# Boats like S&S 34



## andyselzn (May 2, 2014)

What boats come closest to the S&S 34? Speed, comfort, and ability to handle rough seas are the most important. I looked at the Sail Calculator but find that it is insufficient. I picked the S&S 34 for discussion because it seems to have a track record with several circumanvigators.


----------



## christian.hess (Sep 18, 2013)

islander 36 
le comte 35
yankee 38(think stern pinch)
contessa 32


just to name a few

whats did you find was insufficient on sail calculator?


----------



## andyselzn (May 2, 2014)

Thanks Christian. The other day I saw a Cal 2-30. I ran it through the Sail Calculator. Seemed good. As I looked further I found it had a Fin Keel and Skeg Rudder (if I remember right). So it was not the right boat even though the speed, capsize factor, and comfort factors seemed as good as the S&S 34. So, I wanted first hand knowledge. I surfed the web some and the Olson 34 came up as a comparable boat.


----------



## andyselzn (May 2, 2014)

Just ran the specs. The Contessa 32 is so very close as far as the calculator goes. I wonder how they are different.


----------



## zedboy (Jul 14, 2010)

Anyone who thinks the Olson 34 and the S&S 34 are similar because they pop out similar numbers needs to stop thinking that the numbers capture the boat.

(In this particular case, needs to also learn to look at more numbers).

BTW the capsize screening and the motion comfort numbers are ... very questionable approximations. JeffH has written some good pieces on why.


----------



## andyselzn (May 2, 2014)

Makes sense. At first the Calculator seemed like a great way to learn about boats but I suppose one grows out of it as one goes along. 

What is the fastest heavy weather boat under 40 feet? Handling conditions (think capsize) and speed are the main two criteria.


----------



## zedboy (Jul 14, 2010)

Heh. Yeah.

You can go read bluewaterboats.org. Most of the boats there tend to be heavy displacement traditional/conservative designs with a long keel or moderate fin + skeg rudder. That would fit with Coles' book Heavy Weather Sailing, where Olin Stephens basically calls for moderate design and heavy construction.

There are others who swear by newer and much lighter designs, of course with lots of debate about which boats really merit trust. A high-aspect-ratio fin with a bulb can provide an impressive righting moment - on the other hand, a Farr-designed First 40.7 called Cheeki Rafiki just lost its keel and its crew in a nasty N. Atlantic storm. Lots of racers on Olsons would take them anywhere. Go read Paulo (PCP)'s Interesting Sailboats thread. The Europeans, especially the French have been very into this stuff - Pogo.

Yet another interesting French approach is the shallow-draft centerboard boats, which Alubat/Ovni has been doing for years. I just read about a guy who took a new Boreal 44 into some very nasty stuff and loves it. Aluminum boats with all-welded deck fittings = no leaks. They are relatively fast, he was posting 200+ mile days with slowing down at night, though not like a Pogo can do running full-out.

Again, JeffH has written some excellent posts about these questions. Google is your friend.


----------



## Ilenart (Jul 23, 2007)

My yacht, a UFO 34 is very similar to a S&S 34 and here in Perth they used to race in the same fleet. However on Sail Calculator the numbers look pretty different. The two diagrams below show the similarities.





When I was looking for my yacht, three boats that were very similar were the S&S 34, UFO 34 and Van De Stadt 34. Biggest issue with the S&S 34 was the lack of room midship around the galley. The UFO 34 was better (mainly as they are about a foot wider) and the Van De Stadt had the most room.

Ilenart


----------



## christian.hess (Sep 18, 2013)

andyselzn said:


> Thanks Christian. The other day I saw a Cal 2-30. I ran it through the Sail Calculator. Seemed good. As I looked further I found it had a Fin Keel and Skeg Rudder (if I remember right). So it was not the right boat even though the speed, capsize factor, and comfort factors seemed as good as the S&S 34. So, I wanted first hand knowledge. I surfed the web some and the Olson 34 came up as a comparable boat.


Im very confused about this sail calculator thing

the s and s 34 is a fin and skeg...so is a yankee 38, a yankee 30, the contessa 32...

Im giving you boats that have VERY similar underwater designs, displacement, and ballast to displacement ratio, sail design too, to some extent...

the thing with numbers is it can bite you in the ass if you dont know what you are lloking for

for example an olson 34 has nothing remotely similar or in common to a s and s 34, however a contessa 32 looks and feels very similar to it...

other boats as well like some I posted


----------



## christian.hess (Sep 18, 2013)

andyselzn said:


> Just ran the specs. The Contessa 32 is so very close as far as the calculator goes. I wonder how they are different.


its 2 feet shorter! jajaja duh

sail desigin is similar, fin and rudder design as well as the iorish stern...probably as close as you are going to get

however you can look at the yankee 38 for ior inspiration...designed again by sparkman and stepehens...

the 34 has many attributes found on this boat(except the extreme squirelliness off the wind that made the yankee 38 famous...catalina bought the plans and changed the rudder design as well as keel shape for the later catalina 38 boats)

however the catalina 38 was buily lighter and "crappier" and wasnt as stout...but it became an awesome racer...also yankee corp was know to build extremely high quality boats and they preffered to quit making boats in the oil crisis rather than keep going half assedly.


----------



## christian.hess (Sep 18, 2013)

Ilenart said:


> My yacht, a UFO 34 is very similar to a S&S 34 and here in Perth they used to race in the same fleet. However on Sail Calculator the numbers look pretty different. The two diagrams below show the similarities.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


love the ufo 34 however its a spade rudder...

I thought the op wanted as close a design as possible to the s and s 34...

if all you are looking for is a fin and spade there are a gazillion boats out there that match the boat...

however as has been stated NUMBERS CAN BE DECIEVING...look for sailing qualities...similar ballast to displacement ratios, and sail area design...to get comparable boats


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

Some quick thoughts off of the top of my head: 
One of my favorite boats of that size and era is the Halsey Herreshoff designed Bristol 33/34. 

Holman and Pye were some of my favorite designers during the era of the S&S 34. One of their nicer designs of that size is the Wauquiez Pretorien 35. 

Garry Mull designed a wonderful 30 footer called the Chico 30. I had only heard of these boats since most of them were built in NZ and Aus. but got to see one half way through making a circumnav a few years ago and the owner sang its praises very highly. 

A slightly older design, the Tartan 34 is a great all around boat from that era. I am also a big fan of the Tartan 30 which I like better than the the Tartan 34. 

Both are newer designs that I like; the Farr 9.2 (keel version) which is a good all around boat, and the Farr 1020 is a spectacularly nice 34 footer. 

Jeff


----------



## miatapaul (Dec 15, 2006)

A few things, if you look at that drawing of the S&S I don't think that skeg would give any protection to the rudder, so it is essentially a spade with a touch of skeg in front of it. I think you are giving way too much credence to the "numbers" as they really don't say much. Even the creator of the "motion comfort" number has said it is really meaningless only capable of comparing very similar boats. The Olson is not in the same category as the S&S so that shows how the numbers don't in themselves tell you much.

I would not have any "must haves" like skeg hung rudder as there are thousands of boats out there actually sailing that have spade rudders. A well made spade will be stronger than a weak skeg hung rudder. There was a recent thread that showed how most skegs are not at all structural. They may give a touch directional stability, not not necessarily any strength. I would concentrate on finding boats that fit your budget then look into if they will fit your needs. 

Of the "numbers" the main one I look at is sail area to displacement as that will give you an idea to light wind performance. Remember 90% of all cruising is going to be in light winds so that one is important most of the time.


----------



## christian.hess (Sep 18, 2013)

yup the one I always like is sail area and ballast to displacement ratio in general terms...

but like I said before know the designs, what you are looking for and the characterstics in REAL life versus what the numbers "say"

cheers


----------



## andyselzn (May 2, 2014)

i like the notion of giving more weight to sail area to displacement. sweet.

all this is still a little confusing though. and, a lot of what is being said is subjective. 

lets remove budget as a criteria for now and that might narrow us to the top 3 fast under 40 foot sail boats that can handle very heavy weather.


----------



## andyselzn (May 2, 2014)

@JeffH. Sounds like your vote is clearly for the Farr 1020. What are your top 3 picks (removing all constraints including cost). Under 40. Fast. Can handle heavy weather.


----------



## Ilenart (Jul 23, 2007)

christian.hess said:


> love the ufo 34 however its a spade rudder...
> 
> I thought the op wanted as close a design as possible to the s and s 34...
> 
> ...


The S&S 34 was built in West Australia in a number of versions. Mark 1 had the skeg. Mark II was built with a spade rudder (also a taller twin spreader rig and a "Mk 2" keel). I changed my old "barn door" spade rudder for a more modern shape a couple of years ago and the mould was the same one used on the latest S&S 34s. Picture below.

As Christian saids, I don't think you can get too specific with the numbers. The S&S 34 actual built displacements ranged from 11,000 to 13,000lbs, sail areas depends on whether you are talking about the short or tall rig, etc.

Ilenart


----------



## andyselzn (May 2, 2014)

how does the Cal 2-30 compare?


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

andyselzn said:


> i like the notion of giving more weight to sail area to displacement. sweet.
> 
> all this is still a little confusing though. *and, a lot of what is being said is subjective.*
> 
> lets remove budget as a criteria for now and that might narrow us to the top 3 fast under 40 foot sail boats that can handle very heavy weather.


Well, so are concepts such as "fast", or "can handle very heavy weather"... 

You're asking questions for which there are no simple answers, and starting from a very ambiguous point. The S & S 34 is a wonderful boat, but hardly fits into the category of what most sailors would consider a "fast" boat under 40 feet...


----------



## christian.hess (Sep 18, 2013)

without being too repetitive you are looking at this from a wrong angle andy...

if you look at numbers you can come up with wildly different looking boats yet the numbers are similar as you have already seen.

you can search by decade design say ior, cca, etc or

you can look at the physical attributes and aspects of the boats

you can class them by displacements

you can class them by sail area or phrf

you can class them by sail design

or spade and fin
spade and full keel
skeg and fin
skeg and full keel
3/4, cutaway full keel, barndoor ad nauseum

the point is SIMILAR to me means similiar looking and performing...

so take your s and s 34 to me close very close is a contessa 32...however the contessa 32 is definitely more iorish because it has a very very small main...

other than that and the fact that they were built in different continents they have very similiar underwater features and performance

while this is subjective in the sense we are judging by looks and certain aspects to me its the best way to compare boats

real life versus say just NUMBERS...

it would be a fools errand to shop for boats on numbers alone...to me at least

you are confusing yourself now more because you have peoples likes and dislikes....added to the "numbers"

best way to search for boats is to hear real life stories about their sailing characteristics in racing, cruising, offshore scenarios, club racing etc...and compare

cheers


----------



## bobmcgov (Jul 19, 2007)

andyselzn said:


> *@JeffH. Sounds like your vote is clearly for the Farr....*


:laugher Always, in every case. With all due respect.:laugher

Another comparable S&S design is the SHE 31 or 33 (pronounced 'shay'). Built in South Hants Engineering, England (hence the acronym) to very high standards, SHEs have been merrily bashing around the North Sea for decades. Second Jeff's endorsement of Wauquiez. You might also look at others of the English & Scandinavian boats in that size: Comfort, Nicholson, Najad, Sweden, Albin, Sigma, Omega....

http://www.yachtsnet.co.uk/archives.htm

http://www.scanboat.com/uk/default.asp

Boats intended for those stormy, rocky waters tended to be overbuilt while still being sleek and decent sailing craft. A couple of my faves are the Albin Nova 33 (Norlin) and the Athena 34. On the distaff side of The Pond, don't dismiss the Peterson 34. Toward the seakindly side of the ledger, try the Elizabethan and Contest/Conyplex boats.

Most of these boats are tiny inside by modern cruiser standards; they have low freeboards and minimal comforts or tankage. Their SA/D numbers on Sailboatdata.com may be suspect, since that number is based on 100% of foretriangle -- but many boats listed above were IOR influenced and carried 135-150% headsails.


----------



## Plumbean (Dec 17, 2009)

Ilenart and JeffH have identified some of my favorites that are similar to the S&S 34. For what it is worth, the displacement numbers that are kicked around online for the S&S 34 have always been a bit suspect. I have a UK built one (MK1 with double spreader tall rig), and she weighs in at about 13,000 pounds. My understanding is that the AUS built boats range from 11,000 to 13,000. Only the new ones (yes, you can actually have a new one built -- there have been 3 built in the last few years) approach the displacement numbers on the design sheet.


----------



## andyselzn (May 2, 2014)

Ok. Am going to short list three or so of these tonight and see what the price ranges are. I do understand that the older boats may require a fair bit of work. Original plan was to head down to Sydney and buy a S&S 34, just to get it done. However, I am told that it is a very soft buyers market. Maybe there are some other options on the West Coast (US).


----------



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

West coast YW search for racer/cruisers 35 -40ft up to 1990.... enjoy

(Sail) Cruiser/Racer Boats For Sale

Get a good look around, don't get fixated on any 2 or 3 designs, keep an open mind and see what pops out.

For fast, easy to handle, seaworthy I'd lean towards the various Farr designs, Express 34/37, some of the Jboats, and in general probably more IMS inspired than IOR.


----------



## zedboy (Jul 14, 2010)

andyselzn said:


> Original plan was to head down to Sydney and buy a S&S 34, just to get it done. However, I am told that it is a very soft buyers market. Maybe there are some other options on the West Coast (US).


Pardon my French, but are you out of your mind? Pay a fortune to fly from a large, inexpensive market to a small expensive one?

... Do you even know for sure that you like offshore sailing?


----------



## CBinRI (May 17, 2004)

I'm a big fan of the S&S designed Swans. They made several models 40 feet and under (mine is a 41). Just make sure you find one that has been maintained well. They are extremely well-built and blue water suitable. I prefer a fin keel (for speed) and skeg rudder (for safety). Measurements and ratios don't tell you the whole story. Build quality is key for ocean crossings.


----------



## zedboy (Jul 14, 2010)

This is exactly what JamesWilson was talking about - not to knock the meaningful contributions of JeffH & others, but it's hard to believe Andyselzn is or should be seriously considering offshore work...


----------



## saldrich (Oct 10, 2013)

I read the book by Jessica Watson. Her S&S 34 sailboat cost like $60,000 which was paid by sponsors. And that was before the refit.


----------



## andyselzn (May 2, 2014)

Here is a particularly informative post from blue water boats dot org. I believe it adds significant value to this thread so I am cutting and pasting it here. It is in reference to a S&S 34 and goes on to compare boats that are very similar.

Simon Torvaldsen says:	
February 21, 2010 at 6:58 am	

The boat was originally designed under RORC rules (ie pre IOR). However, Olin had a hand in designing the IOR rule proclaimed in 1969 and so knew what was coming, and the S&S 34 was designed with this in mind. Some IOR features have been left behind over the years – the mainsail was originally very short footed and there was a 160% genoa option – the IOR rules favoured this but it is not as efficient and over time the 11′ boom has been lengthened to 12’6 and no-one uses more than a 150% genoa. In winds over about 18-20 knots true (less when cruising) we use the #3 which has a 105% overlap

Unless racing hard, most owners would in fact consider a reef in less than a steady 25knots, but it is true that the gung ho racers can hold on and sail very effectively in up to 25 knots (or even more) before reefing. There is always a debate about whether to reef with a #3 jib or got to a #4 before reefing – most seem to reef before changing to the #4 (perhaps it’s less work!)

It probably takes less than 20hp to get to hull speed on smooth water. The original Volvo MD2 engine was I think rated at only 15 hp. Perie Banou III seems to get around fine with on 13hp, although Col Sanders says it is hard work powering into a seaway or stiff breeze.

The bow is fine (compare to say a Tartan Classic 34 also designed by S&S) as the boat was originally designed as a racer not a cruiser. The fine stern makes a well balanced boat, unlike a similar sized Beneteau/Bavaria etc if overpowered the 34 does NOT round up, but just heels over further. However, we don’t get a whole lot of aft cabin room/double beds etc.

The waterline length also increases when going downwind – the stern drops down so the the waterline length effectively extends to the very tip of the transom. They do tend to be a bit wetter than modern designs – due to finer fore section and lower freeboard – the trade off is that they don’t pound to windward as most comparable modern flat bottomed designs do.

It is correct that they are still quick boats. After 4 days of racing in the 2007 Hobart the new Farr designed “IRC optimised” Beneteau First 34.7 (actually a longer and bigger boat) was only 6 hours ahead over the line and about 3 hours behind on handicap. The conditions particularly favoured the Farr design. Under more favourable conditions the 34 can actually beat the Beneteau over the line, although on balance the Beneteau is more often slightly ahead. We regularly beat a well sailed Bavaria 34 over the line on the river. We can’t beat lightweight planing boats downwind though, at least on smooth water. Speed hard on the wind is about 61/4 knots. It is hard to get more than 9-10knots downwind in smooth water without an awful lot of wind, but an S&S 34 has been clocked at 17 knots surfing downwind in the ocean.

As a matter of interest the comparison with the Tartan 34 Classic is interesting one, this was designed just before the S&S 34, and was built with the USA East Coast in mind, more of a cruiser/racer. Hence the fuller bow and centerboard. They have good speed and are reasonably seaworthy I think, but are not as fast or bulletproof as the S&S 34 (but we can’t moor in 4′ of water either). It shows the same designer designing quite different boats for different purposes. The offset engine is also of interest as this was a feature Olin used on a number of his designs to improve the interior layout, including the original S&S 34 design. I think he said the shaft could be offset up to 8 degrees without causing problems under power.

The closest similar boat is probably the UFO 34 designed by Holman & Pye. The dimensions and performance are almost identical, they are perhaps slightly quicker than the Mk1 S&S 34 but slightly slower than the Mk2, however, close enough that they can and have raced at times as a combined class. They were never as popular and didn’t gain quite the reputation for seaworthiness as the S&S 34, but perhaps this is more an accident of fate than reality.

The Brolga 33 is also very similar,as this was designed as a direct competitor to the 34, with the aim of retaining seaworthiness and increasing internal space at the expense of some sacrifice in performance. Most would agree that this was achieved.

The Duncanson 34 is somewhat similar, but never achieved the racing success (I think because it was basically slower and/or didn’t rate as well) and likewise never achieved the same popularity as the S&S 34. However it has a good reputation as a tough easy to sail cruising boat.

The Contessa 32 built (still) in the UK is very similar, but slightly smaller and slower. It has not been updated over the years like the 34 (which makes for a very strong Class Association in the UK). It has a similar reputation for being seaworthy and bulletproof, backed up by an impressive record.

There are not many specific points to watch for in buying a second hand boat, just the fact that many are old and tired and need cleaning/painting/refurbishing. Many were fitted out internally by owners and the standard can vary enormously. Watch for osmosis (usually relatively minor and fixable) and perhaps loose rudder bearings, as well as the usual mechanical things with old engines, prop shafts, rigs etc. There have never been any serious structural failings (despite numerous accidents and groundings) and all the boats made are still afloat (although I think one sank after hitting a reef it was subsequently refloated). One suffered cabin top damage being flung upside down from the top of a wave in a cyclone (later repaired) and one lost a mast in a rollover in the 1998 Hobart race (est wind strength 80-90knots, their instruments were jammed on the stop at 75) and had to motor back to Eden. It is interesting to note that most boats in reasonable condition now sell for more than what they cost to build new. Not many second hand boats can boast that!

There is plenty of info and opinions re the 34, I guess it is one of the most influential and significant yacht designs of the 20th century. I don’t think any other has set so many records or probably sailed as many miles.


----------



## christian.hess (Sep 18, 2013)

well there you have it....seems a few of us got at least one design that is very similar...

I did not know of the duncanson or the brolga...so Ill put that in the mental list! jajaj

cheers


----------



## casey1999 (Oct 18, 2010)

andyselzn said:


> What boats come closest to the S&S 34? Speed, comfort, and ability to handle rough seas are the most important. I looked at the Sail Calculator but find that it is insufficient. I picked the S&S 34 for discussion because it seems to have a track record with several circumanvigators.


I was in your situation a few years ago. I had been looking (not very hard) for maybe 5 years for a boat to purchase. I did not really know what model but I wanted somthing as bullet proof as I could afford. Then I saw the video of Jessica Watson returning after a solo non-stop circumnavigation:
jessica watson returns to sydney you tube - Bing Videos

And I said that is the boat for me (if I could afford it). Went to craigs list and low and behold was an S&S 34 for sale (interesting the one for sale had just returned from a solo with stops circumnavigation.

There are some S&S34s for sale at very resonable prices in Australia. I also like the Brolga 33 but very few for sale and expensive (but might even be stronger than an S&S34):
Boat Design, Specs & Plans | Berrimilla

Boats For Sale - Boats-A-Million

this looks like a good deal:
http://www.boatsales.com.au/boats-f...ing|0&Cr=&trecs=2&__N=1456 285 4294878253 607

Have a look at the S&S34 Australin web site:
S&S34.org


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

andyselzn said:


> @JeffH. Sounds like your vote is clearly for the Farr 1020. What are your top 3 picks (removing all constraints including cost). Under 40. Fast. Can handle heavy weather.





bobmcgov said:


> :laugher Always, in every case. With all due respect.:laugher


I hate to disappoint you both but on the list above, the Farr 1020 would probably only be my first choice for a boat for myself around 34 feet and only if I was on a moderately limited budget. It would not be my first choice for someone who for some reason was looking for an S&S 34 or with an unlimited budget, which it why it was at the bottom of the list.

Probably my first choice would be a more modern design like the 2000 era Dehler 36 or slightly earlier Dehler 39 as a good mix of robust build quality and very good sailing characteristics.

Probably my second choice would be something like the semi-custom Merek 38that has been in Annapolis. It seems like a great all around design and I like that it has lift keel with a bulb for sneaking to shallower areas or shipping it as deck cargo.

A third choice would be a tough one. If performance were more important, and budget a bit more pinched I might include something like a Lightwave 39. If budget was a bit larger I have admired Paulo's Comet ever since I originally became aware of the design.

Of course if I were really on a tight budget, I'd own the boat that I own. Especially since its paid for and can do pretty much anything I would want it to.


----------



## casey1999 (Oct 18, 2010)

Jeff_H said:


> I hate to disappoint you both but on the list above, the Farr 1020 would probably only be my first choice for a boat for myself around 34 feet and only if I was on a moderately limited budget. It would not be my first choice for someone who for some reason was looking for an S&S 34 or with an unlimited budget, which it why it was at the bottom of the list.
> 
> Probably my first choice would be a more modern design like the 2000 era Dehler 36 or slightly earlier Dehler 39 as a good mix of robust build quality and very good sailing characteristics.
> 
> ...


Jeff,
If a Dehler 36 is such a great boat (and maybe it is), why would someone like Jessica Wattson choose a S&S34 when she could have used a Dehler 36 (price looks to be about the same)? The Dehler 36 does look to be a much faster boat which means the circumnavigation would be quicker and one might be more able to avoid storms.


----------



## andyselzn (May 2, 2014)

Thank you, Casey 1999, JeffH, and others,

Budget is a lower priority. And, I would think of it in terms of re-sale value rather than simply initial cost.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

casey1999 said:


> Jeff,
> If a Dehler 36 is such a great boat (and maybe it is), why would someone like Jessica Wattson choose a S&S34 when she could have used a Dehler 36 (price looks to be about the same)? The Dehler 36 does look to be a much faster boat which means the circumnavigation would be quicker and one might be more able to avoid storms.


I have no idea why Jessica Watson chose the boat she did. We all pick the boats we choose own for our own reasons. I personnally cannot imagine why anyone would choose to own an S&S 34 in this day and age, but I am not the one who chose this boat. from my point of view, these are tough boats to sail in the kind of broad range of conditions one experiences going around the world or doing coastal sailing for that matter. They tend to be a little short on stability being designed to sail with 1400-1600 lbs of crew weight on the rail, and require more frequent sail changes than a design which is less dependent on its headsails. They don't have a particularly comfortable motion. They are not especially burdensome.

So while they were good boats for their day, their appeal compared to some of the designs which followed is a bit of a mystery to me. I can certainly speculate I why she may not have chosen a Dehler or other more modern design. At least in the case of the Dehler these are pretty rare boats in the antipodes. She may never have heard of the Dehler 36 or 39, and there are several well know cases of S&S 34's sailing around the world, and that may be what she knew.

But that is simply speculative on my part.

Jeff


----------



## miatapaul (Dec 15, 2006)

casey1999 said:


> Jeff,
> If a Dehler 36 is such a great boat (and maybe it is), why would someone like Jessica Wattson choose a S&S34 when she could have used a Dehler 36 (price looks to be about the same)? The Dehler 36 does look to be a much faster boat which means the circumnavigation would be quicker and one might be more able to avoid storms.


Perhaps they had a good s&s 34 available? Sometimes we on the internet put more thought into these things.

Sent from my NookColor using Tapatalk


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

casey1999 said:


> Jeff,
> If a Dehler 36 is such a great boat (and maybe it is), why would someone like Jessica Wattson choose a S&S34 when she could have used a Dehler 36 (price looks to be about the same)? The Dehler 36 does look to be a much faster boat which means the circumnavigation would be quicker and one might be more able to avoid storms.


That question would be better asked of Don McIntyre, who made the choice, and bought the boat for her...



Jeff_H said:


> I have no idea why Jessica Watson chose the boat she did. We all pick the boats we choose own for our own reasons. I cannot imagine why anyone would chose to own an S&S 34 in this day and age.


Much less, put $100K into one?



JESSICA WATSON - The Making of Pink Lady


----------



## christian.hess (Sep 18, 2013)

never understood why threads like this become bashing threads

I guess the thread veered when the op asked what are the fastest sub 40 footers in the market today...

so maybe the title of the thread should be changed?

ps. btw how do you avoid storms by maybe going a knot or 2 faster? 

this only applies to volvo ocean boats and similar boats that can attain 30-40 knots...

you cant outrun a storm or cyclone or tropical depression on anything that averages less than 10knots....(unless you are talking about not getting rained on on a beer can race so your newb crew wont get mad or something...jajaja)

even modern boats...

sorry for the slight thread derail

peace


----------



## casey1999 (Oct 18, 2010)

christian.hess said:


> never understood why threads like this become bashing threads
> 
> I guess the thread veered when the op asked what are the fastest sub 40 footers in the market today...
> 
> ...


This was OP original post:
"What boats come closest to the S&S 34? Speed, comfort, and ability to handle rough seas are the most important. I looked at the Sail Calculator but find that it is insufficient. I picked the S&S 34 for discussion because it seems to have a track record with several circumanvigators."

Note speed is one of three desires. With todays weather predictors (like passageweather.com), we can forecast weather out fairly accurately for 7 days out. And using passageweather.com, with a little metorological skills, one can somewhat predict large storms like typhoon, hurricane, or large low pressure areas out to at least 10 days (practice this with passageweather.com to hone your skills. So at say 2 knots extra speed, I can make at least 240 miles to veer away from a storm. That offers quite a bit of distance that could make a big difference in wind speed and sea state.


----------



## casey1999 (Oct 18, 2010)

JonEisberg said:


> That question would be better asked of Don McIntyre, who made the choice, and bought the boat for her...
> 
> Much less, put $100K into one?
> 
> ...


As I remember from Jessica's book, she choose an S&S34 for her trip. Don got involved after she had made the decision. I have exchange e-mails with Don McIntyre, one thing he said was an S&S 34 is a very strong boat.

From my understanding, Jessica choose an S&S34 based somewhat on the fact that Jessie Martin had used one for his record breaking solo non stop. And Jessie Martin choose one based somewhat on the fact that David Dicks had used one in his solo non stop. And David Dicks used his families S&S 34 since that is what he had and it is what his mentor Jon Sanders used in his double solo non stop.


----------



## christian.hess (Sep 18, 2013)

^^^yup

her choice was heavily influenced by jesse martins trip


----------



## christian.hess (Sep 18, 2013)

casey1999 said:


> This was OP original post:
> "What boats come closest to the S&S 34? Speed, comfort, and ability to handle rough seas are the most important. I looked at the Sail Calculator but find that it is insufficient. I picked the S&S 34 for discussion because it seems to have a track record with several circumanvigators."
> 
> Note speed is one of three desires. With todays weather predictors (like passageweather.com), we can forecast weather out fairly accurately for 7 days out. And using passageweather.com, with a little metorological skills, one can somewhat predict large storms like typhoon, hurricane, or large low pressure areas out to at least 10 days (practice this with passageweather.com to hone your skills. So at say 2 knots extra speed, I can make at least 240 miles to veer away from a storm. That offers quite a bit of distance that could make a big difference in wind speed and sea state.


true

but it would be a fools errand to beleive that a minimally faster boat would be the decisive factor there

what you are talking about is what a tactician does...PLAN


----------



## casey1999 (Oct 18, 2010)

Jeff_H said:


> They tend to be a little short on stability being designed to sail with 1400-1600 lbs of crew weight on the rail, and require more frequent sail changes than a design which is less dependent on its headsails. They don't have a particularly comfortable motion. They are not especially burdensome.
> 
> Jeff


Jeff,
Where the heck do you get this from?

I single hand my S&S 34 in winds from 5-35 knots and never have a problem. I have never seen a S&S34 with 1400 lbs or meat hanging over the rail. As far as stability, the S&S34 is one of the best, with an excellant righting moment thanks to a 5,000 lb lead keel that draws 6 feet. As far as head sail, I use a 100% and do not have any problem reaching hull speed (or greater) even in very light winds. Large overlapping head sails are not required. As far as comfort motion, the S&S34 has one of the best in a rough sea.

Have you ever sailed a real S&S34 (not a Tartan 34)?

Here is some good reading:

My Sailing: Still racing after all these years
Australian Sailing - November 2010

The formidable S&S34 is first choice for circumnavigations, but can still win races under IRC, as Bernie Kaaks reports.

Solo sailors Jessica Watson, Jon Sanders, David Dicks, Jesse Martin and Jamie Dunross are all circumnavigators, and all have something in common - a robust little 34 foot yacht from the renowned American marine architects Sparkman & Stephens, designed by the legendary Olin Stephens. What many people don't realise is that the same boat is still available brand new, and is still winning races on both sides of the continent.

Stories abound of how well S&S34's handle extraordinary conditions. Few have been more poignantly reported than David Goodfellow's police interview regarding the dismasting of Solandra in the 1998 Sydney to Hobart Race. Even in winds of well over 70 knots, Solandra handled the winds well, and it was only a mountain of white water in a breaking wave estimated at 12 to 15 metres in height that finally rolled the yacht enough to bury the mast and break it. Even then, having cleared away the debris, Solandra was able to fire up its diesel and motor back for 20 hours through those terrible conditions to reach Eden without the need for assistance.

British heritage

The S&S34 probably owes its existence to an Englishman, Michael Winfield, who built a timber 36 footer he called Morningtown (after a successful racehorse) to a Sparkman and Stephens design. He was so impressed by the one tonner that he asked Olin Stephens to draw up plans for a production yacht along similar lines, set up moulds in his factory and produced a number of boats from them.

One of Winfield's first yachts was bought by a British politician, Edward Heath, who four years later was to become Prime Minister and was eventually knighted. His campaign with the yacht Morning Cloud catapulted the S&S34 into international prominence by winning the 1969 Sydney to Hobart race and taking first place in its class in the Fastnet Race a year later.

However Winfield was not an experienced boat builder and after producing a handful of boats he sold one of the two sets of moulds to a company called Aquafibre, which continued to build the yachts in the UK until 1974.

At the same time, respected Perth-based boat builders Swarbrick Brothers developed an interest in the 34 and in 1969 Tom Swarbrick flew to England to purchase the second set of moulds. Not satisfied with the deck layout, the first S&S34 built by Swarbrick Brothers had a hand built "plug" deck to give the boat full standing headroom and which also removed the raised coamings from the original design.

Most yachts built for local owners were routinely fitted with a deck-stepped, hinged mast which could be lowered for transit under the bridges which block access from the Swan River to the ocean.

An instant Aussie hit

The S&S34 proved an instant success in Australia. Its 2 ½ tonne lead keel and conservative sail plan made it the perfect craft to sail in the prevailing "Fremantle Doctor", an afternoon sea breeze which typically kicks in along the West Coast at 20 knots-plus during summer afternoons. In racing mode in a moderate 12 to 15 knot breeze it can sail at around 6.4 knots in an apparent wind of 25 - 30 degrees, equating to a true 40 degrees or a tacking angle of 80 degrees.

Downwind the boat is good to 8 or 9 knots under spinnaker in similar wind strength, but in ocean races has reportedly reached sustained bursts of 17 knots while surfing down waves.

Given those statistics, it is hardly surprising that over 120 yachts were produced in Perth from the Swarbrick Brothers mould. The design evolved over the years. During 1974/75 a tall rig version was introduced, adding a couple of feet to the mast and extending the boom to increase sail area. A short time later, Bill Langham of Sparkman and Stephens redesigned the foils, replacing the traditional angular rudder and keel configurations with elliptical blades. This had the effect of increasing the draft from 1.85 metres to 1.92 metres, but at the same time allowed a decrease in ballast weight by more than 100kg. The Mark II version, as it became known, was quicker than Mark I designs in all but heavy weather and remains a beautifully balanced yacht across a wide range of conditions.

The end of WA production

Unfortunately Swarbrick Brothers fell on hard times and the S&S34 moulds found their way to Maybrook Marine in NSW following bankruptcy proceedings. Only four boats were produced before the moulds were packed away in storage and the S&S34 story may well have ended there were it not for a passionate believer in the design in the form of Michael Finn, owner of the S&S34 Huckleberry, a yacht he and his late father Merv sailed with distinction. Their dominance of Division 2 in WA offshore racing was so complete under the IMS rule that some argued that the yacht only had to turn up to win! That argument failed to recognise the inescapable truth that Mike and his father were a formidable combination on the water, for they achieved their success in the company of a number of sister ships.

Re-birth of the legend

Convinced that the lifespan of the S&S34 design was far from over, Finn purchased the moulds and returned them to WA. Then, in conjunction with Tom Swarbrick's son Glenn and in consultation with Sparkman and Stephens, the team settled on a new foam sandwich method of construction, using vacuum infusion technology. Operating as Swarbrick & Swarbrick, Glenn was to build the yachts using the moulds now owned by Mike Finn's Cottesloe Yachts. Permission was obtained from Olin Stephens himself to use the name "Constellation" for the new range, after his successful America's Cup winner. The boats are now in current production, with three boats completed and enquiries coming from both locally and as far abroad as the United States.

Although they come from the same mould, the new boats differ in many respects to their predecessors. Vacuum infusion produces a hull which is 25% lighter, more uniform in hull thickness, with better impact strength and which is physically stiffer. Cabinetry is predominantly made in fibreglass modules, thus minimizing weight and increasing strength. The main bulkhead is now a thick foam sandwich construction rather than a plywood sheet.

All these improvements beg the question: With all the modern designs currently available, why bother?

The answer is a complex one, but has a lot to do with the legendary achievements recorded by the class. While Sir Edward Heath certainly did his bit in the emergence of the design, what followed is the stuff of legends. Olin Stephens said at its release: "We hope and believe that the S&S34 will make a good all-round boat, so as to demonstrate in a fairly small package that a good boat for offshore racing will also be a good boat for cruising." Little did he know just how prophetic those sentiments would prove to be.

Circumnavigators

Having already completed a successful solo circumnavigation in his S&S34 Perie Banou, Jon Sanders set out in 1981 to complete a double circumnavigation in the same boat. He completed the non-stop voyage in 419 days, covering a staggering 48,510 nautical miles and claiming 12 new world records in the process, including the longest distance sailed by any yacht at that time.

It was inevitable that Jon Sanders' exploits would encourage any would-be circumnavigator to at least consider the S&S34 for the journey, and so it was that David Dicks set out to emulate his mentor in his family's S&S34, Seaflight, to become the youngest sailor to complete a non-stop circumnavigation. Only the supply of one little bolt during the voyage prevented its recognition as "alone and unassisted".

While talking to David Dicks' mother prior to his return, I was surprised to learn that at the age of 12, David was already sailing Seaflight single handed from Fremantle to their holiday spot at Quindalup (near Busselton) to meet his parents down there, a distance of around 120 nautical miles. This revelation said as much about the future ambitions of the young skipper as it did about the handling characteristics of the yacht itself. It might also put to rest some of the theories advanced by armchair experts who argued that Jessica Watson would not have the physical strength required to sail a 34 foot
yacht around the world.

David Dicks completed his circumnavigation in 1997 at the age of 17, while Jesse Martin completed his journey in Lionheart in 1999 aged 19, inspiring Jessica Watson to her circumnavigation in 2010, becoming the youngest person to complete a solo unassisted circumnavigation at the age of 16. Jessica's yacht Ella's Pink Lady was hull number 106 built by Swarbricks in Perth, and like Perie Banou, Seaflight and Lionheart before her, had travelled many miles prior to her preparation for Jessica's "Big Trip".

Gold medallist chooses S&S34

Jamie Dunross completed his circumnavigation under somewhat different circumstances to the others, and certainly with much less fanfare. Though Jamie's circumnavigation was around Australia, not around the globe, some of his greatest admirers are the globe circlers. Jamie was also a very good competitive yachtsman before taking on his challenge. His yacht Spirit of Rockingham was built by Glenn Swarbrick's new vacuum infusion technique and she was purpose-built for her task. You see, Jamie Dunross, in addition to being a Paralympic Gold medallist, is a quadriplegic. Spirit of Rockingham was fitted with a number of features to make it possible to sail her from the cockpit, a necessity for a solo sailor with no use of his legs and very limited use of his arms. The reality varied from the theory however. Several times during his odyssey Jamie found it necessary to drag himself onto the foredeck, a slow, painful and dangerous move, to undertake tasks which could not be done from the safety of his cockpit refuge - such as untangling jib sheets.

Few yachts could have accomplished the task of safely transporting a person with such a severe disability. Spirit carried Jamie through a savage storm off Cape Leeuwin, stood him in good stead after being flattened in a sudden squall off the Queensland coast and carried him safely back to his starting point in Rockingham. In the process he sailed non-stop from Darwin to Fremantle, a world record for a quadriplegic sailor.

Racing pedigree

On the race track the class excelled in most theatres. The late Max Shean's Bluebell won the 1979 Parmelia Race (from England to Fremantle) from Jon Sanders' Perie Banou. Both yachts sailed from Fremantle to Britain to start the race. In addition to Sir Edward Heath's Sydney to Hobart victory, S&S34's placed in the Great Race in 1971, '78, '79, '81, '82 and '84. An S&S34 won the 1996 Lord Howe Island Race. In 1989 the S&S34 Deerstalker won the North Sea Race and in 1992, the Round Britain and Ireland Race. No wonder then, that Gryphon Management Consultants stated "The S&S34 is the most celebrated and successful of all of the S&S production designs".

It might be argued that a 40-year-old design could not possibly be a competitive racing proposition, but that would ignore the brilliance of Olin Stephens' original design concept, the advantages of modern production techniques and the foresight of the designers of the IRC rule. The first of the new boats was Mike Finn's Constellation, which in its first serious outing placed second behind a very well sailed Beneteau 34.7 in the IRC Red fleet at this year's Geographe Bay Race Week. Her sister Blondie, owned by Simon Torvaldsen, sailed in two of the four races of Fremantle Sailing Club's winter Valmadre Series and placed first on IRC in both, also against quality opposition. Both yachts will meet next February at Geographe Bay, so there is considerable interest in the outcome.

Their performance to date has proven that the design will continue to be a very competitive IRC package for some years to come.

There is a certain irony in Blondie's race performance. Simon Torvaldsen finally settled on the S&S34 not because he wanted a good race boat, but because he wanted a boat in which he could cruise safely and with confidence with his wife and two daughters! Given that there are many S&S34's on long distance cruises as you read this article, Michael Finn's conviction that there is still a lot of life left in the class is undoubtably correct.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

casey1999 said:


> Note speed is one of three desires. *With todays weather predictors (like passageweather.com), we can forecast weather out fairly accurately for 7 days out.* And using passageweather.com, with a little metorological skills, one can somewhat predict large storms like typhoon, hurricane, or large low pressure areas out to at least 10 days (practice this with passageweather.com to hone your skills. So at say 2 knots extra speed, I can make at least 240 miles to veer away from a storm. That offers quite a bit of distance that could make a big difference in wind speed and sea state.


Hmmm, that's a damn good weather router, who can predict within 200 miles or so where the center of a major low pressure system at sea will be, 10 days in advance 

I don't know, that seems a rather optimistic appraisal of the magical powers of prognostication that gets posted on Passageweather.com... I'd bet that most of the boats that got into trouble last fall in the Salty Dawg Rally, the last thing they checked before departure, was the latest update on Passageweather... 

Just one of numerous examples we've seen lately, where a forecast Offshore Weather Window went bye-bye in 36 hours, or less...


----------



## casey1999 (Oct 18, 2010)

JonEisberg said:


> Hmmm, that's a damn good weather router, who can predict within 200 miles or so where the center of a major low pressure system at sea will be, 10 days in advance
> 
> I don't know, that seems a rather optimistic appraisal of the magical powers of prognostication that gets posted on Passageweather.com... I'd bet that most of the boats that got into trouble last fall in the Salty Dawg Rally, the last thing they checked before departure, was the latest update on Passageweather...
> 
> Just one of numerous examples we've seen lately, where a forecast Offshore Weather Window went bye-bye in 36 hours, or less...


And that is why one should sail an S&S34. Even if the weather does not do what you predicted, you still have a good chance of an excellent passage.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

casey1999 said:


> And that is why one should sail an S&S34. Even if the weather does not do what you predicted, you still have a good chance of an excellent passage.


Yours is a wonderful boat, with a terrific pedigree, no doubt about it... Quite similar to my own in many respects, I would imagine...

However, I have to wonder, what other boats do you suppose people are commonly sailing offshore and making passages aboard today, that you think the S & S 34 would average out to being 2 knots faster than?


----------



## casey1999 (Oct 18, 2010)

JonEisberg said:


> Yours is a wonderful boat, with a terrific pedigree, no doubt about it... Quite similar to my own in many respects, I would imagine...
> 
> However, I have to wonder, what other boats do you suppose people are commonly sailing offshore and making passages aboard today, that you think the S & S 34 would average out to being 2 knots faster than?


Jon,
You misunderstand me. I am saying the S&S34 may be a lot slower than a lot of similar size more race oriented boats that would be able to average a speed 2 knots faster than the S&S34. If one were able to sail at 8.5 knots as opposed to the S&S 34 at 6.5 knots that could make a big difference in being able to avoid (not outrun) stoms. I do like the S&S 34, but would like her even more if she average 8.5 knots. Also less time at passage means less time for chance of storm, as I am sure you know.

Here a a 34 footer, looks like she can fly:
http://www.yachtworld.com/boats/2009/Pogo-10,50-1050-10.50-2629443/St-Malo/France


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

casey1999 said:


> Jeff,
> Where the heck do you get this from?


I got it from several places. First of all, I got from racing a Palmer Johnson 34 which I believe was an American finished version of the S&S 34 which we sailed with a crew of 7 to 9 depending on the amount of wind and which would not move in light air without a 165% genoa, which we traded down to a 155% at 7 or 8 knots to keep from being over powered, which we traded down to a roughly 135% around 12 knots, which we traded down to a 110% around 18 knots which we traded down to a 95% somewhere in the low 20's.

I also got it from campaigning the S&S designed North Star 1500, a similar but later design with very similar behaivior.

And I got it from a conversation with Olin Stephens at SNAME about how S&S designed for crew weight in which he said that the practice changed over the years and that crew weight has progressively dropped since the high point around 1970, which if I remember right he said was when design crew weight could approach 10-12% of the weight of the boat.

But reality, whatever my experience with these boats, you continue to sail these boats and they suit you fine and that is what counts.

Respectfully,
Jeff


----------



## casey1999 (Oct 18, 2010)

Jeff_H said:


> I got it from several places. First of all, I got from racing a Palmer Johnson 34 which I believe was an American finished version of the S&S 34 which we sailed with a crew of 7 to 9 depending on the amount of wind and which would not move in light air without a 165% genoa, which we traded down to a 155% at 7 or 8 knots to keep from being over powered, which we traded down to a roughly 135% around 12 knots, which we traded down to a 110% around 18 knots which we traded down to a 95% somewhere in the low 20's.
> 
> I also got it from campaigning the S&S designed North Star 1500, a similar but later design with very similar behaivior.
> 
> ...


Jeff,
You and me (and others with me) might as well be on a different planet. First I don't see how you can get 9 crew on an S&S34, or why you would want to. The boat is not designed for that amount of crew and you all would be tripping over each other- no wonder you went so slow. I have never seen a pic of an S&S 34 racing seriously with even 7 crew hanging off the rail. And your sailing speed, wind conditions and sail size don't make sense. I am surprised I can reach hull speed (with a dirty hull) with only a 100% jib and very little wind. And the fact that I can reach hull speed with a 20 hp yanmar (3gmd) at only 1/2 throttle (equal to about 10 hp) shows the hull shape is very efficient. They way you describe the S&S34 it is lucky to have made it out of its slip. Kind of confusing since the boat has set more records than any other boat in its size range.

Here is some good reading:
SAIL Magazine: Setting Sail: A century of excellence

SAIL Magazine: Setting Sail 
By Peter Nielsen, Editor-in-Chief
Thursday, April 17, 2008
A century of excellence

Olin Stephens turned 100 last weekend, and that's a birthday worth noting even if you've never owned a Sparkman & Stephens design. The old boy's life spans the history of yachting as we know it - or indeed sailing as we know it. He's designed some of the loveliest and most enduring yachts ever built, and stamped his influence on cruising, racing and even motorboating. From bulletproof cruisers to America's Cup winners, graceful yawls to blunt-nosed workboats, Stephens had the kind of magic touch that most boat designers would kill for.

The roll call of famous S&S boats would take too long a time to get through, so I'll restrict myself to one of my favorites. I was living in Australia during the early 1980s when two remarkable voyages took place. A likely lad called Serge Testa built himself a 12-foot aluminum boat and sailed it round the world. But I digress - this was no S&S design, it was all Serge's own handiwork, and a finer example of never letting a lack of cash stand in the way of a great adventure has seldom been seen. More on that some other time.

The voyage I really mean was that of Jon Sanders, a sheep shearer from the dusty hinterland of Western Australia. I was a long-haired, bewhiskered editor of a motorcycle magazine in Melbourne in '81 and '82, the years in which Sanders circumnavigated Antarctica - twice, alone - in Perie Banou, his Aussie-built S&S34. 
I wasn't interested in sailing per se in those days but I was interested in adventure, and since I knew people who knew Sanders I followed his exploits keenly. He had already made a name for himself by placing second in the 1979 Parmelia Race, from England to Fremantle, on the same boat (another S&S 34). Back in the mid-70s, he'd circumnavigated with stops, and with crew. In between, he'd criss-crossed the Pacific and Indian oceans numerous times and made a dozen or more transits of the southern Australian coastline, and raced a few Sydney-Hobarts.

Later in the 1980s, Sanders traded up to a bigger boat and circumnavigated another three times without stopping - twice west-east, once east-west, covering 71,023 miles in 657 consecutive days at sea. I have a feeling that's a record that'll stand forever; Sanders later said: "Normal people would say 'you've got to be mad,' and I'd think, yup, and if I'm not, I'm sure it would be helpful."

Mad or not, Sanders trusted his little 34-footer enough to dodge icebergs alone for nearly a year. The S&S 34 was conceived in the dying days of Britain's RORC rule, and its design was influenced by both that and the new International Offshore Rule (IOR). Olin said at the time: "We hope and believe that the S&S 34 will make a good all-round boat, so as to demonstrate in a fairly small package that a good boat for offshore racing will also be a good boat for cruising."

The 34 had all the characteristics of what we now identify with those early IOR days - a hull that was diamond-shaped when seen from above, with fine bows and a pinched stern, a short waterline, long overhangs and a generous dollop of tumblehome that meant the person sleeping in the windward pilot berth was further outboard than the rail monkeys sitting above. The skinny-main, big-foretriangle rig set the tone for the decade that followed.

This is the style of boat that leads people who have never sailed one to pontificate about downwind death rolls, lack of stability, poor build quality, bad seakeeping and lord knows what else. Some later IOR boats did for sure give the whole generation a bad name, but many early examples were and remain excellent, solidly built sailing boats that are still rewarding to sail today. Note to people looking for cheap, tough, well-mannered cruising boats - you could do a lot worse than an early IOR racer.

The 34 made its bones when British prime minister Ted Heath won the 1969 Sydney-Hobart in Morning Cloud, and for the next five years S&S 34s won or placed highly in that tough ocean classic. It gained a rep as an excellent heavy weather boat, and even now, beating into a stiff breeze, it would give nothing away to many modern designs. Sailing conditions around the Australian coast are as tricky as you'll find anywhere, so it wasn't surprising that the boat proved so popular there. The Aussies soon began building S&S 34s, and believe it or not you can still order a brand new one, built the modern way with resin infusion by the Swarbrick yard.

Following in Sanders's wake, Aussie youngsters David Dicks and Jesse Martin also circumnavigated alone on S&S 34s, and these little boats have carried many other sailors safely through adventures on the world's oceans. A few years back I tried hard to find one to buy, but the only example I could track down was a tired old warhorse in California that had way too high an asking price.

They don't design boats like the S&S 34 any more, because people don't buy them. Like the Contessa 32 - another '70s cult classic - a 34 was a big boat back in the '60s, but compared to a modern 34-footer it feels like you're in a closet. At sea the lack of interior volume is a blessing rather than a handicap, but in port you need to set your sights a bit low in terms of cruising comfort. This isn't a boat for big crews, which may be one reason it's so popular with singlehanders.

Even though it doesn't have the cachet of Dorade, the beauty of Finisterre, or the high profile of many bigger S&S designs, the S&S 34 epitomizes that sweet blend of form and function that made Olin Stephens such a great designer. It looked right, it was right, it still is right, and it'll always be right. There aren't that many boats you can say that of, and a good many of those took shape on Olin Stephens's drawing board.


----------



## Ilenart (Jul 23, 2007)

I think that Jeff and Casey are both correct. 

I have also heard plenty of comments that my UFO 34 was also designed with all the crew perched out to weather. However the fact is the boat sails fine with no crew hanging out and I'm sure the S&S 34 sails just the same. Sure, If you wanted to get an extra half a knot or an extra 5 degrees closer to the wind 500kg / 1,000lbs of crew weight would help and probably clinch the race.

It is also obvious from looking at the plans that both the UFO 34 and S&S 34 were designed with large overlapping jibs, with 150% to be used in light breezes. However, again the yacht sails fine with 120-100% jibs. Lately I have been using a No 4 jib, which I think is around 75% as it is nice not having to change the jib until you hit 30 knots wind speed. I reckon I lose around 1-1.5 knots when the breeze is below 10 knots. Sure, if I was racing I would carry a larger jib. However when the boat speed drops below 4 knots I normally start the engine anyway and recharge the batteries. 

Ilenart


----------



## casey1999 (Oct 18, 2010)

Not trying to beat a dead horse. However never herd of a North Star (Hughes) 1500 so did a search. Apparently some like the boat and have done some significant sailing in them with sucess. While similar to the design of an S&S34, it still could sail very differently. In any case, looks to be an excellent boat and available at a good price:
North Star 1500 35' - Cruisers & Sailing Forums


----------



## Torvie (Jun 20, 2014)

Hi all,

As the owner of the last S&S 34 built (2008), I thought I should inject some facts into this debate. My boat was built as a cruiser (5000kg whereas a strict racer with carbon rig could be built at 4000kg). The S&S 34 strengths are strength, seaworthiness, ease of sailing and perhaps surprisingly speed (for her size, they are actually only 33' and have a short waterline). They are a sailors boat, not a show boat. The weakness is small interior volume, with pinched bow & stern, and lack of access in getting overboard into a dinghy (plus nowhere to readily store dinghy or liferaft on board). Headroom is just adequate at 6'1".

The UFO 34 is the closest comparable boat, they are a bit bigger and potentially very slightly faster (although we have yet to be beaten by one). The Contessa 32 in the UK is very similar, the 1' difference in length is negligible, but they are a bit slower I think, the S&S 34 was designed specifically to race and Olin Stephens was a very talented designer.

I have no idea where Jeff H is coming from- no S&S 34 would race with 8 or 9 crew, we prefer 5 although can do it with 4. Weight on the rail helps (as with every boat), but only modestly - we usually race with the off watch sleeping comfortably below and 2 on deck - and we win - we are currently West Australian Offshore Champions and the runner up for top Blue Water race boat on this side of Oz (we race under IRC). This season we have beaten the Beneteau Firsts, Jeanneaus, various Farrs, a professionally crewed Ker 39 ( which retired from one tough race due to structural damage/delamination) a Sydney 36 and several high tech custom carbon IRC racers. In our last major 220nm race we were 5 hours ahead over the line in front of a Dufour 40 and Farr 40, both crewed by highly experienced ocean racers. Despite being the smallest boat in the race by a fair margin we were 4th over the line. We can't compete with a flat bottomed carbon racer downwind, but the S&S 34 is NOT a slow boat for it's size even by modern standards. It is probably more optimised for windward work vs most newer designs are more downwind boats though. For comparison, we are a percentage point or two slower than the significantly larger First 34.7 (although readily beat them on IRC). We leave any similar sized "cruiser racers" like Dufours, Bavarias, etc well behind us.

Large overlapping genoas are a relic of the past- our largest genoa is 135% and anything over 15kts we use the 105%. Heavy weather (esp 25kt+) dead downwind isn't the strongest point, although you have to set sails poorly to really roll under spinnaker. Lighter weather is a different story and we readily hang onto the much bigger boats. 2 sail reaching is a matter of waterline length with isn't a 34 strength either, although adding a Code 0 changes this equation in under 15 kts. Windward work is a different story and no modern boat walks away from a 34 to windward. We can usually point several degrees higher than most. Remember half our weight is in the lead keel underneath.

Hopefully this gives some idea re strength & weaknesses. By modern standards, the S&S34 is quite a small boat. Her real strength is the compromise between being a still competitive racer but also able to be sailed safely & comfortably by one or two crew (& looking after less experienced crew). Not many 34' yachts can expect to race and win, but also be capable of single handing around the world. The trade off is that the accommodation is designed around the yacht, rather than vice versa, and although the space is very well utilised, it is not huge. It comes down to sailing qualities vs interior spaciousness.

Hope this helps provide some perspective.


----------



## christian.hess (Sep 18, 2013)

very much appreciated...and thanks for posting.

Im always amazed at the blatant misfacts posted only to prove points based on supposedly objective facts and numbers.

Like you many owners of similar designed boats say the same things...boats are compromises, but real world facts trump numbers any day of the year for me.

cheers


----------



## miatapaul (Dec 15, 2006)

christian.hess said:


> this thread just got dumb
> 
> once again too many damn people with biases condemning a boat
> 
> man


I don't think anyone has condemned the boat here in this thread. Just pointed out it's liabilities. All boats are a compromise otherwise we would all sail the same perfect boat. Some folks here are speaking of it as though it is the perfect boat. It is an older design and still made, but still older design. I think it is crazy to look for such a relatively (in the US) rare boat to the exclusion of all others. It is simply a nice design and beautiful boat, but not the be all to end all design. I think that is all that was meant by any negative comments.

As usual Jeff's comments are backed by experience and his knowledge as a boat designer. I may have differences in opinion on some of his preferences, I can certainly see were he comes from. If I found a good deal on a S&S 35 I would consider it, but I would not search the world for one.


----------



## christian.hess (Sep 18, 2013)

theres just too much bias...thats why it got dumb...to me at least...whats the point?

I wasnt trying to be rude, I apologize for that, but too many times on sites like these bias trumps real world and people asking simple questions get all the wrong answers because they are given "numbers" and "facts"

I also think its a bit crazy too look for only an ss 34 thats why some of us pointed out more popular ones and or similar ones...but then I think the whole point of this thread was lost when similiar became new dehler 36s all of a sudden

sorry for the rant but I just dont get it.


----------



## miatapaul (Dec 15, 2006)

christian.hess said:


> theres just too much bias...thats why it got dumb...to me at least...whats the point?
> 
> I wasnt trying to be rude, I apologize for that, but too many times on sites like these bias trumps real world and people asking simple questions get all the wrong answers because they are given "numbers" and "facts"
> 
> ...


Ah, just make a nice batch of Paella and have a beer and calm down! 

How is the Islander coming?


----------



## christian.hess (Sep 18, 2013)

will do(I deleted my post)

project on hold, too much rain lately...slow progress

sorry again...for the attitude

back to boats....

if you want to go small and very good to weather and fast, as well as great in offshore conditions my vote would go for the

*YANKEE 30*

it was is still one of my dream boats and very similar to the s and s 34, not to mention same designer...

olin was very proud of this design...

peace


----------



## miatapaul (Dec 15, 2006)

Anything designed by S&S will l likely be a good sailing boat. it is up to the builder to make it strong, and most did. I like the Yankee.

Hey by the way no attitude at all by you. Perhaps a bit of grumpiness, but not really attitude.


----------



## christian.hess (Sep 18, 2013)

im a grumpy old man(curmodgeon) however im not old at all

man 

imagine when Im old ajajajajajaja!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

peace

ps. regarding yankee they took the high road and stopped producing boats so quality wouldnt go down(resins, blisters, etc...)


----------



## chall03 (Oct 14, 2002)

The S & S 34 has a huge a fan base particularly and obviously here in Oz. They are no doubt a sailors boat. Not a carbon toy nor a floating RV, but a _yacht_

I agree with Torvie that they are still the surprise performer among race fleets, and obviously very trendy with our gaggle of circumnavigating teens.

I have sailed and raced on a couple and we looked at a few when boat shopping.

While they are good boats for _what_ they are, I would also agree with Jeff that personally depending on my needs there are other boats I would choose first.

For cruising like a lot of people the interior ruled it out for _us_. Compared to comparable boats of its era it is cramped, compared to more modern production boats it a matchbox.

They have become very reasonably priced on the market here, while most are showing their age, they are the kind of boat where you will come across examples that have been meticulously maintained.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

andyselzn said:


> @JeffH. Sounds like your vote is clearly for the Farr 1020. What are your top 3 picks (removing all constraints including cost). Under 40. Fast. Can handle heavy weather.


Just to set the record straight, I brought up the Dehler 36-2 as an answer to this specific question quoted above.from the original poster asking me personally what would be my favorite pick, removing all constraints, fast, under 40 feet. I did not bring it up in answer to the original question. To me, as a single-handed racer, and short handed cruiser, ease of handling and performance at the top and bottom end of the wind range are key factors in a decision in picking a boat for myself. While I in no way disagree with the assertion that the S&S 34 was a great boat, especially for its era, having sailed both I personally would chose the Dehler which rates nearly 90 seconds a mile faster than the S&S and has an easy time sailing to that rating in lighter and heavier conditions. But that is just my choice for my use.

Jeff


----------



## Torvie (Jun 20, 2014)

Agreed, they have a relatively small interior in a relatively small boat. For example a Bene First 35 is nominally only 1' longer, but side by side appears about twice the size. Having said that, the 34 interior can be very well planned (although many weren't) and we still have berths for 7, incl 2 double berths, enclosed head, shower, hot water, fridge, freezer, reasonable galley storage etc. I recently raced on a Sydney 36 and there was a lot more shoulder room etc but in fact not really any more "useable" space than the 34. But there is no doubt the S&S34 is cramped down below compared to recent designs. Think of it more like a modern 30'.

So it depends what you are using your boat for. If you want the biggest boat you can buy for you money, it won't be a 34. Likewise, they are not the best boats for day sailing, chartering, twilight sailing etc. if you are spending your time in sheltered waters and moderate breezes there are numerous designs that will be better suited and provide more space & convenience. But if you are wanting to go longer distances, especially short handed, you would choose an S&S34 over the typical modern cruiser any day. Or if you are wanting to race as well as cruise offshore. 

Wide open spaces below (or in the cockpit) are not necessarily an advantage offshore- the Dufour 40 we beat in our last long race had a crew member seriously injured after being thrown across the boat (he spent a week in hospital with multiple fractures) and at least one other yacht had to offload crew injured under similar circumstances. Injuries from being thrown across the wide open cockpits of modern race yachts are also quite common. Being snug and having plenty to grab onto is not so bad when the going gets tough. Neither are bilges that will hold a bit of water.

There are other seaworthy small yachts, but mostly they are full keeled pure "cruising" designs and very slow & heavy. The S&S 34's strength is in terms of the compromise between seaworthiness & speed. In terms of pure sailing ability especially in offshore conditions it is about perfect for a yacht of this size. They are the ideal long distance tourer for a couple (or single handed if you are masochistic enough). More can sail for a week or two, but if you want a long distance boat for 2 or 3 couples I think you'll need to bite the bullet and pay out to buy (& maintain) a bigger boat. But I can't think of a better design (or all that many that come that close) for a smallish boat for short handed cruising, and especially not if you want to combine it with being able to race successfully.

Having said the above, I suspect it is a relatively small market. I think that most yachts are only sailed shorter distances and in relatively benign conditions and modern design has adapted to this.


----------



## chall03 (Oct 14, 2002)

What is it they say about every boat being a compromise? 

I suspect the S & S 34 is probably one of the better compromises out there particularly for those that get it, who wish to actually sail and who aren't millionaires. 

We personally needed a bigger interior for longer periods onboard cruising with a family so we went with our Martzcraft 35 ( albeit with a modified taller than standard rig) and it is a good compromise for us.

At times however beating into a developed sea in a blow I do sometimes do wish it was a S & S 34


----------



## Torvie (Jun 20, 2014)

Just like sometimes over at Rottnest we wish we had a nice big cockpit and a sugar scoop stern, especially when clambering down the ladder into the dinghy.

The real issue nowadays is that a larger boat costs virtually the same as a smaller one (labour being such a large part of the cost it's virtually the same for a 36-38' as a 33-24'), so smaller yachts are less in favour. I could probably have had a 38-40' for a similar price (although perhaps not to the same spec) as my 34 cost to build. But it is sometimes forgotten that the 38' will cost a fair bit more to maintain than the smaller boat, sails etc are larger, anchors are heavier (eventually you have to lug them around for various reasons, windlasses fail etc) so there are still some advantages to a smaller boat, provided it is reasonably fast and seaworthy.

I think the Martzcraft/Roberts 35 sounds like an excellent compromise for cruising, I haven't sailed one but know the interior is much bigger than the S&S 34, and 1/2 knot of speed either way is less important than this when cruising with a few on board. We would be happy to share our boat with another couple but only for relatively short periods. Long term it's great for 2 maybe 3 but more would be a crowd after a while. The lack of the aft cabin found on most modern boats means little privacy. The fore cabin is a nice private double but of course only of use at anchor. 

For us the winning compromise is in being able to race successfully but still have a boat that is safe and easy for my wife and I to cruise when we wish. If we were purely cruising we might prefer the Martzcraft...


----------



## casey1999 (Oct 18, 2010)

For those that want a larger boat, what are your opinions about the S&S39?
Here are some for sale:

This looks to be a good price:

Used Sparkman & Stephens 39, S&s 39 for Sale | Yachts For Sale | Yachthub

And this one very nice looking:

SPARKMAN & STEPHENS S&S 39 for sale | Trade Boats, Australia


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

casey1999 said:


> For those that want a larger boat, what are your opinions about the S&S39?
> Here are some for sale:
> 
> This looks to be a good price:
> ...


Nice looking boats, but those bridgedecks would be a deal-breaker, for me...

I suspect navigating this companionway with the dodger in place would get old VERY quickly, for anyone over about 4 feet tall


----------



## christian.hess (Sep 18, 2013)

looks like an "improved" version of the yankee 38, I see the keel design is less swept back as well as the rudder...transom is less pinched and wider...

the deck and cabin have a more modern look

they obviously have the same "feel" by stephens.


----------



## casey1999 (Oct 18, 2010)

JonEisberg said:


> Nice looking boats, but those bridgedecks would be a deal-breaker, for me...
> 
> I suspect navigating this companionway with the dodger in place would get old VERY quickly, for anyone over about 4 feet tall


I agree. What was the purpose, to keep water out when you were pooped? Some Nautor Swans are even worse.


----------



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

True such bridge decks make a dodger a challenge, but they usually enhance below decks space considerably.. we faced the same challenge.



The bridgedeck does make a decent lounging space at rest, but the other aspect of it is that one ends up feeling like your 'on deck' more than 'in the cockpit' when underway. Still, we have a rather decent aft cabin in an otherwise 'skinny assed IOR hull', mostly due to the space and headroom under the bridge deck...



As to the calisthenics required to negotiate the companionway, we prefer to think of it as something that will 'keep us nimble'.. though having recently passed the 60th milestone that may turn out to be wishful thinking !


----------



## christian.hess (Sep 18, 2013)

nice boat faster

the bridgdecks sole purpose all along has been to prevent pooping waves from doing excessive damage and risk sinking, they are also major stiffeners of the aft part of the boat...and prevent hull flex in that area.

of course all cons to them are blatantly obvious

also being race boats dodgers are assumed a no no...jajajaja


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

The S&S 39 clearly shares a lot of DNA with the S&S designed Tartan 41 
1972 Tartan 41 Sail Boat For Sale - www.yachtworld.com

The S&S designed Swan 41:
1974 Swan 41 Sail Boat For Sale - www.yachtworld.com

and the slightly later S&S Designed Tartan 37. 
1979 Tartan 37 Sail Boat For Sale - www.yachtworld.com

or the cool little S&S quarter Tonner, that I owned during that period. A North Star 500 QT
NORTH STAR 500 sailboat specifications and details on sailboatdata.com

I spent a lot of time aboard Tartan 41's. At the time we were amazed at how great these boats seemed compared to the boats which came before them. I can remember coming back from a race on the Tartan and the crew was sitting around talking about the performance of the boat, especially upwind and the big leap in sail handling gear, and verbalizing that we could not imagine boats getting any faster or more advanced.

But within a year, a J-36 showed up in town and certainly demonstrated that it was possible to be faster and easier to handle, especially in heavy going.

Jeff


----------



## casey1999 (Oct 18, 2010)

Jeff_H said:


> The S&S 39 clearly shares a lot of DNA with the S&S designed Tartan 41
> 1972 Tartan 41 Sail Boat For Sale - www.yachtworld.com
> 
> I spent a lot of time aboard Tartan 41's. At the time we were amazed at how great these boats seemed compared to the boats which came before them. I can remember coming back from a race on the Tartan and the crew was sitting around talking about the performance of the boat, especially upwind and the big leap in sail handling gear, and verbalizing that we could not imagine boats getting any faster or more advanced.
> ...


I wonder how that J-36 would have held up at the start of the Cape to Rio race?
Chaos to Champagne for WA?s Perie Banou II?s in 2014 Cape2Rio - Yachting WA - FOX SPORTS PULSE


----------



## christian.hess (Sep 18, 2013)

there is a j36 down here that was cruised down here only to be snapped off a mooring, hit a pier and suffered so much damage the owner left the boat for a buck to the guy taking care of the moorings...

while that can happen to many boats I really honestly beleive there is no comparison bewteen buildin styles, "overall" strength and overall design...

apples and oranges these boats compared to these previous designs being talked about I honestly have a hard time understanding why people compare them again just me.

I do like the j boats especially the j30 and 24.

anywhoo


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

casey1999 said:


> I wonder how that J-36 would have held up at the start of the Cape to Rio race?
> Chaos to Champagne for WA?s Perie Banou II?s in 2014 Cape2Rio - Yachting WA - FOX SPORTS PULSE


It probably would have held up about as well as ISKAREEN which finished 9 days ahead of PERIE BANOU ROLLY TASKER, or AMTEC WITS ALADDIN (a Farr 11.6 sistership of my boat but with an open transom and sugar scoop added) which finished 4 days ahead of PERIE BANOU ROLLY TASKER with a smaller less experienced crew.

But I suspect that PERIE BANOU ROLLY TASKER had a more comfortable ride than a J-36 would have had.

And for the record, I did not bring up the J-36 as a comparason to the S&S 34, but more to put into context of the amazing experience of sailing these S&S designed early IOR and late RORC boats when they were comparatively new designs in the 1970's, as well as, the mindset of sailing during that era (or any era for that matter) and thinking that boats cannot get any faster than they are, and noting how in each era there are raceboats which feel like the ultimate possible pinnacle speed only to have the next generation show up and demonstrate the vanity of those feelings.

Jeff


----------



## Torvie (Jun 20, 2014)

To once more add a few facts to clarify:
I lent one of my crew to Perie Banou for the Cape 2 Rio race. Perie Banou is set up for single handed cruising, the racing is incidental. The max. sail area is so small she actually rates better than my S&S 34. They did have a nasty storm near the start, with 20m+ waves coming from different directions, some of which were "pyramidal". PB did handle all this well, arguably better than most others in the race. But the rest of the race was in light winds, and she does NOT handle these well, certainly not as well as the boats Jeff was talking about. But did sail reasonably to her rating to be 2nd in her Division.

As a design, the S&S 39 is incredibly strong, seaworthy, & rather heavy. The interior is not as well planned (IMO) as the 34 but is significantly roomier. The design doesn't quite hit the same "sweet spot" as the 34 in terms of performance and the 34 will always beat the 39 on handicap and often over the line. Look at how relatively small the "sharks fin"keel is. They are not quite so good to windward either. It is a slightly different compromise in design.

But when the going gets tough they give an extra layer of solidity, comfort and reassurance, I think even beyond the 34. As a long distance blue water cruiser it would be well worth considering. Funny, I have never heard anyone complain about the bridge deck...


----------



## casey1999 (Oct 18, 2010)

Torvie said:


> To once more add a few facts to clarify:
> I lent one of my crew to Perie Banou for the Cape 2 Rio race. Perie Banou is set up for single handed cruising, the racing is incidental. The max. sail area is so small she actually rates better than my S&S 34. They did have a nasty storm near the start, with 20m+ waves coming from different directions, some of which were "pyramidal". PB did handle all this well, arguably better than most others in the race. But the rest of the race was in light winds, and she does NOT handle these well, certainly not as well as the boats Jeff was talking about. But did sail reasonably to her rating to be 2nd in her Division.
> 
> As a design, the S&S 39 is incredibly strong, seaworthy, & rather heavy. The interior is not as well planned (IMO) as the 34 but is significantly roomier. The design doesn't quite hit the same "sweet spot" as the 34 in terms of performance and the 34 will always beat the 39 on handicap and often over the line. Look at how relatively small the "sharks fin"keel is. They are not quite so good to windward either. It is a slightly different compromise in design.
> ...


I was always curious as to why Jon Sanders went to a S&S39 (and often single hands the 39) after his double in his own S&S34. Any insight?


----------



## Ilenart (Jul 23, 2007)

The link below is a blog of an S&S 39 that recently completed a circumnavigation

Pachuca Circumnavigation

When I looked at a couple of S&s 39's a few years ago one of the issues was the back cabin. Very badly designed with about 5ft of head space and awkward to move around in, with plenty of things to bang your head against.

Ilenart


----------



## chall03 (Oct 14, 2002)

Torvie said:


> To once more add a few facts to clarify:
> I lent one of my crew to Perie Banou for the Cape 2 Rio race. Perie Banou is set up for single handed cruising, the racing is incidental. The max. sail area is so small she actually rates better than my S&S 34. They did have a nasty storm near the start, with 20m+ waves coming from different directions, some of which were "pyramidal". PB did handle all this well, arguably better than most others in the race. But the rest of the race was in light winds, and she does NOT handle these well, certainly not as well as the boats Jeff was talking about. But did sail reasonably to her rating to be 2nd in her Division.
> 
> As a design, the S&S 39 is incredibly strong, seaworthy, & rather heavy. The interior is not as well planned (IMO) as the 34 but is significantly roomier. The design doesn't quite hit the same "sweet spot" as the 34 in terms of performance and the 34 will always beat the 39 on handicap and often over the line. Look at how relatively small the "sharks fin"keel is. They are not quite so good to windward either. It is a slightly different compromise in design.
> ...


Thanks Torvie,

I just learned something.

I forget to say it before - Welcome to Sailnet and thanks for sharing your knowledge, experience and opinions here I hope you hang around.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

Torvie said:


> Funny, I have never heard anyone complain about the bridge deck...


I don't know, I'll bet if you stuck one of those among the boats in the brokerage section at the Annapolis Boat Show, it might elicit a comment, or two... 

I'll admit, I'm somewhat of a 'special case' when it comes to companionways on small boats. I'm 6'5", and have a pair of 14" stainless steel rods screwed to my spine courtesy of an old skiing accident, so I'm a bit less 'flexible' than most, and a high bridgedeck/low dodger combo just doesn't work well for me 

Even if that were not the case, however, I'd still rate the ergonomics of the companionway as one of the most important design features of any boat, particularly a cruising boat. Few features are more likely to become an immediate deal-breaker, for me. it's impossible to underestimate how routinely you navigate that space while living aboard, or during an extended cruise, or how often you wind up performing somewhat awkward or delicate maneuvers such as passing food or drinks up to those in the cockpit underway. As one who has had the opportunity to run a pretty wide assortment of boats, I'd say the #1 feature of a boat most likely to become a real annoyance over the course of a delivery, is probably the design of the companionway and cockpit in general... my most recent trip was on a Pacific Seacraft Crealock 44, a marvelous boat. But, when I finally clambered out over that bridgedeck for the last time, it was truly a cause for celebration 

In my opinion, it's more than a simple matter of comfort, or convenience. In sporty sailing conditions, it becomes a real matter of safety. Having to contort one's body into an awkward or unbalanced position, in a spot where sharp edges or corners abound, often when wearling bulky foul weather gear, at the top of a steep ladder descending below, can be a recipe for disaster... Especially for aging sailors, I think the importance of a companionway that can be passed through with relative ease cannot be overstated...

One of my favorite builders of companionways has always been Sabre Yachts... They consistently seem to get it right, striking just the right balance between a secure bridgedeck offshore, and a comfortable 'stairway' rather than a ladder leading below. A real pity Sabre is now out of the sailboat business, but this is about as well as it can be done on a 36-footer, in my view...


----------



## Torvie (Jun 20, 2014)

I agree re the bridge deck, we have a half board we can fit in rough weather, not quite as watertight but a lot easier the other 99% of the time. It's just that I don't remember the bridge deck on the 39 being all that awkward and no-one I know who has sailed on one has complained about it either. So perhaps the design wasn't so bad on the 39. I will try to pay more attention next time I am on board! But I am a lot shorter and maybe don't notice it as much.

I don't worry too much about boat show type comments, the perspective is quite different to most blue water sailors, I think it gets back to my earlier comment about what most yachts are actually used for. The ones that look best at the show/when anchored aren't necessarily so when at sea. But I do agree about how often you go in and out of a companionway and my reply to someone who suggested raising our hatchway lip several inches "for safety" was almost word for word what Jon has said.

I also agree re the poor space utilisation on the 39, especially aft, where there isn't really enough space for a cabin of any use, it is really just a bigger version of what we have on the 34.


----------



## Torvie (Jun 20, 2014)

In answer to Casey's question, Jon Sanders retired his S&S 34 after his solo double circumnavigation because there wasn't enough room on board for all the food, supplies and spares for a 2 year triple circumnavigation. He used a heavily modified Curran 46 instead. If you Google "Parry Endeavour" you can get the details of all the work that was done.

I suspect he bought the S&S 39 a) because he was offered a bargain and b) because of its solidity and seaworthiness, it is really the big sister to the 34. Things like space efficiency didn't really rate. Last I heard he was returning home single handed the wrong way around Cape Horn (a lot cheaper than the Panama Canal!). Jon has earned his living for many years doing deliveries, and so knew what to look for and what to avoid when picking a safe long distance cruiser. I know he hasn't a great opinion of a number of well known mass produced yachts and has had some hairy moments with a few of them with either poor handling, poor construction or things breaking when they shouldn't.

I think it's his 10th circumnavigation, Jon could probably lay claim to being the world's greatest living sailor, he still holds a whole bunch of world records - we tried to figure out how many miles he has sailed, it must be well over 500,000nm, a lot of it solo. But I don't think Jon is much interested in fame - except when it gets him a free beer at a yacht club!


----------



## christian.hess (Sep 18, 2013)

awesome stuff...


----------



## casey1999 (Oct 18, 2010)

Torvie said:


> Jon could probably lay claim to being the world's greatest living sailor, he still holds a whole bunch of world records - we tried to figure out how many miles he has sailed, it must be well over 500,000nm, a lot of it solo. But I don't think Jon is much interested in fame - except when it gets him a free beer at a yacht club!


Torvie,
If you ever get a chance, please ask Jon to write a book about sailing techniques and equipment. Things like storm handling and what equipment works and does not work. What rigging works and what fails. What techniques and equipement are best used to keep a boat going for such long passages and extreme conditions. I have read all the books he has written to date. I am sure he has a lot of "new" information since it has been a while since he last book. It would be great if Jon could put some of his extreme knowledge down on paper.


----------



## Torvie (Jun 20, 2014)

Dear Casey,

Will do, next time he is back (don't know exactly when it will be). Although Jon isn't really great for that sort of thing. He is now over 70 and probably not that keen on writing much. I think a lot of his books were probably ghostwritten - he is great in conversation and can give lots of opinions , I think the previous books were probably in essence interviews. Not that the information was less accurate or the story was less interesting. I know that his philosophy is to go with modest sail areas, reduce sail early and generally prefers to heave to and point into bad weather rather than run with it. Overall he is a very conservative sailor. He doesn't favour lots of gadgets, and tends to run his boat on a shoestring - partly out of necessity, and partly because he doesn't need a lot of stuff. If he had no electrics for example it wouldn't be a disaster, he could navigate by sextant and the loss of radio would be just an inconvenience. By our standards he probably pays less attention to maintaining/replacing some items simply because if they fail he can manage without. The self-steerer is a windvane, the only other thing that is essential is mast & sails and food, plus a bit of metho for the stove.

Might be easier to persuade him to call in to Hawaii next time!


----------



## Ilenart (Jul 23, 2007)

casey1999 said:


> Torvie,
> If you ever get a chance, please ask Jon to write a book about sailing techniques and equipment. Things like storm handling and what equipment works and does not work. What rigging works and what fails. What techniques and equipement are best used to keep a boat going for such long passages and extreme conditions. I have read all the books he has written to date. I am sure he has a lot of "new" information since it has been a while since he last book. It would be great if Jon could put some of his extreme knowledge down on paper.


Assume that you have read "Lone Sailor" that Jon wrote about his double circumnavigation. The book "Sextant, Sea and Solitude" by Hugh Schmitt detailed his triple circumnavigation. These books contain a lot of info about sail techniques. A couple of years ago I posted the info below from Lone Sailor.

http://www.sailnet.com/forums/seamanship-navigation/57042-jon-sanders-heavy-weather-techniques.html

Ilenart


----------



## Torvie (Jun 20, 2014)

Yes, many years ago - I know a lot has already been written - I am not sure in response to Casey's question how much more there may be to add to what has already been published, but I really don't know. I only get to talk to Jon now and again, although I do see his brother Col regularly.


----------



## casey1999 (Oct 18, 2010)

Ilenart said:


> Assume that you have read "Lone Sailor" that Jon wrote about his double circumnavigation. The book "Sextant, Sea and Solitude" by Hugh Schmitt detailed his triple circumnavigation. These books contain a lot of info about sail techniques. A couple of years ago I posted the info below from Lone Sailor.
> 
> http://www.sailnet.com/forums/seamanship-navigation/57042-jon-sanders-heavy-weather-techniques.html
> 
> Ilenart


Yes, I have read the book "Lone Sailor". I read the book right after I had bought my S&S34 "Stray Bit". Read the book to try to learn how to sail an S&S34. I was surprised when reading the book as Jon states his back up wind vane (an Airies) used on this trip was purchased used off "Stray Bit". His primary wind vane failed early on the double non-stop and he used the back up- it carried him around twice and as I understand, it is the same vane he is still using today- so the vane has somthing like 9 circumnavigations on it. I also read the Sextant, Sea and Solitude- good read.


----------



## casey1999 (Oct 18, 2010)

Torvie said:


> Might be easier to persuade him to call in to Hawaii next time!


Any time he is in the area, he can have free room and board, and all the beer he wants. And unlimited use of S&S34 Stray Bit.


----------



## casey1999 (Oct 18, 2010)

Torvie said:


> Yes, many years ago - I know a lot has already been written - I am not sure in response to Casey's question how much more there may be to add to what has already been published, but I really don't know. I only get to talk to Jon now and again, although I do see his brother Col regularly.


The main thing I would be interested in is how he keeps his rig up in the severe conditions he often sails. I understand on his triple circumnavigation, Jon rigged the boat to have two of all stays and shrouds, in case one broke. In would be interesting to hear Jon's opinion on how often he changes the standing rigging. Is the rigging changed out based on miles or inspection? Does he use compression fittings or swage? How often does he change out chain plates and bolts? How often are things like mast tangs changed out? What manufactures for rigging fittings does Jon prefer?


----------



## Torvie (Jun 20, 2014)

Dear Casey,

I think basically Jon over-specs the rig and sails with fairly small sail area to keep loads down, and also minimise the workload. Unfortunately I can't give the fine details.


----------

