Hanse 418 or Jeanneau 410?

[Polux]

One considerably diference between the two boats is that the Jeanneau is considerably lighter than the Hanse, 9800 to 7860 kg. They are not built the same way but the built of the Jeanneau is of no superior quality so, one wonders if the Hanse will not be stronger.

The B/D are very similar but the Hanse has 2900kg of ballast while the Jeanneau has around 2260kg. That and the diference in weight makes the Hanse a boat with a bigger overall stability. Probably the Jeanneau is faster and more fun to sail. It has a very nice hull too.

[wildblueyonder]

Hi all, I just joined because I thought maybe I can add something here. I bought a 418 new last year in UK, South Coast and spent a lot of time researching exactly this subject. We are very happy with the choice. I looked at the Jeanneau 410 in detail and decided on the Hanse which we have now sailed one season. I wasn't prejudiced going in.

My main reasons were:
- Build reputation. Hanse's have the edge here according to what I researched. Mass market like Jeanneau yes, but solid and heavy. Built like "tanks" was the general reputation. Compare displacements and subframes and keel bolts/backing plates (my own opinion) to just name a few.
- Fit: I am a big chap and could hardly stand between the wheels and the aft benches on the Jeanneau. The Hanse has a more roomy cockpit, gangway etc.
- Dealer network: I used the excellent Inspiration Marine. A good dealer, as was mentioned, is essential, almost decisive.
- Fittings: This was important to me: Hanse use leading kit from the likes of Selden and B&G, Elvstrom, Lewmar, Yanmar. Only the bow thruster and windlass are not from leading manufacturers and that's not essential. Jeanneau do a lot of white label equipment that I couldn't assess.
- Price: for my chosen spec the Hanse was slightly cheaper.
- Self tacker as standard, easier to sail for a newbie like me.
- Overall impression: the Jeanneau has more bells and whistles and little yachty details in the interior but the Hanse felt more solid with better equipment.

Two general comments: mast is deck stepped and that's good. I prefer deck stepped than having a mast with a structural weak spot (literally perforation) about 1 meter off the deck:you need the mast to separate from the boat in extremis and modern builders don't keel step anymore I think (but would love to hear more views on this).

Neither of these boats is a blue water boat let's be honest. We plan to do the ARC in 2020 but mostly we want her for coastal cruising. Lack of a forefoot in the hull will make them both quite "slappy" in heavier seas. Get a HR or Amel for habitual ocean crossing imho.

Best. WBY

[Polux]

Originally Posted by wildblueyonder

...
..modern builders don't keel step anymore I think (but would love to hear more views on this).
..

You are wrong about that. Only cruising boats where a greater importance is given to have a better saloon, without a mast intrusion, in detriment of an increase on mast performance and safety use deck stepped masts.

If you look at the builders that maximize performance and mast safety due to a more expected hard use you are going to see that practically all have keel steeped masts. Some examples: Grand Soleil, X yachts, Arcona, Solaris, Wauquiez centurion, Jboats, JPK, Luffe, Azuree, Dehler. Swan and Baltic all use keel steeped mast.

Even in what regards mass production brands, when they made performance cruisers, they use keel steeped masts. That's the case with the First line from Beneteau, including the new First 53, the old Jeanneau from the performance line, the new jeanneau Sunfast and even the old Bavaria match line.

The performance cruiser from the Hanse group is the Dehler and they use keel steeped masts:

[B23iL23]

Good feedback and useful. two points
- Deck vs Keel. Most performance boats will go for keel stepped. This is because they will put in much greater loads into the stick than any cruiser - Most will have an adjustable mast step so they can kick the foot fore or aft as required. Added benefit of deck is no water dripping down.


- I think virtually any modern boat, including your Hanse can go anywhere on any ocean. Take a look at any of modern design and they are all heading in the same direction in terms of design - Even the new Amels are deck stepped, have big asses and flat forefoots and big wide cabins.



Most of us , no matter what the design have no intention of pounding upwind if we can help it. We're cruisers after all!

Originally Posted by wildblueyonder

...

Two general comments: mast is deck stepped and that's good. I prefer deck stepped than having a mast with a structural weak spot (literally perforation) about 1 meter off the deck:you need the mast to separate from the boat in extremis and modern builders don't keel step anymore I think (but would love to hear more views on this).

Neither of these boats is a blue water boat let's be honest. We plan to do the ARC in 2020 but mostly we want her for coastal cruising. Lack of a forefoot in the hull will make them both quite "slappy" in heavier seas. Get a HR or Amel for habitual ocean crossing imho.

Best. WBY

[Zzmeyer]

Chatted with a marine architect I have engaged unrelated to mast step. The production boats he has designed and I'm guessing most of his racing boats are keel stepped. His comments (my interpretation). Both are fine. What causes a mast to fail is almost always the failure of standing rigging. How the mast is stepped doesn't matter much. Occasionally a mast step will corrode and fail. Can happen with either. There are definite advantages to each. Both require careful engineering (compression posts, tie bars, mast step drainage). He wouldn't let the step of the mast be a determining factor in boat selection.

[mglonnro]

Originally Posted by Zzmeyer

He wouldn't let the step of the mast be a determining factor in boat selection.

Especially when choosing between the two boats this thread is about

The blue water boat stuff is intriguing. I think during my twenty or so years of sailing I've only sailed and/or owned non-BW boats and gotten used to "slamming and being uncomfortable". It would be cool to experience it all on a heavier and more traditional boat (let's say a Swan, because I've always adored those) and see if I'd see the light.

Wishing winter would end,

[Polux]

Originally Posted by mglonnro

.... It would be cool to experience it all on a heavier and more traditional boat (let's say a Swan, because I've always adored those) and see if I'd see the light.

Wishing winter would end,

Where do you get the idea that the Swan are heavy? And even if they made recently a conservative boat (because they knew that there are a lot of people that when they think about Swan, think about old designs) all their other boats are not traditional but thoroughly modern.

Just to give you an idea the new Swan 65 that belongs to their more cruising line weights 27 650 kg while the Amel 64 weights 34 100kg and the Hallberg Rassy 64 weights 36 000kg.

I visited recently their new 65 and it is beautiful and contemporary. Saw also the drawings and a model of the future Swan 48 and I can tell you that it is state of the art and beautiful.

[Tillsbury]

Originally Posted by Polux

The only reason why boats are deck stepped is for interior space considerations. On racing boats or cruiser racers de masts are always keel stepped. Why do you think they do that if not because it is better that way?

I don't understand this at all. On every boat I've owned there is at least a compression post if not a whole lot more directly below the mast. On my current boat the compression post is next to the forward bulkhead and is bedded in a substantial arrangement of metal and timber glassed into the hull and deck in all directions. Design-wise on all of them the mast could easily have been keel stepped in the exact same place and it wouldn't have made the slightest bit of difference to the interior. Apart from getting the bilge wet, I guess...

[mglonnro]

Originally Posted by Polux

Where do you get the idea that the Swan are heavy? And even if they made recently a conservative boat (because they knew that there are a lot of people that when they think about Swan, think about old designs) all their other boats are not traditional but thoroughly modern.

Ah, yes! I was actually thinking about the older designs there. My friend's family had a Swan 41 from 1977. I assume a lot of fantastic blue water people over here would rather take one of those than a new Hanse 418 at double the price.

[mat jam]

Boats are designed for specific markets. They sell based on what the customers are looking for, and designed not always for the safest or smartest reasons and need to match a price point. For instance, not wanting to take sides, one the the boat brands listed here, not sure of the model - but a new boat had a 70,000 euros repair bill when the new fuel tank leaked and they needed to rip apart the interior to access it. The Amels that get praised have issues which is evident if you watch the SV Delos videos. There is no way I would want a drop down thruster.
I don't know why people are arguing deck stepped are stronger and better. There are some things one should look for if you want a strong safe boat - no deck stepped mast, no in mast furling, no electric furler. These are luxuries made to make sailing easier however when they fail and you can not get your sail in and the squall hits and your boat gets knocked down and your mast breaks...

Any boat can cross the pond, however in the event you hit rough weather then the safe stronger boats have a much better chance of seeing you to the the other side.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by Tillsbury

I don't understand this at all. On every boat I've owned there is at least a compression post if not a whole lot more directly below the mast. On my current boat the compression post is next to the forward bulkhead and is bedded in a substantial arrangement of metal and timber glassed into the hull and deck in all directions. Design-wise on all of them the mast could easily have been keel stepped in the exact same place and it wouldn't have made the slightest bit of difference to the interior. Apart from getting the bilge wet, I guess...

I don't know about your boat but generally a compression post is much smaller than a mast, it can be chromed or it can be cylindrical. It does have the same interference on the interior. Imagine this was a mast. Can you see the diference?

[Polux]

Originally Posted by mglonnro

Ah, yes! I was actually thinking about the older designs there. My friend's family had a Swan 41 from 1977. I assume a lot of fantastic blue water people over here would rather take one of those than a new Hanse 418 at double the price.

I understand what you mean but the Swan 41 on its time was a very light boat too. Today it is still light specially if we consider the 4400kg ballast.

The Hanse 418 weights a little bit less than the old Swan, 9800kg to 10795kg, 995kg less but the Swan has more 1540kg of ballast and that means that if we consider the boats without ballast the Swan is effectively lighter by 545kg.

That tells you a lot about the building techniques of that boat, that were top on their time and intended to make a boat as light as possible and enough strong to last.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by mat jam

Boats are designed for specific markets. They sell based on what the customers are looking for, and designed not always for the safest or smartest reasons and need to match a price point. ...

You are certainly right but it is worse than that. Mass market boats like these two are designed according what most people value when they chose a boat. It is there that most of the money is spent because it is what is going to sell the most boats and that is obviously the interior. After that the cockpit and the cockpit table, the living spaces.

I know plenty of very good sailboats, very well built, some at the same cost of main brands mass market boats, some slightly more expensive that don't sell or don't sell well. People get what they want and that is a nice interior most of the time.

Look at this beautiful interior for a 39 ft boat!


Can you believe that the boat comes standard with only two small winches over the cabin?

[mglonnro]

Originally Posted by Polux

I understand what you mean but the Swan 41 on its time was a very light boat too. Today it is still light specially if we consider the 4400kg ballast.

The Hanse 418 weights a little bit less than the old Swan, 9800kg to 10795kg, 995kg less but the Swan has more 1540kg of ballast and that means that if we consider the boats without ballast the Swan is effectively lighter by 545kg.

That tells you a lot about the building techniques of that boat, that were top on their time and intended to make a boat as light as possible and enough strong to last.

Interesting!

Well anyway. I don't know what boat would best fit the bill but I'd like to experience sailing on something that even the longest of seabeards would call "blue water". Just to know what they are all talking about.

[mglonnro]

This is a cool way to open up the interior by replacing the compression post with a carbon bridge. #clubswan50