# Cheap Classic Plastic smokes the fleet in 2013 Down the Bay Race



## jameswilson29 (Aug 15, 2009)

For all those folks propagating the B.S. that newer and more expensive sailboats are necessarily better sailboats, classic plastic smoked the fleet of boats, including those costing 10 to 20 times more this weekend.

A 1983 Hobie 33 "Mirage" and a J/24 sailboat "Rocket J" corrected to 1st and 2nd place respectively in the 2013 Down the Bay Race. a 140 mile overnight race from Annapolis, MD, to Hampton, VA, with a strong Northwest wind propelling the boats to record time.

The Hobie 33 (probably less than 20K) not only corrected to 1st, but also beat two J/120, a Sabre 426, a Jeanneau 409, a Catalina 387, a J/42, and a Benneteau First 36.7 on elapsed time.

Race results: Yacht Scoring - A complete web based regatta administration and yacht scoring program


----------



## PBzeer (Nov 11, 2002)

Sometimes, it's not how well the boat sails, but how well you sail the boat.


----------



## jameswilson29 (Aug 15, 2009)

Agreed, and perhaps those owning a $10K - $20K debt free raceboat are more willing to push the envelope when it is blowing in the 20s.

What is fascinating about these results is that a classic J/24, a good all around racer first designed and built in Rod Johnstone's garage some 40 years ago, in the days before computer design and high tech materials, can still go out and stomp $200-300K boats, boat-to-boat.


----------



## ccriders (Jul 8, 2006)

Dang James, I thought you were going to tell us you smoked them in your P28. Wouldn't that have been something? I like what PB says, especially when I overtake a larger, newer boat, which isn''t often as they are not often sailing.
John


----------



## SVAuspicious (Oct 31, 2006)

PBzeer said:


> Sometimes, it's not how well the boat sails, but how well you sail the boat.


Always.


----------



## tommays (Sep 9, 2008)

Well





As a TWO TIME J24 owner going back to 1981 i can assure you it was a good thing there was no real UPWIND work as it would have been a slow REALLY WET submarine ride

In reaching conditions like that 9 knots steady with plenty of 12 knots surfs is easy and you will sail well above the rating

When you gotta make it home upwind and there is any kind of sea your VMG is going to be down in the 4 knot range

Same deal with the Hobie cant go upwind


----------



## Unkle Toad (May 11, 2013)

ok so it looks like the conditions were good for the 2 older boats who also had great crew and knew what to do with it .. what I take from this is that all the advancements in hull design and everything are pulling small %'s out of the air but the majority of it is still around the crew and conditions.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

jameswilson29 said:


> For all those folks propagating the B.S. that newer and more expensive sailboats are necessarily better sailboats, classic plastic smoked the fleet of boats, including those costing 10 to 20 times more this weekend.
> 
> A 1983 Hobie 33 "Mirage" and a J/24 sailboat "Rocket J" corrected to 1st and 2nd place respectively in the 2013 Down the Bay Race. a 140 mile overnight race from Annapolis, MD, to Hampton, VA, with a strong Northwest wind propelling the boats to record time.
> 
> ...


And what that means?

First of all that the Hobie 33 was much better sailed than any other boat. The boat beat by 1h e 20m all boats with an identical performance (PHRF).

Second, comparing the performance of the Hobbie 33 with the one of the a Jeanneau 409 or the Catalina 387 is not meaningful, not only because they are not the same type of boat but also because those two boats were in a class that does not use spinnaker.

Third, if the idea was to say that old boats can beat new boats the fact is that there was not any recent boat racing on the A2 class, the class where raced the Hobbie 33 and on the other "racing" class there were racing only two recent boats, a Farr 400 and a TP 52.

The Hobie 33 made and incredible race, in 10h 58m, the Farr 400 has done it in 9h 4m and the TP 52, in 7h 3m. These are race boats and not comparable with the Hobbie 33, that is not also comparable with a Jeanneau or a Catalina. The Hobie 33 was one of the first ultra light displacement boats, much of a race boat in its time and an expensive boat when new.

Among the boats without spinnaker the very bad time of the Jeanneau 409 can only be explained by a very badly sailed boat but the times of the other modern cruisers on that class, like the Jeanneau 42i (12h 41m) and the one of the Catalina 385 (14h 10m) compare very favorably with older boats of the same type using spinnaker, like the Sabre 426 (12h 44m), J40 (12h 20m and J42 (13h 32m). A spinnaker makes a big difference in a boat speed.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## SchockT (May 21, 2012)

Not to take anything away from those boats, as they clearly sailed a good race, but you can't put too much stock in overall results in a phrf fleet with a 280 point spread! The system just doesn't work well in those circumstances.

To declare the J24 and Hobie 33 to be superior boats to all the others based on that result is just a bit silly.

Having said that, I agree that beating big expensive boats with an old beater is fun!


----------



## Rhys05 (Aug 22, 2012)

SchockT said:


> Not to take anything away from those boats, as they clearly sailed a good race, but you can't put too much stock in overall results in a phrf fleet with a 280 point spread! The system just doesn't work well in those circumstances.
> 
> To declare the J24 and Hobie 33 to be superior boats to all the others based on that result is just a bit silly.
> 
> Having said that, I agree that beating big expensive boats with an old beater is fun!


^^ This. I mean, in a PHRF race a Westsail 32 can "beat" an Open 60...nevermind the fact that the Open 60 completed the race twelve hours before the Westsail... I'll take the (objectively) faster boat, thanks. (caveat being, of course, that I could afford to own a Westsail, I couldn't afford a single sail for the Open 60...) Point being that the results of a PHRF race have very little to do with the boats, and everything to do with the sailor(s) and the conditions of the race.


----------



## Ajax_MD (Nov 24, 2009)

...and in other news, two ancient, Pearson Tritons rating 252 corrected to 1st and 2nd place in PHRF C in the Miles River Race on Saturday. They didn't even have any high-tech rags for cryin' out loud.

I managed to surf my way to 10.8 knots SOG and peg out the knot meter multiple times in a _Pearson 30_ and was still DFL.

Mortifying.


----------



## jameswilson29 (Aug 15, 2009)

Unkle Toad said:


> ok so it looks like the conditions were good for the 2 older boats who also had great crew and knew what to do with it .. what I take from this is that all the advancements in hull design and everything are pulling small %'s out of the air but the majority of it is still around the crew and conditions.


Ding, ding, ding...this is the correct answer! (By the way, some of you don't know what "elapsed time" means: Hello, the Hobie 33 beat most of the fleet, boat to boat, without regard to any PHRF handicap rating!!!)

Lessons:

Applying rocket science to sailboats does not necessarily produce a rocket, but is does produce an extremely expensive sailboat.

While technological advances such as carbon fiber and computer assisted design have greatly increased the cost of new sailboats, they have not greatly increased the speed potential of monohulls in all conditions.

The 70s and 80s were the heydey of sailing in the U.S.: all the recent technological advances have not produced a better Hobie 33 or a better J/24. If so, such boats would have won the race.

A simple fiberglass, aluminum and lead sailboat with a symmetrical spinnaker and a good crew can still smoke the fleet in the right conditions.

Not only is racing nonspinnaker a contradiction in terms, it is also like kissing your sister, drinking decaf coffee or lite beer, or paying to go on a sailing rally. Sure, there are people who do it, but you gotta wonder why... Here are the most common reasons:

"Oh, we are just racing for fun..." What is not fun about a spinnaker?

"I don't have the crew to race with a spinnaker." Um...I sail solo and fly a symmetrical spinnaker. How many people do you need?

"It is too complicated." So, you don't really know how to sail? Even after all your ASA courses? A spinnaker is a basic and essential sail on a boat, especially if you race.

"We ran out of money and can't afford one because we spent too much money on the boat, and no one will finance a spinnaker set up." Finally, the truth...:laugher

Excuses, excuses, excuses...

Here are some videos of the fast TP 52 "Irie" that took line honors (yes, the TP 52 is a testament to what high tech can accomplish - yes, I like it, but it costs half a million dollars):


----------



## jephotog (Feb 25, 2002)

Anyone willing to spend 24 hours sitting on the rail of a H33 or J24 deserves a trophy for just that, glad they won.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

Rhys05 said:


> ^^ This. I mean, in a PHRF race a Westsail 32 can "beat" an Open 60...nevermind the fact that the Open 60 completed the race twelve hours before the Westsail... I'll take the (objectively) faster boat, thanks. (caveat being, of course, that I could afford to own a Westsail, I couldn't afford a single sail for the Open 60...) Point being that the results of a PHRF race have very little to do with the boats, and everything to do with the sailor(s) and the conditions of the race.


Yes but we were talking about real times, not corrected to PHRF. The Hobie 33 was sailed very higher than its PHRF. That means probably a planing boat sailing over hull speed for a lot of time for a very good crew on ideal conditions for the boat. As others had said that time has to do with the crew, not the boat. There were other boats that could be sailed as fast or more downwind with a great crew, like the j105 ot the J120 that made not so good in real time. That means probably that they were not so well sailed not that the boats are slower.

Regarding other types of boats, like a Sabre, a Catalina or Jeanneau, those are not cruiser racers and cannot plan downwind, most of them did not even had a spinnaker.

To take significant information out of a race regarding boats it is needed that all the boats are sailed at very high level (top regattas) and preferably with hundreds of boats racing and you need to look at the real times not corrected times.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

jameswilson29 said:


> Ding, ding, ding...this is the correct answer! (By the way, some of you don't know what "elapsed time" means: Hello, the Hobie 33 beat most of the fleet, boat to boat, without regard to any PHRF handicap rating!!!)
> 
> Lessons:
> 
> ...


What are you talking about? What you say makes not any sense. it is evident that new technologies materials and advancements in design produced faster boats in all conditions.

You are talking about a backwater race where the only two modern racers were a Fart 400 and a TP 52. The fact that the Hobie 33 made a great race regarding that size of boat and was miles ahead of all has nothing to do with a being a boat with a similar performance of a modern carbon similar sized recent sailboat, but with the fact that in that race there was not any, not to mention sailed with an equally competent crew.

If you want to proof your point look at the results of major races on the states or elsewhere with top crews sailing top modern carbon boats and compare the results with the ones with older boats (I am sure you will see the difference). The Fastnet, that is almost here would be a good place to look at.

If that was as you say nobody would buy very expensive top recent sailing boats for racing. They would race in old boats with similar performance (if they existed) that would cost a fraction of the price.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## jameswilson29 (Aug 15, 2009)

PCP said:


> What are you talking about? What you say makes not any sense. it is evident that new technologies materials and advancements in design produced faster boats in all conditions.


O.K., so why did a 30 year old design smoke the fleet then? The idea that the incorporation of Open 60 design and technology, computer simulation and design, and other high tech racing ideas into ordinary production sailboats has somehow improved practical sailboat performance (it certainly has made them more expensive) is questionable. Why didn't the new production boats beat the Hobie 33?

Now, we have expensive new production boats that look fast, but may not really be any significantly faster in practice.



PCP said:


> You are talking about a backwater race where the only two modern racers were a Fart 400 and a TP 52.


Although it may be a small town, Annapolis has some of the best sailboat racers in the world. The Wash., D.C., area is one of the most affluent areas in the U.S. This is hardly a backwater area. Any one is free to enter this race. I suspect some decided not to race after seeing the weather predictions.



PCP said:


> The fact that the Hobie 33 made a great race regarding that size of boat and was miles ahead of all has nothing to do with a being a boat with a similar performance of a modern carbon designed race, but with the fact that in that race there was not any, not to mention sailed with am equally competent crew.


The point is, the Hobie 33 was designed in 1982 and is low tech, yet it beat most of the boats, boat to boat. High tech has not readily translated into higher speeds for the average production boat. Where is the fast new-tech version of the Hobie 33 and the J/24? Is is possible the design was nearly perfected at that time?



PCP said:


> If you want to proof your point look at the results of major races ...If that was as you say nobody would buy very expensive top recent sailing boats for racing. They would race in old boats with similar performance (if they existed) that would cost a fraction of the price


I am talking about regular sailboat racing, not Grand Prix stuff. I think many are beginning to realize in average sailboat racing in the U.S. that some of the older designs are still competitive, and that the tremendous advances in technology have not really produced significantly better new boats, just more expensive boats.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

I don't want to discuss with you. If you cannot understand what I have said...that's too bad, It does not change reality.

Today production sailing boats are comparatively much less expensive than 30 years ago.

The Hobie 33 was high tech when it was built and also an expensive boat.

Here you have a study of what should be modified to improve the Hobie 33 and make it a boat with modern performances:

http://wisemarine.com/images/hobieproject2.pdf

If someone build one know, it would be an expensive boat.



jameswilson29 said:


> ... I think many are beginning to realize in average sailboat racing in the U.S. that some of the older designs are still competitive, and that the tremendous advances in technology have not really produced significantly better new boats, just more expensive boats.


Yes, and that makes you bright and the top racers that buy very expensive modern top racing boats very stupid, except that they now a bit more about racing and fast boats then you.

Regards.

Sorry, I couldn't resist

Paulo


----------



## blt2ski (May 5, 2005)

Not sure what rating the Hobie had, but IIRC in South Cal, the hobie has 3 ratings, around the bouy rating of say 100, ocean rating with some up and down wind of say 90, and a down wind projected race of say 80. NOW, that I have posted 3 ratings for this boat per say, please note, I doubt very much my numbers are correct. BUT it does show the how some regions will rate a given boat, and why the hobie probably smoked the course, adn to a degree, the J24. If a Moore 30 would have been racing, probably would have done the same. if it woudhave been an upwind race, then some old heavy clunker might have been able to do the same......

Lets all be realistic, some races do bring out the best conditions for a given boat, and that boat if sailed well, will smoke the fleet! 

I would also agree, that NFS is hard to compare to nfs ratings too. Some boat will sail way faster than the 18sec credit one gets with a spin vs with out! Folding vs fixed props are also not true. a fixed will cost one more than the 9 sec credit one gets! same with furling..........

It is fun to see well sailed boats win races!

Marty


----------



## Alex W (Nov 1, 2012)

A 1907 wooden Schooner just won the Swiftsure Inshore Classic:
Swiftsure 2013 » 2013 Inshore Classic Results

That's a lot more impressive to me than a Hobie 33 winning.


----------



## chef2sail (Nov 27, 2007)

I don't put much stock in this result or draw any generalizations from this race , except to congratulate the winner, as any winner is to be congratulated

A paper boat would have set records this weekend in that race. For the record this is a straight line race with nothing even close to an upwind leg. 

Conditions were 25-30 steady with gusts to 35 on Saturday on the Bay and they would have been on a broad reach not tacking once down the Bay down the Bay the entire course. Sunday was a repeat of Saturday , minus 5 knots of wind. It was like being in an NHRA 1/4 mile drag race instead of a true test of boats on a course race with different points of sail. How can the use PHRF rating and corrected times in such a race.

We sailed the same direction South on the Bay and on Saturday reached record hull speeds on our little 35 foot boat of 10+ knots with a furled jib.. Nothing like near gale force winds with gusts in that range to give any boat a big PUSH

Now if you'd told me that cheap plastic boat won a race heading north...that would have been a feat indeed.


----------



## bljones (Oct 13, 2008)

Taking PHRF entirely out of the picture, the elapsed time tells the tale:

Yacht Scoring - A complete web based regatta administration and yacht scoring program

The Hobie 33 is obviously one hell of a downwind drag racer.


----------



## jameswilson29 (Aug 15, 2009)

Here is what it looks like when a $10K, low-tech, 35-year-old J/24 planes past your $300K Open 60-styled boat incorporating all the lastest technology and electronics (different race, same conditions and same effect): 




The $20K 30-year-old Hobie 33 would also spray you with its bow wave as it passed you...


----------



## night0wl (Mar 20, 2006)

May be faster, but I'm sure the folks on the newer bigger cruiser-racers arrived in better form to the after-party


----------



## zz4gta (Aug 15, 2007)

James, I've done this race twice in my Merit 25. Basically the same boat as a J24. Once I finished in 34 hours in 4th place. The next year we finished in 35 hours and won our class. We beat "boat for boat" the entire PHRF B fleet over the line. Both years it was entirely upwind. Does that mean the Merit 25 with 20' of waterline is faster upwind than a newer 33 footer upwind? No, it doesn't. 

There's is now doubt in my mind we would've won the Miles river race on saturday. We took Second last year in our class and with a downwind ride in a 3000 lbs boat that J24 surfing wouldn't of had a chance. Unfortunately I'm injured and had to bail. 

Fact is that I know my boat is fast downwind in a blow. It will surf and plane much sooner than larger heavier boats. Newness has nothing to do with it. 

The Hobbie 33 is a downwind machine. Take a look at the results from past transpacs. A typically downwind race. Lots of videos of these 33 footers surfing and planing. Some boats go downwind like a rocket. Others, not so much. 

The TP 52 is a "Trans Pac 52" footer. It was built specifically for a downwind sleigh ride in the pacific ocean screaming down waves in 25+ knots. When you purposely build a boat for specific conditions it will scream in those conditions. Hobbie 33's are built for similar downwind conditions. 

The real impressive feat here, is the TP52. Set a new course record of just over 7 hours. That's an average speed of 17 kts. 

James, if you'd like discus this more, I'll be at SBRW this weekend. Stop in for a beer and I can go into more detail. I'll be on the other Merit 25 down there, not mine.


----------



## zz4gta (Aug 15, 2007)

BubbleheadMd said:


> ...and in other news, two ancient, Pearson Tritons rating 252 corrected to 1st and 2nd place in PHRF C in the Miles River Race on Saturday. They didn't even have any high-tech rags for cryin' out loud.
> 
> I managed to surf my way to 10.8 knots SOG and peg out the knot meter multiple times in a _Pearson 30_ and was still DFL.
> 
> Mortifying.


You know why...


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

blt2ski said:


> Not sure what rating the Hobie had, but IIRC in South Cal, the hobie has 3 ratings, around the bouy rating of say 100, ocean rating with some up and down wind of say 90, and a down wind projected race of say 80. NOW, that I have posted 3 ratings for this boat per say, please note, I doubt very much my numbers are correct. BUT it does show the how some regions will rate a given boat, and why the hobie probably smoked the course, adn to a degree, the J24. If a Moore 30 would have been racing, probably would have done the same. if it woudhave been an upwind race, then some old heavy clunker might have been able to do the same......
> 
> Lets all be realistic, some races do bring out the best conditions for a given boat, and that boat if sailed well, will smoke the fleet!
> 
> ...


Not Bad at all. On that race the PHRF of the Hobie 33 was 96 the one from the Jeanneau 409 was 90, the one from the Jeannau 42ip 81 and the one from the J105 90.

Either the J105 and the Hobie 33, if very well sailed by an experienced crew and if the race is downwind with strong winds can get to planning speeds and on those conditions make much better than heavier boats, specially when those are racing without spinnaker. That would not be so in any other conditions where they would be slower, assuming equally competent crews, that was not obviously the case here.

http://www.yachtscoring.com/boatdetail.cfm?Yacht_ID=38217

http://www.yachtscoring.com/boatdetail.cfm?Yacht_ID=38351

http://www.yachtscoring.com/boatdetail.cfm?Yacht_ID=38083

http://www.yachtscoring.com/boatdetail.cfm?Yacht_ID=38822

Regards

Paulo


----------



## rgscpat (Aug 1, 2010)

From what I'd heard, the Hobie 33 was racing without spinnaker most of the time... they only had it up for about thirty minutes, then took it down as conditions built.


----------



## pdqaltair (Nov 14, 2008)

Sounds like the same old stuff I heard when sailing my 12K 30-year old Stiletto with original sails and 8-year-old crew against 6-7 figure race boats; you're cheating, that's a catamaran and not a real boat.

Whatever. My fun/$ ratio had them buried and they didn't like that. They couldn't afford to loose, I could.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

jameswilson29 said:


> Here is what it looks like when a $10K, low-tech, 35-year-old J/24 planes past your $300K Open 60-styled boat incorporating all the lastest technology and electronics (different race, same conditions and same effect): Miles River Race onboard a J/24, May 25, 2013 - YouTube
> 
> The $20K 30-year-old Hobie 33 would also spray you with its bow wave as it passed you...


I continue without understanding your point. If your point is that 30 year old boats are as fast as today's boats or even close...well what can I say, Wolfie in another thread is saying the same regarding 70 year's old boats and you are as wrong as him.

For any comparison to make any sense you have to compare similar types of boats. What is the sense of comparing and old high tech (at the time) and very expensive (at the time) racer cruiser (much more racer than cruiser) with an inexpensive mass production boat like the Jeanneau 409? True, the Jeanneau is faster, at least in most conditions, but then it is also a bigger boat.

If you want to compare the Hobie 33 compare it with a modern boat of the same size and type, for instance the JPK 10.10. Not much of a comparison, the JPK will smoke the old Hobie upwind, downwind in weak or stronger wind and not by a little but by a lot. have a look at one going downwind:






No, this is not a downwind boat, it is a IRC champion, the boat wins upwind or downwind and contrary to the Hobie 33 it can be also a winner solo sailing, able to go fast on autopilot. The boat has also a much better cruiser interior than the Hobie and much more interior space.

Regarding prices how can you compare prices of new boats with 30 year old used boats? But if you think that you can race effectively an old Hobie without a complete overall of the boat including new sails you are wrong...and then the boat will not cost $20K anymore and the money you have "invested" would almost all be lost when you sell the money...for $20K.

An interesting article about that:

*"The first production ultralight displacement boats are turning 30 years old, and that means their price is finally down in the ultra-affordable range. I bought a 1986 Hobie 33 in New England for $23,000, dreaming of 20-knot surfs and front-of-the beer-can-fleet finishes, but its ancient sails and knotty foils needed replacement or repair, as well as some other standard old-boat touch-ups.....The worn deck is just one of the tired parts of the boats. The halyards have another year or two of life, and the sheets are dirty but serviceable. The wood parts of the cabin sole need refinishing, and the cushions need recovering or replacement, but those items can wait. This year, my family has an appointment with the front of the fleet."*

Total cost, even without recovering the interior or the worn deck : $37,796

I wonder what would amount a proper boat recuperation  and what would be the resale value of the boat after that.

And james, a JPK 10.10 does not cost $300 000

Regards

Paulo


----------



## chef2sail (Nov 27, 2007)

Had the Hobie 33 had any upwind legs we wouldn't even be talking about it here. Conditions that day fit that boat. You can draw generalizations about the boat from hat.

Dave


----------



## KeelHaulin (Mar 7, 2006)

IIRC a Cal 20 sailed Pacific Cup (SF to Hawaii) a couple of years ago... It arrived a couple of weeks behind the first to finish; but corrected to 1'st place.  

I think too much is made out of the PHRF numbers. These are ratings based on displacement hull designs with the assumption that the boat does not plane. The extremely low, even negative PHRF ratings that are given to larger and faster boats (like maxis, cats, etc) are for their ability to exceed hull speed (plane). The smaller boats will plane or surf more readily than a larger hull and when they do it's going to far exceed it's downwind PHRF rating, which only accounts for it's non-planing theoretical hull speed.


----------



## anthemj24 (Aug 24, 2011)

Horses for courses. Hobie 33s go downwind very fast, that is what they were designed to do. They still do that 30 years later. If you want to go downhill really fast on a budget, a Hobie 33 or Olson 30 is your ticket. If you want to go uphill fast too, then you might want to look at some other boats. If you want to be comfortable while you do it, you are going to need to dig into your wallet a bit more. I love some of the older boats, I even own one. But you can't compare them with new ones without taking into account the requirements the design is meant to meet.


----------



## PalmettoSailor (Mar 7, 2006)

I'm guessing the owner of Irie, isn't all that worried about where he corrected out in PHRF. You own a boat like that to take line honors and he did that setting a course record that could stand for decades.


----------



## jameswilson29 (Aug 15, 2009)

There is a reason why there are races, and actual results.

Some love the theories and the numbers, and who should win based on abstractions. (When I was involved in SCCA solo II racing, people did the same things with sports cars: "Well, based on the numbers, this one should easily beat that one..." It did not always work that way in reality: some things in vehicle design cannot be accurately measured. The whole is often greater than the sum of the parts. Also, some of the guys with the most expensive cars were not willing to actually push them to the limit while racing, because they were too precious to risk destroying.) 

Results matter.

In sailing, when the wind blows 20-30 knots on the race course, the hype and the B.S. are separated from the reality. These theoretically faster boats are apparently not showing up for the races. The fact is, these 30 year old West Coast ULDBs, the Olsons, the Hobies, the Santa Cruzs, the Moore, even the older East Coast J boats and early 90s racers, are still winning races.

Is it possible that all the claims about technological improvements in sailboats in the last 20 to 30 years is mostly puffery to sell boats, in an industry that is a victim of its own successes in the 70s and 80s?

The marine industries took a left turn after the recession in the '80s in order to survive, dropping value-oriented spartan race boats and dual purpose boats in order to survive. Now, the bulk of boats are either expensive production condo cruisers that appeal to wives at boat shows (and rate no better than the 70s and 80s racer/cruisers of the same LOA), or expensive all-out high-tech racing boats that break fairly easily. A sane boat buyer today asks, "why should I pay X for a new boat, when I can buy a used boat that does 95% of what X can do, for one-tenth the price?"

I don't buy the hype. Outside of Gran Prix sailboat racing, there has not been such a great improvement in production boats over the last 20 to 30 years to justify the greatly higher prices. It is a matter of value. The planing racers from the '70s, '80s and the early '90s racers can still win, at all but the highest levels. If you have any doubts, look at the 2012 Newport to Bermuda race results.

Is anyone surprised that Sabre Yachts just ceased production of its sailboat line? Exactly why would someone pay half a million dollars for one of its new cruising sailboats?

You wonder why sailing is a dying sport, a dying activity? It is not because we sailors are not inviting enough novices in. The marine industries stopped catering to the affluent-but-not-rich masses in the late 80s, and they have been headed down ever since. The other thing you can notice about this past weekend's local races - the Down the Bay race and the St. Michaels race - is not too many people are participating any more.


----------



## tommays (Sep 9, 2008)

First I sail and race on old boats and we do win are share of silver against for the most part against other older boats when we do beat the modern stuff it is because conditions are just really perfect for us and don't allow them any conditions were there speed advantage comes into play

And I have to add the Zzzoom may be a 1970 boat BUT it is on its third keel and second rudder and has a current state of the art bendy aluminum mast and a full modern 3DL sail inventory

Except for the current sail inventory most of the stuff was done by a deep pocket PO who got tired of the boat and passed it along to the current owner who put a pretty massive amount of effort into putting the boat back into race condition

And none of the other old boats we race against are doing it with old rags they also spend BIG MONEY on modern sails



If there is any kind of balance of upwind VS downwind were getting killed on the downwind legs



On are trip out to port Jefferson last summer which took place on a Strafford Shoal race day (36 mile round trip) we left 4 hours before the start and the Farr 400 in the picture made up the 16 miles that took us 4 hours in about 2 hours and there was really nobody in second place

This season in are area the spinnaker fleets have been divided up by sprit boat and symmetrical boat division's which is pretty much a new boat and old division as it was completely impossible for us at a PHRF 115 to keep up with a J80 downwind if it was above 12 knots ?

We are stuck at 7 knots and there turning at the mark and surfing away at 12 knots


----------



## jameswilson29 (Aug 15, 2009)

tommays said:


> This season in are area the spinnaker fleets have been divided up by sprit boat and symmetrical boat division's which is pretty much a new boat and old division as it was completely impossible for us at a PHRF 115 to keep up with a J80 downwind if it was above 12 knots ?
> 
> We are stuck at 7 knots and there turning at the mark and surfing away at 12 knots


Yes, and the J/80s are now turning 20 years old. When I crewed on an Olson 30 in the Bay in PHRF A2 in the early to mid-90s, we were sailing against some 35-40 footers that were difficult to beat unless conditions allowed us to plane downwind. CBYRA formed a new "sportboat" class for the ultralight and A-sym boats; I am not sure whether it ever caught on.

So what has happened in the last 20 years, other than the prices of new production boats have increased exponentially while performance has not really improved?


----------



## tommays (Sep 9, 2008)

Well

The new J70 is proving to be a good bit faster for one with its 111 something rating 

For the most part here older boats still get raced the J44 has a big group with deep pocket owners of course Rambler races here a lot also (the 90 is back in action) 

Most of the expense in new boats is all the stuff now somehow needed that we did without on older boats like 50,000 dollar wind/navigation systems


----------



## anthemj24 (Aug 24, 2011)

jameswilson29 said:


> Yes, and the J/80s are now turning 20 years old. When I crewed on an Olson 30 in the Bay in PHRF A2 in the early to mid-90s, we were sailing against some 35-40 footers that were difficult to beat unless conditions allowed us to plane downwind. CBYRA formed a new "sportboat" class for the ultralight and A-sym boats; I am not sure whether it ever caught on.
> 
> So what has happened in the last 20 years, other than the prices of new production boats have increased exponentially while performance has not really improved?


A new J24 today will cost you 60k when all is said and done. A J/22 new today will cost you 50k when all is said and done. A new J/70 will cost you 50k when all is said and done. As far as I can tell, new boats are more expensive because they are new, not because of design changes. Design changes occurred because what people wanted changed. You can race a j/70 with 3, a J/22 needs 4. A J/22 requires someone to go up on the foredeck for jibes, a J/70 does not. A j/22 requires a hoist to launch it, or at least a steep ramp, a trailer tongue extension, and a lot of time and patience. A J/70 is easily ramp launched and rigged. Of course, if you want to race with 4 or 5, and you want to have a v-berth because you want to sleep in it once in a while, and you want to keep it in the water, because you hate trailering your boat, then the J/22 makes much more sense.

I paid $2,500 for my J24. I have put another $5,000 into it between new sails, new cushions, new cabin sole, new electronics, etc. I also put a ton of hours into it, sanding off 30 years of accumulated bottom paint while in positions that would make a contortionist cringe, scraping out 30 year old soggy vermiculite, updating deck hardware and rigging, etc. etc. I think I got a great deal, even though my boat will never be competitive on a national or even regional basis. But it is great for what I need and want. If I had bought it to compete at the J/24 Worlds and gone through all that, it would have just been a waste of time and $7,500.

Horses for courses. Some folks buy new boats and have a reason why. Those reasons don't have to match up with yours. Be glad that some people buy new boats, it means some of those golden oldies are available for sale at very reasonable prices.


----------



## jameswilson29 (Aug 15, 2009)

I agree. I have always liked the J/Boat line of boats. It is one of the few builders who have stayed true to the idea of relatively simple, affordable, great sailboats


----------



## tommays (Sep 9, 2008)

The J24 is my favorite case as are first new sailboat was a Victoria 18 which was a nice boat on the shallow Great South Bay 

But when we moved to Peconic Bay we kept getting beat up and seeing these strange looking boats go by and trust me the J24 was a strange looking boat in 1981 

Anyway at the age of 26 or 27 I was able trade in the 18 and but a new J24 with a pretty limited income 

At 57 with a far bigger income I find the thought of dropping 50,000++ dollars on a tiny boat a NO GO and cant begin to justify close to 200,000 on a new 30 foot

With the way sailboat sales are going I would think I have plenty of company


----------



## PalmettoSailor (Mar 7, 2006)

jameswilson29 said:


> You wonder why sailing is a dying sport, a dying activity? It is not because we sailors are not inviting enough novices in. The marine industries stopped catering to the affluent-but-not-rich masses in the late 80s, and they have been headed down ever since. The other thing you can notice about this past weekend's local races - the Down the Bay race and the St. Michaels race - is not too many people are participating any more.


You're lumping a crap load of factors into one post, so much so that I don't know if I agree or disagree with you.

I'm pretty sure I disagree with the assertion that the marine industry stopped catering to the affluent but not rich masses. I'd argue that economics has greatly reduced those that fall into that category, and that the preference for instant gratification have decimated them even more when it comes to recreational boating. I think its far more likely the marine industry and sailboat sector especially have tried to find ways to adapt to that changing environment and have been somewhat successful doing so. You cannot argue that the size of a "starter" sailboat has increased drastically over the past 10-15 years. Apparently these boats provide more margin and a better chance at survival compared to selling more smaller boats. Lastly, I don't know that as a percentage of income that the cruiser racer of the 70's-80's posed any less financial burden that today's offerings.

Going back to your comments on rating schemes and results, you have confused me. If a new design boat completes a course of sail faster than a older boat design, but looses the "race" because of a handicap system, are you saying those are the results that matter and the old boat is the better boat?

Many people see lots of issues with the PHRF ratings, sometimes with diametrically opposed views. Many think the system is flawed if the newer boats don't dominate and others complain if older boats seem uncompetitive.

Regarding declining numbers participating in DTB, consider that it does compete with another, shorter, distance race will less daunting logistical issues.


----------



## anthemj24 (Aug 24, 2011)

tommays said:


> The J24 is my favorite case as are first new sailboat was a Victoria 18 which was a nice boat on the shallow Great South Bay
> 
> But when we moved to Peconic Bay we kept getting beat up and seeing these strange looking boats go by and trust me the J24 was a strange looking boat in 1981
> 
> ...


Yep. With our kids now grown and independent, we suddenly have a bit more money in our pockets. We could definitely afford upgrading to a J70 or J88, but I just can't justify it based on how we use the boat. The 24 does everything we want it to, with the added advantage of being able to buy one regatta sails for half off retail whenever we need new ones. The money that would have gone for the newest toy is instead going into retirement, so we can better enjoy the toys we already have.


----------



## jephotog (Feb 25, 2002)

Every dog has its day. The downwind scream for the H33 was its day. My boat (crew not owner) beat the TP52, as well as the rest of the fleet, after correction both days last weekend even though we could not see the TP52 after a few hours it was so far ahead of the fleet. My boat is well sailed and can do well but we are in the top half of the fleet usually but dont win every time out. This last Saturday and Sunday was a close reach with a short spinnaker finish. A race with no downwind component was to our advantage. Excellent crew work and a lack of downwind legs put us at an advantage, compared to our competition, who turns out "set their sails and sat on the rails".

The object of the PHRF rating is to find the boat underated and sail it to its potential and hopefull win. Of course the super rich guy is going to buy the newest boat out there and outfit his crew in matching uniforms because he can and it makes him look good sitting at the helm, he deserves it because he can afford it. The smart guy buys a boat he can sail to its rating and can win probably more often. This is the reason Dennis Conner has owned nearly 100 boats over the years.

I think an older saiboat can be a good deal up front to get into racing but eventually the cost of campaigning will be the same. The cost of slip fees, new sails and feeding the crew does not change with the age of the boat.


----------



## jameswilson29 (Aug 15, 2009)

PalmettoSailor said:


> ... If a new design boat completes a course of sail faster than a older boat design, but looses the "race" because of a handicap system, are you saying those are the results that matter and the old boat is the better boat?


That is not what happened with the Hobie. Most of the new design boats were beaten on elapsed time (real time) by a 30 year old boat. The Hobie 33 finished 4th overall in real time out of 31 boats, most larger, newer and much more expensive. (It corrected to 1st, just as the J/24 corrected to 2nd and still beat a lot of boats in elapsed time.)

Even if you dismiss the results as a reflection of the Hobie's strength on one point of sail, the fact is, it appears no one has built a better Hobie 33 type boat in 30 years of supposed advances in sailboat design and materials.



PalmettoSailor said:


> Many people see lots of issues with the PHRF ratings, sometimes with diametrically opposed views. Many think the system is flawed if the newer boats don't dominate and others complain if older boats seem uncompetitive.


My point was never about PHRF, although some posters misinterpreted it that way.

My essential point was the fact that an inexpensive 30 year old boat blew the doors off the fleet, despite the constant hype about all the new technological marvels appearing on the water, which have made boats much more expensive, but not correspondingly much more faster.

Perhaps, sailboats are essentially low tech vessels, and the tremendous expenditures to improve their performance with high technology is misplaced and has come at the expense of lower overall participation due to new boat prices.


----------



## chucklesR (Sep 17, 2007)

Meanwhile I dawdled down the bay that day at 7 knots on main only. My PHRF is a seriously misguided 126 (New England area, no one is silly enough to race a Irwin 38 CC MkII on on the Chesapeake). The only plane she'll see is the one passing overhead.
I'll bet my time on anchor at Galesville was just as much fun .

I 'race' a Hunter 216, stock(ish). PHRF 192. 
It's a game - we crush heavy classic plastic PHRF'ing 30 seconds below us in 10 kts or less because we are at hull speed and they are struggling for steerage. 
In 20 kts, we try to finish the course and stay on the boat. 
I gave up PHRF racing, too easy to trick the system. I've got trophies on my mantle for being committee boat (we score committee boat as a 3rd place, I've won silver for not raising my sails).


----------



## jephotog (Feb 25, 2002)

Maybe the newer boat owners had way too much money and pride invested to let the boat be sailed as hard as it needed to be to win. "I don't want to break it as i can barely afford the payments as it is"


----------



## PalmettoSailor (Mar 7, 2006)

jameswilson29 said:


> That is not what happened with the Hobie. Most of the new design boats were beaten on elapsed time by a 30 year old boat. The Hobie 33 finished 4th out of 31 boats, most larger, newer and much more expensive. (It corrected to 1st, just as the J/24 corrected to 2nd and still beat a lot of boats in elapsed time.)
> 
> My point was never about PHRF, although some posters misinterpreted it that way.
> 
> My essential point was the fact that an inexpensive 30 year old boat blew the doors off the fleet, despite the constant hype about all the new technological marvels appearing on the water, which have made boats much more expensive, but not correspondingly much more faster.


But as others have pointed out, in one set of conditions that ideally suited that boat. In 2009 and 2010's windward races, the same boat was mid pack at best. I can't see asserting its an all round better boat. Most races involve upwind and downwind in more equal measures.

I also don't know how the owner prepares his boat, but he could be spending a huge percentage of the boats value every year for a racing bottom and the latest technology in sails and rigging, while you see very few fully race prepared modern cruising boats.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

jameswilson29 said:


> There is a reason why there are races, and actual results.
> ....
> Results matter.
> 
> ...


There you go again: Today boats are not more expensive than 30 year old boats but less. What kind of price comparison is to compare a used 30 year old boat with a brand new boat?

New boats only don't show in US because US overall picture in what regards sail racing is pretty low. Nobody competing on major races with 30 year old boats in Europe and there are plenty of new boats, that normally win the races that sometimes have more than a 1000 boats racing.

Yes, race results does matter and it is because of that that on major races the ones that comes first on elapsed time in what regards cruiser-racers are recent boats...if they are racing there.

A good example of an American fast boat of that size is the J111, that would beat a Hobie 33 in any conditions, being also a very good upwind sailboat.

The fact that you have J111 racing in almost all European races and almost none racing in what you call major US races (like that one) is sad and shows the difference between sailboat racing interest (and sailing) between the two continents.

Have a look at two other modern boats that will be as faster or more downwind as a Hobie 33 and that will smoke it upwind or in any other point of sail, the Xp 33 and the J111:











None of them is a fragile boat or a carbon boat and by the way where do you got the idea that the carbon race boats are fragile boats or that break easily?

Regards

Paulo


----------



## anthemj24 (Aug 24, 2011)

chucklesR said:


> Meanwhile I dawdled down the bay that day at 7 knots on main only. My PHRF is a seriously misguided 126 (New England area, no one is silly enough to race a Irwin 38 CC MkII on on the Chesapeake). The only plane she'll see is the one passing overhead.
> I'll bet my time on anchor at Galesville was just as much fun .
> 
> I 'race' a Hunter 216, stock(ish). PHRF 192.
> ...


126 seems like a brutal rating for that boat. Did the owner run over the handicappers dog or something?

We race Portsmouth here. All ratings systems suck, you can't take it too seriously. It gives you a chance to have fun sailing against non-identical boats. Without it, all I could do is match race the same guy all year long, and that would get boring pretty quick.


----------



## anthemj24 (Aug 24, 2011)

PCP said:


> There you go again: Today boats are not more expensive than 30 year old boats but less. What kind of price comparison is to compare a used 30 year old boat with a brand new boat?
> 
> New boats only don't show in US because US overall picture in what regards sail racing is pretty low. Nobody competing on major races with 30 year old boats in Europe and there are plenty of new boats, that normally win the races that sometimes have more than a 1000 boats racing.
> 
> ...


Don't take the entries in one race and try to extrapolate that to all racing in the Chessy or US. There are a couple of J111s down there on the bay, and there was even a TP52 in this race. DTB is a long race that usually turns into a drift fest by morning, so a lot of boats don't do it. I am not even a Chessy racer and I know that.


----------



## chucklesR (Sep 17, 2007)

anthemj24 said:


> 126 seems like a brutal rating for that boat. Did the owner run over the handicappers dog or something?
> 
> We race Portsmouth here. All ratings systems suck, you can't take it too seriously. It gives you a chance to have fun sailing against non-identical boats. Without it, all I could do is match race the same guy all year long, and that would get boring pretty quick.


Not a problem, racing a 20k pound center cockpit around a couple buoys on a river is just not my style. I'd rather go out and watch the other folks collide and fight for a 9 dollar trophy.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

anthemj24 said:


> Don't take the entries in one race and try to extrapolate that to all racing in the Chessy or US. There are a couple of J111s down there on the bay, and there was even a TP52 in this race. DTB is a long race that usually turns into a drift fest by morning, so a lot of boats don't do it. I am not even a Chessy racer and I know that.


Not me, It was James that said that was a major race. Fact is that besides the Farr 400 and the Tp52 there was not any modern racers on that race and not a single modern cruiser-racer. We cannot compare the performance of a 30 year old cruiser racer with the ones of modern ones if they are not racing there.

Besides, giving the absence of a decent fleet the chances that you would find a boat much better sailed than any other ( the Hobie 33 in this case) are big and that makes any boat comparison in what regards performance irrelevant.

If you have a major race with lots of top racers and lots of top boats the chances are that there will be several boats very well sailed and not only one and that makes much more relevant boat comparisons because we know that the boats were sailed by similarly skilled crews.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## jameswilson29 (Aug 15, 2009)

PCP said:


> There you go again: Today boats are not more expensive than 30 year old boats but less. What kind of price comparison is to compare a used 30 year old boat with a brand new boat?


O.K., how about this one: Apparently, you could still buy a Hobie 33 in 2003 for $55,000 : Torresen Sailing and Boating News » Blog Archive » One Design Comeback Hobie 33

At about the same time, I believe the J/105 (one of the least expensive of the newer Asym sportboats) was in the $150-200,000 range.

That is exactly my point.

Where are the new, production raceboats like the old Santa Cruz 27, J/27, Olson 30, and Hobie 33?

These were superfast for their day, relatively spartan, low tech boats for the average (did-well-financially) Joe to race: regular hand-laid fiberglass hull, regular aluminum single spreader rig, simple layout, simple gear, and regular lead keel.

Now you have to buy a scrimp, vacumn-bagged epoxy hull with a carbon fiber mast, a carbon fiber foil, and a more complicated, expensive rig and gear, not to mention electronics. The entry costs are much greater now. And for what? An incremental speed gain in light air?

The relatively, inexpensive new speedsters don't exist anymore. That fact that those boats are still competitive says something about where modern race design has gone.


----------



## anthemj24 (Aug 24, 2011)

chucklesR said:


> Not a problem, racing a 20k pound center cockpit around a couple buoys on a river is just not my style. I'd rather go out and watch the other folks collide and fight for a 9 dollar trophy.


They spend that much on the trophies down there huh? If I were dictator for a day, the trophy would be a bottle of wine and the rules of the club would dictate that it must be immediately shared with the fleet upon being awarded. All protests would be held during said sharing of the wine.


----------



## anthemj24 (Aug 24, 2011)

jameswilson29 said:


> O.K., how about this one: Apparently, you could still buy a Hobie 33 in 2003 for $55,000 : Torresen Sailing and Boating News » Blog Archive » One Design Comeback Hobie 33
> 
> At about the same time, I believe the J/105 (one of the least expensive of the newer Asym sportboats) was in the $150-200,000 range.
> 
> ...


The Flying Tiger 10 is pretty much now what the Hobie 33 was then. It is very fast and very affordable, and they just don't sell a ton of them. The cost of campaigning a boat in the 35ft range is very high regardless of the initial price. Plus the logistics are crazy. I had a half baked idea to do more racing and get a sport boat I could trailer around, once I started adding up the costs in time, money, and grey hair, I bagged the whole idea. The price of the boat was the last thing on my mind, instead it was the hotels, gas for the tow vehicle, new sails each year, restaurant bills, and trying to get 5 people to commit to a full schedule given the realities of today's work schedules. The guys who can take that time off, or pay people to put a campaign together for them, pay for all the maintenance, crew, and other expenses, are not going to skimp on the initial price.


----------



## zz4gta (Aug 15, 2007)

James, you're missing the point. The ONLY reason the older boats are competitive is because of their handicap rating. That's it. Take away the rating, and they are obsolete. Still a fun boat to sail, but boats that are 20-30 years old will not hang with a new race boat. Period.


----------



## CBinRI (May 17, 2004)

zz4gta said:


> James, you're missing the point. The ONLY reason the older boats are competitive is because of their handicap rating. That's it. Take away the rating, and they are obsolete. Still a fun boat to sail, but boats that are 20-30 years old will not hang with a new race boat. Period.


Of course, and I don't believe he is missing the point. His point is not that the older boats can beat the high tech new boats head to head. He is simpy saying that they can be very competitive in handicap racing and can give a high bang for your buck fun ratio, which is really the point of handicap racing.


----------



## SchockT (May 21, 2012)

Races like that one do not represent the pinnacle of racing in North America, rather it represents a typical "run what you brung" phrf club race. The beauty of races like that is that anyone CAN win, even the oldies. Any given boat can benefit from being on the right side of a big shift, fleet compression on a dying breeze, or other teams mistakes. It is not an indication of one boat's overall superiority, nor is it an indictment of modern technology. (Don't forget, even the old boats benefit from technological advancements in sail, rope, and hardware technologies.) I have been in races like that one where even a lowly San Juan 24 has won overall. I am sure that San Juan owner was happy to get the pickle dish, and his moment of fame, but was under no illusion that his boat was superior to the rest of the boats in the fleet.

The Hobie 33, like the Olson 30 I race on, is capable of getting onto a sustained plane in the right conditions, and when that happens, all bets are off, because any displacement boats, no matter how new and expensive are not going to win a drag race. In a well set up buoy race that advantage may be partially offset by.the upwind legs where the bigger faster rated boats may be able to stretch out enough to hold their lead off the wind. 

The J24 owes it's success to good marketing and strong one design fleets. One design crews tend to be more polished and know how to get the most out of their boats. At the same time they have tended to have pretty soft ratings under phrF, since the vast majority race one design so their rating has not evolved as other boats have. They are NOT particularly good boats overall, they are good one design boats. If you compare them to their more modern replacements like the Melges 24 they are complete dogs!


----------



## anthemj24 (Aug 24, 2011)

SchockT said:


> Races like that one do not represent the pinnacle of racing in North America, rather it represents a typical "run what you brung" phrf club race. The beauty of races like that is that anyone CAN win, even the oldies. Any given boat can benefit from being on the right side of a big shift, fleet compression on a dying breeze, or other teams mistakes. It is not an indication of one boat's overall superiority, nor is it an indictment of modern technology. (Don't forget, even the old boats benefit from technological advancements in sail, rope, and hardware technologies.) I have been in races like that one where even a lowly San Juan 24 has won overall. I am sure that San Juan owner was happy to get the pickle dish, and his moment of fame, but was under no illusion that his boat was superior to the rest of the boats in the fleet.
> 
> The Hobie 33, like the Olson 30 I race on, is capable of getting onto a sustained plane in the right conditions, and when that happens, all bets are off, because any displacement boats, no matter how new and expensive are not going to win a drag race. In a well set up buoy race that advantage may be partially offset by.the upwind legs where the bigger faster rated boats may be able to stretch out enough to hold their lead off the wind.
> 
> The J24 owes it's success to good marketing and strong one design fleets. One design crews tend to be more polished and know how to get the most out of their boats. At the same time they have tended to have pretty soft ratings under phrF, since the vast majority race one design so their rating has not evolved as other boats have. They are NOT particularly good boats overall, they are good one design boats. If you compare them to their more modern replacements like the Melges 24 they are complete dogs!


I agree with some of what you say here, but the idea that the J24 has a soft PHRF rating is just not true. The same guys racing their a**es off in regional one design events are also sailing weds nights and other local PHRF events. J24s that do consistently well in PHRF are being sailed hard and sailed well. A rating of 168 is no gift, and with >5000 hulls sailing for over 30 years, it is one of the most well established ratings you could find.

I also think it is a mistake to compare the Melges 24 to the J24, they are completely different boats. If I traded the J for a Melges, my wife would never get on the boat again. You could not pay me to sit on the rail of a Melges 24, hanging over the lifelines by my midsection. They are fast and cool boats, but a completely different design criteria and set of requirements. I can not imagine anyone attempting to do the DTB race in a Melges 24, you might as well be doing it in a Hobie or Thistle. Aside from being boats that are popular to race and the same length, there is very little in common between them.

I don't know that there exists a boat which is "good overall", just ones that meet a set of design criteria and ones that fail to meet a set of design criteria.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

jameswilson29 said:


> ..
> 
> Where are the new, production raceboats like the old Santa Cruz 27, J/27, Olson 30, and Hobie 33?
> 
> ...


I continue without understanding. An Olson, a Santa Cruz or a Hobbie were not in their time more expensive than a Jboat and a Jboat is not comparatively more expensive now than what it was 30 years ago.

There are plenty of new boat like that in Europe, they are not exported to the US because the market for that kind of boats in the US is very small.

Just some boats that go on that category: Surprise, A31, Salona 33, Elan 310, A27, seascape 27, Pogo 30, First 35, Malango 888, Django 7.6, Sunfast 32, JPK 998, Dehler 29....well I could continue to post boats... I find the situation amusing : Americans don't want or buy that kind of boats and then you complain that they don't exist on the market. For having a market it is necessary to have enough sailors wanting a given type of boat and does not count the ones that only buy used old boats.

Well James, that is mot happening on the US. The ones that want new boats want Hunters, Jeanneaus and Benetaus or Bavarias, even in what regards 30/33ft boats. They don't want fast boats with a less big or good interior and James, size for size, quality for quality fast boats were always more expensive than slower boats: You can see that comparing the Benetau with the First or the Cruising line of Elan with the performance line. The reasons are obvious.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

anthemj24 said:


> ... The cost of campaigning a boat in the 35ft range is very high regardless of the initial price. Plus the logistics are crazy. I had a half baked idea to do more racing and get a sport boat I could trailer around, once I started adding up the costs in time, money, and grey hair, I bagged the whole idea. The price of the boat was the last thing on my mind, instead it was the hotels, gas for the tow vehicle, new sails each year, restaurant bills, and trying to get 5 people to commit to a full schedule given the realities of today's work schedules. The guys who can take that time off, or pay people to put a campaign together for them, pay for all the maintenance, crew, and other expenses, are not going to skimp on the initial price.


The reason there is a lot more new boats used for race in Europe and a lot more sail racing has to do with that. Regular people like much more sailing here than in the US so it is much more easier to get a sponsor to pay at least part of the expenses. Because sailing is looked as "nice and clean" its value for promoting a product is much higher than in the states where its value seems to be associated with "old and rich guys".

Regards

Paulo


----------



## anthemj24 (Aug 24, 2011)

PCP said:


> The reason there is a lot more new boats used for race in Europe and a lot more sail racing has to do with that. Regular people like much more sailing here than in the US so it is much more easier to get a sponsor to pay at least part of the expenses. Because sailing is looked as "nice and clean" its value for promoting a product is much higher than in the states where its value seems to be associated with "old and rich guys".
> 
> Regards
> 
> Paulo


That is part of it. I think part of it may also be that you folks have have not lost as much of your free time to the altars of globalization. Sailing takes space, money, time, and desire. Americans have money, the rest .... Of course this is just a generalization, there are still some folks here with all 4, and some with none. Still, my belief is that loss of time and space is a much greater contributor to sailing's decline here than money, marketing, or promotion.


----------



## GeorgeB (Dec 30, 2004)

Ah, classic plastic… As you may know, I race on a Cal 40 that was built back in the sixties. We were San Francisco YRA (HDA) season champions last year, been third in the Rolex Big Boat Series, 3rd in the Pac Cup and have amassed numerous other victories. Old girls can still rock! It still takes a lot of money to race competitively. You can find used Cal 40s for a low as $50k, but expect to put in another $100k to make that boat race-ready. It is still a lot cheaper than a J120 or Elan however.

Competitive sailing is a much different sport here than in Europe. Here it is much more Corinthian than a spectator sport. With sponsors out of the equation, and the owner footing all the bills, racing over here (at least in California) is much more democratic and you see a lot more classic plastic than the latest design. Interestingly, in May’s Sailing World there is a nice article about affordable (classic plastic) racers. In addition to the Cal 40, there are the Express 27 & 37s, Santa Cruz 27s, Moore 24s amongst others. Oh, by the way, the blue boat on the two page photo spread is us and yours truly is the guy sitting in the back of the boat.

What is the name of the hobbie and J24? I’ve sailed on a friend’s Hobbie 33 a few times and it is a lot of fun though a little Spartan with a porta potti, igloo ice chest, and no standing room down below. It is a trailer sailor after all. A “modern” equivalent would be a Melges 32. Once you have thrown the gauntlet down, you need to track them throughout the season and let us know their standings at the end of the year. One race does not make a trend. If it did, my lowly C34 out rates a Santa Cruz 50 because on one DH race I beat one boat-for-boat.


----------



## Ajax_MD (Nov 24, 2009)

GeorgeB said:


> <Snip> Interestingly, in May's Sailing World there is a nice article about affordable (classic plastic) racers. In addition to the Cal 40, there are the Express 27 & 37s, Santa Cruz 27s, Moore 24s amongst others. Oh, by the way, the blue boat on the two page photo spread is us and yours truly is the guy sitting in the back of the boat.
> 
> <Snip>


Got a link to that article or is it only available in print?


----------



## Chimbatete (May 22, 2011)

I would have to say that I agree with JamesWilson point. I do agree that boats like the Olson 30 has the best $$/Fun,speed ratio, that's almost irrefutable. We have one for sale here in Lake Ontario for $25k. The fact that it can sometimes win in real time against boats 200k more makes it very attractive. 

I also I agree with his point on technology. Its real simple. They are making sport boats now that are only a couple of knots faster than some of these 30 year olds ULDBs. It takes no genius to know that compared to cars, planes, that sailboats are not advancing technologically exponentially to $$.

I do agree with Paulos points that you cannot compare the prices since a new Olson would probably cost $150k now. 

I'm 29 and there is now way I can just drop 300k on a J111. And we can all agree that its a bit out of reach for many middle/upper middle class people and now think that you're only going 2+ knots more than a 30 year old boat. 

At the same time if I can afford it Id get a wally and have a Pogo 30 as my liferaft.


----------



## asdf38 (Jul 7, 2010)

I don't have a problem with older boats, I own one, but winning a race with corrected time isn't evidence on their behalf...the whole point of handicapping is to guarantee that slow boats, including older ones, can still win. Older boats must sometimes win, otherwise re handicapping is faulty.


----------

