Leopard 45 or 50

[CarlF]

Granted - Chris White's boats are designed for a different market than Leopard. But how is the forward cockpit any different from a safety perspective? If it was so unsafe, why would Chris allow it in his designs?

And as you say, we have no idea what happened to that 44. But the likely case is capsize - since that's how the majority of mid-ocean cat losses occur. Including several of Chris White's boats. A forward cockpit is not going to make a capsize more likely.

Given the extremely large number of Leopards out there with forward cockpits - all delivered - until recently - on their own bottom from South Africa - a serious safety problem with that cockpit would have shown up by now.

I'm not suggesting that Leopards are a great choice for a southern ocean circumnavigation or a polar expedition but I expect it would do just fine if it had a competent skipper.

[sv Stella Maris]

I like my Lagoon. I like my Hobie Cat 16. I like my dingy.

They are all made for different things.

Forward cockpits are just another ‘different thing’...and they do ‘that thing’ well...

I was on a new 45 docked next to me for a couple days. Beautiful boat. It had the space of the older 48 but more efficiently arranged. The full time capitan aboard with over a decade of Leopard only vessels was very happy with it as well. Boat and crew out of St Lucia, I saw it in Grenada.

[Barra]

Originally Posted by CarlF

. A forward cockpit is not going to make a capsize more likely.

.

I disagree wholeheartedly. The leopard cockpit is large enough and with enough vertical glass to present a serious risk of exactly that happening in the wrong conditions.

Again don't compare that design to the Atlantic's. It's apples and oranges.

Ever had greenwater come over your saloon roof? It certainly focuses the mind to the possibilities once you have experienced it I can tell you.

[NPCampbell]

Originally Posted by Barra

I disagree wholeheartedly. The leopard cockpit is large enough and with enough vertical glass to present a serious risk of exactly that happening in the wrong conditions.

Many of the Leopard, Lagoon and FPs have forward lounges, large foot wells or vast expanses of fiberglass outside of the tramps. Almost all of them have vertical glass around the salon. There have been over 10,000 catamarans built amongst these 3 brands representing millions upon millions of miles traveled. How many documented cases are there where these criteria have caused the catamarans to sink or capsize? I'm sure they exist but I'm going to take a wild guess and say that having too much sail, grounding and seacock problems cause sinking or capsizing by a factor of 1000 to 1 over retaining water in the forward cockpit.

Originally Posted by Barra

Again don't compare that design to the Atlantic's. It's apples and oranges.

A rogue wave doesn't care who designed your boat. The forward cockpit in those CW designs is ginormous. If a Leopard holds 6300 pounds then that cockpit's gotta hold 20,000. However, once again, I'm not sure I can recall a capsize or sinking due to this. The Anna and Leopard, 2 CW designs that capsized in the past 10 years sank because of too much sail out.

[smj]

The Chris White catamarans Anna and Leopard capsized but did not sink.

[Barra]

First up most of the lagoons FPs and earlier leopard designs do not have large forward cockpits in the same style as the new leopards. That's why they had to get a specific CE assessment done dealing with drainage rates etc. It was something new.

Yes there is alot of vertical glass in some of them but again not nearly to the extent of t h e leopards. They are taking things to extremes.

Second too much sail, grounding etc are all things the skipper can control so can be mitigated on the conditions of the day so to speak.

A design compromise like the forward cockpit can only be mitigated at the time of purchase or trip planning stage, not on the day. It's the reason why there probably aren't more failings of these designs. Ie few are taken where greenwater over the bows are a possibility. If they faced these conditions regularly there would be more failings I have no doubt.

Anyway that's my real point - horses for courses. The new leopards are great at their design brief. Just recognise what that brief is - calm water coastal chartering. If you want to cross oceans there are far better and safer designs including the earlier leopards.

Originally Posted by NPCampbell

Many of the Leopard, Lagoon and FPs have forward lounges, large foot wells or vast expanses of fiberglass outside of the tramps. Almost all of them have vertical glass around the salon. There have been over 10,000 catamarans built amongst these 3 brands representing millions upon millions of miles traveled. How many documented cases are there where these criteria have caused the catamarans to sink or capsize? I'm sure they exist but I'm going to take a wild guess and say that having too much sail, grounding and seacock problems cause sinking or capsizing by a factor of 1000 to 1 over retaining water in the forward cockpit.


A rogue wave doesn't care who designed your boat. The forward cockpit in those CW designs is ginormous. If a Leopard holds 6300 pounds then that cockpit's gotta hold 20,000. However, once again, I'm not sure I can recall a capsize or sinking due to this. The Anna and Leopard, 2 CW designs that capsized in the past 10 years sank because of too much sail out.

[AlexTurin]

Originally Posted by smj

I ran the numbers many moons ago and completely filled, the Leopard forward cockpit holds about 6300 lbs of water, if I remember correctly.
So if your ok with a full sized Ford F-250 pick up truck suddenly parking itself on your fore deck, then your good to go.

Have you heard about new Garcia Explocat 52? https://www.garciayachts.com/en/yach...n/explocat-52/
I think we have To inform Garcia about F-250 on their Explocat forward cockpit )))

[AlexTurin]

Originally Posted by Barra

First up most of the lagoons FPs and earlier leopard designs do not have large forward cockpits in the same style as the new leopards. That's why they had to get a specific CE assessment done dealing with drainage rates etc. It was something new.

Yes there is alot of vertical glass in some of them but again not nearly to the extent of t h e leopards. They are taking things to extremes.

Second too much sail, grounding etc are all things the skipper can control so can be mitigated on the conditions of the day so to speak.

A design compromise like the forward cockpit can only be mitigated at the time of purchase or trip planning stage, not on the day. It's the reason why there probably aren't more failings of these designs. Ie few are taken where greenwater over the bows are a possibility. If they faced these conditions regularly there would be more failings I have no doubt.

Anyway that's my real point - horses for courses. The new leopards are great at their design brief. Just recognise what that brief is - calm water coastal chartering. If you want to cross oceans there are far better and safer designs including the earlier leopards.

I think you are right. But if you will find in YouTube Sailing Sisu you will see that couple Of people just without experience started in CapeTown went to Cabo Verde, Canaria Island, Madeira then cross Mediterranean and came to Turkey. They made this on Leopard 45.
I think this boat is great for calm water but strong enough to sail across a oceans.

[Tupaia]

Originally Posted by AlexTurin

Have you heard about new Garcia Explocat 52? https://www.garciayachts.com/en/yach...n/explocat-52/
I think we have To inform Garcia about F-250 on their Explocat forward cockpit )))

Maybe they should Pierre Delion although very skilled in aluminium boats has never designed a catamaran. (excepting a small service vessel). Garcia themselves although skilled in expedition monohulls have never built a catamaran.
Considering where this vessel is expected to operate I would be sceptical about its safety in rough conditions.
When your cat is buried up to the mast in the back of a wave the ability to shed water is paramount to safety.

[smj]

Originally Posted by AlexTurin

I think you are right. But if you will find in YouTube Sailing Sisu you will see that couple Of people just without experience started in CapeTown went to Cabo Verde, Canaria Island, Madeira then cross Mediterranean and came to Turkey. They made this on Leopard 45.

I think this boat is great for calm water but strong enough to sail across a oceans.

I think the Leopard is plenty strong enough to sail across an ocean, and the chances are absolutely minimal that the forward cockpit would be a problem, but if it was.........That’s what worries me.

[capn_billl]

Originally Posted by Tupaia

Maybe they should Pierre Delion although very skilled in aluminium boats has never designed a catamaran. (excepting a small service vessel). Garcia themselves although skilled in expedition monohulls have never built a catamaran.
Considering where this vessel is expected to operate I would be sceptical about its safety in rough conditions.
When your cat is buried up to the mast in the back of a wave the ability to shed water is paramount to safety.

Note to self: Don't sail to windward with 40 kt winds, and 20ft breaking seas in a Leopard with a forward cockpit.

That's where the stern drogue is a better storm tactic.

Most Cats have large vertical windows in front.

Not an Ideal design, but when the waves are large enough to matter you should be taking them at an angle anyway.

[CarlF]

Originally Posted by smj

I think the Leopard is plenty strong enough to sail across an ocean, and the chances are absolutely minimal that the forward cockpit would be a problem, but if it was.........That’s what worries me.

The L50 is a 25 ton boat. 3 tons of water that drains in just over a minute is not going to be an issue. If it was, the Leapord engineers would have added even more drains. It's not expensive to do so.

And as mentioned, only an idiot would drive a Leopard (or any catamaran) straight into large breaking seas.

It does concern me how many catamarans are taken across an ocean without a proper drogue on board.

[Barra]

Said with such certainty Carl.

Personally I would be more concerned with the static risk of the compromised forward cockpit that basically nothing other than avoidance of conditions can mitigate ie once your in it your stuck with it vs the active management via use of drogues etc

You can always find the gear to tow warps if needed so for me the cockpit rates as a higher risk than lack of purpose built drogues on board but in any event is cheaply and easily remedied. The cockpit not so much.

And to assume you can always choose which way to take waves in extreme conditions is dangerously flawed.

Each to their own.

Originally Posted by CarlF

The L50 is a 25 ton boat. 3 tons of water that drains in just over a minute is not going to be an issue. If it was, the Leapord engineers would have added even more drains. It's not expensive to do so.

And as mentioned, only an idiot would drive a Leopard (or any catamaran) straight into large breaking seas.

It does concern me how many catamarans are taken across an ocean without a proper drogue on board.

[smj]

Originally Posted by CarlF

The L50 is a 25 ton boat. 3 tons of water that drains in just over a minute is not going to be an issue. If it was, the Leapord engineers would have added even more drains. It's not expensive to do so.

And as mentioned, only an idiot would drive a Leopard (or any catamaran) straight into large breaking seas.

It does concern me how many catamarans are taken across an ocean without a proper drogue on board.

The forward cockpit that holds over 3 tons of water is on the Leopard 44, not the 50. I’m sure the forward cockpit on the 50 is substantially larger?
Either way, it’s a matter of feeling comfortable with the compromises.

[capn_billl]

6300 lbs is 750 gallons.

I carry 350 gallons of tankage.


This weight causes no issues.