Catalina/Beneteau/Hunter/Jeanneau good enough for coastal cruising?

[SilentOption]

I met a French couple in Key West who crossed the Atlantic in a 25 Catalina and we all know there are people out there cruising on boats we might not personally cross a lake on.
If you are contemplating near coastal with passages of a few hundred miles you could do that on any number of boats safely. If you think any particular boat brand has a stigma then you might easily be prejudiced here or some other forums. Everyone has an idea of what's seaworthy. Most ideas are based on anecdotes not actual experience. Near coastal, say out 60-100 miles in my opinion it comes down to how comfortable do you want to be. Any number of boats will be safe all things equal but they wont be comfortable. You can still carry a lot of fuel and water on a smaller boat but it will be on deck. Some boat's in the over 40 range still carry fuel on deck. Do you need an indoor shower? 6 foot plus headroom? Storage space for extra stuff? I have a Beneteau 473 and I last had a CSY 44. Two totally different boats in performance characteristics but both very comfortable in heavy seas. The Catalina 47 is a very robust boat. If it's coastal cruising almost any modern boat will do. If it's fairly new expect issues with electrical and other systems. If it's on it's 2nd or third owner a lot of those nagging problems have like as not been addressed and upgraded.

[ontherocks83]

Originally Posted by Lost Horizons

Catalina 355 was on my list of next boat candidates. I have chartered one for a week in June and it was immidiately removed from the list. Way too many “why would the do it” moments.

As far as original question goes, yes all modern mass production sailboats are good coastal cruisers with few exceptions and limitations.

I am just curious, and again not looking for a peeing contest. What was it about the 355 that you didn't like?

[ontherocks83]

Originally Posted by gmakhs

They still can't quality for A certification so Catalina's are out of the question .

My 26 feet havebbeen qualified with A up to 2 people and ii hardly consider it offshore , so any boat without it doesn't worth the money.

Beneteau and janneau are the best on your list, hunters I don't have a clear opinion , but don't waste money on Catalina or on the hull made only for inshore , the shame stormy conditions can get you offshore as inshore with the seccond ones be more critical (Lee shore )

I don't know if I can quite understand your post but I haven't seen any Catalina's go through what the blue pearl did in 2014.

http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/...ng-129942.html

I would definitely take a Catalina rudder construction over a Beneteau any day of the week, just sayin'.

[daletournier]

I always find it amusing when people make broad statements such as "Catalinas are lightly build boats".

As a previous poster mentioned, Catalinas (well at least my 470)have a lead keel, do Amels amongst others?

I'll add to the previous posters list, glassed in bulk heads, very decent solid lay up under the water, independent wheels (ie separate cables) , glassed in massive structural grid, heavier rigging (3/8 & 7/16)than many equivalent sized boats etcetera.

I'm just not sure how anyone can crawl over the Catalina 470 and come to the conclusion it's not a reasonably well built boat.

Is it the best built or strongest boat in the world? of course not BUT the build quality is very good and quite robust.

Many don't question what they know or how they know it, many don't really have enough technical knowledge to have an opinion, yet they do! So see it here all the time. Mostly people just regurgitate what they heard or read somewhere. People have all sorts of opinions, from catamarans to inmast furlers etc but few have real world experience that their beliefs are founded on.

The original post is just silly, of course they can coastal cruise, they are designed to be on the sea, that's what they do, secondly which boats are we talking about, small 20 footers or 47footers like mine.

Granted, some production boats are built better than others (keep in mind an Amel is a production boat), all kinds of production boats cross oceans safely every single year, this is a fact, they can't all just be lucky.

The problem for a newbie asking questions like this on a forum like this is, how does he determine the quality of the source delivering the information? He can't!

[Freyfrey]

Our Beneteau 42.7 sailed from France to Australia before we purchased it , we love it !

[Davy J]

Well, I suppose if these guys can cross the Gulf Stream on stand up paddle boards......... then most "coastal cruisers" can do it.............

https://www.sportfishingmag.com/news...am-paddleboard



I think the three big ones are:

1) Keep the mast in the air...........
2) Keep the keel in the water..........
3) Keep the water... out of the boat....

You should be OK.

[Amnesia II]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

One of the admitted issues with many such boats is the mfg's suggestion that the vessel be slipped an d inspected after ANY grounding. Most groundings happen coastally, not in offshore passages., so in that sense, well, you get the picture.

For myself, the form of construction that relies upon a glued in support grid is unacceptable. Thousands of boats are sailed daily with such construction, but it isn't for me, coastally or offshore.

Jim

No “glued in support” used in Catalina 42 which I sailed from California to Australia, and even to the West Coast of Tasmania...no structural issues to record.

[Jim Cate]

Originally Posted by Amnesia II

No “glued in support” used in Catalina 42 which I sailed from California to Australia, and even to the West Coast of Tasmania...no structural issues to record.

And that is a good sales point for the Catalina folks IMO. I too believe their construction to be more robust than the big three French boats and their ilk, at least in their larger models. Haven't looked into the smaller ones in many years and don't know how they stack up.

Jim

[chuckr]

Originally Posted by sailorboy1

So you read threads I guess trashing the production boats and ignored the posts that say for the most part are just fine. So you start a new thread to just repeat all the others and rehash the 100s of other ones asking the same question as you just posted. Maybe you could just tell everyone the answer you want to read about whatever boat you really wish to know about.

To answer your question

Yes they are good coastal cruisers and if you chose the correct model are just fine “blue water” boats

sailorboy nails it here - there are lots of postings on this subject. It is your responsibility to read ALL the postings and then make up your mind,

as for Jeanneau - we have over 40k on ours with a Carib crossing, Atlantic crossing, around the Black Sea and most of the Med - and we have friends who just did a 2 handed crossing of the Pacific - Check boats in the ARC and see what people sail offshore -

[Lost Horizons]

Originally Posted by ontherocks83

I am just curious, and again not looking for a peeing contest. What was it about the 355 that you didn't like?

Most noticeable items were very poor access to through hull fittings under the head sink (I could not put both hands through the access lid to fit a cable tie, how one would replace a hose or a seacock?), poor refrigirator access, and general lack of storage throughout the boat. Performance wise, it was slower both under sail and power than what I anticipated - it could hardly go 6 knots, which is sad given its length.
What I liked most was the berth in the forward cabin - very comfortable unlike the aft cabin, which was probably meant for small children.

[boatman61]

To me the lead vs iron keel is a straw arguement.
Its not what its made of that makes a keel safe.. Its the condition of the bolts holding it, the internal framework that takes the load.. and all important.. the owners vigilance and checks.

[daletournier]

Originally Posted by boatman61

To me the lead vs iron keel is a straw arguement.
Its not what its made of that makes a keel safe.. Its the condition of the bolts holding it, the internal framework that takes the load.. and all important.. the owners vigilance and checks.

Hmmmm, the way impact is distributed matters, of course the design and condition of impact its distributed to matters as well BUT all else being equal lead absorbs and distrubutes the energy of impact alot better than iron does.

Manufacturers dont use Iron because its better,they use it because its cheaper.

[daletournier]

Originally Posted by daletournier

Hmmmm, the way impact is distributed matters, of course the design and condition of impact its distributed to matters as well BUT all else being equal lead absorbs and distrubutes the energy of impact alot better than iron does.

Manufacturers dont use Iron because its better,they use it because its cheaper.

Sorry about the above,predictive text is killing me.

I was trying to say , of course the design and condition of the structure the impact is transfered to matters. But lead absorbs and distrubutes that impact better than iron.

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by daletournier

Sorry about the above,predictive text is killing me.

I was trying to say , of course the design and condition of the structure the impact is transfered to matters. But lead absorbs and distrubutes that impact better than iron.

I know its cheaper.. but thank you..
Also its better not to hit things such as rocks, seabeds etc.. however all else being equal for me its more a psychological sales tactic than a must have 'bluewater' requisite.
And yes.. I know theres 10000 containers lost each year.. but I have yet to see one.. Whales on the other hand.. Loads of em..

[SVNeko]

God, this is a tired old saw. I know plenty of people who have crossed oceans in production boats.