# Center Cockpit Versus Aft Cockpit



## BlueWaterBlair (Jun 14, 2009)

I did an archive search, but could not find any threads on this subject.

I am looking for a new boat, that i am going to live on.

Local coastal cruising, singlehanding in the San Diego area.

I am presently looking at Hunter 420s. I really like the large aft cabin sleeping areas.

I really don't know much about the differences in the two different cockpit styles, other than it generally gives you a larger sleeping area in the aft.

I appreciate any and all constructive advice.

Blair


----------



## kd3pc (Oct 19, 2006)

CC is "dryer" but also presents more windage, especially on the 42/420s...the CC can be more difficult to get in and out of, than an aft cabin. CC presents a more comfortable area for anchoring and living, but again the trade off is as above. 

The aft cockpit was "easier" to motor and single hand, you were inches from the stern, could throw dock lines and spring lines, steer easier as you are standing over the rudder, and could judge the nose easily...the CC a little more learning curve on motoring and docking as you are 8-10 feet from the stern and almost that far from the rudder post, so your perspective of turning and such were delayed....

Can't beat the CC for liveaboard, and the Hunter 420 uses the same hull as the 41, as does the Beneteau 36CC and the B 361....i.e. they sail quite well....


----------



## neptune6 (Jul 7, 2005)

center cockpit only way to go,much drier in a sea,much more room inside,great for living aboard. the rest of the garbage about easier control can easily be adapted too.


----------



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

I think the CC can give a gentler motion, being closer to the center of motion of the hull - but a higher roll moment being higher in the boat. In the smaller sizes you're going to get a taller, higher windage package and while you can get 'privacy' the left over interior space is tighter than the same sized aft cockpit.

Not sure how different the H 420 is, but we know people with the 450 and it's so tall that it's difficult to get off onto those typically low lying floats when docking, they have exceptionally high freeboard. The early FG arches were suspect too, from what I've heard.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

The advantage of a center cockpit is the space on the back cabins, I mean in standing height. The disadvantages are a higher freeboard and more windage if the boat is smaller than 60ft.

On boats with less than 50ft it is really too much, I mean the space is very good but it comes clearly in prejudice of the sailing performance.

As always it is a question of compromises: If you really want/need that space and are more living on the boat than sailing then we can even justify that in a 37ft boat...but certainly that has nothing to do with a sailing advantage.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## Melrna (Apr 6, 2004)

While CC have more living space than aft cockpits as a general rule, the newer boats out there Jeanneua, Benneteua, Catalina aft cockpit boats, are putting in very large aft cabins. So one is not restricted anymore to just CC boats to get the large aft cabin. But in both designs it comes at a price; storage. Cockpit lazzerates are smaller or non-exsistant. Finding place to store dock lines, fenders, extra sails, wash stuff and other gear can be problematic. 
Also, CC cockpits are typically very small. Lounging out with more than 3 people, especially when the weather get bad, can also be a concern. With most tables extended out eating with more than 4 people around one will have to find other means to entertain guest.


----------



## killarney_sailor (May 4, 2006)

We now have our first centercockpit boat and I like everything about it except the look and the fact that you are islolated and it is harder to help with docking when there are only two (or one) onboard. We looked at a number of aft cockpit boats in the 42 -44 foot range (Swan and Hylas among them) and could not accept the compromise they had chosen to get a decent aft cabin - having a very wide bridge deck (in one case it was 5 or 6' feet from the cockpit well. If you wanted a dodger, which is pretty much a given for extended cruising, you had to go out on deck, around the dodger to get to the companionway.

I found handling not an issue. Coming from a 35' it felt the same, just another 10' following along behind.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

Melrna said:


> While CC have more living space than aft cockpits as a general rule, the newer boats out there Jeanneua, Benneteua, Catalina aft cockpit boats, are putting in very large aft cabins. So one is not restricted anymore to just CC boats to get the large aft cabin. But in both designs it comes at a price; storage. Cockpit lazzerates are smaller or non-exsistant. Finding place to store dock lines, fenders, extra sails, wash stuff and other gear can be problematic.
> Also, CC cockpits are typically very small. Lounging out with more than 3 people, especially when the weather get bad, can also be a concern. With most tables extended out eating with more than 4 people around one will have to find other means to entertain guest.


Yes you are right but the boats that come with a big aft cabin with standing height are the so called Deck saloons, that should be called instead raised cockpits

In fact the extra height in the saloon, besides give light to the interior demands a raised cockpit and that permits the height in the aft cabin.

The costs are a lot more windage, more steps to go from the cockpit to the saloon, as killarney has referred, more difficult docking (to jump out of the boat) and a position on the cockpit more far away from the boat CG and that means more ample lateral movements and more discomfort.

The Deck saloons and the center cockpit boats have many things in common

Regards

Paulo


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

The other trade off is between entertaining space and sleeping space, generally. Aft cockpits usually have more open salons/galleys, but the cockpit floor impedes the ceiling height in much of aft stateroom. CCs have apartment like aft staterooms, but you lose it in the salon. Very generalized statements.

Since most of our activity is horizontal in the stateroom, with plenty in a corner to stand and dress, we opt for more elbow room with guests. The Deck Salon just gives us tons more room to enjoy on deck. We can sit 12 easily. Most CCs in our size range get maybe 8, even 6. The downside to the huge cockpit is distance to controls, lines, winches, etc.


----------



## rhr1956 (Dec 18, 2010)

Iasked the same question a while back on a different forum. Here are some responses from that post. Living Aboard Forums • View topic - Aft cockpit or center cockpit


----------



## denverd0n (Jun 20, 2008)

Actually, there are some center-cockpit boats out there that are WETTER than their aft-cockpit counterparts. It really depends on a lot of different design parameters as to whether or not a center-cockpit will be drier in heavy seas.


----------



## PBzeer (Nov 11, 2002)

If the bulk of your time is at the dock, then the interior space of a CC is a plus. If the bulk of your time is away from the dock, then the extra deck space of an aft cockpit is a plus. It basically comes down to making a realistic assessment of how you'll actually use the boat.


----------



## SVAuspicious (Oct 31, 2006)

PBzeer said:


> If the bulk of your time is at the dock, then the interior space of a CC is a plus. If the bulk of your time is away from the dock, then the extra deck space of an aft cockpit is a plus. It basically comes down to making a realistic assessment of how you'll actually use the boat.


I don't agree. I sail the bottom paint off my CC boat. BTW - buying a CC was a surprise to me. I truly didn't expect to buy anything but an aft cockpit boat. She sails great, is easy to handle alone, dry in really ugly conditions, and is comfortable entertaining and for just the two of us.


----------



## tdw (Oct 2, 2006)

When we considered a centre cockpit some years back I found the loss of cockpit lockers something of a minus but the aft cabin a major bonus. 

Have to say I do prefer sailing an aft cockpit but visibility particularly under power is a nice aspect of centre.

Quite frankly, if it came to the crunch I doubt the position of the cockpit would be a deal breaker.

Mind you, the very idea of ever having 12 people on board give me the heeby jeebies.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

tdw said:


> .......Mind you, the very idea of ever having 12 people on board give me the heeby jeebies.


Amen. We've only maxed at 11. They all sat lined up shoulder to shoulder with each other for a day sail. It actually went much better than expected, but that was a lot of work to entertain that many. The boat herself, at 22 tons, doesn't even notice we're aboard.

The advantage of having 12 seats is the room to spread out very comfortably with only 4 or 6 aboard. In fact, 8 becomes a no-brainer. When you only have 6 seats, the cockpit get cramped quickly.


----------



## BlueWaterBlair (Jun 14, 2009)

wow, great information.
i knew some of that stuff, but didn't consider all the differences.
thanks

blair


----------



## Telesail (Dec 28, 2011)

Of course, if you have the cash, an Alubat Cigale solves the problem without needing to argue for or against CC.......

Aft cockpit with Saloon in the aft and state rooms by the mast for easiest motion when asleep.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

Nothing better to understand the differences between a CC and a AC boat then to have the same hull designed by the same guys on both configurations. Yes it exists; the Najad 440 comes in both configurations.

The 44 is a size that where a CC is already not too ugly but it is evident that the AC version is much more elegant, offers less windage and a much bigger cockpit and the Najads are among the best designed and less massive CC. 
Of course, you can go to the Najad site and compare the Aft cabin...and there the advantage goes to the CC.


----------



## chall03 (Oct 14, 2002)

We have a Centre Cockpit 35 footer, and love it. 

When we bought her we had discussed the pros and cons of aft cockpit vs Centre Cockpit and had no real prejudice either way. Now after months of cruising I can say that for us the design works.

Is the cockpit small?? 
Yes but this gives the boat A snug and protected feel offshore, and I believe it helps makes for a drier boat. Plus at anchorage, the rear deck area means that you end up with two separate outside 'living areas', I can fish off the back or top up the outboard with fuel, while my wife is reading in the cockpit with a glass of wine  Combining the two together in one cockpit would result in displeasure. Being a 35 footer generally someone else in the anchorage has the bigger boat for sundowners for 12  

Is the cockpit harder to get out of??
Yes. On a boat designed to sail oceans that is kind of the point  
I do have to step out of the cockpit carefully to help with lines etc coming into a marina, but it has never really been a deal breaker......... 

Small Salooon? 
Also yes, but even on our 35 footer, it has been big enough for the 3 of us without any problems, the big aft cabin once again means that you have another very useable and comfortable space for booking reading and relaxing. Our aft cabin means our boat feels like home, It is far more liveable than the V-Berth on alot of 40+ Aft Cockpit boats.

Is the boat ugly???
Please. Compared to the 'squat' look of a 35ft modern high volume aft cockpit production boat? I think you are in dangerous territory calling anyone's boat ugly.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and we believe she is a gorgeous boat. 
The Centre Cockpit Hallberg-Rassy's are to me some of the most beautiful yachts sailing the oceans. If like some of the more racing orientated members above, you prefer yachts that look like spaceships with sails then maybe they are not to your taste 

High Windage??
On some designs perhaps yes. Ours is not as bad as some and well to be honest I have never really found it too much of an issue. 

Like all things boat design it comes down a compromise between competing needs. It depends on how you want to use the boat, and what you believe would work best for you. I tend to think Centre Cockpit tends to lend itself more to serious cruising. A bit of research will show you most Centre Cockpit designs are aimed at this section of the market( Yes there are plenty of aft cockpit boats in that category too). I would not buy a CC as a party boat, a day sailor, or social racing boat.....


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Chall03, brings up a very good point. On a CC, the Bimini is usually only over the cockpit, allowing more flexibility to get out in the sunshine on the aft deck, if you choose. Personally, I prefer shade (lots of skin cancer in my gene pool) and I get plenty of outdoors. My wife suffers from a tad of claustrophobia and really wants to get out from under it. Her solution is the foredeck, but not underway. Ironically, she has no problem being cramped in any tight bunk we've been in. But once awake, she is on deck.


----------



## SVAuspicious (Oct 31, 2006)

chall03 said:


> The Centre Cockpit Hallberg-Rassy's are to me some of the most beautiful yachts sailing the oceans. If like some of the more racing orientated members above, you prefer yachts that look like spaceships with sails then maybe they are not to your taste .


*grin* I certainly like the HRs. I came to sailing through racing and wanted a boat the could move in any air. HR builds boats that do that.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

chall03 said:


> ...
> Is the boat ugly???
> Please. Compared to the 'squat' look of a 35ft modern high volume aft cockpit production boat? I think you are in dangerous territory calling anyone's boat ugly.
> ......


Sorry about that, I have changed that word on the previous post. Ugly was really not appropriated.

Certainly I find some modern cruisers "fat". I do not want to use that word also, let's stay for massive? In Portuguese I would say "volumoso" but I cannot find the right world in English.

Bottom line, small sailboats with a high free-board will generally do not look as good as boats with a smaller freeboard and considering similar hulls, a CC will always have a lot more freeboard than an AC option.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

SVAuspicious said:


> *grin* I certainly like the HRs. I came to sailing through racing and wanted a boat the could move in any air. HR builds boats that do that.


 Halber-Rassy and Najad after many years building CC boats on all boats bigger than 35ft are now starting to produce AC boats, like the new HR 412 or the Najad 355 and 440 AC.

That is true that HR is making better sailing boats, boats that can sail better with light wind, specially on their AC series (372 and 412) but to say that a HR can move in any air is quite an exageration

If you say that for instance regarding to HR, what would you say regarding a First, a Salona or any good and fast performance cruiser?

Regards

Paulo


----------



## BlueWaterBlair (Jun 14, 2009)

Those Najads and HRs are sweet boats, but definitely out of my my budget.

I think i would be open to an AC or CC, as long as i could have a sleeping arrangement that didn't feel like i was in a cocoon.

thanks again for all this great info.

blair


----------



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

PCP said:


> Sorry about that, I have changed that word on the previous post. Ugly was really not appropriated.
> 
> Certainly I find some modern cruisers "fat". I do not want to use that word also, let's stay for massive? In Portuguese I would say "volumoso" but I cannot find the right world in English.
> 
> ...


"Voluminous" works too, Paulo!

as to the bolded bits above... to the first I agree, but esp in the case of the HRs referred to above, surely the hulls are identical and freeboard the same? Overall height will differ of course because the house is taller....


----------



## SVAuspicious (Oct 31, 2006)

PCP said:


> Halber-Rassy (sic) and Najad after many years building CC boats on all boats bigger than 35ft are now starting to produce AC boats, like the new HR 412 or the Najad 355 and 440 AC.


Yes - I know that the decision at HR was to provide an upward path from the smaller boats for owners that wanted to stay in aft cockpit designs. I don't know of my own knowledge what Najad design thinking is but I suspect it is similar.



PCP said:


> That is true that HR is making better sailing boats, boats that can sail better with light wind, specially on their AC series (372 and 412) but to say that a HR can move in any air is quite an exageration


I don't agree. The big improvement in speed at HR came with the transition from Enderlein designs to Frers designs.

I'm a delivery skipper. I sail a lot of boats. HRs tend to be heavy (my 40' is about 22k#) but I can keep boat speed about half of true wind speed down to 2kts of breeze. A Beneteau First is surely as good or better although not a lot. I haven't sailed a Salona. The Frers HRs are as fast or faster in light air than most production boats. That's my experience.

Of course a lot depends on the sails and the weather you're sailing in. Offshore I'm always happy on my boat and we pretty much sail no matter how light the air gets, and the boat will soldier on when the going gets tough. I haven't been out in anything over F9 though.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

Faster said:


> "Voluminous" works too, Paulo!
> 
> as to the bolded bits above... to the first I agree, but esp in the case of the HRs referred to above, surely the hulls are identical and freeboard the same? Overall height will differ of course because the house is taller....


Yes you are right the freeboard is the same. It seems that today I am just not good with words. I mean the lateral surface of the boat, the one that gives windage that is the freeboard more the cabin height. That one is bigger on a CC boat regarding a AC boat. Look at the two lateral profiles of the Najad:










Regards

Paulo


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

SVAuspicious said:


> ..
> 
> I'm a delivery skipper. I sail a lot of boats. HRs tend to be heavy (my 40' is about 22k#) but I can keep boat speed about half of true wind speed down to 2kts of breeze. A Beneteau First is surely as good or better although not a lot. I haven't sailed a Salona. The Frers HRs are as fast or faster in light air than most production boats. That's my experience. ...


Just talking about very light winds: You have said " could move in any air". I agree that the new HR are a lot faster than the old ones but regarding light wind the difference is that while a HR (or that type of boat) makes half the wind speed in light wind, a modern performance boat makes almost, and in some cases better, than wind speed (upwind) an that is an huge difference. I know, I have been trying that kind of boats on the last years to select one.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## bljones (Oct 13, 2008)

Minnewaska said:


> The other trade off is between entertaining space ...
> 
> Since most of our activity is horizontal in the stateroom, with plenty in a corner to stand and dress, we opt for more elbow room with guests.


...
:worthless:


----------



## tdw (Oct 2, 2006)

I'm constantly surprised by how well our Malo keeps moving in very light air. While not suggesting she'd keep up with the Salonas of this world she still slips along quite nicely. The newer Malos/HRs/Najads etc, would I'm sure be even better. 

Ours, being the 'classic' version has the extended aft deck that makes for relaxing out of the cockpit, fishing, bbqing and the like. Nice compromise though I still think the advantages of a swim platform and/or open stern cockpit cannot be over stated. 

As per previous post in another thread, if we were to change boats one of the HR CCs would be definitely be on the list either 43 or 48. Not at all sure though that I want or need such a big boat, 42 is for me a lot of boat but yes, I wouldn't mind that island aft berth. 

However you look at it though, an aft cockpit is almost/always more handsome than centre. Check out Bob Perry's Norseman 447. One of the best looking CCs, certainly of its time but the AC is still the serious looker.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

tdw said:


> I'm constantly surprised by how well our Malo keeps moving in very light air. While not suggesting she'd keep up with the Salonas of this world she still slips along quite nicely. The newer Malos/HRs/Najads etc, would I'm sure be even better.
> 
> ...


The main difference is with very weak wind, like 2 to 4K, mostly thermic wind. With this wind your boat will be dead on the water while a performance cruiser if sailed upwind will make wind, going a bit faster than the wind.

Also with 8/10k, performance cruisers will be near their hull speed upwind while you will be going well, but not near hull speed. For that you will need 12 or 13K.

With more wind (+ 10) the differences are smaller, except when it blows at more than 15K and you are going downwind, than the differences starts to be big again.

But you are right, modern boats, even boats like the HR and Malo are much faster than older boats....but so are performance boats, compared with older performance boats

Regards

Paulo


----------



## poopdeckpappy (Jul 25, 2006)

In addition to our ty37 we also have a H45CC; The Hunter is a easy boat to sail singlehanded, the space below is nice, the windage is minor and docking could be a task when doing it alone but, this also depends on conditions.

Having said all that, I still prefer my tayana, but the wife prefers the comfort of the Hunter


----------



## welshwind (Feb 27, 2005)

Have a Beneteau 36CC and love it ... A couple of things that are great ... the galley on it is huge and bigger than I've ever seen on a comparable aft cabin. It is long with much counter space as it is a passageway to the aft cabin... so counter space to the left and right as you go aft... in my case, probably nine feet on each side. 

Aft cabin has lots head room.

Outside lazerette space is typically more limited than I've seen on aft-cockpits of comparable size. Also, I do find that it is much tougher to dock singlehandedly than an aft cockpit boat is. You just cant' get around the fact that you are much further from the dock (no matter what you do) than you would be on an aft cockpit.

But, I love my CC and would look for another if I ever get one-footitis (or two-, three- or more-footitis)


----------



## chall03 (Oct 14, 2002)

tdw said:


> However you look at it though, an aft cockpit is almost/always more handsome than centre. Check out Bob Perry's Norseman 447. One of the best looking CCs, certainly of its time but the AC is still the serious looker.


I find Centre Cockcpit's polarize me. They either seem completely ugly, or in the case of the like of HR's as I said above I think they are some of the more beautiful boats out there. Look at some large Centre Cockpit Swans and tell me thats not one heck of a boat.

In terms of 'beauty', it's kind of ummm like debating blonde vs brunette isn't it? At the end of the day there are hotties amongst them all.


----------



## SVAuspicious (Oct 31, 2006)

PCP said:


> Just talking about very light winds: You have said " could move in any air". I agree that the new HR are a lot faster than the old ones but regarding light wind the difference is that while a HR (or that type of boat) makes half the wind speed in light wind, a modern performance boat makes almost, and in some cases better, than wind speed (upwind) an that is an huge difference. I know, I have been trying that kind of boats on the last years to select one.


No argument. Half wind speed is good for a cruising boat. Not so much for a racing boat. In the cruising category there is a big difference between boats like Tayanas and Passports and the newer Scandanavian boats.



PCP said:


> The main difference is with very weak wind, like 2 to 4K, mostly thermic wind. With this wind your boat will be dead on the water while a performance cruiser if sailed upwind will make wind, going a bit faster than the wind.


Nope. I can keep the boat moving in 2 kts. We're not dead in the water. Come sail with me in a Chesapeake summer any time you like.



PCP said:


> Also with 8/10k, performance cruisers will be near their hull speed upwind while you will be going well, but not near hull speed. For that you will need 12 or 13K.


Obviously dependent on point of sail and the seas but a performance boat will generally do better. Interestingly, some of the mid-weight boats move faster offshore in a sea in medium air.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

SVAuspicious said:


> ...
> 
> Obviously dependent on point of sail and the seas but a performance boat will generally do better.


If a performance cruiser can not do a lot better than a medium weight cruising boat with 8K wind, than it is not a performance cruiser

Regards

Paulo


----------



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

tdw said:


> However you look at it though, an aft cockpit is almost/always more handsome than centre. Check out Bob Perry's Norseman 447. One of the best looking CCs, certainly of its time but the AC is still the serious looker.


That boat has always been one of my favourite Perry designs too.. Interestingly way back we ran into a boat in Victoria that 'seemed' to be a N447 but it wasn't quite right... got looking at it and it was clearly a metal boat with a hint of a chine. Turns out BP reworked the plans and this fellow had built himself an aluminum version. He did a fabulous job and it looked just as good!


----------



## SloopJonB (Jun 6, 2011)

It's been touched on here but deserves emphasis I think. CC boats excel in the area of interior comfort, space, privacy etc. The liveaboard qualities. They frequently have exceptional engine rooms as well.

Where they come up short is stowage. I have never seen a CC boat that had anything close to adequate stowage, let alone a GOOD amount of it. Take a look at the CC boats on YW and take note of the number of substantial deck boxes on them.

Every CC boat I have known was optimized for maximum living space at the cost of significant sailing practicalities - where does the bagged spinnaker go? Spare or small jib? Where do you stow spare sheets & docklines? shore power cords? Paddles for the dinghy? Crab trap? Etc. etc.

To me, that is the single biggest factor that has to be taken into account when deciding if one is suitable for your intended use.


----------



## SloopJonB (Jun 6, 2011)

tdw said:


> Check out Bob Perry's Norseman 447. One of the best looking CCs, certainly of its time but the AC is still the serious looker.


+ 1 or 3 on that - one of his very best IMO. The pickleforks were one of the best bits of deck detail ever.

To my eye, the best looking CC boats ever, were the old Hylas 47 and 49. I can't imagine them looking better with aft cockpits.


----------



## PJFORD (Aug 11, 2011)

Remember the Irwins; give me a 34-37 ft center cockpit aft cabin ketch! Now you're talkin'!


----------



## tdw (Oct 2, 2006)

SVAuspicious said:


> Nope. I can keep the boat moving in 2 kts. We're not dead in the water. Come sail with me in a Chesapeake summer any time you like.


We can generally keep our girl moving in sub four knots although a real speedster will still pass us by.

Funnily enough, and this is probably some fault of mine, its six - twelve that i have the most trouble with. I'm sure its a trim thing but I never seem to be happy with performance in that wind speed range.


----------



## SVAuspicious (Oct 31, 2006)

SloopJonB said:


> Where they come up short is stowage. I have never seen a CC boat that had anything close to adequate stowage, let alone a GOOD amount of it. Take a look at the CC boats on YW and take note of the number of substantial deck boxes on them.
> 
> Every CC boat I have known was optimized for maximum living space at the cost of significant sailing practicalities - where does the bagged spinnaker go? Spare or small jib? Where do you stow spare sheets & docklines? shore power cords? Paddles for the dinghy? Crab trap? Etc. etc.


Spinnaker - forward sail locker
Spare jib (100 or 135, whatever is not on the furler) - forward sail locker
Staysail - forward sail locker unless hanked on and bagged
Spare sheets - forward sail locker
Docklines - cockpit locker
Power cords - cockpit locker
Paddles - lashed inside the dinghy upside down on the foredeck
Crab trap - don't have one
Spare anchor - forward sail locker
Dive gear, life jackets, oil, fishing gear, cleaning products, spare anchor rode, passerale, yadda yadda yadda - cockpit locker

HR 40 center cockpit liveaboard


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

I apologize that this is a long explanation and that it is a draft an article which I wrote for another purpose:

I would suggest that the center cockpit versus aft cockpit discussion is another one of those topics for which there is no one universally right answer and yet it still seems to elicit near religious faith in one or the other view point. My sense is that there are cases where a center cockpit works well and cases which make almost no sense to any fair and impartial judge. 

As someone who has designed the interiors for both, I will start with the practicality issue. When you design a boat, and if you start by assuming that the hull form is controlled by the hydrodynamic needs of the boat, the physical dimensions of the human body are so controlling that that for any given length of boat there are relatively few layouts which balance being efficient in their use of space with providing reasonable sized amenities. And while it is true that sometimes the shape of the hull can be tweaked to improve accommodations some, there is a practical limit on which layout will fit and which won't fit without compromising sailing ability. 

To explain, as a general rule, designers try to save the best real estate for interior accommodations. Prime real estate needs enough bilge depth and a location near enough to the center of the boat to get adequate headroom in the passageways and standing work areas, and enough beam to get reasonable sized bunks, or dinettes, or heads or galleys plus the necessary passageways. 

This goal of preserving prime real estate and not altering hull forms, begins to set a practical minimum size for a center cockpit boat. Since there is a practical minimum size to an aft cabing, as a center cockpit boat gets smaller, the aft cabin pushes the cockpit location proportionately further and further forward, so that the cockpit and passage to the aft cabin are occupying some of the most valuable real estate in the boat. And since there is a practical useful limit to the width of a cockpit, this in turn results in wasting an excessive amount of this prime real estate for items (engine compartments, sail lockers, narrow side decks and so on) which could and should be located in narrower portions of the boat. 

Similarly, as a boat gets smaller, it is difficult to obtain adequate headroom in the passageway to the aft cabin without artificially altering the cockpit and deck. For this reason many smaller center cockpit boats eliminate the passageways and become ‘walk overs’ rather than ‘walk-throughs’ as the literature used to call them.

From a motion comfort standpoint, cockpit seats should be as low as possible and still have adequate drainage and vision forward, ideally at or below the height of side decks. As center cockpit boats get smaller the cockpit seats are typically raised to provide a little more headroom in the passage. And as the seats get raised, so do the occupants so that they experience more violent motion both in terms of amount of roll angle but also the whiplash at the end of each roll. 

It is for that reason that you often hear that small center cockpit version have poorer motion comfort than their aft cockpit sisters. This may be seen as being offset in part by having less pitching motion, but pitching, especially near the stern as compared to the bow, tends to be the gentler of the two motions. 

As boats get longer, there is less of a need to raise the seat tops for headroom in the passageway and less of a need to preserve key real estate since more length of boat has an adequate width for accommodations. In a practical sense, it is very hard to design a center cockpit boat that is much below 42 feet that has adequate passageways, proper sized berths, and which does not have a deck plan or hull design compromised to make the design work. This is especially true if the designer includes enclosed forward and aft heads since the aft head almost by necessity ends up under the cockpit seats. Once the boat gets smaller than around 42 feet, without altering the hull and deck adversely, the passageway becomes overly confined and more difficult to use. 

In terms of wetness, because the cockpit on a center cockpit is proportionately closer to the bow, passengers in center-cockpits that are otherwise unprotected, experience more spray and solid water than make it aft. 

Center cockpit boats often require more complex and higher maintenance steering gear. They sometimes require more complex deck plans as well with turning blocks and slant base winches making ergonomics and low friction harder to achieve. 

With the extra companionway, and more opportunities for operating portlights, ventilation tends to be better on center cockpit boats especially in the aft cabin. 

The storage issue is one that is more or a liability on smaller center cockpit boats. Walk through center cockpit boats simply have more circulation area. There is no way around that since there is no way to double load the passageway to the aft cabin. And if a head and or berths tuck under the cockpit seats then more bulk storage is lost. It’s just the way it is. 

But as boats get larger, these issues fade away quickly and at some point the sheer length of travel between the cockpit and the main cabin make an aft cockpit less practical. 

There is a perception that performance sailors buy aft cabins and only cruisers buy center cockpit designs. I am not sure that is all that true, but I will say that from a performance sailing standpoint, lower friction and direct feel steering is easier to achieve with an aft cockpit, and it is easier to get a clear view up the slot without craning your neck while still being in a spot where you can see the leech telltales on the mainsail from an aft cockpit. 

So in the end, like so many sailing decisions, the choice of center cockpit versus aft cockpit comes down to personal taste, sailing objectives and aesthetic sense. Now that we put that one to rest, does anyone want to debate which is inherently better vanilla or strawberry ice cream?


----------



## SloopJonB (Jun 6, 2011)

Jeff_H said:


> Now that we put that one to rest, does anyone want to debate which is inherently better vanilla or strawberry ice cream?


That is not open to debate - vanilla.  You can always add strawberries or anything else to vanilla but picking them out of strawberry gets VERY tedious.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

Yeah, but try picking the vanilla beans out of vanilla. 

By the way, did you know that vanilla is the only edible agricultural use of orchids.


----------



## SloopJonB (Jun 6, 2011)

Jeff_H said:


> Yeah, but try picking the vanilla beans out of vanilla.
> 
> By the way, did you know that vanilla is the only edible agricultural use of orchids.


I didn't even know it CAME from orchids. I just checked with my foodie wife and as I expected, she did know.

At least there is SOME good provided by those vile plants. The description of them by General Sternwood in "The Big Sleep" perfectly describes my own attitude to those particular parasites.

Knowing that they provide vanilla puts them in a whole new, more favourable, light though.


----------



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

....oooohhhh... thread drift... more like torrent....


----------



## SloopJonB (Jun 6, 2011)

Faster said:


> ....oooohhhh... thread drift... more like torrent....


Thread Skookumchuck?


----------



## looking4wind (Jul 30, 2010)

Greeting all. I mostly lurk on this forum, but this topic has certainly caught my attention as I have had my eye on on a few CC models as I am intrigued with the "Aft Cabin" aspect.

Most of the references in this thread point to some high end/larger CC designs, but I'm wondering if any out there can comment or has experience on some of these specific models that are more in reach of the "budget sailor". Particularily sailing characteristics, and operating under the general acknowledgment that most find the cc's to be "ugly" (though I don't find a couple of them ugly, especially the S2 9.2C) 

S2 9.2C

Irwin 37 CC

Morgan 41 Out Island

Coronado 35

O'Day 32

O'Day 37

Any others I'm missing?

Thanks,

Mark


----------



## SloopJonB (Jun 6, 2011)

looking4wind said:


> Greeting all. I mostly lurk on this forum, but this topic has certainly caught my attention as I have had my eye on on a few CC models as I am intrigued with the "Aft Cabin" aspect.
> 
> Most of the references in this thread point to some high end/larger CC designs, but I'm wondering if any out there can comment or has experience on some of these specific models that are more in reach of the "budget sailor". Particularily sailing characteristics, and operating under the general acknowledgment that most find the cc's to be "ugly" (though I don't find a couple of them ugly, especially the S2 9.2C)
> 
> ...


I'm one of the eccentrics (some would say weirdo's) who actually LIKE the Coronado 35 (and 41). I've never been on a similar sized boat that had so much useful accommodation, with headroom everywhere. I also like the flush deck, a LOT. They are a bit "motorsailorish" - overly small rig and REALLY suffer from a lack of stowage, however the big deck can easily hold a couple of deck boxes that double as seats. Less easily corrected is very small tankage.

For a dockside liveaboard and local coastal sailing they would be high on my list of choices. They come REALLY cheap too. 

One thing about their aesthetics - is absolutely essential to have the original style broad stripe of colour that runs through the hull ports - they are pretty ugly without it - it really makes a difference to their appearance. A band of the same colour around the moulded recess on the outside top of the cockpit coaming improves their appearance as well. With the stripes they look a lot less dumpy.


----------



## killarney_sailor (May 4, 2006)

Of the mid-30s CC boats I quite like the Moody 345. Not too many on this side of the pond but very nice boats. They even look OK. The big compromise is that the passage to the aft cabin is low - but this is not something you do too often in a day.


----------



## tdw (Oct 2, 2006)

Killarney,
The Moody 425 was always high on my list of desirable boats. Very few in Oz but to my mind a goodun.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

Regarding the aesthetics of small center cockpits I still think they are generally too high for my taste but some manufacturers have found a way of disguising that in a very effective way, using wood. I know, I am an aesthetics freak but I found these ones pleasing to my eye and some even very beautiful and I want to share with you guys, maybe you find them beautiful too



























































































Well, the last one are not really CC cockpit boats but they are not also true AC boats, let us call them classics?

...


----------



## tdw (Oct 2, 2006)

All Najads Paulo ? Simply beautiful and you know me ... I am somewhat fond of the "classic" look.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

tdw said:


> All Najads Paulo ? Simply beautiful and you know me ... I am somewhat fond of the "classic" look.


Hi! No the first one is a Najad 38, a special edition, in the middle you have a Nordborg and the two last ones and more beautiful are Scalar.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

There are SO many cool European boats that we never get to even hear about, let alone see, on this side of the pond.. Thanks for those, and all the others, Paulo!


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

For a few years runnng, an aft cockpit Najad was probably my favorite boat in the Annapolis Show... One year the 332, I believe, another the 440 AC, and then their 35-footer (which CRUISING WORLD referred to as a "Pocket Cruiser" in their review)

Even more is the pity, that Najad filed for bankruptcy last summer...


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

JonEisberg said:


> ...
> 
> Even more is the pity, that Najad filed for bankruptcy last summer...


They were saved by a neighbor company that makes motor boats and that now owns Najad. I think they are going out of trouble and they certainly deserve it.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## tdw (Oct 2, 2006)

Truly beautiful boats ... you are right Paulo, the Scalar is the pick of a very attractive litter.


----------

