would be the wise choice.
There's always more than one way to skin a cat.

[GWB]

Originally Posted by Polux

I don't understand the contempt regarding the "waxing lyrical". Certainly if you have something to add you can add it without resourcing to that kind of empty and offensive language, even so I will reply: Go to my blog and you will see practical examples. The smaller the boat the bigger the importance in what regards a proportionally bigger stability given by the hull form stability of a very beamy hull (in what regards offshore solo sailing).

That is why proportionally, boats like mini racers (and derived cruisers) are more beamier than 60ft solo racers (and their derived cruisers), Even more so if we are talking about 80ft yachts.

Even 100ft yachts when designed to be sailed for a very short crew will benefit from this approach. Here you have Nomad, designed to be sailed by a crew of 3. A narrower yacht of this size would need at least the double:

A bord de Nomad IV

And here you have a Django 7.20 that is circumnavigating:

Into the wind | Un bateau , un piolet , un parapente , un tour du monde . . .

Following the mini racer concept they make also the even smaller Django 6.70:

Paulo, thanks for the spam. I don't visit your blog, as the sight of men in speedos striking a pose is off-putting to me.. to say the least.

Back to your statement about these new designs being better platforms for offshore cruising because they are derived from solo minis - I'm not sure how you arrived at this conclusion. The smaller boats are uncomfortable and get thrown around in heavier weather, they struggle in the ocean unless off the wind (in heavier weather) - and then they need constant attention. Contrast that with a heavier boat - like mine which, does not need attention and will happily sail at hull speed for days. In a recent long distant race my tiller broke off but the boat kept sailing at close to hull speed. Try that on a mini.
I know you will be outraged at these observations, but its just reality.

[robert sailor]

Originally Posted by Jon Eisberg

Even Rustler has acknowledged the reality of The Market...

The 36 is the only full-keeled boat they still build, the new 37 pictured below, their 42 and all their other models now feature a more contemporary underbody...

I think the change away from full keel sailboats started many many years ago. For all intents and purposes there is no longer a market for this product beyond a small nieche market at best. A form of modified fin keel and skeg hung rudder have replaced the full keels. These days most boats are built with fin keels and spade rudders. I like spade rudders but in my mind many are lightly built and often are the weakest spot on the boat.

[Julie Mor]

Originally Posted by lifeofreilly57

Boats are better than they've ever been, there's not much truth to the statement "they built them better in the old days", it's really that the crap ones died off and were scrapped, most of the better quality boats survived and in most cases were better cared for since they had higher value throughout their useful life cycle.

How do you determine which new boats built today will be the ones still afloat 20 years from now? You can't. Looking now may be fun, but shopping now could be a waste of time.

New technologies in use today still haven't had their mettle tested. What seems like revolutionary and rock solid now may well fail the test of time. We know tabbing in bulkheads and building in longitudinal stringers and large floors makes for a rock solid hull. But what about the new epoxies in use today that effectively glues an interior ("bulkheads" included) to a hull shell that has no stringers and small floors?

I've read it's wise to avoid buying the #1 hull of any boat because the weaknesses haven't been exposed through real life testing. I tend to feel the same way about new technologies.

[lifeofreilly57]

Actually you can buy a new boat these days, it doesn't need to log 5,000,000,000 sea miles on a hull. Displacement, hull forms, S/D ratios, etc, etc are pretty good predictors of performance and capabilities. From there it's build quality.
Most designs are derivatives of others, I haven't seen a huge change in design except for racing boats, that said, you can compare hull forms to existing boats which have a track record and have some predictability of their overall sea keeping and performance.
As for build quality? It's not hard, if you were buying a new boat don't be afraid to ask hard questions, pull up the floor boards, ask for design prints of the grid structures. Heck, if the factory is open to it ask for a tour to see boats under construction, the cost of a flight is pidling compared to the money your putting out for the boat.
All the boats I've owned were either salvage or auction boats, you learn a lot when doing your own work, but you don't need to go to that extreme to learn enough to know how to pick a boat for your needs.
If buying a new boat you either better educate yourself or be willing to hire someone who has the knowledge, when you put it in the perspective of cost, the fee for a marine architect or expert surveyor is small in the overall cost of buying a new boat.
See if the boat model your interested in is used in a charter fleet somewhere, then charter one.
Ask the seller to provide contact information for current owners so you can talk directly to people who own them and are using them the way you intend to, if the factory is unwilling to cater to your requests then maybe their not the ones for you. After all, you want them to support you long after the sale.
A little knowledge goes a long way, it's relatively cheap compared to the cost and long term commitment taken on when purchasing a new boat.

[barnakiel]

Originally Posted by letsgetsailing3

I think his point is that they all made it there.

Well. Maybe.

I think things like WS and IP were a marginal minority when we rtwed in our 2003-2007 stunt. There were plenty of true Water boats">blue water boats out there, but not all that many 'full keel attached rudder' boats among them.

I did not notice any WS boats last winter in the West Indies, I spotted two IP. And hundreds of newer true blue water boats too.

b.

[barnakiel]

Originally Posted by robert sailor

I think the change away from full keel sailboats started many many years ago. For all intents and purposes there is no longer a market for this product beyond a small nieche market at best. A form of modified fin keel and skeg hung rudder have replaced the full keels. These days most boats are built with fin keels and spade rudders. I like spade rudders but in my mind many are lightly built and often are the weakest spot on the boat.

I think, possibly-maybe, a full keel attached rudder was the weakest spot too? Not much changed then.

To follow up on your post: I think the departure was partly due to the fact that bigger full keel attached rudder boats may/tend to be very hard to steer - their rudders get very big and the forces required to control them ask for huge gears. Now enters the detached rudder and pop comes the weasel: we can hand-steer the bigger boats again. And so it goes with the balanced spade rudder too - even bigger boats can be hand-steered, at even higher speeds. And so on/forth.

The Dashews claim their detached rudders can take anything the nature can throw at them. I see no reason not to trust them.

And spade rudders can be secured in the way of flip-up mechanism: see Minis, Class 40, Imocas, Volvoes, etc. They can be also built with sacrificial tips.

BTW The otherwise lovely sample of Rustler 37 you posted got a most odd polar diagram in a recent YM review: hitting speeds that seemed to me way and way beyond her theoretical LOA hull speed. And it is a very short LOA in this case due to her 'classic' bow and stern.

b.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by Jon Eisberg

Even Rustler has acknowledged the reality of The Market...

The 36 is the only full-keeled boat they still build, the new 37 pictured below, their 42 and all their other models now feature a more contemporary underbody...

I would say much more modern. Actually the 37 that you posted even if a new boat is heavily based on the old 36. They are trying to survive purposing new relatively modern designs: Fin keel, spade rudder. I have some doubts, the boats have good quality but are dam expensive. The new 53:

[Polux]

Originally Posted by GWB

,,,
Back to your statement about these new designs being better platforms for offshore cruising because they are derived from solo minis - I'm not sure how you arrived at this conclusion. The smaller boats are uncomfortable and get thrown around in heavier weather, they struggle in the ocean unless off the wind (in heavier weather) - and then they need constant attention. Contrast that with a heavier boat - like mine which, does not need attention and will happily sail at hull speed for days. In a recent long distant race my tiller broke off but the boat kept sailing at close to hull speed. Try that on a mini.
I know you will be outraged at these observations, but its just reality.

There are three ways to get more stability from a sailboat (same size): Lowering the CG (bigger draft, torpedo keel) increasing beam and increasing weight. Increasing weight on a sailboat is a bad idea, it makes it slower and sluggish. Modern designers work with lowering the CG and increasing beam maintaining the weight as low as possible. That allows for more stable boats without making them slow.

I don't understand why you talk about small boats. This is not specific of small boats but generic to modern boat design. The influence is not specifically from mini racers but from all open solo racer designs, that go till 60ft. On the post you had replied I posted a 7.7m sailboat but also a 100ft boat.

Regarding this type of boats needing attention you are wrong. They are designed to be forgiven and to be sailed under autopilot even on demanding conditions:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_ZXmr8pmrs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ERwKZcacG0Q

[Jim Cate]

Then you try to appear more objective by saying "There are plenty that I would be happy to sail at sea, but they're not my choice", while your original statement was " I wouldn't go to sea in most of these old type vessels, for despite their full keels and attached rudders, few of them are strong enough for heavy weather at sea. "

LGS3, perhaps you misread this statement. My point was that I wouldn't go to sea in many of the full keel boats specifically moored here in Port Cygnet for the reasons stated.

I'm tired of this argument. I know what I see out cruising. I am doing so (cruising in distant ports) right now and have been a long time. I see lots of newer boats and fewer and fewer "BWB full keelers" as the years go by. This is not BS.

You believe what you want.

Jim

[sailorboy1]

[QUOTE=Jim Cate;1759086 I see lots of newer boats and fewer and fewer "BWB full keelers" as the years go by. This is not BS.

You believe what you want.

Jim[/QUOTE]

I predict that someone will now post about how much luck there is out on the water

[mitiempo]

Originally Posted by Jon Eisberg

Even Rustler has acknowledged the reality of The Market...

The 36 is the only full-keeled boat they still build, the new 37 pictured below, their 42 and all their other models now feature a more contemporary underbody...

True, but still a bwb I think. Sort of a modern version of the Nicholson 35.

[Skipper434343]

I agree with Robert, that fast boat is safe as you can get out of weather faster than slow one. 40 footer that is stiff and can make 170 per day and can survive 80 knots storm (with the right crew) is a good boat. When you look at the IMOCA 60 they are very light and they are deign to go fast, fast is safe in Southern Ocean because you can outrun the Low systems, one of the reason they don't allow smaller boat because are not fast enough.
The problem with some of the big names that some of their boats fall apart while sailing in normal condition, loosing rig because of chain plates are part with the boat, loosing keels and other critical failures over the years, bad thinks can happen to any boat but when happen multiple times to same brand that raising question why the builder did get this fix and still saying boats that are not safe.My take on it is that what is change is the approach of the builder whom used to be manage by people passioned about sailing and they build boats with that purpose. Now they are just another "product" managed by hedge funds and investors whom don't care about it. The sale "units" powered by big marketing. If you look many of adds in magazines or on line all what they saying is "new big interior" "large cockpit", that's sales special to buyer who is new to sailing.

[Jon Eisberg]

Originally Posted by mitiempo

True, but still a bwb I think. Sort of a modern version of the Nicholson 35.

I agree completely, that seems a perfect description of that boat. I was simply referring to the fact that Rustler has moved away from introducing any new full-keeled/attached rudders to their product line...

Beautiful boats, but put that thing in the Annapolis Boat Show, and 99 out of 100 people stepping off of it will be complaining how "cramped" is was below...

:-)

I was aboard the Mystery 35 a few years ago, another very sweet little boat... But in comparison to the Average White Boat 35s being offered today, it was almost shocking how 'small' it was below. That boat would be a VERY tough sell today, at least in the American market...

Plus, a tiller coupled with the mainsheet in the cockpit, that would be the death knell for 99% of today's new boat buyers... :-)