Bluewater cruiser thoughts?

[TeddyDiver]

Originally Posted by JPA Cate

"too constricted" is a response to a vision. Close construction can keep you safer in a seaway, so it is not all a downside. You do want finger rails or handholds for getting fore and aft when on the wind--or plan to heave to if someone wants to get fwd to the head. Open plan boats (with handholds of some kind) help a lot with the "constricted" feeling.

Ann

As Ann says. Most often accidents on sailboats are due sudden rolling and you get ballistic inside the boat. Less room to get momentum before landing on some hard corners keeps you in better shape to continue the dream. Also things keeping their assigned placements, lockers stay closed and kettles on the stowe. The head, best when you can wedge you in on the seat to do your business without needing both hands for it..

[Chris 249]

Originally Posted by Cloroxbottle

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

As I think you said earlier, personal tastes differ and if your taste is to heavier craft that's fine. However the fact is that the boat you mentioned isn't particularly light.

Incidentally, I had a long chat once with the former owner of one of the original steel Freyas about the seaworthiness and seakindliness of his various boats. He rated modern racer/cruisers as roughly equal to his Freya, with each having its own strengths and weaknesses.




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.

The point is that the claim was utter codswallop, and the Fastnet was only one example that proved that anyone who made that claim was BSing.

The Fastnet was just one example. Off the top of my head I can think of a bunch of others in the era when the expert said rudders didn't fail. The truth is that they did fail and therefore the "expert's" claim is overstated BS.

The 1% failure rate seems to be an unsubstantiated claim for ALL rudders, not for spade rudders. See the article that some people say came up with that figure -https://www.sailmagazine.com/diy/know-your-rudder. For some reason it gets used as if it only applies to spades.

I also note that on other threads here, people have pointed out that using the ARC fleets as samples, the 1% claim falls over. So since the 1% figure is completely unsubstantiated and unreferenced why should we believe it?

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.

But as you said, you rate certain aspects of design (ie alleged safety in extreme conditions) well above others, which is just a personal choice.

[Happ]

Originally Posted by Ledfoot2

My wife are getting more serious about planning our escape! We have narrowed our choices down to a shorter list. Any thoughts on these boats?
1. Island Packet 45. Only concern is the chainplates and potential fuel tank issues.
2. Hylas 46. Only issue we have noticed is pricing.
3. Caliber 47 LRC. No real issues so far, maybe the pedestal is a little weird.

We would like to stay in the low 200's. We plan on doing some major blue water as we are on the west side of the states.

Our checklist is no teak decks, nav station, prefer island berth and Pullman berth in the front with forepeak head. Seperate shower is nice. Center Cockpit preferred.

Thanks folks, love the site!

A friend of mine had an IP 45. Great boat but as one person said can you fixit without a chainsaw. In my friends case the forward head tank had pin hole leaks starting. It showed up in the survey when he was trying to sell it. The tank is stainless steel. The problem is Chlorine used in waste treatment does like SS. He had to dismantle almost the entire compartment to replace the tank which he did with a plastic tank which cost around $500. If he had the yard do it the cost was around $10,000!

[Happ]

Originally Posted by Bowdrie

And neither do I.
That link is a good read. IIRC, Nat Herreshoff designed a spade rudder boat about 100 years ago, it was, and they were, are, and always have been a feature for a racing boat.
They have no place on a cruising boat that's sticking its bow into all manner of out-of-the-way places that are replete with shallow water/reefs/rocks, let alone any problems at sea that "just happen".




1, Agree with head location.
2, Right, and how do you stay in an island bed when the boat is heeled/rolling?
I might add that a bunk that has you at much of an angle from the centerline will not be as comfortable as one that's aligned fore-an-aft.
3, CC boats also raise you up way above the roll center, perched up in the air doesn't give the "snug-and-secure" feeling that a sunken aft cockpit has, and sorting out issues with line handling and leads to/from things can get sticky.

As I see it the only advantage to an island bed is you don’t have to climb over someone to get in or out. That’s nice tied at anchor or in a slip. If you’re offshore Ann is right about giving up storage. For offshore you don’t want to give that up. Besides more than likely you’re changing watch so it doesn’t matter LOL!

[sailcrazy]

A couple of thoughts. Living in Asia for over 12 years, I had the pleasure f visiting several yards, and seeing actual construction. We, too, made our list. Taswell (not on your list) was at the top of ours, and what we've sailed now for 25 years....no regrets! I'd also add a HR to your list of considerations...quality-built boats. Other considerations I'd include:
1) angle of the drive shaft=prop walk=hard to back....a real consideration especially in the Medd/Medd mooring. Also,Spade rudders seem to be much easier to back.
2) Advertised weight??? Our T43 is advertised at 24,000lbs......maybe in someone's dream? Every travel lift we've every been on shows us at 32,000lbs, give or take, in cruising form.
3) Look closely at eng, driveshaft, refer, and tank accessability. Someday that gets to be a really big deal!, ie, changing impellers, oil+filter change, shaft seal mx, tank Cr/needs to be replaced, etc,etc,etc. and the genset (sound shield, accessability, size...watermakers, aircons, refers, etc,etc all take power, and if your better halk prefers an electric stove....that's more power still!).
4) On board storage and accessability. We've got every nook and notch occupied-some is much easier to get to than others. But as you go cruising you'll use all of it, and wish for more.
We're very happy with our CC, and would buy it again. We also realy like our centerline bed(aft) with private head and seperate shower. Our fwd head, in the forepeak, is pretty uncomfortable in a heavy seaway. But on anchor, or a mooring, or a quiet sea....it's really nice to have. We've sailed Asia, the Medd, and now the Caribb. Depending on where, and with how many onboard you intend to sail, and how long you plan to be out for at a time (we almost never go into marinas/$$$/if it can be avoided), I'd seriously expand your possibilities list. Taswell and Hallberg-Rossy need to be looked at, too. But, from your list, and having been to the Queen Long Yard and seen Hylas's being built...Hlyas would absolutely be my 1st choice. FWIW

[MJH]

Originally Posted by Ledfoot2

My wife are getting more serious about planning our escape! We have narrowed our choices down to a shorter list. Any thoughts on these boats?
1. Island Packet 45. Only concern is the chainplates and potential fuel tank issues.
2. Hylas 46. Only issue we have noticed is pricing.
3. Caliber 47 LRC. No real issues so far, maybe the pedestal is a little weird.

We would like to stay in the low 200's. We plan on doing some major blue water as we are on the west side of the states.

Our checklist is no teak decks, nav station, prefer island berth and Pullman berth in the front with forepeak head. Seperate shower is nice. Center Cockpit preferred.

Thanks folks, love the site!

While the Hylas sloop has a longer LWL (40 vs. 37.6) for slightly better speed I think you will find the Island Packet cutter has a better COMFORT and CAPSIZE ratios, plus a full keel and cutter rig for long distance passage-making.

Good Luck.

[RedneckRedcoat]

Originally Posted by Ledfoot2

My wife are getting more serious about planning our escape! We have narrowed our choices down to a shorter list. Any thoughts on these boats?
1. Island Packet 45. Only concern is the chainplates and potential fuel tank issues.
2. Hylas 46. Only issue we have noticed is pricing.
3. Caliber 47 LRC. No real issues so far, maybe the pedestal is a little weird.

We would like to stay in the low 200's. We plan on doing some major blue water as we are on the west side of the states.

Our checklist is no teak decks, nav station, prefer island berth and Pullman berth in the front with forepeak head. Seperate shower is nice. Center Cockpit preferred.

Thanks folks, love the site!

See if you can sail or view all three before deciding and then keep an open mind when looking.

[SofaKingFishy]

I work as a professional rigger & have banged on a lot of boats. Buy the newest, biggest boat you can afford. Caliber is out of business. They are challenging to work on (I.e.: $). IP’s are great when they’re well maintained & yes- you”ll need to replace the chainplates. The build quality is very good. Hylas is what we see most for Bluewater cruisers here in Annapolis- they’re very capable vessels & if you are ok with maintaining them, they’re fantastic boats & laid out very well below. It will be very challenging to get into one for your budget. You might consider a Hunter or Catalina for this budget.

[Tsuru]

Congratulations on your goal of some long term crusing. I think any of the boats on your list will make fine choices.
The Hylas would be my choice based on performance and design. The partial supported skeg rudder is fine and the wide fin keel give adiquate stability/motion and a quicker passage. Both the aft berths and pullman have lee cloths. Our boat is a couple feet shorter but with a similar layout. We’ve made several 20+ day passages with it and were comfortable. Spot on regarding the foreword head, but it’s nice at anchor. From our experience with a similar design the Hylas should make 160 to 170 miles per day in the trades without pushing the boat and crew too hard (maybe a bit more).
With any of these choices consider a prop shaft line cutter for sailing the Pacific.

[Leee]

A Hylas cc 46 was in the same yard as I south of Halifax. It had hit a rock with it's keel at a relatively slow speed but all the bulkheads including motor mounts had shifted as the structural tabbing was insufficient. Very nice boat to sail though.

[AiniA]

Originally Posted by s/v Jedi

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.

Let's talk about the vast majority of people who cannot afford a 64 footer. Depending on budget they are looking at much smaller and most often much older boats. I don't know that Ted Hood was designing his boats for either a rating rule or for the charter trade. In fact, when new they were relatively expensive because of their displacement. If various Hoods, HRs, and Vegas are making many, many trans-oceanic passages and keeping their owners safe and comfortable, they are successful designs for cruising. You seem to have a very narrow sense of what a cruising boat is, even though the boats you mentioned are often very different from each other - not to mention very expensive. Most people cruise on the relative cheap and are happy with the experience.

[s/v Jedi]

Originally Posted by AiniA

Let's talk about the vast majority of people who cannot afford a 64 footer. Depending on budget they are looking at much smaller and most often much older boats. I don't know that Ted Hood was designing his boats for either a rating rule or for the charter trade. In fact, when new they were relatively expensive because of their displacement. If various Hoods, HRs, and Vegas are making many, many trans-oceanic passages and keeping their owners safe and comfortable, they are successful designs for cruising. You seem to have a very narrow sense of what a cruising boat is, even though the boats you mentioned are often very different from each other - not to mention very expensive. Most people cruise on the relative cheap and are happy with the experience.

It depends on your viewpoint. If you look at 30’ designs then there simply isn’t a pure cruiser that I know of and everything seems expensive. But there must be older Amels within budget and Sundeers also come smaller and just over $200k, which to me feels like they are giving them away.

[sailingharry]

First, performance matters. It really does. Not only does it shave days off passages, it allow you to sail in lighter airs. And most of all, it's FUN! I shop with a PHRF (it's a rating rule) list in my pocket. Any racer will tell you PHRF is awful, but truth be told it's a fairly decent one-number descriptor of speed. Two boats with a similar number will sail similar. With different numbers, the lower number will be faster. I've attached an old list.

The IP 45 is 135. Frankly, awful.
The Hylas 66 is 99. Still slow, but much better.
The Caliber 47 isn't listed, but the 40 is 168, a number that is so awful I don't believe it.

My boat, a Saga 43, is about 83.
An Outbound 44 is 90, and meets a LOT of your criteria
A Swan 46 (isn't that about what 50 North has?) is 60.


The difference in numbers is seconds per mile. A 60 number difference is a minute a mile. On a 1000 mile passage, that's 1000 minutes, or 16 hours.


Your list is boats that are slow and not fun. They may be other things, but they are slow and not fun.

A comment on a center cockpit. I hate them, but that's me. In addition to Ann's comment on breaking up space, they make for a very steep and long companionway ladder (a real nuisance) and, especially for vertically challenged folk like my wife and me, make for cabin ports that only let in light -- we can't actually see OUT of them. They also often seem very dark.

[sailingharry]

Hmmmm found a better PHRF list here:
https://www.ussailing.org/competitio...-class-lookup/
And the Caliber 47 has a rating of 147. That's staggeringly slow! Seriously, if you live in high wind/seas areas, maybe, but if you sail in more normal areas you'll be motoring a lot.

[Bowdrie]

Originally Posted by s/v Jedi

If you look at 30’ designs then there simply isn’t a pure cruiser that I know of and everything seems expensive.

Originally Posted by sailingharry

First, performance matters. It really does. Not only does it shave days off passages, it allow you to sail in lighter airs. And most of all, it's FUN! I shop with a PHRF (it's a rating rule) list in my pocket.
My boat, a Saga 43, is about 83.
An Outbound 44 is 90, and meets a LOT of your criteria
A Swan 46 (isn't that about what 50 North has?) is 60.

The Saga 43/Outbound 44/Swan 46 are all big boats with big rigs.
Yes, length has its benefits that's for sure, and "performance" is easier to obtain.
When you get into smaller boats in the 30>35' range you're more-or-less forced into what you call a "slow" boat in order to get one that has enough hull depth/weight, (D/L ratio,) to carry all the gear and junk for voyaging.
I use the word "voyaging" as Sterling Hayden used it, people can "cruise" to the fuel dock or "cruise" to Catalina from Long Beach.
As for the post by Jedi, over the years I've spoken with young people who want to "voyage", but have limited resources and can only get a smaller boat, and don't want to spend half their life trying to save-up for the "Big Dream Boat".
I tell them to get a Westsail 32, there's lots of them around, (over 800 hulls were built,) in all price ranges, even an old beat-up one will go around the world, you can't hurt them, they're easy to work on, and they will carry all the junk imaginable.
And when you run aground the keel or rudder won't break off, (jeepers, what a concept).
PHRF? forget it, it matters little on small boats that are loaded up and heading for distant shores.