Can you have Comfort, Value and Performance in a Catamaran?

[sailingharry]

Originally Posted by tp12

This debate pops up every now and then. There is, occasionally, definitely some boats that treat the ARC as a race. The vast majority treat it as what it is, though, and that's a cruise. Without knowing how many crew they have, what sails they have, how they sailed the boat it's very easy to come up with illogical conclusions. I'm not sure it's really all that useful.

Indeed, it's not useful to compare a single pair of boats. But, if you consider that it is mostly cruisers, and that most of us are mostly cruisers, and you look at the stack of finish times, you won't suddenly realize that catamarans get there 2, 3, 4 days earlier. In an 18 day trip, the production catamarans weren't significantly faster than comparable production monohulls.


You could make an argument that the type of person who buys a monohull is more focused on performance, and so the mono's as a category were sailed more aggressively, and the type of person who buys a cat is not. Not sure I'd buy the argument.


But looking at those results, it is very hard to say that an advantage of the typical production cat is "speed" or "reducing passage time." They have many other advantages, of course.

[tp12]

Originally Posted by sailingharry

Indeed, it's not useful to compare a single pair of boats. But, if you consider that it is mostly cruisers, and that most of us are mostly cruisers, and you look at the stack of finish times, you won't suddenly realize that catamarans get there 2, 3, 4 days earlier. In an 18 day trip, the production catamarans weren't significantly faster than comparable production monohulls.

Yeah, I can see the positives in looking for cruising examples. It's trying to extrapolate to boat performance conclusions that you run into a lack of data.

Originally Posted by sailingharry

You could make an argument that the type of person who buys a monohull is more focused on performance, and so the mono's as a category were sailed more aggressively, and the type of person who buys a cat is not. Not sure I'd buy the argument.

You could certainly make the argument but, like you, I don't think that floats.

Originally Posted by sailingharry

But looking at those results, it is very hard to say that an advantage of the typical production cat is "speed" or "reducing passage time." They have many other advantages, of course.

I agree. Typical production cats aren't built for speed, they're built for comfort, and I think meet that design brief very well. They're great boats.

There are performance cruising options with two hulls if that's your particular bent. They're lighter, feature daggerboards, have longer and skinnier hulls compared to the typical production cats and will happily sail fast and close to the wind (30 apparent).

[sailingharry]

Originally Posted by tp12

There are performance cruising options with two hulls if that's your particular bent. They're lighter, feature daggerboards, have longer and skinnier hulls compared to the typical production cats and will happily sail fast and close to the wind (30 apparent).

I did 1000 miles offshore on a Catana 42 (43? I forget). Wow, what a ride! I race when I'm not cruising, and to me boards aren't a "problem", they are a "feature." Same with the board on my Sabre 34, or adjustable jib cars, or a host of other tweaks.

[sailjumanji]

I'm chairman of a rating committee for multihulls participating in long distance offshore regattas in Texas. At maybe the top third of the finish order, we can definately tell that finish order is indicative of boat and crew performance. Racing sails, race-experienced crew, weather routing, etc, assure the boats are sailed to their potential. On the other end of the scale are the guys dragging fishing lures, playing drinking games, putting people on the helm that have never raced. They could be on a Catana, an Outremer, or even a Gunboat, and make the boat look like a condo cat. Their finish order is not indicative of a slow boat.

My experience is the metrics and VPP on a boat dont lie. If its heavy, its slow. If it has daggerboards, it can point. Sail area is king. Fat hulls are slower than slim. Performance cats with a load are still faster than condo cats. If it was a 150 nm or 500 nm race, i might get excited about finish order. For the ARC - with boat owners and crew that may not have sailing speed as a priority - i wouldnt read too much into finish order. IMHO

[sailingharry]

Originally Posted by sailjumanji

For the ARC - with boat owners and crew that may not have sailing speed as a priority - i wouldnt read too much into finish order. IMHO

The ARC has a lot of boats that are similarly crewed. And looking into the aggregate, I think it is indicative. But it is difficult to find a better comparison venue. Where else can you compare a dozen or more production cruising cats to production cruising boats on a passage-length trip? None of these boats will ever show up in a well-crewed Bermuda Race!


If the question is, what kind of performance can you expect on a Lagoon 45 or similar, compared to a Bene 45 or similar, I think looking in the aggregate at the ARC results does show that the cats are no faster, and probably slower, than similar length monohulls.


I certainly wouldn't take those results as input into a handicap system, or insist that the Bene is at least 12 hours faster than the Lagoon. But I also would have trouble defending the argument that on a 2-3 week passage, a Lagoon sees several days less time at sea -- an argument that is often made (ie, catamarans are safer than monohulls because by saving passage time, you see fewer weather systems).

[tp12]

Originally Posted by sailingharry

The ARC has a lot of boats that are similarly crewed. And looking into the aggregate, I think it is indicative. But it is difficult to find a better comparison venue. Where else can you compare a dozen or more production cruising cats to production cruising boats on a passage-length trip? None of these boats will ever show up in a well-crewed Bermuda Race!


If the question is, what kind of performance can you expect on a Lagoon 45 or similar, compared to a Bene 45 or similar, I think looking in the aggregate at the ARC results does show that the cats are no faster, and probably slower, than similar length monohulls.


I certainly wouldn't take those results as input into a handicap system, or insist that the Bene is at least 12 hours faster than the Lagoon. But I also would have trouble defending the argument that on a 2-3 week passage, a Lagoon sees several days less time at sea -- an argument that is often made (ie, catamarans are safer than monohulls because by saving passage time, you see fewer weather systems).

This statement may, or may not, be true generally - "The ARC has a lot of boats that are similarly crewed." but the difficulty is then of which actual boats does this apply to? Does it apply to the boats I want to compare? You don't know that, you don't even know if the initial statement is true, and therefore using that as a basis of comparison is flawed and can't be relied upon to make deductions from. Additionally what sails have they got? How did they choose to sail the boat? What weather did they experience? What points of sail etc etc ... all this information is absent.

Trying to ascertain boat performance from ARC results is just not a feasible proposition. There being no other comparison data available doesn't make the ARC data any better or worse. Sailjumanji gave some boat properties that can more reliably be used to predict performance. Best to stick with them if that is your goal.

Regarding your quoted argument " catamarans are safer than monohulls because by saving passage time, you see fewer weather systems" this would generally apply to more performance oriented boats. And even then, faced with being overtaken by a low or whatever the skipper might change their normal approach to an ocean crossing and sail the boat harder to get the extra performance. Might even skip 5pm mojitos!

There's a lot of factors to consider and these factors aren't recorded in ARC data.

[tp12]

To take this a bit further, if you were using the ARC data to draw statistical conclusions from you would be producing a probability for your conclusion. A value between 0 and 1. The lower your p value, the less likely your conclusion is useful. Your assessment of the limitations of your study of ARC data would have to say that the data is incomplete and probability that the conclusions are accurate, or useful, is low.



Now that may or may not be suitable, depending on what you want to use those conclusions for. For talking rubbish down the pub with your mates = great. For spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on a boat purchase = bad.


As I mentioned, sailjumanji, has given us the benefit of his experience in what are much more reliable boat properties to be used for performance. These would be better to use in purchasing decisions. Then again, if the goal is to outrun weather systems then you're going to need a light cat with long, skinny hulls and daggerboards.


Anyway, I've geeked out enough!

[arsenelupiga]

Originally Posted by sailjumanji

I'm chairman of a rating committee for multihulls participating in long distance offshore regattas in Texas. At maybe the top third of the finish order, we can definately tell that finish order is indicative of boat and crew performance. Racing sails, race-experienced crew, weather routing, etc, assure the boats are sailed to their potential. On the other end of the scale are the guys dragging fishing lures, playing drinking games, putting people on the helm that have never raced. They could be on a Catana, an Outremer, or even a Gunboat, and make the boat look like a condo cat. Their finish order is not indicative of a slow boat.

My experience is the metrics and VPP on a boat dont lie. If its heavy, its slow. If it has daggerboards, it can point. Sail area is king. Fat hulls are slower than slim. Performance cats with a load are still faster than condo cats. If it was a 150 nm or 500 nm race, i might get excited about finish order. For the ARC - with boat owners and crew that may not have sailing speed as a priority - i wouldnt read too much into finish order. IMHO

seawinds not done too well in ARC, i gather.

[RaymondR]

I'm not going to read all the previous posts but to answer your original question you can have twice as much of everything at three times the cost on a multihull.

[sailjumanji]

Originally Posted by arsenelupiga

seawinds not done too well in ARC, i gather.

None entered, but I suspect you know that. But otherwise, that is what you got out of what I wrote?

[malbert73]

To go even further, probably need to add 25-30% in length to accurately compare a mono to a cat. 40 foot production cat (example Lagoon 40) and 50-52 foot production mono (example Beneteau Oceanis 51.1) are very similar in price new on YachtWorld. compare interiors and you really are just comparing type of layout not really more or less space. And speed particularly upwind then favors mono. So you’re left with absence of heeling and rolling as only advantage of cats

[smj]

Originally Posted by malbert73

To go even further, probably need to add 25-30% in length to accurately compare a mono to a cat. 40 foot production cat (example Lagoon 40) and 50-52 foot production mono (example Beneteau Oceanis 51.1) are very similar in price new on YachtWorld. compare interiors and you really are just comparing type of layout not really more or less space. And speed particularly upwind then favors mono. So you’re left with absence of heeling and rolling as only advantage of cats

Really not a fair comparison as the Beneteau is known to be a good performer and the Lagoon.....
The absence of heeling and rolling to me is enough to own a catamaran but you also have shallow draft, the redundancy of 2 motors and 2 rudders, the ability for superior performance if you pick the right boat, unsinkable also if you choose the right cat, much larger cockpit, the ability to carry more solar and probably a better resale value.

[malbert73]

I guess Beneteau is a better performer but what’s the production boat at that size that is slower?
But do you think the 40 foot cat has that much more space than a 51 foot mono? Agree on shallow draft- forgot that one.
You see advantage of redundancy of 2 engines- I see diesels as nearly bulletproof and 2 engines as twice as much maintenance

But I see a lot of merits in cats and for the right cruising I’d consider one. Just saying that you can’t compare LOA to LOA

[Wolfgang.Schau]

I have been a hardcore mono-hull sailor for 20 years, until I step on a catamaran.
We have a Lipari 41 from Fountian Pajot and we absolutely love it!
A 41' catamaran give you the same living space than a 54' mono-hull.
With your budget you will be one category up, i.e 48', almost double the space. You will be amazed about the space and the comfort. There are a few things I would consider:
1) Never buy a new boat. We got ours 1 year old, and the previous owner has already taken care of all the warranty and infant issues, plus many of the usual addition like water maker, solar, wind-turbine, etc.
2) Make sure all your running gear is routed to the helm. Many cats have the genua winches an each side, it drives you nuts jumping back and forth while tacking. Make sure you have at least one power winch for the halyard! I'm single handed sailing thousands of miles. You will be amazed how easy a catamaran can be maneuvered under engine. Tacking is very different and needs some experience. However, even a 54' catamaran can be single handed if the setup is right.
3) Usually your helm is either on starboard or on port side. Make sure the master cabin is opposite! Why? You will preferably tie up on a slip with on your helm side, because you have a better visibility. But the you have the noise of the fenders, ropes, walking by folks, etc. on this side. Your kids may care less.
4) Make sue there are no steps between the salon in the bridge and the cockpit. If it is all the same level, a large sliding door will make it become a large living space, combining the inner and the out part, you will love it during sailing and on anchorage.
5) etc.

Enjoy

Wolfgang

[Mr B]

Originally Posted by Wolfgang.Schau

I have been a hardcore mono-hull sailor for 20 years, until I step on a catamaran.
We have a Lipari 41 from Fountian Pajot and we absolutely love it!
A 41' catamaran give you the same living space than a 54' mono-hull.
With your budget you will be one category up, i.e 48', almost double the space. You will be amazed about the space and the comfort. There are a few things I would consider:
1) Never buy a new boat. We got ours 1 year old, and the previous owner has already taken care of all the warranty and infant issues, plus many of the usual addition like water maker, solar, wind-turbine, etc.
2) Make sure all your running gear is routed to the helm. Many cats have the genua winches an each side, it drives you nuts jumping back and forth while tacking. Make sure you have at least one power winch for the halyard! I'm single handed sailing thousands of miles. You will be amazed how easy a catamaran can be maneuvered under engine. Tacking is very different and needs some experience. However, even a 54' catamaran can be single handed if the setup is right.
3) Usually your helm is either on starboard or on port side. Make sure the master cabin is opposite! Why? You will preferably tie up on a slip with on your helm side, because you have a better visibility. But the you have the noise of the fenders, ropes, walking by folks, etc. on this side. Your kids may care less.
4) Make sue there are no steps between the salon in the bridge and the cockpit. If it is all the same level, a large sliding door will make it become a large living space, combining the inner and the out part, you will love it during sailing and on anchorage.
5) etc.

Enjoy

Wolfgang

Very well said, Great post,

Brian,