Visit our Popular Forums

satdiver · 10-04-2014, 00:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by MarkSF

Can you tell me anything more about the Bristol construction? What is semi diagonal layup? I have a Bristol 31.1 and my impression of the construction is that it's bombproof. Also so far it's been immune to blisters. But I would be interested to know why.

It's a well built boat as you know first hand. I really don't know how to explain what your asking.

But I'll do my best. It's laying fibreglass dip to pit crossing over smaller sheets by feel rather than focusing on how flush a section is which reduces the space between plys. This is the best way I know how to describe it. It is not a nessesary method to build a strong boat but it is nessesary when building a long gun 50 cal bullet proof one. As for the other method they were and still are building on edges because the conserves the amount of spent glass on a project. It does not mean the boat is not solid. Cherubini and Morris still does a dip to pit method which is when you hear the word solid fiberglass hulls they are the only current US builders I know of in sailboats that do it. In big sportfishes you have to because of IAS ratios.

When Ted Hood moved to Little Harbor thats one reason he moved to doing Airex in the hull to reduce the dip to pit cost. Also most Little Harbors and Bristols started moving to dcell for decks for later model builds and thats why the later model bristols among boat builders tend to get a more favourable review. In fact it was recommended to owners wanting to build in the late 80's and early 90's. to go dcell decks and Airex in the hull. One of Teds personal sloops he took south for many years (I forget the name) Was actually quadrupedal diagonal epoxy glued cedar plank with a uni directional kevlar over lay. But these days unfortunately that will still get treated like a wooden boat by insurance even though it is IMHO the best way to build a boat for warmer climates. You can still call Dieter and get info on the Bristols and Little Harbors. He is a wealth of information.

**carstenb** · 10-04-2014, 00:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by racinejf

Hi, I'm new to the forum and, hopefully, will be a new owner of a sailboat soon. I'm looking very seriously at an Albin Vega. It looks to me like a good beginner and single handler boat. Does this make sense ?
P.S. It's my first post, but I've been reading the threads for awhile now. Very interesting and, hum, enlightening.

Hi racine

Welcome aboard.

The albin is a great first boat. Very seaworthy (I believe a fellow just single-handed one solo circumnavigation around north and south america). Non-stop.

It is big enough to provide for long weekends or a holiday and small enough to really learn how to sail.

carsten

Polux · 10-04-2014, 04:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

As for the size issue, in the size range being discussed it doesn't make all that much difference. That is, 30 feet or 36 feet... not a huge difference in s/h difficulty. I can say this with some confidence, having done just that: single handed a Yankee 30 for many miles of racing and some cruising, and a Standfast 36 (IOR one-tonner) as well (not racing... I'd learned better!).

More important to me is the stability and the tracking of the boat. Boats that are erratic in motion and that require a lot of steering input put more demands on the skipper than those with better behavior. And as others have said, heavy displacement means higher loads on everything.

Hmmm... there's a conflict, for stability and tracking are often (not always) associated with greater displacement. I hate it when faced with conflicts like that! But fortunately there are designs that make the right compromises and help the hapless singlehander find a good boat. ....
Jim

Not of any help regarding really olde designs that were not really thought particularly with solo sailing in mind but since the 80's solo racing (or short crew) started to be more and more popular to the point that some boats started to be designed with that as main design input. As you say, besides having to be fast, and that means necessarily light, they had to offer a superior stability and tracking, what is some times described as a stable working platform.

As a negative effect these boats tend to pay their increased directional stability with a less nimbleness around the cans, having less maneuverability.

Some of the characteristics of these boats are fine entries, beamy with the beam pulled, deeply asymmetric hull footprint while sailing, twin rudders, chines and a transom design that allows for little heel before hull form stability is deeply increased (that among others things allows for sailing with less heel and diminish roll downwind).

All of this came not at the same time but have been a line of development through the 80's, 90's till our days, a line of development that ended having a big influence on modern cruising boat design. Those qualities you refereed, like directional tracking and superior stability does not only make the life easier to the solo racer but also to the short crew less experienced cruiser.

As you say these characteristics can also be increased with heavy displacement or a full keel at the cost of a loss of speed, specially in light winds and downwind.

thomm225 · 10-04-2014, 06:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Polux

Not of any help regarding really olde designs that were not really thought particularly with solo sailing in mind but since the 80's solo racing (or short crew) started to be more and more popular to the point that some boats started to be designed with that as main design input. As you say, besides having to be fast, and that means necessarily light, they had to offer a superior stability and tracking, what is some times described as a stable working platform.

As a negative effect these boats tend to pay their increased directional stability with a less nimbleness around the cans, having less maneuverability.

Some of the characteristics of these boats are fine entries, beamy with the beam pulled, deeply asymmetric hull footprint while sailing, twin rudders, chines and a transom design that allows for little heel before hull form stability is deeply increased (that among others things allows for sailing with less heel and diminish roll downwind).

All of this came not at the same time but have been a line of development through the 80's, 90's till our days, a line of development that ended having a big influence on modern cruising boat design. Those qualities you refereed, like directional tracking and superior stability does not only make the life easier to the solo racer but also to the short crew less experienced cruiser.

As you say these characteristics can also be increased with heavy displacement or a full keel at the cost of a loss of speed, specially in light winds and downwind.

So does all this mean the Ericson 35-3 is not necessarily a good cruising boat?

I will be working for quite a few more years so the speed of the Ericson was a factor as in how far you can get on a weekend or week's vacation. Plus I am an exracer and a bit more performance would be nice.

I am finding out though that this cruising business is a lot different than bouy racing or even the yearly 100 milers we used to do. So I do want a boat that will be strong if caught in a bit of a blow.

On the other hand if I know weather is coming, I will run the other way and I was thinking the Ericson would be a good boat for that.

One thing that does concern me on the Ericson 35-3 as a cruiser is it's 6'2" draft.

Blue Crab · 10-04-2014, 06:14

Given your background, and that you still have years to work, I'd be looking for a multihull. They don't all costs millions. If you can keep it remotely light, your routine sailing would be at speeds a mono would rarely achieve. That said, the C/B Bristol would be hard to pass up if affordable.

thomm225 · 10-04-2014, 06:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blue Crab

Given your background, and that you still have years to work, I'd be looking for a multihull. They don't all costs millions. If you can keep it remotely light, your routine sailing would be at speeds a mono would rarely achieve. That said, the C/B Bristol would be hard to pass up if affordable.

Even though I have been assured by various multihull owners on here that they are good and stable, I have flipped and pitchpoled so many times on the smaller versions that it worries me. (of course I was over canvassed etc. We don't reef in small cat racing)

Plus parking those things seems to be a problem as in who has the space. On top of that, the ones I would want are out of my price range.

I do like the Bristols though. The ones in this area are around $62,500 for the 35.5. That Ericson is $38,900 (asking price) (but) What "normal" cruiser on the Chesapeake Bay wants a boat that draws 6'2"? (besides me)

Also the sails on the Ericson are 2009 vintage, and he installed a baby stay on it and has a small sail for that. Plus he installed what I guess you'd call running back stays...................like that which is on a West Sail 32 or Gladiateur.

**weavis** · 10-04-2014, 06:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by thomm225

Even though I have been assured by various multihull owners on here that they are good and stable, I have flipped and pitchpoled so many times on the smaller versions that it worries me. (of course I was over canvassed etc. We don't reef in small cat racing)

.

Stop.
None of these quoted were catamaran cruisers. Completely different breed. You have your answer after ".....of course........."

Smaller Cats 30-35ft do not cost more to park.

Double the room and can be got for under $100K or closer to 50k if you know what you are looking for. Safe? yes. Stable? yes....

thats all.

As you were....

Blue Crab · 10-04-2014, 06:55

I hear ya about the speed thing. There's a Sundeer vid out where the couple went from Tahiti, I think, to San Diego in 10 days. Ooooooooooooh, that would be fun!

hoppy · 10-04-2014, 08:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by SaltyMonkey

Pogo, Figaro, sunfast!

I like the cut of your jib

Polux · 10-04-2014, 10:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by thomm225

So does all this mean the Ericson 35-3 is not necessarily a good cruising boat?

Not by any means. I don't know well those boats but always heard good things regarding them. Just saying that these or any other boats of that era where not designed with single handling in mind. That one particularly was designed having crewed racing in mind. That does not mean that they can't be solo sailed, just that they are less suited to it than most more modern cruisers.

Quote:

Originally Posted by thomm225

I will be working for quite a few more years so the speed of the Ericson was a factor as in how far you can get on a weekend or week's vacation. Plus I am an exracer and a bit more performance would be nice.

I am finding out though that this cruising business is a lot different than bouy racing or even the yearly 100 milers we used to do. So I do want a boat that will be strong if caught in a bit of a blow.

On the other hand if I know weather is coming, I will run the other way and I was thinking the Ericson would be a good boat for that.

One thing that does concern me on the Ericson 35-3 as a cruiser is it's 6'2" draft.

Draft is indispensable to have a good upwind performance. The Ericson 35 was a fast boat in its days and still today has a good performance. If I was buying a boat in that price range probably I would be looking to something similar.

Sorry my comment was not directed to your particular case, just pretending to highlight something that Jim had said.