"Very Inneficient Multihulls?"

[schoonerdog]

Duh! The only race records kept by monohulls are ones in which cats haven't competed in, compare 766 nautical miles in one 24 hr period set by Orange II to 563 to the Volvo racers. Orange II set the transatlantic record for 4 days with a broken rudder after hitting an iceberg. It's only a matter of time before they do it in 3 days.

[yotphix]

Yeah but...a BROKEN RUDDER?!? That would NEVER happen on a monohull! They were luck the thing didn't just turn upside down!

[yotphix]

Any how, sometimes in the evolution of a thing, older versions kick around for a while. Not all new versions prove ultimately more successful either. We all still use sails no?

[avazquez]

Multihull versus monohull...........men forget it, I have monohull and have sailed multihulls...just pick whatever you like best. If you like the beauty of heeling and waves displacement, monohulls are for you (and me). If you like to go fast above the water get a cat. If you want to say bye bye to multihulls as you beat against waves get an efficient monohull. Otherwise get whatever makes you happy.

There is no point in comparing different design approaches. Each one has advantages and disadvantages.

[44'cruisingcat]

Originally Posted by avazquez

If you want to say bye bye to multihulls as you beat against waves get an efficient monohull. Otherwise get whatever makes you happy.

There is no point in comparing different design approaches. Each one has advantages and disadvantages.

The old "cats can't go to windward" fantasy yet again. Maybe you should watch some video from the 1988 Americas cup?

I own a 40 foot cruising monohull, (which is now for sale) and have cruised and recently raced a well designed, modern composite 38 foot cruising catamaran. So what do I see as the mono's advantages? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. OK marina berths are cheaper. That's it. The cat points at least as high, sails faster and more comfortably to windward, and on every other point of sail there is just no comparison.

The difference in space and comfort are astounding. Anchorages where our mono would have been rolling it's (and ours) guts out all night, were very pleasant. Daysailing ONLY, going North we averaged 120 miles a day, and slept at anchor every night - the trip Brisbane - Airlie took 5 days. We would have needed to sail overnight at least a couple of times on our mono. For cruising, as in racing, there is simply no contest - cats win for speed, comfort, space and safety.

[Therapy]

Originally Posted by 44'cruisingcat

The old "cats can't go to windward" fantasy yet again. Maybe you should watch some video from the 1988 Americas cup?

I own a 40 foot cruising monohull, (which is now for sale) and have cruised and recently raced a well designed, modern composite 38 foot cruising catamaran. So what do I see as the mono's advantages? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. OK marina berths are cheaper. That's it. The cat points at least as high, sails faster and more comfortably to windward, and on every other point of sail there is just no comparison.

The difference in space and comfort are astounding. Anchorages where our mono would have been rolling it's (and ours) guts out all night, were very pleasant. Daysailing ONLY, going North we averaged 120 miles a day, and slept at anchor every night - the trip Brisbane - Airlie took 5 days. We would have needed to sail overnight at least a couple of times on our mono. For cruising, as in racing, there is simply no contest - cats win for speed, comfort, space and safety.

This I was convinced of in the early 1980s and yet there are still few cats out there compared to mono's. It seems to be some sort of hard to break "tradition". I want to have a cat with a mast-aft rig but won't because I cannot afford to have one designed and built.

DANG IT!!

Once some folks with money put some together and spank the bejesus out of the current fast cats with the contemporary (and outdated) sloop rig they will become more and more common.

I want it all NOW!

DANG IT!!!!!

[MysticGringo]

For me... its simply economics. No way I could afford a Cat for the cost of my mono. Once I learn more about what I am doing, and have enough money, I will have a cat.

Don't burn me for defecting mono-lovers. I love my boat... she's the greatest thing I ever purchased. I love pulling into an anchorage with boats that cost 10 or 20 times more than mine, knowing that they are paying so much more for the same view I have.

[coot]

Originally Posted by 44'cruisingcat

So what do I see as the mono's advantages? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. OK marina berths are cheaper. That's it.

I seem to recall that the boat itself is also considerably less expensive.

[Tropic Cat]

Yeah but ya get what ya pay for

[Ex-Calif]

I am contuing my education here and would appreciate some comments. When we are comparing monohulls vs. multi hulls in terms of price and performance wouldn't it be fair to consider interior volume?

For example doesn't a 40 foot mono have about the interior volume of a 30 foot cat? so shouldn't one compare a 30 foot cat to a 40 foot mono in terms of price and performance?

A 40 foot cat is probably more like a 60 foot mono, isn't it?

[cooper]

if someone could tell me how you turn a cat back up the right way if it goes over I would be sold.....

[cat man do]

Originally Posted by cooper

if someone could tell me how you turn a cat back up the right way if it goes over I would be sold.....

Yeah, if someone would tell me how to stop a couple of ton of steel, lead and concrete from sinking to the bottom I'd probably have a mono as well.

Nah, don't think so

Dave

[coot]

Originally Posted by Ex-Calif

I am contuing my education here and would appreciate some comments. When we are comparing monohulls vs. multi hulls in terms of price and performance wouldn't it be fair to consider interior volume?

Yes, but you want to compare usable volume. My boat has many small, oddly shaped places that are interior volume, but that I can't really do anything with. 100 feet of garden hose has an interior volume of about 4 cubic feet, but that doesn't mean that 1000 feet of hose makes a good storage closet.

For example doesn't a 40 foot mono have about the interior volume of a 30 foot cat? so shouldn't one compare a 30 foot cat to a 40 foot mono in terms of price and performance?

No, I don't think so.

I looked at a bunch of catamarans at the boat show a few years back. I wondered why there were so few catamarans smaller than about 40 feet (12 meters). Then I went in a Gemini that was 10.5 meters (34 feet), and I understood immediately. It was tiny inside. My wife immediately said "We can't even consider this boat because it is too cramped". I don't doubt that the total volume of the Gemini was more than my Catalina 34, but a lot of that volume was in the hulls. It didn't make particularly effective living space.

b.t.w. Center cockpit designs have the same problem. I now have a Beneteau 42 CC, but I looked at the 36 foot version first. The cockpit displaces some of the living area and divides it into smaller spaces. In the smaller boat, you end up with two cabins that are both too small. In the bigger boat, there is more room.

From the catamarans I have looked at, it looks like 40 feet is about the minimum size that can have a reasonable interior. At that point, the usable space looks bigger than a 40 foot mono, but at a dramatically increased cost.

I suspect your thought applies at larger sizes. e.g. compare a 40 foot catamaran to a 50 foot mono, or a 50 foot catamaran to a 60 foot mono. I don't spend much time looking at boats that cost more than a half million dollars, though...

[44'cruisingcat]

Originally Posted by cooper

if someone could tell me how you turn a cat back up the right way if it goes over I would be sold.....

You must be sold then. Of the small number of multihulls that do capsize, the VAST majority are righted, repaired and put back into service. How many sunken monohulls are refloated? No doubt some are, but not many.

[44'cruisingcat]

Originally Posted by coot

Yes, but you want to compare usable volume. My boat has many small, oddly shaped places that are interior volume, but that I can't really do anything with. 100 feet of garden hose has an interior volume of about 4 cubic feet, but that doesn't mean that 1000 feet of hose makes a good storage closet.


No, I don't think so.

I looked at a bunch of catamarans at the boat show a few years back. I wondered why there were so few catamarans smaller than about 40 feet (12 meters). Then I went in a Gemini that was 10.5 meters (34 feet), and I understood immediately. It was tiny inside. My wife immediately said "We can't even consider this boat because it is too cramped". I don't doubt that the total volume of the Gemini was more than my Catalina 34, but a lot of that volume was in the hulls. It didn't make particularly effective living space.

b.t.w. Center cockpit designs have the same problem. I now have a Beneteau 42 CC, but I looked at the 36 foot version first. The cockpit displaces some of the living area and divides it into smaller spaces. In the smaller boat, you end up with two cabins that are both too small. In the bigger boat, there is more room.

From the catamarans I have looked at, it looks like 40 feet is about the minimum size that can have a reasonable interior. At that point, the usable space looks bigger than a 40 foot mono, but at a dramatically increased cost.

I suspect your thought applies at larger sizes. e.g. compare a 40 foot catamaran to a 50 foot mono, or a 50 foot catamaran to a 60 foot mono. I don't spend much time looking at boats that cost more than a half million dollars, though...

There are a few sub 40 foot cats that have pretty good space. Certainly more than a 35 foot mono. Probably more than a lot of 40 foot mono's too. The Seawind 1000, and Tasman 35 are a couple of examples. -=[ t a s m a n * c a t a m a r a n s ]=-