Bluewater cruiser thoughts?

[s/v Jedi]

Sundeer, Amel, Ovni, Garcia, Hylas, okay Bruce Roberts, ehrmmm … I think that’s it. The rest is all for yotties

[dcondit]

Originally Posted by Ledfoot2

I cannot find a lot of folks with experience on the Caliber 47, but it seems to have a lot of neat features on it, kind of reminiscent of a Super Maramu, which I love, but the wife says are too constricted.

I've sailed all three (well - IP445 & 485 not the 45) and think you have a great list. If your wife doesn't like the Super Maramu because it's constricted then you might want to reconsider the Caliber 47LRC. My wife describes it as "too cave-like" and said no. It has small, port-like saloon and cabin windows, and the aft bed is "claustrophobic" (according to my wife). It's actually my favorite as I loved the engine access (wife could care less), keel/rudder, sailing quality (good sailing + sea kindly), and the sea chest set-up with a single through-hull.

The Hylas 49 solved several of the issues with the 46 (full skeg-hung rudder, hull design that does not pound upwind, etc.) However, you likely will not find it in the under $300K range.

One other I might recommend from your list is the Moody 46 which should be in your price range.

[MicHughV]

An old time favorite of mine is the Vagabond 42.....could easily pick one up for under $100k these days.
A good friend of mine did not do one, but two circs on on one, testimony indeed.

And...it's a center cockpit

[Cloroxbottle]

Originally Posted by Ledfoot2

I cannot find a lot of folks with experience on the Caliber 47, but it seems to have a lot of neat features on it, kind of reminiscent of a Super Maramu, which I love, but the wife says are too constricted.

For better or worse, we all end up with the boats that our future ex-wives permit us to have.

Best wishes as you make your decision.

[AiniA]

Originally Posted by s/v Jedi

Sundeer, Amel, Ovni, Garcia, Hylas, okay Bruce Roberts, ehrmmm … I think that’s it. The rest is all for yotties

I assume your list is very much tongue in cheek. There are lots of others.

[s/v Jedi]

Originally Posted by AiniA

I assume your list is very much tongue in cheek. There are lots of others.

Please, elaborate

[Chris 249]

Originally Posted by Cloroxbottle

Fin keel, skeg rudder, it's 27,000 pound displacement is abnormally light for a 46 foot sailboat. You'll sail faster in a Hylas than the IP, but it will be a rougher ride and if you get into a situation where you wish you could heave-to, you'll wish you were in the IP.

With respect, 27000 lb displacement is far from "abnormally light". That's the same sort of weight as a very popular mainstream boat like the Benny 47.7, while a lighter mainstream cruiser/racer like a Concordia 47 is just 16,755 lb.

That article from the Kraken website is a bit silly. It quotes a boatbuilder as saying that when he started in the industry in 1987, yachts didn't suffer rudder damage. That's just completely and utterly wrong. In the 1979 Fastnet, for example, 17% of retirements were from boats that sufferered steering damage, mainly from rudder loss and about 9% of all boats suffered steering damage.

Considering how often that Fastnet is brought up when people talk about seaworthiness, and how much publicity was given to the many rudder failures, the "expert" quoted in the Kraken article must not have been paying any attention to history when he made his completely false claim that yachts of the '80s didn't suffer rudder damage. They certainly did, as did some I sailed on myself.

Some engineers and NAs have stated that structurally there is no reason at all for spades to be inherently weaker. Many skegs are themselves not very strong.

Kraken makes other claims that are dodgy. For example they refer to the loss of Rising Farrster and say that it's a possibility that the boat hit a container - that's just crap. There was an inquest and the coroner specifically addressed that possibility and concluded, after hearing all the evidence, that there was no such collision. For Kraken to just raise the opinion of one person and to ignore the coronoer's conclusion to the contrary is dishonest and misleading.

The Kraken site also lists ARC boats that have lost rudders but ignores the fact that some of them had large skegs, like Modus Vivandi, a heavy steel Motus 39 with full skeg that lost its rudder in 2012, or a Contest 48 that lost its rudder in the 2006 ARC. To list such boats in an article that claims spade rudders are unsafe, without mentioning that these boats had skeg hung rudders, can seem misleading.

[Bowdrie]

Using ad copy as a method of denigrating or reinforcing ones opinions/viewpoints concerning yacht design is to stand on shifting sand.
Having a "skeg" is no guaranty of the absence of rudder loss or damage, especially in the manner that many skegs are designed and incorporated into the hull structure.
As to the Concordia 47, using the word "cruiser" in any way pertaining to that boat is a cruel joke.
Over a 9'draft, a D/L ratio of little more than 100, and a triple-spreader fractional rig on top of a hull with basically a helicopter blade for a rudder and a bulb hanging on a high-aspect fin does not a "cruiser" make.
The Contest 48 a is little better, but a casual look at its "skeg" makes one wonder, "does the rudder support the skeg?".
A similar thought might be made about boats that cover the cabin with "panoramic view windows", do the windows support the cabin?
In any case, a hull shape on a 45+ boat in which standing on the cabin sole the WL is about at your ankles is not the best proposition.
Some engineers think that there is no inherent reason for a spade to be weaker? What, you mean like all three of them.
Well, they may have a point.
I looked a boat that had what appeared to be a very strong mounting for a spade rudder, the rudder stock had to be at least 6in. across and of heavy wall.
It was supported by a bearing at the deck that looked as though it could be a hub bearing from a D8 Caterpillar, (I presume the lower bearing in the hull was similar).

[Rockinar]

Boats are tons of maintenance. I look to see how good the access to all maintenance items are. Starting with the engine. Cause they will break at 2AM while you are offshore and half asleep.

[gonesail]

the caliber is a pretty sophisticated and beautiful boat. friend of mine owns one. lots of deck space and heavy duty hardware. if possible you should at least check one out. none of the IP problems and probably a better performer overall.

[jt11791]

Many of the Hylas models, including the 46, have partial skegs. None of them are lightly built. I've sailed over 18000nm in the past year on my Hylas 54 and I can say it is more than up to the job. I am also sailing with a buddy boat IP 485, which is also up to the job but about a week behind me on every crossing. IMHO, save longer and get the Hylas.

[AiniA]

Originally Posted by s/v Jedi

Please, elaborate

I must be a yottie, whatever that might be. What amazed me in our travels was the enormous range of boats that were successfully passage making in exotic locales in all oceans. Just a few examples, out of the many. An obvious one is HR and similar Scandinavian boats, we had a Bristol 45.5.Ted Hood's heavy centerboarders (Bristol, Little Harbor, some Wauquiez) are terrific cruisers. The most common model we saw was the little Vega. Some Camper-Nicholsons on the list. I could go on, but I have lost interest

[Cloroxbottle]

Originally Posted by Chris 249

With respect, 27000 lb displacement is far from "abnormally light". That's the same sort of weight as a very popular mainstream boat like the Benny 47.7, while a lighter mainstream cruiser/racer like a Concordia 47 is just 16,755 lb.

Yes, but I wouldn't set off across the Pacific in either of them shorthanded.

That article from the Kraken website is a bit silly. It quotes a boatbuilder as saying that when he started in the industry in 1987, yachts didn't suffer rudder damage. That's just completely and utterly wrong. In the 1979 Fastnet, for example, 17% of retirements were from boats that sufferered steering damage, mainly from rudder loss and about 9% of all boats suffered steering damage.

Yachts didn't suffer rudder damage as a matter of course. Reference the 1% failure rate for spade rudders. You can't really compare the numbers coming out of a survival storm that went down in history as once of the worst and caused the racing side of yachting to re-evaluate the IOR rules with what he is saying.

Some engineers and NAs have stated that structurally there is no reason at all for spades to be inherently weaker. Many skegs are themselves not very strong.

The weakness or robustness of these systems is, in the end, a matter of construction. But in an apples-to-apples comparison, the full keel or skeg design beats the keel bolt + spade design in durability.

[s/v Jedi]

Originally Posted by AiniA

I must be a yottie, whatever that might be. What amazed me in our travels was the enormous range of boats that were successfully passage making in exotic locales in all oceans. Just a few examples, out of the many. An obvious one is HR and similar Scandinavian boats, we had a Bristol 45.5.Ted Hood's heavy centerboarders (Bristol, Little Harbor, some Wauquiez) are terrific cruisers. The most common model we saw was the little Vega. Some Camper-Nicholsons on the list. I could go on, but I have lost interest

I’m not really joking, let me explain: most yachts are either build to racing rules or for charter markets. Camper-Nicholsons are in the first category and most modern production boats are the second.

Even when you get an owners version: it’s still a charter boat with a redesigned interior.

A HR will make successful passages, yes of course, but we’re not talking about seaworthiness but rather designs for cruising. The list I posted is boats that are not designed to racing rules and not designed for chartering (although the new Amels certainly seem to be moving that direction). Take our boat: 64’ loa with a 39’ interior, designed to be sailed by a single couple anywhere in the world. That’s a cruising design.

[Cloroxbottle]

Originally Posted by AiniA

I must be a yottie, whatever that might be. What amazed me in our travels was the enormous range of boats that were successfully passage making in exotic locales in all oceans. Just a few examples, out of the many. An obvious one is HR and similar Scandinavian boats, we had a Bristol 45.5.Ted Hood's heavy centerboarders (Bristol, Little Harbor, some Wauquiez) are terrific cruisers. The most common model we saw was the little Vega. Some Camper-Nicholsons on the list. I could go on, but I have lost interest

HRs, Nicholsons, and Wauquiez are all well built, well known voyaging boats with robust designs.


But in general my preference would be for a pre-2005 to pre-2008 vessel, full keel > encapsulated fin + skeg rudder > keel bolts + spade > portland pudgy > life raft. In my opinion, monohull design after roughly that point has been influenced far too much by a "keeping up with the catamarans" philosophy, not to mention the slow degredation of craftsmanship that has occurred over a number of decades. It's pretty unlikely that you're going to be seeing many of these newer boats cruising around at age 50.