# Tell Me About Jeanneaus



## MikeinLA (Jul 25, 2006)

Hi all. I have fallen hard for the Jeanneau Sun Odyssey 409. I first saw her at Annapolis last year, but put her out of my mind since the salesman said they only made a 3 cabin. Now I see they have a 2 cabin/1head model with the most amazing forward cabin I've ever seen and I'm back in love again. Problem is, I don't know a single thing about the brand, so I'm looking for info from the collected wisdom. I'd like to know about their construction quality, sailing ability, company reputation, notable issues or anything else you can think of to help educate me. I'm also curious if they would be considered "blue water" capable or more "coastally" suited like my Cat 36. Thanks for your help.

Mike


----------



## Zanshin (Aug 27, 2006)

Jeanneau belongs to Groupe Beneteau and the group is the world's largest producer of sailboats. Jeanneau manufactures exclusively in France while some of the Beneteau models are now also produced in the USA.

I'm on my third one (43DS, 49DS and now a Jeanneau 57) and when properly prepared I would consider all 3 to be bluewater capable boats, so far I've only taken the 57 from Annapolis (where it was displayed last year) to the Caribbean but the 8-day passage had some heavy weather and the boat didn't even notice although the crew certainly did. Many Jeanneaus have done the ARC or Pacific run and several have circumnavigated. Bluewater capability is a hotly contested subject here and many seem to consider only smaller to mid-sized, full-keeled, skeg-hung and massively builts boats to be such, but I'll just let the numbers (ARC lists, Cornell's statistics, etc.) speak for themselves. If your intent is to go around the Capes the wrong way or visit arctic waters then Jeanneau is most certainly not the correct choice. All of the bigger Jeanneaus are CE rated for offshore, although that certification is geared more towards fulfilling certain characteristics as opposed to being a true measure of offshore capabilities. The fuel tankage on the Jeanneaus is sufficient for normal onshore, Caribbean or Mediterranean cruising, but needs to be stocked up for true bluewater use.

The Jeanneau factory is quite impressive and efficiently organized. I took a tour (which I would recommend to anyone who finds themselves in the areas of Nantes, France) and posted some pictures from the factory tour here.

There is an active owner's forum at Jeanneau Owners Network Forum - Home and you can look through the threads to see typical owner problems and comments.


----------



## blt2ski (May 5, 2005)

I believe the 409 is built in what is now a joint factory in SC, along with the 379 and any of the DS models using the same hulls.

ALL of the models except the smallest will have multiple interior options. 
409 link
Sailboat Jeanneau Sun Odyssey 409 - Jeanneau Yard
general jeanneau site
JEANNEAU shipyard, boatbuilder for sailing : sailboat, motorboat, powerboat racing boat cruising fishing yachting - Jeanneau Yard
owners news site that goes with the forum that zanshin linked earlier 
http://jeanneau.tripod.com/

I would not be surprised if the 409 has not done an ocean passage or two or three. May Jeanneau models get used on the ARC out of Europe. with usually the highest % of boats in the crossing. The recent ARC world cruise, IIRC the 49 or 54'ish foot model was the most used.

Marty


----------



## Zanshin (Aug 27, 2006)

Interesting about the manufacture in the USA - A quick browse of the web showed references to the factory in Marion, SC. -- thus I stand corrected about the Jeanneau series being exclusively manufactured in France.


----------



## Sabreman (Sep 23, 2006)

> The Jeanneau factory is quite impressive and efficiently organized. I took a tour (which I would recommend to anyone who finds themselves in the areas of Nantes, France) and posted some pictures from the factory tour here.


That's one fine looking boat. I like the styling of the Jeanneau line. And yes, I still love my boat, but I'm allowed to look aren't I?


----------



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

Sabreman said:


> That's one fine looking boat. I like the styling of the Jeanneau line. And yes, I still love my boat, but I'm allowed to look aren't I?


I suppose.... but if I was your boat I'd be a tad miffed!!


----------



## SloopJonB (Jun 6, 2011)

FWIW I recently checked out a Jeanneau Attalia - an early 80's 32' based on a hot IOR 1/2 ton hull. I didn't do a detailed survey of the boat but I found its build to be very similar to the Beneteaus I've been on.

Sort of like the old Buick / Oldsmobile thing. 

It was a nicely turned out boat.


----------



## flyingriki (Sep 27, 2012)

Crewed an SO-49 from the south Pacific to Honolulu and we pounded like big dogs the whole way. Didn't faze the boat. Sure rattled my bones but not the Jeanneau. Fabulous boat. I don't hear the same of Beneteau. Me thinks it's a different quality of boat. Seems to be indicated by the pricing differences......

49' Beneteau 49
•Year: 2007 
•Current Price: US$ 289,000 
•Located In San Diego, CA 
•Hull Material: Fiberglass 
•Engine/Fuel Type: Single diesel 
•YW# 77288-2341638 

49' Jeanneau SO 49 Performance
•Year: 2007 
•Current Price: US$ 349,500 
•Located In Anacortes, WA 
•Hull Material: Fiberglass 
•Engine/Fuel Type: Single diesel 
•YW# 24190-1970295


----------



## HeartsContent (Sep 14, 2010)

Damn, pass the Grey Poupon!


----------



## paulk (Jun 2, 2000)

Jeanneaux that I've come across in the past have all seemed somewhat better built than their super-refined & tightly engineered Beneteaux cousins. The mooring cleats were a tad bigger; the fittings a touch heftier; the door hinges & latches more substantial. This may or may not be a good thing, depending upon what you're looking for. Things may have changed some since Beneteau took over Jeanneau, but Jeanneau's base is still up by the English Channel and North Sea, while Beneteaux come from the relatively warmer waters of France's west coast.


----------



## blt2ski (May 5, 2005)

"GENERALLY" speaking, Jeanneau's have been a touch upper scale than Beneteau. They have different presidents if you will, with there own how they wish to do things. YES< some things are one and the same, but generally speaking, a given boat of a given size, will be designed by a different architect! so it is not as simple as an olds vs chev, where the body/shassis of the car is the same, but different trim levels. Both design and trim levels will be different. 

Jeanneau does generally speaking gives you a good bang for the buck. Reality is, Jeanneau, Beneteau, Catalina and to a degree Hunter here in the states, do have similar price points for a given model. Jeanneau does shoot for having a well sailable boat. 

The boat in Anacortes, IE the 49Ip, is owned by the owner of the local jeanneau dealer. He bought that to take his family on a 2-3 yr cruise from here in Seattle to Oz and back. ONE of his at the time 15 yr old daughter's was steering the boat doing 15 knots in some low 20 knot winds. 20' seas with an AS up, easy as pie, being as his daughters are little string beans, maybe 100 lbs dripping wet! they had no issues sailing the boats. MOST are designed by Marc Lambeaugh.......hope I spelled the last name correct, altho I think it is not frankly........That boat is setup for an ocean cruise, you could take off tomorrow, the beneteau that is referenced, would guess is not as setup! not sure there is normally that much difference between the two boats.........

Jeanneaus are cross's between the Beneteau First and Oceanus setups. Not as quick/powerful as a First, but more so than an Oceanus. Generally speaking, more than a Catalina or Hunter. 

Reality is, some like Jeanneaus better than bene's, or catalinas, and vice versa. 

If it will suit what you want to do, like the interior, join Zanshin and myself at the Jeanneau owners area. if not, you could Join CD at the catalina forum, but I am sure with his bull dog posting upon occasion, it is not as much fun!

Marty


----------



## telecam (Mar 21, 2012)

I looked very hard at both, Jeanneau 409 and Beneteau Oceanis 41 and ended up choosing the B41. The J409 design seems a bit more seaworthy but the B41 offers better value, and has a roomier cabin and cockpit. As far as built quality, they are made at the same factory and after looking at both vessel in and out, I couldn't really tell a difference.


----------



## flyingriki (Sep 27, 2012)

blt2ski said:


> The boat in Anacortes, IE the 49Ip, is owned by the owner of the local jeanneau dealer. He bought that to take his family on a 2-3 yr cruise from here in Seattle to Oz and back. ONE of his at the time 15 yr old daughter's was steering the boat doing 15 knots in some low 20 knot winds. 20' seas with an AS up, easy as pie, being as his daughters are little string beans, maybe 100 lbs dripping wet! they had no issues sailing the boats. MOST are designed by Marc Lambeaugh.......hope I spelled the last name correct, altho I think it is not frankly........That boat is setup for an ocean cruise, you could take off tomorrow,....


That's the one, Ruby Slippers:


----------



## MikeinLA (Jul 25, 2006)

Thank you for all your comments so far, they are really helping. Is there any downside to the iron bolt-on keel or the deck-stepped mast?

Mike


----------



## SloopJonB (Jun 6, 2011)

MikeinLA said:


> Thank you for all your comments so far, they are really helping. Is there any downside to the iron bolt-on keel or the deck-stepped mast? Mike


People trash talk iron keels a lot. Undoubtedly lead is best but iron works well as long as the lower density is accounted for in the design. They can rust if not sealed in epoxy but if they ARE sealed, it isn't the maintenance nightmare some suggest.

Bill Garden figured iron was better for cruising boats that sometimes have to "feel" their way into anchorages because it bounces off any obstructions while lead, due to its softness, "forms" around the obstruction and transmits more impact into the hull.

I've seen iron keeled boats bounce off rocks and it looked exactly like he described.

One nice aspect of iron keels is that the bolts (studs actually) can be withdrawn and inspected as well as easily replaced - not so for lead.


----------



## blt2ski (May 5, 2005)

The only REAL bad downside I can think of for an iron keel, is is it harder than lead, so if you hit a rock, the hull will feel it more than with lead. Another issue, altho minor to a degree, lets say you need 2000 lbs of material in a bulb as the new boats will have, the iron bulb will be bigger in volume so not as fast or streamlined if I am typing that correct. BOTH, should keep you upright just fine if designed correctly. Worry about RM IMHO more than lead vs iron.

As far as deck stepped vs keel.......both IMHO are good and bad. JeffH seems to personally IIRC like deck stepped. One advantage I can see, is there is no water leaking from the seals etc to the bilge! The only time my bilge has had water is a water tank leak, a NEW PSS shaft that was vented incorrectly, and recently when I forgot to close the ice chest drain valve, put ice in the IC, and it started to melt! I'm sure both have weakness's too. One of the things now that I am typing Jeff likes, IF you do get dismasted, with a deck top, if you can salvage the boom, it is easier to use this as a makeshift mast vs a keel stepped setup. Reality, take you lumps either way. Keels are the same IMHO.

marty

Now that I am done typing, I see sloop is saying lead will transmit more to the hull......hmmmmmm....he does have good points.......so I could be wrong!


----------



## HeartsContent (Sep 14, 2010)

I'm no boat engineer but it's really hard to see any advantage to an iron keel (other than it being cheaper). Iron rusts, so how can tis bee 

To me, this is a deal breaker.


----------



## SloopJonB (Jun 6, 2011)

blt2ski said:


> Now that I am done typing, I see sloop is saying lead will transmit more to the hull......hmmmmmm....he does have good points.......so I could be wrong!


The incident I witnessed that seemed to back up what Garden wrote was an old wood motorsailer motoring along close to shore one evening. I was watching from a high bank foreshore when they hit a rock about 300 yards out. There was an almighty CLANG and the boat lifted visibly. They altered course a few degrees toward deeper water and kept on motoring - no visible fire drill or anything.

Whenever I've witnessed a lead keeled boat hit they've come to a dead stop.

Not exactly a science experiment but that HAS to impart more stress to the boat don't you think?


----------



## Zanshin (Aug 27, 2006)

HeartsContent said:


> I'm no boat engineer but it's really hard to see any advantage to an iron keel (other than it being cheaper). Iron rusts, so how can tis bee
> To me, this is a deal breaker.


I was up in arms for the iron keel being a deal breaker and thought I'd show that the big name brands had gone that way, but I was wrong:

Oyster - lead
Nautor Swan - lead
Hallberg-Rassy - lead

Then to some other brands:

Jeanneau - iron
Beneteau - iron
Bavaria - iron
Hanse - iron
Island Packet - iron / lead
Catalina - lead
Hunter - iron
Tayana - iron


----------



## blt2ski (May 5, 2005)

Sloop,

That does look like a real item in reality. I kept thinking I have heard it the other way......

zanshin

at the end of the day, it is cost for many of the brands shown. Oyster buyers are not going to worry about a 5G keel vs 2500 lets say for an iron keel, Oyster buyers are already paying a million or so for a boat, so 2500 is not a big deal. Lower price point buyers in the 100-200K range. may.......

I only see it personally as a is the wt part taken care of, then the iron being as it is less dense, will take up more volume below the water line, so 5000 lbs of lead should have less resistance than 5000 lbs of iron equally proportioned. 

At the end of the day, reality is, either will work. Iron does probably have a bit more maintenance to it vs lead having to keep the epoxy layer up. Other than that, they both work. 

Marty


----------



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

Another aspect is the strength required by the relatively short chord/expanded bulb type keels.. I don't think lead alone would be strong enough to prevent the bulb from eventually bending the keel. 

A steel internal structure or an iron 'fin' with a lead bulb seems to be the practice there.

We've owned 3 iron keeled boats and 2 lead keels.. the first two had never been properly sealed and the keels were a mess until we did so. Our current boat has iron, well sealed and faired and it's been fine.

Given the choice I'd probably still go for lead, but today the market is full of iron keels so you might be severely limiting your options if that's a 'deal breaker' for you.


----------



## Zanshin (Aug 27, 2006)

I agree that it is less wetted surface with lead. With full keel and interior ballast then lead is going to make a significant difference regardless of cost, but with external keels, particularly fin ones, the added structural strength of steel makes for more streamlined shapes.

To the thread - I'm absolutely amazed that we haven't degenerated in a downward spiral regarding plastic production boats yet!


----------



## miatapaul (Dec 15, 2006)

I have read that many of the European boats use iron instead of lead due to regulations against heavy metals more than the advantage of one over the other. Cost is obviously a big reason iron is chosen. I am glad to read about people who have had good success sealing iron keels, perhaps we only read about those who have problems because they are seeking help while those who do it successfully don's advertize it much. I have looked at a few boats that had iron keels and thought of it as a major disadvantage.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

SloopJonB said:


> People trash talk iron keels a lot. Undoubtedly lead is best but iron works well as long as the lower density is accounted for in the design. They can rust if not sealed in epoxy but if they ARE sealed, it isn't the maintenance nightmare some suggest.
> 
> Bill Garden figured iron was better for cruising boats that sometimes have to "feel" their way into anchorages because it bounces off any obstructions while lead, due to its softness, "forms" around the obstruction and transmits more impact into the hull.
> 
> ...


Boats are not made to bounce on the rocks but if that happens a lead keel has advantages. While the all iron keel will deform very little transmitting to the hull attachment point (that is much weaker) all the force of the impact, a lead keel will deform under the impact absorbing in that deformation a lot of energy. The energy transmitted to the hull attachment point will be far less.

I had saw once a wauquiez that had hit rocks hard at speed: The lead keel was incredibly bent but not even a small fracture on the point the keel meet the hull. I was very impressed.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

miatapaul said:


> I have read that many of the European boats use iron instead of lead due to regulations against heavy metals more than the advantage of one over the other. Cost is obviously a big reason iron is chosen. I am glad to read about people who have had good success sealing iron keels, perhaps we only read about those who have problems because they are seeking help while those who do it successfully don's advertize it much. I have looked at a few boats that had iron keels and thought of it as a major disadvantage.


If it is like that why all expensive European brands use lead keels? and why many of those that use iron offer an expensive upgrade for a lead keel?

To give you an idea normally the upgrade on a 40ft boat for a lead keel costs about 10 000€. Almost all prefer to buy with that money a bow thruster.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## Zanshin (Aug 27, 2006)

I just checked and spot market industrial pricing for lead is at US$2080 per metric ton, while mild iron/steel/scrap for use in casting is just a bit over 1/10 of that. Even with the higher costs involved in heating, cleaning and casting the iron there is still a big savings with steel for the manufacturers. I just did a quick calculation and the price difference on my keel runs at about US$25,000 comparing the two metals!


----------



## blt2ski (May 5, 2005)

Zanshin, 

That is a bunch of money be it US$ or Euro's! Hence why the lower priced brands will be using Iron vs lead. $25G for an Oyster your boats size, is peanuts, ie less than 1%. for your boat, 5% or so! A much bigger chunk of the puzzle. For my boat with 2400 lbs of iron, that is $2000, or about 3-4% difference in initial cost.

Marty


----------



## blt2ski (May 5, 2005)

Not to get too far off topic here. A thought, maybe sloop can reflect on BG's thoughts as I did.....While BG does say iron is better. maybe in HIS boat designs, being as he designed mostly from what I can tell full keels. They can bounce if you will a bit better than fin's can, hence why and iron ballast might be better from this standpoint. Where as lead in a fin, as paulo points out would be better, with the give being a softer material. 

Please note, lets keep this to an iron vs lead part of the disscusion, not merits of fin vs full. There is another rather large thread elsewhere to go into that part of the disCUSSion.

At the end of the day, a jeanneau would probably work well for the OP, as would a Catalina or beneteau in reality.

Marty


----------



## miatapaul (Dec 15, 2006)

Hey to bring it back to topic, one of the iron keels I was looking at belongs to a Jeanneau Sunrise, but unfortunately it sold before I could even look at it. I like them and especially the Gin Fizz and the Sunrise seem really solid boats with some real passage-making history even though that was likely not the intent when originally designed and made. They seemed to be strongly built for a production boat. I don't know about the current production line and how much influence Beneteau has influenced the line. Not that Beneteau makes a weak or inferior product, just their focus seemed to be a bit different.


----------



## SloopJonB (Jun 6, 2011)

blt2ski said:


> Not to get too far off topic here. A thought, maybe sloop can reflect on BG's thoughts as I did.....While BG does say iron is better. maybe in HIS boat designs, being as he designed mostly from what I can tell full keels. They can bounce if you will a bit better than fin's can, hence why and iron ballast might be better from this standpoint. Where as lead in a fin, as paulo points out would be better, with the give being a softer material.
> 
> Please note, lets keep this to an iron vs lead part of the disscusion, not merits of fin vs full. There is another rather large thread elsewhere to go into that part of the disCUSSion.
> 
> At the end of the day, a jeanneau would probably work well for the OP, as would a Catalina or beneteau in reality. Marty


I really can't say, not being a materials engineer. With a lead keel deforming, it seems to me that all the stress energy is contained within the boat. When an iron keel bounces off, I don't know where or how the energy is dissipated.

I have grounded hard with a lead fin and I know that the absorption of energy by the lead deforming doesn't feel like much - it was quite a shock.

I've never grounded an iron keel so I have no personal comparison, I just thought that Garden had the experience to know the difference after 1000 boats or so.


----------



## Gene T (May 23, 2006)

Sorry I am late to this discussion, I don't follow this board very often. My boat is a SO40, my only problem with the boat was finding one configured the way I wanted it. You might like to read my thought process while boat searching.

The Boat

Every boat is a compromise, cost, performance, maintenance, usability and comfort.

Iron keels if properly maintained are fine. One advantage is bottom paint sticks. I don't think I have ever heard of a boat being lost because of an iron keel.

Gene


----------



## Yamsailor (Jun 7, 2006)

I think the Jeanneau's are great production boats. The only big negative I see is their use of iron for keels. I think lead is a better material to use for keels. Lead is more forgiving then iron if the boat goes aground; There is less maintenance and less to worry about with regards to glavanization. You need to be careful about the keelbolts in iron keels as well as their attachment points. You have to maintain a barrier coat on the iron keel as well as ensure it continues to be completely encases--you don't have those issues with lead. Other than that, they are quite nice for the money.


----------



## blt2ski (May 5, 2005)

paul,

The sunrise IIRC is about 34-35'. At the time, probably a race-cruise to cruise-race style boat. The Ginn Fizz was more of a cruiser per say. It can be found in both a ketch and sloop rig. The ketch IIRC is a much lower build % than the sloop. 
If you like these two, also want to look for the SunShine 36/38. The only real difference between the 36 and 38 is the 38 may/should have what i will call a true sugar scoop stern. There is also a regatta version that has the surgar scoop fill in, into a normal looking solid transom, but really raked backward! This allows a bit more waterline at times, so a faster boat. Some even had a taller mast/more SA etc, ie the regatta version. The Sunshine is an early Tony Castro design, as is my smaller version the Arcadia. Also, a lot of boats of this era, do not have some interior niceties that some like, ala a shower, hot and cold running water. Wood work frankly I feel is better, a bit more solid wood/teak used, and better quality teak plywoods. But being as teak is harder to find, not as good etc, the newer models are using a ground teak to make the look of todays models, be it a Beneteau, or Jeanneau.
The boats of this 80's era were built when Bangor Punta owned Jeanneau, along with Cal, O'day, ranger to name a few others. You can find some Cal and O'day versions of some Jeanneau's, built here in the states with that boats name tag. An Oday 39/40 IIRC is the sunfizz, and the Cal 9.2 a "Rush" IIRC. having a hard time looking this combo up. Both the Rush and Cal 9.2 are Ron Holland designs.
If one goes HERE, you can find differenc models and names, with specs, and also on the left upper side of the page, some alternitive models, depending upon when built, by whom etc. Like my boat, Arcadia, became a Sn Way 28 after Bangor Punta folded, the French government found a buyer/take over company to keep Jeanneau open for 10 yrs or so, then in 98?!?! or there abouts, Group Beneteau took over the franchise. Henri Jeanneau who started the company around 1959 or so, started literally building what became some of the fastest motor race boats in France, then branced out to cruiser and a sail boat that sold something like 2500 hulls! The rest is history to say the least. SO racing is in the brands blood much more than cruising in reality. They at least are building fast cruisers vs SLOW cruisers.

marty


----------



## SimonV (Jul 6, 2006)

I cant see the reasoning here in relation to steel or lead having more or less shock absorption. There seems to be a conception that we all go around slamming into immovable objects, when lots of the boats like mine have encapsulated keels and yes I have ran aground more than once but only in mud or sand. I would rather hit coral or rock with something more forgiving than fiberglass. At the end of the day its swings and roundabouts.


----------



## Halcyon1 (Oct 29, 2012)

We have delivered lots of Jeanneaus. They are very popular in Europe - good value for money, and generally with reasonable performance and sensible designs. 

Pete


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

We've been extremely happy with our Jeanneau. She sails like a rocket on rails with furling 135 genoa and furling main with NO battens. Some would try to argue that can't be done. While not a high end brand, our is very often mistaken for one. Probably the majestic blue paint job. 

While Jeanneau is owned by the same company as Beneteau, they began separately. I recall, when they merged, that Benie affirmed they would not change the manufacturing process of Jennies, which I understand was a bit superior and a bit more expensive. I believe they kept that vision.

I have to admit that I think the pre-2008ish era had better mechanical fixtures and I prefer the teak work from those days to the new manufactured teak. But, if you like a contemporary look, the new finishes would be very appealing. Clean and bright.

I have not sailed the newer series boats, but do have a friend that recently delivered a 509. He said it was unbelievably fast. 

In the end, when shopping for our current boat, we found ourselves comparing all others to her. She is the perfect balance of sailing and living for us. She is better designed for coastal cruising than blue water passage, but perfectly capable of the latter. I believe you buy the boat for what you intend to do with it 90% of the time, as long as she can handle the exception or two. That's what we have.


----------

