# Lets have a chat about multis.



## tdw (Oct 2, 2006)

I'm guessing that any one of us who spends any time at all out and about is very much aware of the ever increasing number of multi hulls. 

Now for the puropse of this thread lets ignore the very high tech racers and probably the tris and have a good look at true cruising catamarans. What is to like ? What is to dislike ? 

The way I see it cats have two , pretty obvious, advantages over mono and that is comfort and speed. Now OK, your yahoo whizbang monos such as the amazing Pogos will give any cruising multi a serious run for their money but it does seem to me that for intents and purposes a cat will flog a mono over the ground. Or will it ? Hard on the wind there is probably not a lot in it but reaching it is surely a different story. 

As an example of this, on our recent trip we left Port Stephens in company with a 40 odd foot cat. Close hauled we took opposing tacks for the first hour or so and when we crossed we'd pretty much held our own but then the cat eased off onto a reach while we maintained close hauled. An hour later they had beaten us into the anchorage by half an hour. 

Now fairly obviously, cats have their shortcomings. Mooring and docking costs are pretty obvious examples. We stayed at two marinas while away, each an overnighter. One, full service and very fancy was $185.00 for the 24hrs but that included a courtesy car and the fanciest bathrooms I have ever seen in a marina, the other a more typical example in a less touristic port was $50.00. Double that for a multi. 

Now .... for a cruising cat I'm thinking 40' or thereabouts would be the go. I've heard that under 40' there are comfort issues. True or not ? Much bigger than 40' and the thing is going to be ridiculously large for two people, hell even a forty foot cat has more than enough room for us. 

So lets look at a few options, discuss (I know its been done before but what the hell, lets go round again) the pros and cons. Examples Leopard v Lagoon ? Chalk and cheese perhaps but just what does the Lagoon give to the Leopard or vice versa ? 

anywho ... topic is here for discussion. I'll be very interested to get any feedback. 

...... and no the Womboat is not on the market, I'm just interested in the subject of cats.


----------



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

I think the performance issue is a debatable one, but it depends greatly on the boats themselves and the point of sail. On a 50nm passage Guadeloupe to Antigua some years back, close reaching a 40' cat didn't put enough time on our 37 ft mono to get into harbour prior to our catching up as the doused sail outside. As you noted hard on the wind you gave up very little yourselves.

I think many cruising cats suffer from overloading and that's what takes the edge off their performance.

Other issues that seem to come up include the clearance of the midsection- apparently certain models are known to pound in ocean waves as the mid "belly" doesn't have enough clearance (but that's anecdotal, have not seen that) I'm sure another factor in the apparent lack of performance could well be the skill levels of the (primarily) charter crews -I'm sure that even an experienced mono sailor may struggle to get a cat up to speed..

The ability to provide multiple relatively private cabins makes it a no brainier for charter operators, I suppose.. And in a quiet area like the BVIs they probably make more sense than for island hopping further south and east.

Our Caribbean cruising friends were avid longtime multi sailors... But chose a mono for themselves.. That spoke volumes to me.


----------



## bljones (Oct 13, 2008)

Cats have had me intrigued to the point of pulling the trigger on building two. With our limited slip length, the only way to have a larger more amenity-filled boat on the Dock is to go wider.
As I got knee-deep in designing what we wanted, i learned a great deal about hull design and dynamics- length: beam ratio, optimum bridgedeck height above waterline, etc.
For coastal cruising, or living aboard/daysailing/occasional cruising, a cat is a great fit. but the lighter payload does have some impact on long-range voyaging. A Flicka can conceivably carry the tankage to cross oceans comfortably- a 25 foot cat has a much tighter margin for payload.
The motion is different. With less draft, less ballast and less keel, it is gonna be quicker, more noticeable on shorter boats than bigger cats.

Before getting too deep into building a 25' trainwreck, i decided to warm up by tackling a Puddlecat:






It will be interesting to see how it compares, performance-wise, to the plywood dinghy i built that is about the same LOA.

And maybe some of the old wives tales of cats pitchpoling and turning turtle with any swell may be finally put to rest.


----------



## Lou452 (Mar 2, 2012)

Used boats for me as price will rule for me. The cats have a lot going for them and time will make them better. They are just to new for me. Good day, Lou


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

There are cats and cats. Last summer when we were beating against the wind my wife asked me: Where are they going? She was referring to a brand new Mooring 40ft cat. I had some difficulty into convincing her that they were doing the same as us, meaning tacking against the wind. The reason of her disbelieve was the very different angle: Maybe 27º to 40º?

We pass all afternoon tacking against the wind and when we were approaching the destination, I mean only two tacks to go, they passed by us, motoring directly against the wind...and I guess they were doing that for a while.

There are faster cats and slow cats but I don't know why you think that the trimarans should not be considered. If I had the money I would prefer a trimaran. Look at this one:






Regarding Cats I agree with what you say, just adding that distinction between slow and fast Cats. I would also add this:

For the same size multihulls are more expensive than monohulls and less seaworthy. They have also more interior space.

Regarding seaworthiness I am not one of those that consider cats unsafe, what I mean is that a 40ft monohull, generally speaking, is an offshore boat while a 40ft cat is also but by a lesser margin. The Cats made for offshore work are considerable bigger than 40ft and that makes them even more expensive as an option as an offshore boat.

Trimarans have, regarding size, a better seaworthiness. I would fell more comfortable offshore on that 35ft Dragonfly than in any 40ft cat.

But one of these babies:











Is pretty much a perfect offshore cruiser. To be comparable in space and performance we would need a 80ft monohull and the prices should not be very different.

....


----------



## Philzy3985 (Oct 20, 2012)

Cat vs. Mono - The Great Debate | Sail Feed

I assumed most people have seen that by now. But it's an experienced well-written opinion.

Aside from buy-in price and docking price, and suspect build quality on random models, catamarans seem like the way to go for cruising.

Now, if you live in a small sailing area and just go out for day sails, maybe you want to go slower (on a mono) so you don't run out of space. That's the problem I occurred with my old beach cat.


----------



## Geoff54 (Oct 30, 2011)

Sorry but cats have got no soul! 

I wanted to like them, I really did but after a week on a Moorings cat I couldn't wait to get back to the tactile enjoyment of healing with the wind. I can certainly appreciate the advantages, especially when you are anchored but to actually sail - a bit numb - a bit like going to bed with your boots on... it just doesn't feel right.


----------



## Geoff54 (Oct 30, 2011)

Here's the only real advantage


----------



## tdw (Oct 2, 2006)

Fast .... there are conflicting stories re cat performance. Undoubtedly the weight issue has something to do with it of course but if that is the case then we need to disqualify any light weight monohull screamers for the same reason. One of the areas that piqued my interest was the realisation that even in LA/Cruising mode we are much less heavily loaded than e.g a family boat or a charter boat of say 6 - 8 people. All in all then, it would appear that at worst a cat is marginally faster than a mono but with scads more space for the crew and a seemingly more comfortable ride. Most certainly more comfortable at anchor.

I guess that heaviest weight carried by a cruiser would be liquid, fuel and water. Fuel is not going to change. Maybe being easier to drive in light air would enable a cat to keep sailing longer but probably not a lot in it compared to a mono. Watermakers otoh reduce the need for overly large water tanks. I'd also think that compared to say the Womboat a similarly sized cat would have less sail area, ergo less weight to lug around. Ground tackle not likely to change. So I'm thinking that for a two person boat weight may not be the issue it might be. 

Lastly , when you say you mates chose mono over multi, how much of that was budget ? As I mentioned in a pm to you earlier on to go from the Womboat to a cat would require the Womboats asking price at least doubled. 


Jonesy .... the way I am looking at this is that our cruising is almost certainly going to be in no more than passages of less than a couple of weeks, maybe at worst a month. Its not as if we, or for that matter most cruisers spend all that much time away from civilisation of some kind or another. In our month away we did one major and two minor shops, so we were able to sit out at anchor for most of the time, spend probably only four or five days actually sailing and a few days berthed in a marina. Had we not gone into one port where one can only berth, no anchorage, to visit some old friends we'd have only spent a single full day in a marina. Outside of civilisation provided you can make your own bread and catch yourself some fish/squid/shellfish you really do not need to load up with tons of provisions. Ergo, I'm thinking as per what I was saying to Fast, that the overloading thing, if you think it through, may well be overstated, particularly if you are just that little bit careful when it comes to over buying before you set out. I know this is hard for many Americans to grasp but you can actually buy toilet paper outside of NYC or LA. 

It seems to me that far to many of us insist on a boat that will go round Cape Horn in a blizzard yet rarely, if ever venture out of home waters. Even then its likely we'll be following the sun. Few cruisers venture into iceberg territory. 

The roll over and die argument agin cats has always felt a wee bit iffy to me. Of course its possible and of course it happens but plenty of mono hulls go to the bottom as well while the is at least a good change that an upside down cat will stay afloat. 

( I have seen a couple of reports of cat hitting something and then sinking but such a fate could just as easily strike a mono .... unless of course she's a Malo which as we all know are indestructible. ) 

Andrew B


----------



## tdw (Oct 2, 2006)

Errk ... took so long to type that last post the world has passed me by. Paulo and others ... I'll reply a little later on but I'm off line for awhile now.

Quick ps - Paulo ... only reason I dissed Tris is that they have no accomodation advantage over a mono.


----------



## tdw (Oct 2, 2006)

Geoff .... your post nails one of our chief concerns with cats, its hard for a lifetime mono sailor to acquire any real affection for them. 

Paulo ... were we to ever consider going multi the accomodation would be one of the major selling points. I know you spend more time on your boat than we do but even so we usually get in a couple of short cruises , total around six weeks, plus we spend around three out of every four weekends on board even through winter and in summer tending towards three day weekends as well. Sydney is a moderate climate, we have a nice long hottish summer that in reality covers the end of spring and the beginning of autumn so easily five months of good weather with a relatively mild winter. Nonetheless we still spend the vast majority of our time at anchor. A forty foot cat murders our 42' mono as far as living area is concerned. 

Regarding performance I'd have thought that once you get into the 40' range a comparable loa cat would outperform a mono in pretty much all conditions though e.g a Lagoon may not fall into that category. Certainly the cat we paced ourselves against last month was our equal hard on the wind and simply walked away when reaching. 

I know it may as if I am trying to sell something but really for the first time I took a real interest in the cats around us this year and yes they did make a positive impression on me. Not they will are likely to change our ride. Looking at things like e.g Leopards indicates that such a move would easily double what we paid for the Malo. Bit rich for me I think.

Nonetheless the discussion interests me.


----------



## chucklesR (Sep 17, 2007)

Now that I've let the thread percolate a little and the mono folks say their piece I'll chime in.
So far, I'm the only poster to have actually owned a cat, just saying. 

Cat's have nine lives, and not all cats are the same. Some are built as cruisers, some racers, some do the same oxymoronic thing mono's do and try to be a racer/cruiser or cruiser/racer. 
All boats are compromises.
I paid a list price of 154k for my Gemini, new off factory floor in 2007. At the time a Bene/Catalina/Hunter in the 38 foot range was 180 ish. 
Gem's are built to a price point, they have gotten better since Hunter took over, but are now in the 200-225k price range. 

As to pointing ability - sure the stub keel types (Lagoons, Leopards etc.) don't point well. They aren't made to folks, no more than shoal keel mono's are. 
Boards down, my Gemini pointed to 35 degrees apparent wind, fall off 5 degrees and speed went up 1/3. 
I broke 14kts in 20kts of wind on a close reach - with a queen sized bed, air conditioner, three cabins and a dinghy hanging on the davits. That wasn't surfing, that was for a mile of thrill ride until common sense prevailed and I shortened sail.
Let's just close the performance issue until someone can say a comparatively sized and outfitted mono can do that, even once. 

Comparing a Lagoon's pointing ability to a Malo is just wrong. Compare it (as a cruising boat) to a Island Packet. 
I've sailed side by side with a IP 34, no boards for me - and it was a point to point match. I put the boards down, I outpointed it and sailed away. 
I've also sailed side by side with CraigToo on his Sabre 34 (centerboard). I can't point with him, but I can catch him on a reach (not with his new assym). 
When he is in cruising mode (full of people, stuff and towing a dinghy) he's right down there in the low knots with me. 

Apples to apples 

Apples and oranges folks. 

Okay, now - as some of you know I no longer have that Gemini, I've gone back to the Dark side on a Irwin 38 CC. 
Don't try to read between the lines. As the cruising time in my life approaches it makes sense to have a paid off boat rather than making payments for another decade. 

The one thing none of you has mentioned so far - heeling. Cat's do heel ya know, especially the smaller ones. 

Capsize, let me bring it up - sure, catamarans can and do, and when they do they don't come back up. 
But they float and provide a survival platform.
Mono's roll, but come back up, sometimes they do, sometimes they just sink - with rig broken and flailing around. It's not like you are going to do anything but fire off a EPRIB and wait for rescue (same as the folks on the catamaran). 

Compromises folks, it's all about compromises.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

tdw said:


> ...
> 
> Regarding performance I'd have thought that once you get into the 40' range a comparable loa cat would outperform a mono in pretty much all conditions though e.g a Lagoon may not fall into that category. Certainly the cat we paced ourselves against last month was our equal hard on the wind and simply walked away when reaching.
> 
> ...


As I said, there are cats that are built for the space and cats that are build for performance and one of those built for space will have not a better performance than a performance mono-hull cruiser.

On the articles section of sailnet, that is unavailable (don't know why) there is a very interesting compassion between cats and monohulls made by a delivery skipper, one of the best I have read.

For what you describe to be your sailing season it seems to me that a cat makes a lot of sense and I am referring of those built for space and living aboard. Even those can sail pretty well, specially if compared with a mainstream cruiser. In Sardinia, some years back I meet an Italian that had sailed a 42ft Lagoon to Brazil, Caribbean and back and he was very satisfied with the boat.

My sailing season is a bit different. I like to have the boat sailing so In average I sail 6/8 hours a day, sometimes more and I like to push the boat (for pleasure) so a small cat (40ft) would be a bad idea for me, specially in the med where strong gusts from mountains are quite frequent not to mention that they provide indifferent sailing. A small cat requires a prudent sailor and one that sails always with a big safety margin.

These guys says about the same as I am saying regarding space and performance and they are heavy weights, I mean to Na Nigel Irens, top sailor Brian Thompson and top tester from YW sail magazine:






The fact they have not much thing to say about sailing is give you a hint that these boats are not designed to give pleasure as sailing boats. They work alright on autopilot and sail you to where you want to go but they are really about space and quality life at anchor. It seems they fit perfectly your bill

In fact what you do it is what most cruisers do and that's why they are so popular. It happens that most don't have the honesty to say that is that what they like most on a sailboat, it seems that you are one of the few that have no problem in saying that you stay 90% of time on anchor. I am quite sure you are not the only one, in fact I am pretty sure you are among the majority, unless we consider the ones that like most to be at marinas.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## MokaKat (Feb 22, 2012)

chucklesR,
As a prior owner of a Gemini, would you buy another one? How was the quality? We plan on buying our first large cruiser, after having smaller monohulls, and spend a couple of years in the caribbean. We have been looking at Fountaine Pajot and Lagoon in the 35 to 38 foot range. I spent a week on a Fountaine 42 last October, and was impressed on the stability and performance. It did struggle on being close hauled (45 degrees). My budget is between $150,000 and $200,000, depending on whether it is ready to cruise. Originally thought that I would consider the Gemini, but thought that they seems to be a little light weight for what I was wanting to do. Since we are 6 months away from having to make any decision, I am open to opinions.


----------



## jorgenl (Aug 14, 2006)

We cruised our 40' mono (Catalina 400) for a year and then lived on it for a year. We have since sold the boat and moved onto a horse farm ;-)

If I could do it again, and the cruising was similar (island hopping Bahamas or the carribean) and did not involve crossing any oceans or rounding any horns, I would definetely choose a Catamaran (assuming money is no object).

The catamaran is a much more comfortable cruising plaform once you are at anchor, even compared to a mono like our C400 (with it's large cockpit and interior volume).

One huge advantage of a catamaran is the closeness of the salon to the cockpit, it allows the galley slave to be part of social activities in the cockpit while preparing food and drinks. When the weather is inclement it is nice to be able to sit in the salon and actually see what's is going on outside.

Some of the larger cats also allow you to sail/motor from the nav station with joystick controls. Nice in bad/rainy weather.

Ease of getting in and out of dinghy is a big plus. Nice sturdy davits another. Ability to add enormous amount of solar panels to cockpit hard bimini.

Private owners states room is nice. lagoon 400 and 420 has very nice starboard hull statesrooms.

Drawbacks: galley storage and counter space can be on the small side (see Lagoon 380)
Also - the interior seems to be less woody and more plastic than most monos.

As far as performance goes, there seems to be a huge difference between a cruising cat like a Lagoon 380 and a performance cruising cat like the Aussie built Fusion 40. we sailed from the Abacos to Ft Pierce FL ( a 24 hr run) on a broad reach with wind strength varying from 10 to 20+ over 24 hrs. the Lagoon 380 started from same place as us and we were probably 500 ft behind the at FT Pierce inlet. The Fusion 40 started 1-2 hrs behind us, overtook us as we entered the gulf stream and then we never saw him again. Admittedly the Fusion guy was a very accomplished sailor and flew a cruising chute (during the night...brave...)

Andrew, take a look at the Aussie built fusion, they come in kit form and you can a professional yard finish them to your spec.

Fusion Sail Catamarans


----------



## jorgenl (Aug 14, 2006)

The Fusion 40 we met in Bahamas was/is called "Boomerang" - you can see it here:

Fusion Sail Catamarans


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

jorgenl said:


> The Fusion 40 we met in Bahamas was/is called "Boomerang" - you can see it here:
> 
> Fusion Sail Catamarans


Nice boat, with a smallish interior if compared with Lagoons, as it would be expected.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## jorgenl (Aug 14, 2006)

PCP said:


> Nice boat, with a smallish interior if compared with Lagoons, as it would be expected.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Paulo


The salon and cockpit are (from memory) probably equal to a lagoon of same size. Galley much better layed out on this particular Fusion than a lagoon.

The hulls are quite a bit narrower (performance) and have dagger boards (for pointing). I think it looks better, sleeker than a lagoon.


----------



## MokaKat (Feb 22, 2012)

There is one used and one new 2012 Fusion 40s on Yachtworld, but at $475,00 and $575,00, they are way out of my price range! Nice boats though!


----------



## shanedennis (Feb 10, 2012)

Philzy3985 said:


> Cat vs. Mono - The Great Debate | Sail Feed


The Bumfuzzle article cited and the above posts sum it up. If money is no object then a big cruising multi wins the day. This would be music to my Dad's ears. Back in the early 80's he was an early adapter with a home built wooden tri.

But multis are just too darn expensive for us. The only way we are going cruising in our 30s and 40s is on a well built, good looking, classic mono.

I love our mono but growing up in the South Pacific multis seemed more classic to me than monos. All the old trading sailing craft were multis. All the old fishing sailing craft were lakatois (outriggers). Monos are just more classic to Europeans. Some of the greatest sailors of all times - the Melanesians and Polynesians - used multis.

Sent from my GT-P3113 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## chucklesR (Sep 17, 2007)

MokaKat said:


> chucklesR,
> As a prior owner of a Gemini, would you buy another one? How was the quality? We plan on buying our first large cruiser, after having smaller monohulls, and spend a couple of years in the caribbean. We have been looking at Fountaine Pajot and Lagoon in the 35 to 38 foot range. I spent a week on a Fountaine 42 last October, and was impressed on the stability and performance. It did struggle on being close hauled (45 degrees). My budget is between $150,000 and $200,000, depending on whether it is ready to cruise. Originally thought that I would consider the Gemini, but thought that they seems to be a little light weight for what I was wanting to do. Since we are 6 months away from having to make any decision, I am open to opinions.


In short, no, I would not. I'd save a little for a heavier CRUISING catamaran. As I said above when they try to stick a racer/cruiser moniker on a boat you wind up with a compromised boat.

Gemini's are faster because they have a 8.76 :1 ratio length to beam on the hulls. Unfortunately the max beam is 4 feet. Pounds per inch immersion is only 450 pounds per hull. 
That is the major indicator of how much weight affects performance.

Take the same money (225k for a loaded, new Gemini) and apply it to a used FP, Maxium 38 etc and you'll be happier.


----------



## MokaKat (Feb 22, 2012)

Thanks chucklesR! That was what I was thinking too, but wanted to hear it from someone that actually owned one!


----------



## TropicCat (Oct 14, 2008)

PCP said:


> ...The fact they have not much thing to say about sailing is give you a hint that these boats are not designed to give pleasure as sailing boats. They work alright on autopilot and sail you to where you want to go but they are really about space and quality life at anchor. It seems they fit perfectly your bill...


Where are all the sailnet catamaran people?

If you enjoy the 'feel of a boat' while sailing, a catamaran is not for you. Think of them as your home away from home which doesn't roll at anchor or DDW. I do agree with chuckles that cats do heel, but in my case it takes 22 knots of wind under full sail to get to a measurable heel.

As for speed, this is debatable. As several have noted, some catamarans can be very sensitive to weight. Look at the fineness of the hulls and whether or not the boat has a hard chine. Fatter hulls and hulls with a hard chine handle weight better than slender hulled boats with some sacrifice in performance.

I don't sail for speed. I love my boat because of the comfort it delivers. At the end of the day there isn't a mono guy in my marina that wouldn't trade boats with me in a heartbeat.


----------



## chucklesR (Sep 17, 2007)

TropicCat said:


> Where are all the sailnet catamaran people?
> 
> If you enjoy the 'feel of a boat' while sailing, a catamaran is not for you. Think of them as your home away from home which doesn't roll at anchor or DDW. I do agree with chuckles that cats do heel, but in my case it takes 22 knots of wind under full sail to get to a measurable heel.


The SN catamaran folks are out sailing and such, far from the internet.

Your Catalac is solid cruising cat, same basic length as mine, heavier and IIRC a 18 foot beam compared to a Gem's 14. 
No doubt you heel less. 
I installed an inclino-meter as a joke, it only went to 10 degrees.


----------



## knuterikt (Aug 7, 2006)

Is this a cruising cat?
To some it is to others not...

NorCat 37 N o r C a t - Info


----------



## tdw (Oct 2, 2006)

I think in the main we have settled that accomodation wise Cats are their own pyjamas. If I have one major criticism of Cat interiors it is that the designers seem obsessed with curved settees .... in my eye an utter abomination . It must be admitted however that the more modern cruising monos are leaps and bounds ahead of their older cousins in providing comfort for their crews ... at least when anchored. 

Now please, humour me somewhat as I know damn well that my knowledge of what may make a good cruising cat is somewhat limited. 

LOA ... I'd thought that circa 40' had bought us into the range of big enough to avoid the downsides of a small cat. If it is so that nothing under 50' will suffice then I lose interest very rapidly indeed. I wouldn't go to a 50' mono so a 50' cat is most assuredly out of the question. Paulo's suggestion therefore that 40' is simply not big enough does concern me.

Performance ..... it would appear that something along the lines of a Lagoon 420 is pretty much on par with a medium performance mono, go to a dagger board design and things are looking better. That said and looking only at working sails (no assy for the moment) our Malo is never going to see plus ten knots, in "crikey maybe we need to tuck in a reef soon" winds we've seen 8.5knts and maybe with an assy we could see that on a reach in lighter winds. However, despite the fact that she is a big old heavy cruiser, in order to maintain that kind of speed you need to sail the old girl. Plonk her on auto and leave her pretty much to her own devices then she'll settle into a 6.5knt (or thereabouts) groove. That is fifty miles a day difference, or on a 100nm passage a difference of four hours. So, at 8.5 knots I can leave at dawn and be in port by nightfall. At 6.5 I need to be away in the middle of the night. So even a couple of knots is important. 

Once upon a time if asked about such a difference I'd have answered, so whats the hurry ? The hurry quite frankly is not wanting to set sail in the dark and not wanting to arrive in a strange port after dark. If, and I say if, a mid performing cruising cat could see those 8.5 knts as a regular groove then the performance while seemingly only marginally better than a mono is in fact quite significant. I don't know about the rest of you but leaving port in the dark, settling the boat in for a passage in the dark, settling yourself in for a passage in the dark is not something I do for fun. Oh sure, on a moonlit night with bugger all wind leaving a quiet port can be thoroughly pleasant, doing the same thing into even a 15 knot headwind over a barred entrance where you will have to motor out and then set sail is very different critter indeed. 

Sailing enjoyment ... despite saying that we spend 90% of our time at anchor most of our sailing (other than a harbour day sail) is coastal and I do enjoy my sailing. Having never sailed a large multi I'll be very interested to see how I feel about it. Geoff and a couple of others downplay the sailing enjoyment, that is of some concern.

Methinks a charter may be in my future. 

Thanks to Chuckles and Tropi for adding a multi hull perspective to the thread. 

Keep it coming.


----------



## tdw (Oct 2, 2006)

knuterikt said:


> Is this a cruising cat?
> To some it is to others not...


Nice boat and overall yes, she is a cruising cat but for the purpose of this thread not applicable for much the same reason as my dismissal of Paulo's nominated trimaran.

I'm not knocking you, Paulo or those boats but i'm thinking in terms of boats that fit the norm of a cruising cat.

cheers

Andrew B


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

tdw said:


> ...
> LOA ... I'd thought that circa 40' had bought us into the range of big enough to avoid the downsides of a small cat. If it is so that nothing under 50' will suffice then I lose interest very rapidly indeed. I wouldn't go to a 50' mono so a 50' cat is most assuredly out of the question. Paulo's suggestion therefore that 40' is simply not big enough does concern me.
> 
> ....
> ...


Maybe I was not clear. When I said that a 40ft cat is not big enough I was talking about a voyage cat, a cat designed with passage making in mind. A boat like yours is in my opinion more seaworthy than a 40ft cat. A 40ft cat is perfectly capable as a coastal cruiser and even as an offshore boat, only in a less extent than a 40ft typical cruiser boat.

Putting it another way: A good 30ft monohull can pass EC certification as a Class A boat, I don't believe a 30ft cat would be able to do that.

But not all are the same. It is not only the boards but also the windage and a high CG. I guess that if you try a lagoon style cat you are going to be bored unless you don't enjoy sailing. It will not make a substantial difference in speed regarding your boat.

Australia has some great cruising cats. See if you can try one of these:











Schionning Designs from Julie Geldard on Vimeo.

Schionning Wilderness 40 cruising catamaran | Multihull Yacht Sales Australia

Regards

Paulo


----------



## TropicCat (Oct 14, 2008)

I have a lot to say about Paulo's post but if I did this thread would degenerate into a mono / multi slug fest, so I will refrain.


----------



## tdw (Oct 2, 2006)

Tropic .... it doesn't have to degenerate into a slug fest , nor should it. I guess you would most disagree with Paulo's assertion re offshore capability ? I think its fair for you to throw in your reasons. 

I'm seriously trying to come to grips with the subject matter. Both sides of any subject need to be aired.

Andrew B

ps - Paulo ... I quite liked that Wilderness though she's probably a bit old. Other Schionning designs look interesting as does the Catana range. (when I have the time I'll start posting some pics.)

The age and layout of that Wilderness raises a couple of questions ... I'd have no hesitation in buying a ten or even twenty year old monohull if of Malo quality. How do the better class of cats hold up as the years pass by ? Also galley ? Up is the flavour of the century but why ? Down galley seems to make more sense from a "using the available space and opening up the salon" point of view.


----------



## TropicCat (Oct 14, 2008)

OH, I'd like to understand why Paulo made that statement concerning blue water capability of catamarans?

I think people in your part of the world still remember the Queens Birthday Storm and how well catamarans held up in a typhoon compared to the monohulls. One would say that not one monohull was seaworthy in that storm when compared to the catamarans, wouldn't one?

Fast Forward to the present and Catalac 12Ms which are now close to 30 years old are still making Atlantic crossings (S/V Angel Louise - Florida to England via Bermuda and the Azores) or even the lightly built Gemini Catamarans who travel from California to Fiji (S/V "Tere Hau Nui"), none of these boats was larger than 40'. We haven't even scratched the surface yet. All of which lead me to believe that Paulo might have to check the dates on his books as his library might be full of pre 1980 books on sailing.

Things have changed.


----------



## bljones (Oct 13, 2008)

CE rating is over-rated and mono biased.


----------



## smj (Jun 27, 2009)

Don't think I've ever posted on this forum but here goes.
There are plenty of smaller catamarans that are serious offshore cruisers as there are monos. Tropicats Catalac 27 comes to mind. The Catalac isn't designed to be a fast cat but at 27' very spacious, seaworthy and comfortable.
Performance wise there are fast cats and fast monos. There are also slow monos and slow cats. They both have advantages. The mono will probably point higher but the cat will run downwind on a rail with no rolling, great for trade wind passages. 
We have owned 8 catamarans over the last 21 years. Guess I have a boat buying problem! Before that we owned 2 monos. We are now boatless. I would love to find another cat but as we now own a house we don't know if we can afford the type cat we like which is performance based. Maybe our next boat will be a mono......maybe not.


----------



## Geoff54 (Oct 30, 2011)

The multi vs mono thing tends to be polarizing (nearly as bad as the sportbike vs harley rivalry) but my bias has been clearly stated so you can take that into consideration. Also, while I do have an opinion, I am not qualified to discuss the seaworthiness or otherwise of cats so I won't be going there. 

Speed: As far as your first post, you were comparing your Malo to a cruising cat. You didn’t identify the cat but even so, I wonder if that is a fair comparison. I love Malos but yours is an older, offshore oriented design, while most cruising cats are more modern, lighter built coastal cruisers. Maybe a more representative comparison might something like a Jeanneau 42i which has a much longer LWL and two thirds of the displacement; admittedly your Malo caries a little more sail. Would it have been faster? I think so but I’m not sure. I am sure it’s difficult to compare apples with apples when looking at monos and multis. And I’m not even sure that the Jeanneau is a fair comparison – should we maybe be comparing based on price or as cats tout their living accommodation, maybe volume or living space? In that case, assuming we are looking a similar age and build quality, we would be looking at a much longer and probably faster mono than either a 42i or a Malo. 

Room: One reason I chose the Jenneau for the previous comparison is because I chartered one recently and I have also sailed a Mooring 4200 which is their version of a Leopard 42. If you need four double cabins and four heads, there’s no comparison (vs 3 cabins/2 heads) but the main cabin (saloon) and galley weren’t much different; I would argue that the Jenneau had the better galley. The cat had a much bigger cockpit but one day when friends came down for a day sail, we had eight on the Jeanneau and it didn’t feel cramped. And we rattled about in the thing when there were just two of us. Obviously, this only comparing one example of each type. So, how much space do you need? 

But really and truly, all that is irrelevant! Life is too short to sail a boat that doesn’t push your buttons. I suggest you sail a cat and a modern mono that you like the look of. Then buy the one that talks to you - and sell the Malo to me.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

TropicCat said:


> OH, I'd like to understand why Paulo made that statement concerning blue water capability of catamarans?
> ...
> Fast Forward to the present and Catalac 12Ms which are now close to 30 years old are still making Atlantic crossings (S/V Angel Louise - Florida to England via Bermuda and the Azores) or even the lightly built Gemini Catamarans who travel from California to Fiji (S/V "Tere Hau Nui"), none of these boats was larger than 40'. We haven't even scratched the surface yet. All of which lead me to believe that Paulo might have to check the dates on his books as his library might be full of pre 1980 books on sailing.
> 
> Things have changed.


I have not said that catamarans were not blue water boats. I said that size by size mono-hulls were more seaworthy and I am talking generically not referring any specific model.

Many monohulls smaller than 35 ft have circumnavigated and even one with less than 24ft had done that without stopping. That does not lead me to say that a 34ft mono-hull are indicated as a voyage boat or passage making (in what regards seaworthiness) even if obviously many had done that.



bljones said:


> CE rating is over-rated and mono biased.


The theoretical work where that legislation is based was done by a huge team that included many of best European architects and even at least a well known American one. I have heard the EC ratings being accused of being too embracing in what regards category A boats (no limits) never heard anybody complaining that it was too severe regards the boats that did not reach the requirements for being considered class A.

There are good technical reasons regarding safety and stability that allows some 30ft mono-hulls to be class A boats and prevents 30ft catamarans to do the same.

Note that there is nothing that says that a 30ft monohull or multihull cannot be Class A boats. For being a class A the boat has to pass some stability and safety requirements. Simply what happens is that some monohulls can meet those conditions and to my knowledge, no 30ft catamaran has done that.

We can argue that the theoretical support for those rules is wrong, even if I never heard nobody complaining that it is too harsh regarding monohulls or multihulls, but what leaves no doubt is that the ones that made that rules were among the best specialists in Naval Architecture and knew and know much more than you or I over the subject.

Best regards

Paulo


----------



## TropicCat (Oct 14, 2008)

PCP said:


> I have not said that catamarans were not blue water boats. I said that size by size mono-hulls were more seaworthy ....


There, you did it again. Where is your data? Just because you type this certainly doesn't make it true, now does it? Cite examples. Prove your point.... I did...

What I did in my post is cite the one major storm in which both monohulls and catamarans were involved. Every monohull was rolled in the storm. All lost their rigs. All had either injuries or deaths on board. Some of them were lost. Yet several catamarans were also caught at ground zero, all survived and none were lost or had injuries.

This is the very definition of seaworthiness.

As I said, I'm afraid your data is not up to date.

TDW .... it begins....mono vs multi...


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

Geoff54 said:


> ..
> 
> Speed:.. And I'm not even sure that the Jeanneau is a fair comparison - should we maybe be comparing based on price or as cats tout their living accommodation, maybe volume or living space? In that case, assuming we are looking a similar age and build quality, we would be looking at a much longer and probably faster mono than either a 42i or a Malo.
> 
> ...




Geoff, that is an interesting post but you talk about speed and then miss the subject all together

You make a good point about price and I think that regarding the buyer that has a budget for a boat, price is the main limitation so in fact price would be a better pattern in what regards a measure to compare.

A new Lagoon 421 costs around 300 000 euros, vat excluded, that is more than a Jeanneau 57. If we compare both boats I don't think that the Cat neither in space or speed would take advantage.

But even so, comparing a much more expensive boat with a less expensive one, as you have done, it would be interesting to hear your comments regarding speed and sail pleasure between the two boats that you refer. You don't say anything about that.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

TropicCat said:


> There, you did it again. Where is your data? Just because you type this certainly doesn't make it true, now does it? Cite examples. Prove your point.... I did...
> ....


I don't want to discuss this further but I have made my point: The EC directive that classifies monos and cats according with its suitability to sail in different sea conditions was made with the theoretical support of many of the best European Architects. According with what they consider adequate minimum stability and seaworthiness some 30ft monohulls can make it Class A boats. There are no Cats that ever had passed the stability and seaworthiness requirements to be a Class A boat (no limits).

Of course it is only an opinion, what I am saying is that their opinion has more credibility than yours or mine simply because is the opinion of experts on the subject, not one but many.

You give anecdotal evidence. That proves nothing. I have said to you that a 24ft monohull has circumnavigated non stop. The fact that a 24ft multihull had not done that proves nothing.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## TropicCat (Oct 14, 2008)

PCP said:


> I don't want to discuss this further but I have made my point: The EC directive that classifies monos and cats according with its suitability to sail in different sea conditions was made with the theoretical support of many of the best European Architects. ...


I don't think so. In my opinion your premise is entirely incorrect. The EU was not in the business of severely harming a European-wide industry by developing the "class" RCD structure. Rather their intent in the whole affair was to construct a protective barrier around their boat building industry.

To use this as a hard 'list' of what is sea worthy and what is not is ingenuous and has no bearing on this subject whatsoever.


----------



## smj (Jun 27, 2009)

Seems to me that modern day thinking doesn't look into the facts of the past. 25 years ago a 35' mono or cat was considered large and seaworthy, nowadays they're considered to small to be seaworthy? Are the newer designs so bad you have to make up for their compromised design with extra length? Another aspect of seaworthiness is the ability to be able to handle the boat in extreme conditions and to me the larger the boat is the harder to handle. Most boats no matter what size are usually able to take inclement weather better than their skippers.


----------



## bljones (Oct 13, 2008)

Paolo,
Whether you "want to discuss this any further" or not is irrelevant. You pulled the pin on this grenade.

Rory And Cookie

Heavenly Twins Catamarans - Experiences

Circumnavigating nonstop is a tribute to payload and the skipper's frugal provisioning more than seaworthiness.

CE certification fails to impress me. Politics combined with protectionism doesn't exactly create an objective standard.

Lloyd's register, on the other hand, has been certifying vessels and setting standards for hundreds of years.
Bobcat catamarans were built to Llloyd's A1 standard in the early 60s.

Comparison of catamaran and monohull seaworthiness on the basis of stability testing in the CEs arbitrary and mono-biased testing is useless, because it works from a faulty premise. Instead of certifying a boat based on how it reacts to a knockdown, if weight was given to the effort it takes to knock the boat down first, and survivability after a turtle, the results would likely look very different.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

TropicCat said:


> I don't think so. In my opinion your premise is entirely incorrect. The EU was not in the business of severely harming a European-wide industry by developing the "class" RCD structure. Rather their intent in the whole affair was to construct a protective barrier around their boat building industry.
> 
> ...


What you say makes no sense. The market for sailboats out of Europe it is pretty residual and European market is a huge open market. Many brands of all over the world sell the boats here, including American brands. The boats only have to be classified, as the Europeans ones, according with safety patterns regarding their use. That classification is not Political determined but technical determined.

If some political influence was made over the technicians was for those patterns to *be less rigorous and not more*.

Europeans are by far the bigger builders of cruising monohulls and cruising multihulls, some groups produce both types of boats. It makes no sense to say that the multihulls or monohulls are discriminated in what regards safety standards and EC classification.

That safety classification has nothing to do with outside commercial protectionism but with citizens protectionism, with Europe being what Americans like to call, a nanny state.

Here a 30ft Cat builder cannot advertise his boat as an offshore boat without any kind of supervision. For that he would have to have a boat approved as a Class A boat and that does not happen with a 30ft Cat, not because the law does not permit a 30ft Cat as an offshore boat but because the boat will not be able to pass the requirements.

The EC mandatory classification says to citizens that a boat is built with the necessary scantlings and has the stability and the seaworthiness to pass a series of requirements that a large group of NA (after many months of work) determined as the minimum needed to be certified for a given wind and sea condition, monohulls and multihulls alike (even if the criteria is different). A 30ft multihull is normally a class B boat while some 30ft monohulls can make it to A class boat.

This has nothing to do with trade protectionism but with citizens protectionism regarding someone advertising a product that cannot safely provide what has been advertised, in this case a boat safe offshore.

Of course, all classifications are arbitrary in what regards to say if a boat is or not an offshore boat, but at least the EC classification his made taking into account the opinion of many experts in the subject (Naval Architects), namely the work made by many commissions on several European states and not an undifferentiated opinion.

The boat certification is a safety ,measure not different of the many safety certifications that are mandatory in the EC and has to do only with citizens information and protection. US has also some even in lesser extent that in the EC.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## tdw (Oct 2, 2006)

Geoff .... she is not for sale. 

I do intend doing a charter later this year and it will be a cat. For no other reason than I'd like to try one out. 

For mine, I see where Paulo is coming from re e.g the Jeanneau 57 though I'd think that a 40' cat would be an easier boat to handle. It seems to me that sail area (or lack thereof) is a major plus for a cat. 

btw ... and maybe I mentioned this earlier .... space allocation is for me one of the big letdowns with cats. So many of them have four sleeping cabins yet saloon seating that would be barely comfortable for two. 

Andrew B


----------



## bljones (Oct 13, 2008)

fuzzy:









by integrating the cockpit and the salon there is tons of space.
Harris & Ellis Yachts (Oakville, ON)


----------



## TropicCat (Oct 14, 2008)

PCP said:


> What you say makes no sense. The market for sailboats out of Europe it is pretty residual and European market is a huge open market. Many brands of all over the world sell the boats here, including American brands. The boats only have to be classified, as the Europeans ones, according with safety patterns regarding their use. That classification is not Political determined but technical determined. ....


I already told you what I thought of CE ratings. However, you persisit. I took 15 minutes and Googled CE Class A catamarans. Here's what I found.

The following catamarans have EU CE Class A certification

PDQ 34
Tomcat 9.7
Antares 44 
Neverlands 65
SUNREEF 62
Jeanneau Lagoon 380
Jeanneau Lagoon 440
Jeanneau Lagoon 500
Dean 380
Fusion 40
Fountaine-Pajot Mahe 36
Fountaine-Pajot Bahia 46
FOUNTAINE PAJOT ORANA 44 (Probably all of them)
Fountaine Pajot Lipari 41 Maestro (Owner's Version)
Catana 47
Catana 521

This is not a complete list. At this point I stopped looking.....as ALL current catamaran designs sold in any EU country have to be CE Certified. From the looks of what I found, Class A is rather common.

I think what's relevant is what's already been stated in this thread. The Lloyds of London certification is much more important.


----------



## tdw (Oct 2, 2006)

Too true Jonesy but she'd be a mite chilly come winter.

This is an Australian design the Seawind 1250. I've been critical of these boats in the past, the ones I have been on were to my eyes caravan like but I do like this layout.










SW1250s have crossed Bass Strait and the Tasman Sea .... neither is for the faint hearted .... yet I had thought of the SW as coastal only.

Looking at her I'd think she'd be very susceptible to overloading.


----------



## smj (Jun 27, 2009)

TropicCat said:


> I already told you what I thought of CE ratings. However, you persisit. I took 15 minutes and Googled CE Class A catamarans. Here's what I found.
> 
> The following catamarans have EU CE Class A certification
> 
> ...


I think the Gemini also has the EU Ce class A certification


----------



## jorgenl (Aug 14, 2006)

tdw said:


> Too true Jonesy but she'd be a mite chilly come winter.
> 
> This is an Australian design the Seawind 1250. I've been critical of these boats in the past, the ones I have been on were to my eyes caravan like but I do like this layout.
> 
> ...


Galley down would be a deal killer for me. I also would need an owners version where on hull is dedicated to owner statesroom and head.


----------



## jorgenl (Aug 14, 2006)

Oh, I see that port hull is owners....

But afthwardships berth is not my preference in a cat....


----------



## smj (Jun 27, 2009)

We have owned two Seawind 1000's and absolutely loved them. I'm not sure about the 1250 but the 1000 is very well built, has a beautiful sea motion and is quite quick. I think Lagoons definetly have their place in the catamaran world but to me would be the caravans of catamarans.


----------



## tdw (Oct 2, 2006)

jorgenl said:


> Galley down would be a deal killer for me. I also would need an owners version where on hull is dedicated to owner statesroom and head.


Yes but why ?

The SW1250 is available as galley up or down. It just so happens I like the down version as it opens up more space in the saloon. The Wombet is of the same opinion. We pretty much share the cooking duties, if anything I do more than her. Galley up or down port hull is owner dedicated.










Jorgen .... I'm sure that changing the athwartships double to fore/aft would not be a problem.

SMJ .... thanks for the feeback re your Seawind ..... how did you go with the weight/load v performance issue ? I have no doubt that Lagoons would be slow though I wonder if they would have a greater load capability before performance would drop off.

rgds

Andrew B


----------



## jorgenl (Aug 14, 2006)

Because when entertaining guest they are often in the cockpit. That way the cook can interact with everybody else and no need to pass things up via a companion way a'la monohull .


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

TropicCat said:


> I already told you what I thought of CE ratings. However, you persisit. I took 15 minutes and Googled CE Class A catamarans. Here's what I found.
> 
> The following catamarans have EU CE Class A certification
> 
> ...


I am confused with your list. Yes for a cat to be sold on the European market has to be certified and it will be A, B or C according with the stability and seaworthiness characteristics. Of course that Class A cats are more than common. Practically all cats bigger than 38ft (and some 36ft) are Certified as class A cats. Most brands start their range at 38/39ft to have all their boats certified as Class A cats.

What I said is that while a monohull can normally pass the Class A certification with 30/33ft, a cat only manages that with 36/38ft.

On your list only the PDQ 34, the Tomcat 9.7 and eventually the Fountaine-Pajot Mahe 36 are relevant.

The only PDQ 34 that I know is a power cat, not a sail cat and is not certainly certified as a Class A boat.

PDQ 34 Power Catamaran

Regarding the other two please post the relevant information that leads you to say that they are EC certified as Class A boats.

I don't believe that is possible for the 32ft Tomcat 9.7 and regarding the 36ft Pajot, well it is possible but very difficult for a Cat of that size to be a Class A.

I searched and Pajot says clearly that its 41ft is a class A cat but regarding the 36ft they don't say in what Class the boat is classified. Maybe you have found what I was unable to find. Please post it, I am curious.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## tdw (Oct 2, 2006)

jorgenl said:


> Because when entertaining guest they are often in the cockpit. That way the cook can interact with everybody else and no need to pass things up via a companion way a'la monohull .


To be honest I don't get that. Remember that I do more than half the cooking on the Womboat and I'll still lose the galley from the saloon and put up with the isolation. Reality is that in our case we only have guests on board in the warmer months if only because not too many people can be bothered going on a boat when it is cold. So, nine times out of ten at least we'll bbq so cook is already amongst the action.

If it is just the two of us on board then we'll often be cooking together or we'll do a set and forget meal such as a casserole or roast. Even in winter we'll still often use the bbq.

Andrew B


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

smj said:


> I think the Gemini also has the EU Ce class A certification


The Gemini are EC certified? They sell boats in Europe? That are news to me and you mean boat, the 34ft and the 35ft?

I have looked and I have not seen any mention to a certification on their technical characteristics. That would be quite an achievement and something to be proud of. When the boats are certified as class A it comes in the technical file:

http://www.catamarans-fountaine-paj..._a_inv20std20millE9sime20201120eng_lip045.pdf

http://www.cata-lagoon.com/site_agents/pdf/Lagoon380_Brochure_09_2012.pdf

Specifications - Catana 42 - Catana - Catamarans

Why do you say the Gemini are Certified as Class A?

Regards

Paulo


----------



## jorgenl (Aug 14, 2006)

Andrew,

I do slightly less than half the cooking since my wife is the more talented and experienced cook. We are the kind of people that very much enjoy to cook and entertain.nothin better then Cooking a standing rib roast or a leg of lamb when under way. We even cooked a smallish thanksgiving turkey on the boat.

Now, even if you BBQ , you will need to make a salad and pass stuff from galley to cockpit.

Someone need another drink or top up of ice - down the companion way you go! I lived and cruised my boat for 2 years. Up and down companionway gets old.

Now, all i need is a boat with a wine cellar


----------



## TropicCat (Oct 14, 2008)

PCP said:


> T.....When the boats are certified as class A it comes in the technical file:
> 
> http://www.catamarans-fountaine-paj..._a_inv20std20millE9sime20201120eng_lip045.pdf
> 
> ...


I see you located the catamaran CE class A documents and take it that you've withdrawn your comment?



PCP said:


> What I said is that while a monohull can normally pass the Class A certification with 30/33ft, a cat only manages that with 36/38ft.


The CE class A rating for the Tomcat 9.7 is here:
TomCat Boats Designer & Manufacturer of Exceptional Catamarans

Which of course means that a 32 foot catamaran is also CE class A certified. Apparently a cat can not only manage it, but manage it with less LOA than a monohull.

What was your point again?


----------



## chucklesR (Sep 17, 2007)

tdw said:


> Nice boat and overall yes, she is a cruising cat but for the purpose of this thread not applicable for much the same reason as my dismissal of Paulo's nominated trimaran.
> 
> I'm not knocking you, Paulo or those boats but i'm thinking in terms of boats that fit the norm of a cruising cat.
> 
> ...


That is absolutely NOT a cruising catamaran. Hobies fly hulls, not homes.

Cruising cat's are homes. Hulls stay firmly in the water.


----------



## chucklesR (Sep 17, 2007)

PCP said:


> The Gemini are EC certified? They sell boats in Europe? That are news to me and you mean boat, the 34ft and the 35ft?
> 
> I have looked and I have not seen any mention to a certification on their technical characteristics. That would be quite an achievement and something to be proud of. When the boats are certified as class A it comes in the technical file:
> 
> ...


Gemini's have for a long, long time been Class A certified. I've been to Portugal visiting Alex on Giulietta and seen them there. 
4 that I know of of them have circumnavigated, many have done trans-oceanic voyages. 
Like any guy will tell you, it's not about the length, it's how you use it.


----------



## smj (Jun 27, 2009)

tdw said:


> SMJ .... thanks for the feeback re your Seawind ..... how did you go with the weight/load v performance issue ? I have no doubt that Lagoons would be slow though I wonder if they would have a greater load capability before performance would drop off.
> 
> rgds
> 
> Andrew B


No doubt the Lagoon has a better load carrying capacity so if you need ac, diesel generator, deep freeze, etc. the Lagoon would be a good choice. We tried to keep our Seawind as light as possible but still carried over 100 gallons of water 45 gallons of gas and enough goodies to make cruising for us fun. We would do 75-80% of windspeed on a good point of sail and even better in light winds. I guess we didnt have all the creature comforts of the Lagoon but then again we didnt have to deal with repairing all those creature comforts.


----------



## chucklesR (Sep 17, 2007)

Basically all of this 'chatter' is a primary reason why catamaran owners don't get into these discussions with monohull owners. 

Not because we (I'm a ex-cat owner, I count as 'we') can't debate the issue, but instead because there is no resolution. 
It's apples and oranges - something most monohull owners can understand when it comes to discussing different types of monohull - although even that has some 'fire' to it (witness the full keel thread here). 

Some folks though, they just can't come around. I've been told that a catamaran isn't a sailboat by people I've respected, I've been told a boat designed to cruise instead of race is not a sailboat, that instead only boats that are designed to maximize performance are truly sailboats. 

We've seen some of that here, in only 6 pages of posts. 

I'm pretty sure that when Woody from Latt's and Att's did his circumnavigation in a coastal POS ( IIRC a Cal 27) he didn't worry that the experts said a 40 foot was needed, he didn't care that a CE certification wasn't issued. That piece of paper was good for TP, but didn't float the boat. 

I'm not here to argue, some are. Have fun with this, I'm out.


----------



## smj (Jun 27, 2009)

chucklesR said:


> Basically all of this 'chatter' is a primary reason why catamaran owners don't get into these discussions with monohull owners.
> 
> Not because we (I'm a ex-cat owner, I count as 'we') can't debate the issue, but instead because there is no resolution.
> It's apples and oranges - something most monohull owners can understand when it comes to discussing different types of monohull - although even that has some 'fire' to it (witness the full keel thread here).
> ...


I like both multis and monos. I can see advantages to both and appreciate both but I'm a multihuller at heart. I think this has actually been one of the most civilized mono multi conversations I've been in!


----------



## bljones (Oct 13, 2008)

I agree.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

*Originally Posted by PCP 
T.....When the boats are certified as class A it comes in the technical file:*[/COLOR]
http://www.catamarans-fountaine-pajo...eng_lip045.pdf
http://www.cata-lagoon.com/site_agen...re_09_2012.pdf



TropicCat said:


> I see you located the catamaran CE class A documents and take it that you've withdrawn your comment?


I guess you never understood what i have said. I do like cats and I did not said that they where not offshore boats. What I have said was:



PCP said:


> ..
> *Putting it another way: A good 30ft monohull can pass EC certification as a Class A boat, I don't believe a 30ft cat would be able to do that.*
> .....
> I have not said that catamarans were not blue water boats. I said that size by size mono-hulls were more seaworthy and I am talking generically not referring any specific model.





TropicCat said:


> The CE class A rating for the Tomcat 9.7 is here:
> TomCat Boats Designer & Manufacturer of Exceptional Catamarans
> 
> Which of course means that a *32 foot *catamaran is also CE class A certified. Apparently *a cat can not only manage it, but manage it with less LOA than a monohull*.
> ...




My point was the same from the beginning. The Tomcat 9.7 is a great 32ft cat *but not a 30ft boat*. It is not also the typical cat with lots of interior volume and standing height. It is low and wide and that's why he is more stable and seaworthy than the typical cat:



















The typical 33ft cat,the ones that dominate the market, with a good height and interior space, are Class B boats, like this nice one:



















As I said I was talking generically. If we go for particular cases (not mainstream designs) we can have Class A mono-hulls with a lot less than 30fts, like the Fisher 25 or the Vancouver 28, just to mention two.

Fisher 25 - Introduction

Vancouver 28 - Introduction

Let me tell you again to make it clear: I am not saying that Cats are not offshore boats, quite the contrary. *What I am saying from the beginning is that generically, size by size, monohulls have stability characteristics that make them more seaworthy*.

One a monohull you can get knock down and come back with no problem, you can get rolled and with some luck still have a functional engine and even if the rig is lost you can jury rig. On a cat you can't so it is normal that a bigger stability and bigger safety margin would be considered as a safety measure. It is what it is done in the ERCD regarding Classifying Monohulls and Cats regarding the sea and wind conditions they are suited to navigate.

I hope this time It is clear

I do like cats and the only reason I don't consider them is because a fast cat with what I consider an adequate safety margin for offshore work, it is very expensive, much more than a less faster mono-hull equally suited for offshore work.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## tdw (Oct 2, 2006)

I think ultimately I'm in agreement with Paulo. 

Nothing wrong with cats, I'd be happy to own one but cost is the real issue.

We already own what is comparatively speaking a fairly expensive mono for her loa but even if we were to sell her we'd need at least her price again to buy a suitable cat. 

Yes there are cheaper cats than USD$400,000 but not I fear to a build quality and fitout level of a Malo. 

I still intend giving a charter a go later in the year. Maybe that will convince me one way or the other though the Wombet is adamant that mono is the go. Deep down inside that woman is somewhat conservative. Me I still like the idea of that big stable platform and even if not as fast as some multi lovers might like to believe under most circumstances when simply cruising the multi will tend to be just a wee bit quicker. 

Me, I'm keeping my mind open. 

Andrew B


----------



## smj (Jun 27, 2009)

I think it's hard to compare the fitout of the mono vs multi. A well fitout mono will have acres of gorgeous solid wood were the multi will have thin wood veneers over some type of structural core. That would be for bulkheads, furnishings and even draws. Really keeps the weight down.
Before we bought our first cat in 1992 I talked to an insurance agent from Lloyd's Of London concerning the cost of multi insurance. He said they had less claims and considered cats to be more seaworthy so the rates would be lower than a mono. This held true a few years ago as the entity that tracks claims for the insurance companies came up with the same conclusion, cats being a slightly better risk. The surprising fact that they came up with was that you had a 7 times greater risk of injury on a mono as compared to a multi.


----------



## jobberone (Jun 24, 2012)

chucklesR said:


> Gemini's have for a long, long time been Class A certified. I've been to Portugal visiting Alex on Giulietta and seen them there.
> 4 that I know of of them have circumnavigated, many have done trans-oceanic voyages.
> Like any guy will tell you, it's not about the length, it's how you use it.


Others would say it's both length and beam as well as how its used.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

chucklesR said:


> Gemini's have for a long, long time been Class A certified. I've been to Portugal visiting Alex on Giulietta and seen them there.
> 4 that I know of of them have circumnavigated, many have done trans-oceanic voyages.
> Like any guy will tell you, it's not about the length, it's how you use it.


I don't know if they are or not Class A certified and if not, if they are certifiable. I have searched and found nothing about that and that's a pretty good advertising piece of information. Maybe you have found it?

Having done circumnavigations means nothing. I have said that a guy with a 22ft mono-hull has circumnavigated nonstop and a Corsair 27 had done that also (I saw the boat once in Dusseldorf). Both boats are not Class A boats.

As we have seen it is possible to certificate relatively small multihulls as A Class boats. Tropiccat gave the example of the 32ft Tomcat and I can give the example of the Dragonfly 32. Both are not the typical mainstream multihull.

Anyway I am sure that even if certifiable in class A these type of boats are pretty limit in what regards the needed stability criteria to be certified.

You can also circumnavigate or cross oceans in a mono-hull that passes closely the stability requirements for a Class A boat and we would be talking about boats like the Elan 31 or the Vancouver 28 but even if the boats have offshore potential I would not choose one to cross the Atlantic, much less to circumnavigate.

Class A stability requirements for classifying boats as no limited boats represent a minimum that many find to be too low and a minority finds also that boats that don't pass those requirements are still suitable to cross oceans.

The safety and stability limits each one is willing to accept in what regards a boat to cross oceans, *I mean for you or me to cross oceans* is a personal choice and I would say it should be an informed one and that's the point of the EC classification regarding seaworthiness.

Personally I would say that what makes it comfortable for me, regarding mainstream design, in what regards monohulls is a 38/40ft boat. In what regards multihulls I would say 42/45ft. Of course that is a personal evaluation based on the risks I am disposed to take. Any small boat crossing an Ocean represents a risk, smaller or bigger depending on the boat. But everyday we take risks and without have a notion of it, we are always choosing what is acceptable and what is not.

I am talking about mainstream designs. Some boats, monohulls or multihulls can by designed to improve slightly its stability characteristics regarding equally sized designs. It is the case of the Dragonflyies or the Tomcat that have the stability of a slightly bigger mainstream designed multihulls.

I would say that in what regards improving a boat stability for its length has a bigger scope in monohulls than in multihulls because multihulls rely exclusively on beam and weight in what regards stability while monohulls rely also in a significantly lowered CG through ballast deep on a keel.

That's why size is so important in what regards a multihull seaworthiness.

Jobberone said all that in a much simpler way:



jobberone said:


> Others would say it's both length and beam as well as how its used.


----------



## smj (Jun 27, 2009)

I have found two sites on the Internet that state the class a certification of the Gemini. 
Seems as if you PCP have a pretty good idea of the size and type of cat you would consider to be ocean going. Can you relate your experiences with the diffrent catamarans and the voyages you have taken on these boats that make up your opinion?


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

smj said:


> ..
> Seems as if you PCP have a pretty good idea of the size and type of cat you would consider to be ocean going. Can you relate your experiences with the diffrent catamarans and the voyages you have taken on these boats that make up your opinion?


yes, I have a pretty good idea of what I will accept not as safe, but as comfortable in what regards safety for Ocean voyaging. As I have said it regards only me and others may have higher or lower thresholds regarding that.

Let me also point that I am refereeing to what is offered today as mainstream market regarding cruising boats and not ones prepared specially for offshore work.

Regarding that knowledge the central core does not comes from sailing different sizes and types of sailboats. The experience anyone can have regarding that is limited unless we are talking of boat testers of very few magazines that are testing sailboats at the rate of 3 or 4 for month on the last 20 years. That knowledge comes from reading their reports, for some experience in sailing and most of all for the analyses that NA make regarding each model and their suitability for sea conditions.

For many years I have an interest in boat design, monohull and multihull alike and I have been following their development. Particularly in what regards multihull I am attracted by their superior speed (when they are designed with that in mind) and I have been following closely their development in what regards size, stability and seaworthiness simply because I would like to have one. I have been also following for many years monohulls and multihulls accidents and I have a pretty good idea of what had caused them.

It is this knowledge and my own evaluation of the risks I am willing to take that permits me to have an informed opinion of the monohulls and multihulls *I* am willing to use offshore. most of them, on the size I have referred, would have to be modified in what regards rigging to meet my personal criteria. But as I have said, that is just a *personal criteria and suits only me*. There are many that circumnavigated with smaller boats, multihulls and monohulls alike, and certainly fell that their boats suits them well.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## smj (Jun 27, 2009)

Fair enough Paulo. You seem to have done a lot of research and your right you have to buy a boat that suits you.


----------



## FSMike (Jan 15, 2010)

smj said:


> I have found two sites on the Internet that state the class a certification of the Gemini. ---


Would you mind sharing those sites?


----------



## chucklesR (Sep 17, 2007)

Class A CE certification was an option for the 105MC, it required modifications while it was being built (not extensive, but not add on at a later date).

For example, some of the options were additional bilge pumps, high toe rails, a higher sill from cockpit to inside, bigger drainage holes in the cockpit. It may or may not have included actually sealing the float tanks. 

My Gemini (a 2007) was not CE class A certified; I didn't opt for it. 

I don't know if Hunter (who now builds it) has continued to provide that option or not.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

The RCD is continually being upgraded regarding safer and less pollutant boats. This year a new version come out with mandatory new rules about engine and noise pollution, the need of all cruising boats to have holding tanks and for all cruising multihulls to have escape hatches accessible when the boat is inverted :

*"All habitable multihull craft that is susceptible of inversion when used in their design category shall be provided with viable means of escape in the event of inversion".*

.


----------



## smj (Jun 27, 2009)

FSMike said:


> Would you mind sharing those sites?


Here's one of them.
A Gemini 105 Page


----------



## Melrna (Apr 6, 2004)

Questions. 
How much deck clearance is really necessary?
What is a good beam to length ratio?
Is a traveler really necessary on a cat since they don't point well?


----------



## chucklesR (Sep 17, 2007)

Melissa, 
For a cruising cat:

36 inches is a rule of thumb at the bow, it's the underbody that matters (and what slams disconcertingly). I don't have a number there, but more than the Gemini's 15 inches  is a good number. 

depends, classical is 9:1 - but for weight carrying capacity less is best. Depends more on where it's 'fat', bows that are too sharp require care as they will plunge and pitch pole. 

Yes, traveler isn't just for pointing, it's for trim/balance and heeling also. Very important.


----------



## smj (Jun 27, 2009)

Deck clearance depends on the size and design of the boat. More is usually better but if you have full standing headroom on the bridgedeck cabin on a 32' cat plus 3' of bridgedeck clearance you would have really tall windage. This would raise your center of gravity and center of effort and probably make the boat unstable. If you take the same boat but make it open bridgedeck, no bridgedeck cabin, then your CG and CE would remain lower. The Gemini for example has a low bridgedeck because it has a narrow beam and needs to keep the CG and CE low to maintain stability.
Some cats go as low as a 7to1 ratio and other 16to1. If you have the length to be able to handle all the weight then the 16 to 1 would be a much quicker boat. If the cat is smaller and needs to support a good sized cruising load they would lean towards a fatter hull.


----------



## FSMike (Jan 15, 2010)

Melissa -
If you're asking about overall beam vs length (as opposed to hull ratios) most designers of offshore cruising cats seem to like overall beam to be at least 50% of overall length in boats up to around 50' length. Over that length the ratio gets a bit narrower.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

mdi posted a link with interesting information about multihulls, including stability on another thread. I think it is useful to have it here also. The link:

Multihull Dynamics, Inc. - Account Login

and my comments:



PCP said:


> Thanks, interesting stuff.
> 
> But in what regards stability the ratios they use are a bit limited. Both take into account the sail area but in extreme situations one does sail in bare poles or with very little sail area so in fact those ratios don't tell about the absolute stability of a boat but about the stability for the max sail area the cat can carry (you can always reef).
> 
> ...


Interesting that the stability ratio used by the designer of Tom cats multihulls is not the same:

*"The stability formula gives a result which is the wind speed (in Knots) required to just lift the windward hull (the point at which, in a cruising boat, not a beach cat, you scream "Let go the sheets!", or better still "Let's put a reef in her").

Stability = 13.7 sqrt(Wt * 1/2Bm/SA * HCE)"*

Welcome to TomCat Boats

As you can see they are different:










Multihull Dynamics, Inc. - News Article

Anyway on this times of CAD design, with powerful programs I don't understand the need of approximated ratios when it would be easy for the designer to calculate for each boat (taking into consideration all boat's dimensions) this value and most of all the force of wind needed to capsize the boat on bare poles. This could be a king of AVS point for multihulls, not related to heeling but with wind force. If those values were mandatory we could have a pretty good idea of the stability of each cat.

Anyway, as we cam all see, Beam, length and weight are all determinant factors in a multihull stability and that's why I had made some personal reserves to the use of small light cats for offshore work.

...


----------



## TropicCat (Oct 14, 2008)

Melrna said:


> Questions.
> How much deck clearance is really necessary?
> What is a good beam to length ratio?
> Is a traveler really necessary on a cat since they don't point well?


I think you have to tell us more before anyone can advise you. Are you asking us about a Friday night around the 'cans' type of boat? Or a cruising boat? Also, sailing is sailing. Of course a traveler is a necessary mainsail control. I sail to 35 degrees or higher depending upon sea state and wind speed. Yes cats point. Some do it better than others.

It might be time for you to sail a few boats to get the feel for what the 'numbers' actually mean.


----------



## c. breeze (Feb 18, 2013)

I'm a hobie cat guy through and through. Grew up sailing 16s an 18s. Racing and off the beach. They are- in point of fact- the bee's knees. However- the cruising cats I've been on which are a leopard 38 and a manta I believe- and 95% of the ones I see on the hook etc have a few design "idiosyncrasies" that I find unpalatable. For instance- yes, they seem to point poorly. Really poorly- like it's all a reach. A close reach maybe but- you can't close haul when the head sail is sheeted outside the shrouds- as it typically is- on those beamy ass platforms. Additionally- most seem to have one helm station- with what I will generously refer to as "limited visibility". And how about the fact that you can't see your sails very well- or in some cases at all from the helm? 

I "hear" they pound- but I don't know. All I have experiences is a crappy view from the helm on a boat that won't go to weather. 

When I was 9 my dad and I were double trapped on a hobie 16 when he buried the lee hull and we pitch poles. It was quite a yard sale. And pretty terrifying for the 9 year old in board... I bet pitchpolling a 40 footer would be absolutely hellacious. But I wouldn't even let that thought enter the equation if I were shopping for one. I DID see a cat the other day in Vero beach that looked pretty sick. Dual helm stations- no hard top over the "cockpit" to obscure your view of the sails- AND a genoa sheeted inside the shrouds. It looked way more like it was designed for sailing rather than designed for entertaining on the hook. 

There- all that typing and I hit what I was trying to say finally. To me- cruising cats typically don appear to be designed with sailing as the primary purpose. They seem built primarily for large groups of people to have something to float on whilst drinking and eating. If wrong about your cat- please take me sailing and prove it!! Haha. 

Alot of them look like Buick regal station wagons with a mast too- not very easy on Los ojos


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

c. breeze said:


> ...For instance- yes, they seem to point poorly. Really poorly- like it's all a reach. A close reach maybe but- you can't close haul when the head sail is sheeted outside the shrouds- as it typically is- on those beamy ass platforms. Additionally- most seem to have one helm station- with what I will generously refer to as "limited visibility". And how about the fact that you can't see your sails very well- or in some cases at all from the helm?
> 
> I "hear" they pound- but I don't know. All I have experiences is a crappy view from the helm on a boat that won't go to weather.
> 
> ...


No all cats are alike even if in most cruiser ones accommodation take precedence over sailing. If you want cats that point relatively well, start looking if they have long daggerboards.

Of course, only racing ones are designed with only sailing purpose in mind but there are some that reach a good compromise. Most cat clients want them not by the speed or sailing advantage but because they don't heel and have more space than a monohull, so for those the compromises goes toward space in detriment of sailing potential.

There are for all tastes and not wrong or right here providing one knows what is buying. The important is the client to be satisfied

Regards

Paulo


----------



## TropicCat (Oct 14, 2008)

c. breeze said:


> ...There- all that typing and I hit what I was trying to say finally. To me- cruising cats typically don appear to be designed with sailing as the primary purpose. They seem built primarily for large groups of people to have something to float on whilst drinking and eating. If wrong about your cat- please take me sailing and prove it!! Haha.
> 
> Alot of them look like Buick regal station wagons with a mast too- not very easy on Los ojos


You don't buy a catamaran for the way she looks, and no matter what kind of boat you sail, you don't close haul on purpose after you pass the age of 40 as the boat will pound you into the deck. When you pass 60 years old, I don't care if you're sailing a 38' Leopard or a 30' Cape Dory, sailing close hauled has about the same attraction as drinking 100% grain alcohol straight up and still warm from a bootleg still. You can do it, but you know it's going to hurt you. While we are on the subject, it takes time to learn to sail any boat. Once you learn how to sail a big catamaran, and tune the rigging there's usually no issue with pointing within reason.

Catamarans are about comfort, and a cruising cat has about as much in common with a Hobie Cat as the average monohull does when compared with a 12 meter yacht. Yeah, they all have sails....but..

I have a marina full of monohull sailors and I'm one of the very few Catamarans. We sail together, we raft up together. These are my friends. Guess which boat is the center of social activities? Guess which is the center boat in raft ups regardless of the fact that one of the monohulls is a 45' Columbia. After years of sailing together all have seen the light and are looking for catamarans, as they know what all experienced sailors know. That unless you own a trailer sailor, 99% of a boat's life is at anchor or at the dock and just 1% is spent with her sails up. Yet when you get around to sailing there is no better boat in the Caribbean than a catamaran. They redefined the term 'island hopping'.

If you don't want a cruising catamaran or can't cough up the $100K++ for a boat, by all means choose your own slice of freedom. It's why there are so many boats models out there.

Just saying...


----------



## TropicCat (Oct 14, 2008)

PCP said:


> No all cats are alike even if in most cruiser ones accommodation take precedence over sailing. If you want cats that point relatively well, start looking if they have long daggerboards.


Personally, I've sailed all kinds of Cruising catamarans, some with center boards, some without. Generally speaking you are correct. A catamaran with boards will outperform and out point boats with fixed keels / no keels and God yes are they fun to sail. However, this comes with a price.

A catamaran caught in a bad gust of wind with her boards down, can trip over her boards. These are the boats that capsize and are the great photo op monohull guys post on sailing forums (Mackinac Race Capsize). Boats with sacrificial keels or "S" shaped hulls like my Catalac and the new boat just introduced at the 2013 Miami boat show designed by Morrelli and Melvin (designer of the America cup boats) are designed to slip sideways in a gust of wind. They don't lift a hull. They don't capsize. They also don't perform as well.

For a cruiser, think about this. Do you want to be at the helm 24/7 with one hand on your mainsheet? Or do you want to put her on cruise control and chase the admiral around the cockpit? At age 30 I loved hobie cats. I'm older, I'm wiser and I'm 40 lbs heavier, and now I don't.

Different strokes for different folks.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

TropicCat said:


> ...
> For a cruiser, think about this. Do you want to be at the helm 24/7 with one hand on your mainsheet? Or do you want to put her on cruise control and chase the admiral around the cockpit? At age 30 I loved hobie cats. I'm older, I'm wiser and I'm 40 lbs heavier, and now I don't.
> 
> Different strokes for different folks.


Yes, we agree, different boats for different people. if I had a cat it would be for the speed and performance, so it would not be like the one you would favor.

In extreme conditions and bare poles all daggerboard cats can pull daggers up and will be in the same condition as your boat. Some daggerboard cats are among the safer offshore cruising boats to sail and also the faster. For instance this one (2013 European multihull):


----------



## TropicCat (Oct 14, 2008)

PCP said:


> ...In extreme conditions and bare poles all daggerboard cats can pull daggers up and will be in the same condition as your boat. Some daggerboard cats are among the safer offshore cruising boats to sail and also the faster. For instance this one (2013 European monohull):


No we don't agree at all. And why are you referencing a 2013 monohull in a catamaran conversation? Surely we can agree that when things go bad, they go bad all at once?

Imagine .... You're sailing your performance catamaran in the dark of night, boards down, no moon and no one could possibly see the squall that is about to hit you. Yet bang! Out of nowhere 80 knot winds slam into the boat and you 'performance' catamaran guys are thrown into the water as the boat turns turtle. What? Did you think that squall was going to text you before it hit the boat so you could have been ready? There's no time to pull those damn boards up.

I can't imagine any circumstances where dagger board cats are safer. All the data simply says the opposite. For races...of course and with a professional crew that know the risks involved, certainly, but not for cruisers.

One last note on this. Most cruisers who buy catamarans are mid aged couples who would never be able to control a dagger board cat in a gust. It's a catamaran... the sails never unload as the boats don't heel, and crews have to be properly trained to sail these boats. It's why my mast is twice the thickness of the same sized monohull and I have 10 oz cruising sails. Board down catamarans won't slide as those boards keep them on rails. Doubling of wind speed increases forces on sails and winches by a factor of x 4. In 80 knots there will literally be thousands of pounds of force. I've had a furler explode (bearings) in just 40 knots.

There are no knock downs on a catamaran, we stand tall and take it like men. The crew has to know what they are doing and the boat has to cooperate or no one comes out of this alive. I strongly suggest you try it sometime before recommending this course to others.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

TropicCat said:


> No we don't agree at all. And why are you referencing a 2013 monohull in a catamaran conversation? Surely we can agree that when things go bad, they go bad all at once?
> 
> Imagine .... You're sailing your performance catamaran in the dark of night, boards down, no moon and no one could possibly see the squall that is about to hit you. Yet bang! Out of nowhere 80 knot winds slam into the boat and you 'performance' catamaran guys are thrown into the water as the boat turns turtle. What? Did you think that squall was going to text you before it hit the boat so you could have been ready? There's no time to pull those damn boards up.
> .....
> I strongly suggest you try it sometime before recommending this course to others.


I have edited the post. Funny mistake. I meant yo say that was the boat that won the 2013 European boat of the year contest on the Multihull class and by mistake wrote Monohull.

After all it seems that it is you that think that some of the most respected voyage offshore cats are unsafe

Came on, everybody knows that Outremer is one of the cats that circumnavigated more times and a favorite in what regards sailors that favors Cats for long voyages. Many experienced sailors have chosen them to circumnavigate and do extensive voyage.

Do you think they are wrong? I would say that they, like me, don't favor the same kind of cat you prefer for voyaging. Nothing wrong in preferring other type of cats or boats, but saying that cats that use daggerboards are not safe makes no sense. Any cat can be capsized by the wind in the sails if the sailor does not have good sense.

Maybe you never heard about Outremer? Here you have a sail test by Charles Doane (Charles Doane is SAIL's Executive Editor) on a boat that was replaced by the one I was talking about, the 49:

*I've done two transatlantics on cats....What intrigued me most about it were the twin carbon-fiber tillers aft on each hull. I'd never steered a cat this size with a tiller before, and I was very curious to find out what it was like.
.....
For me the bottom line on any boat evaluation is always very simple: would I like to own one? Make that a big affirmative on the Outremer 49. I'll take one, please. I'd love to be out there on those tillers, steering through some island-studded turquoise water. *

Or perhaps what Alvah Simon says in "Cruising world magazine" about the 49?:

*Outremer has been building multihulls for 27 years, making it a pioneer in the field. The company is a dedicated bluewater specialist with a straightforward motto: "Seaworthy, Fast, Simple."
*
Alvah Simon - About | Facebook

Or maybe why the boat that I have posted, the Outremer 5X, was chosen has European multihull of the year?

The Swedish tester says: *"An offshore long distance voyager, fast but always safe".*

The Danish tester says: *" As a voyage boat the Outremer 5x is a dream "*.

So, as you can see I am not alone into endorsing this boat as a safe offshore voyage cat. It is an opinion that is shared by almost all cat sailors.

Just look at some of the Outremer that voyaging in far away places and circumnavigating and you are going to see that they are sailed by families, not racers. There are not many but the ones that exist are not at the marina

Liladhoc's Blog

Sailing Around the World on Teulu

Le blog de marick

DAY TO DAY :: Singa CATAMARAN

Journal :: Teoula III

 <link rel="alternate" type="application/rss+xml" title="Tuvaou latest comment RSS" href="http://tuvaou.net/?feed=comments-

le voyage de zephyr

Le Furibard

With Blue Bie around the World

AbraCatabra.com | Accueil

Carnet de bord :: Rêver les yeux ouverts

Flying Cloud - Julian Nichols

http://www.pierrecosso.com/

Le Voyage D'OFF COURSE

Teoula

Imagine ... Une famille en catamaran autour du monde

http://www.untempspourunreve.com

Outremer 45 à vendre » Outremer 45 occasion

Regards

Paulo


----------



## TropicCat (Oct 14, 2008)

PCP said:


> I have edited the post. Funny mistake. I meant yo say that was the boat that won the 2013 European boat of the year contest on the Multihull class and by mistake wrote Monohull.
> 
> After all it seems that it is you that think that some of the most respected voyage offshore cats are unsafe
> 
> Came on, everybody knows that Outremer is one of the cats that circumnavigated more times and a favorite in what regards sailors that favors Cats for long voyages.


OK on your typo

As for the Outremer, what can I say except that I'm stunned. These are fast boats. No doubt about it. And they are famous too. I agree.

But Paulo my friend you are now talking the rarefied air of $1 million boats, which is a far cry from where this conversation began.

A friend of mine did an Atlantic crossing last year from Florida to England in a 30 year old Catalac 12M (S/V Angel Louise), which sells for roughly 15% of the price of the Outremer you suggest and is a safer boat. Not faster. I said safer. This couple is in their 70's and had a very nice trip across the Atlantic. After several months in England, they sailed to France, demasted the boat and experienced a bit of the French canals and lastly managed to travel to the Danube a delightful river which they motored southeast for 2,872 km (1,785 mi), passing through four Central European capitals before arriving at the Black Sea via the Danube Delta in Romania. I think they have to head home soon as they have used all the time allowed in the EU specified in their visa.

Try that with a $1 million Outremer! (They are too wide for the canals)


----------



## c. breeze (Feb 18, 2013)

I think it's cute that the argument you address first is that you don't buy based in looks- which was only an afterthought in my post. I referenced the hobies only to support that I have no ideological issue with multihulls, however I appreciate you instructing me on the "subtle" differences between the two types at any rate. I am also gratified that you made no effort to refute my claim that on most cruising cats "sailing" is an afterthought in the design and layout. I suppose I should be further thankful to you for going on to support my claim- via the 99% / 1% argument. 

All that said- I guess I could for about 3k build or buy a deck boat to chase the admiral around and to raft up with my buddies- and thanks to the wonders Of Craig's list and ikea furnish it in pretty high style. 

I guess if I had 100k to throw at a boat I might do that- and drop 90k on sailbaot designed to sail- and use the other 7k to host a big party on the party barge for all my friends and family. Or the yacht club. 

I admire your passion for the boats you've chosen. And it's awesome that you- like me- have found suitable platforms for your sailing pleasure. 

I do get curious when I see mention Of all the time it takes to learn how to sail a boat in one sentence- and all this talk of autopilot and admiral chasing basically throughout. People don't buy these boats to learn how to get the most ou of them. They buy them because they have an equivalent number of electrical outlets as there home- and more square footage than most 2 bedroom apts. if learning how to sail the boat were my goal- you Better believe I'd want a reasonable view of the sails- a reasonable view from the helm- and yeah. A sheet ( o winch handle) in my hand a pretty good bit- you know - trimming those sails I could see while feeling that helm. 

I'm sure you can sail circles around me. And I'm also sure I can sail circles around (insert random high percentage here- call it 3/4) of cruising cat people because I am actually a sailor- and tend to desire being in tune with the boat more than anything else while I'm sailing. You know- its not an afterthought. But it might be just the while newness of it all- I've only been sailing for 27 years. 

The depressing thing about this whole conversation is the implied inevitability that one day ill lose interest in the sailing and reorder my priorities for how to spend time on my boat. 

I better retreat to the crew wanted thread that mentions the kids sailin j24s so the old farts have a ready source of up and coming crew. I prefer the idea that even when I'm 70- if I make it that far- that sailing will still be my primary incentive for being on a sailboat. 

I also found the S Hull / sacrificial keel design intricacy interesting. I get the sacraficial keel- but what is the s hull- and how does it work? You can explain it or provide links- either way. Thanks.


----------



## c. breeze (Feb 18, 2013)

Thanks iPhone. For all the help you give me. Like I can't seem like a jackass on my own. 

Mods!!! Help!!!


----------



## TropicCat (Oct 14, 2008)

c. breeze said:


> ...I am also gratified that you made no effort to refute my claim that on most cruising cats "sailing" is an afterthought in the design and layout. I suppose I should be further thankful to you for going on to support my claim- via the 99% / 1% argument.


Did you claim this? I wouldn't argue the point although I certainly didn't appreciate the Buick reference, however I did understand it. The price of catamarans almost dictates that you won't see many young people owning one. It's a shame as these are platforms which attract women into sailing and that's not an insignificant thing.



c. breeze said:


> I do get curious when I see mention Of all the time it takes to learn how to sail a boat in one sentence- and all this talk of autopilot and admiral chasing basically throughout. People don't buy these boats to learn how to get the most ou of them. They buy them because they have an equivalent number of electrical outlets as there home- and more square footage than most 2 bedroom apts. ....


Sailing basics are sailing basics no matter what kind of boat you're on. However, the fact that catamarans don't heel is huge. A catamaran sailor mantra is to REEF EARLY as catamarans don't have the feel of a small sail boat nor do they heel. As wind builds you will get into trouble. By this I'm not suggesting they all flip over. Things on board will start breaking, which is never a good thing.



c. breeze said:


> I better retreat to the crew wanted thread that mentions the kids sailin j24s so the old farts have a ready source of up and coming crew. I prefer the idea that even when I'm 70- if I make it that far- that sailing will still be my primary incentive for being on a sailboat.


You don't know that. Or is there an electric winch in your future? I'm 62 and didn't think I'd still be sailing at all.



c. breeze said:


> I also found the S Hull / sacrificial keel design intricacy interesting. I get the sacraficial keel- but what is the s hull- and how does it work? You can explain it or provide links- either way. Thanks.


Morrelli & Melvin are the designers of the Americas cup series , they also designed the Leopard and Gunboat series of catamarans as well as many others. They have a new design which uses the "S" hull. Link is here:

Features | Indikon Boat Works | Indikon Boat Works

In addition, BMW Oracle uses an "S" hard chine main hull on their America's cup boat, and they're obviously very successful campaigning that boat.

Lastly not all catamarans are "condomarans". It's interesting that the two most recognized performance catamaran designers are at opposite ends of the hierarchy. Morrelli & Melvin are the mavens of Americas Cup and *Richard Woods Designs* concentrates on performance oriented affordable catamaran designs. I guess he never grew out of his racing days which at last count included 32 Atlantic crossings. Richard is a friend of mine and stops by and visits me as he's sailing through my part of the world. His boats are the fastest sailing I have ever done outside of Hobie Cats. Link to his site - Richard Woods Designs

Woods is a proponent of centerboards (he and I have discussed this at length as I used to disagree with him). I've sailed his 32' Eclipse and his 38' Transit. Both were incredible but the Transit at 38' seemed much larger than it's size would suggest in the interior, yet sailed not only better than my boat, she sailed easier. Truly amazing designs.


----------



## c. breeze (Feb 18, 2013)

The 99/1 thing wasn't an economic or political reference. It was you saying that 99% of the time is in the hook or ball or dock- and 1% is spent sailing.

Of course sailing basics are sailing basics. In that light- it really took me a bit longer than it should have to realize that my alberg drawn boat isn't that different (performance wise) from an opti- IE keep it upright. To this end I'm all about some early reefing. As I told my dad a short month after taking ownership " pop- it's a travesty that this boat that is a dog in less than 10 knots needs a reef at 12 to sail". Nope. No travesty- just not the stiff performance oriented boat I grew up on. The keelboats I had sailed most prior to this boat were sabres shaw era pearsons J's
And cals. All a far cry from anything Carl alberg drew.









None of the girls I know would be caught dead on a rig like this. Sure looks aren't everything- or even much at all- but seriously? Hence the Buick regal station wagon reference.

I'm familiar with the designers- and there success an failure on the campaign trail- but I'm about to spend a bunch of time learning about s hulls and what they are about. That said- the hull isn't the problem on your typical cruising cAt- IE the leopard. A hull is only as good as the condo you bolt to the top if it.

I'm probably of the farrier/ corsair school mainly when it comes to "cruising" multihulls. Reasonable pointing, pretty decent tacking for a multihull, and of course they just haul ass.

My sister in law is of the opinion that I would crack a big grin if you stuck me in the middle of the ocean or a swimming pool in a bathtub with a broomstick and a bed sheet. Point being- I don't give a good ******** what I'm on or where I am as long as there is wind and waves. I really want to like the cruise cats- I've delivered a few- I find the final execution of the design lacking however- from the viewpoint of the sailor. Because of my roots- I'm always looking for that magic combo of flying and sailing however- so I ll continue to keep my eyes ears and mind open.

And also- I will hold to the belief that sailboats are for sailing first and foremost. As soon as you start to chop into that functionality- they are boring, and may as well be stinkboAts. I'm not the guy who screams for a more seaworthy boat- though I do appreciate one. I'm the guy who will rail against builders (we aren't talking designers- builders are the ones who execute well or ruin a design) who take a sailboat and turn it into the ghastly abominations you see motoring around the carribean.


----------



## c. breeze (Feb 18, 2013)

I also note that you are having at least 2 -3 conversations right now- and as such the accusations, questions and critiques are all coming pretty quick and can be tough to track and address- 

Like I've heard it said- 9 out of 10 people love a gang bang... Your being a damn good sport here- and it's not lost on me.


----------



## TropicCat (Oct 14, 2008)

Ahhh .... a purist. I can respect that. Like I said earlier, it's the reason there are so many boat models to choose from.


----------



## c. breeze (Feb 18, 2013)

Addressing the rigging tune point etc- can we agree that with a high aspect fractional rig- as you typically see on these boats ( and a great rig with tons of potential) it is all about the leech- IE sail trim isn't anymore dificult than with older traditional masthead rigs- but- other than feel- you really need to watch that leech- more so than with a main with less roach and a longer boom. And honestly- I don't know if other than the "race" boat my pop helped deliver a while back that I've ever seen one with tell tales on the leech. Maybe just because you can't see the sails anyway from the damn cockpit- so why add the .76 ounces. Or whatever- point is- again- awesome rig- great hulls- but the whole picture isn't of a boat designed with sailing as the primary goal. 

My enthusiasm for admiral chasing wanes in direct proportion to the beam she carries too far aft- just as my enthusiasm for sailing a boat wanes in direct proportion to how you have crippled her.


----------



## TropicCat (Oct 14, 2008)

c. breeze said:


> Addressing the rigging tune point etc- can we agree that with a high aspect fractional rig- as you typically see on these boats ( and a great rig with tons of potential) it is all about the leech...


You misunderstood or I wasn't clear. I wasn't referring to sail trim when I said "rig tuning". Sail trim is of course related but a different conversation.

Because of the lack of feel and the predominance of hydraulic steering, a lot of boat owners don't even know where there rudder is on any point of sail but particularly with regard to pointing ability. All boats should take advantage of rudder lift but large catamarans particularly benefit from it. Rig tuning determines weather helm or lee helm and tunes the boat to proper balance. I usually do this on a close reach.

Some newer boats were designed with no backstays. Which is great for big roach sails but challenging when finding proper boat balance. This is an important issue and should be one of the finer points boat buyers be aware of.


----------



## funny_polymath (Jul 7, 2015)

Of course, FAR more boats are sunk in collisions than are lost in capsizes, which are far more likely to sink a mono than a multi - hole a multi, you can often still sail, hole a mono, there's a good chance she's 86'd - so which is really safer, statistically? But monohull sailors seem to gloss all of that over. They also gloss over that two race-shadowing cats that hove to during the fastnet debacle never capsized, and that no cat involved in the Sydney-Hobart tragedy capsized either - though one was abandoned by a witless crew. Cruising cats do not capsize often, and when they do, it's usually human error, something like running out the storm to the point that speed has destabilized the boat and marginalized helm control, instead of heaving to, that caused it, just as it causes most rollovers too. Now, true high-performance racing cats... that a totally different story. And don't get me started on 'racing cruisers' like Gunboat.


----------



## TropicCat (Oct 14, 2008)

I think it was mentioned once or twice in this thread that over the life of a boat only 1% of it is spent with the sails up. 99% of the time the boat is at a dock or on a mooring. When you put this fact into context, catamarans are the only way to go. They won't roll at anchor and you have more room to enjoy the boat. The real impediment to catamaran ownership has never been performance or safety issues. It's always been their price.

Find an older Cat that needs some TLC, bring her back to life and I promise, you'll never look back on your monohull days.


----------



## RTB (Mar 5, 2009)

TropicCat said:


> Find an older Cat that needs some TLC, bring her back to life and I promise, you'll never look back on your monohull days.


Some people switch from cats you know? ZTC is selling their PDQ32 and buying an Amel, for high latitude voyaging. Zero to Cruising!

Ralph


----------



## smj (Jun 27, 2009)

RTB said:


> Some people switch from cats you know? ZTC is selling their PDQ32 and buying an Amel, for high latitude voyaging. Zero to Cruising!
> 
> Ralph[/
> 
> ...


----------



## TropicCat (Oct 14, 2008)

I agree, it's all about the cost of the boats. However, I understand the benefits of a monohull for high latitude sailing. If that's what you're going to do, a mono makes sense. On the other hand who wants to sail their boat into ice and snow...on purpose?

Give me warm breezes and hot women any day. It's the tropics for me


----------



## VF84Sluggo (Jan 1, 2015)

TropicCat said:


> Give me warm breezes and hot women any day. It's the tropics for me


+1...man is a tropical animal.

If we were meant to live in the snow and ice, we'd have fur (now, in all fairness, when some guys take their shirt off they look like they might be the missing link, or have a wool sweater glued to their back...but that's another thing)


----------



## RTB (Mar 5, 2009)

smj said:


> RTB said:
> 
> 
> > Some people switch from cats you know? ZTC is selling their PDQ32 and buying an Amel, for high latitude voyaging. Zero to Cruising!
> ...


----------



## RTB (Mar 5, 2009)

TropicCat said:


> On the other hand who wants to sail their boat into ice and snow...on purpose?
> 
> Give me warm breezes and hot women any day. It's the tropics for me


I agree, but they are Canadian, so there ya go. They have been in the Islands for a few years, so guess they have tired of warm tropical breezes and palm trees.

Ralph


----------



## zzrider (Jun 23, 2011)

TropicCat said:


> I think it was mentioned once or twice in this thread that over the life of a boat only 1% of it is spent with the sails up. 99% of the time the boat is at a dock or on a mooring. When you put this fact into context, catamarans are the only way to go. They won't roll at anchor and you have more room to enjoy the boat. The real impediment to catamaran ownership has never been performance or safety issues. It's always been their price.
> 
> Find an older Cat that needs some TLC, bring her back to life and I promise, you'll never look back on your monohull days.


Hmmmm.. I think that assertion is faulty, based on the simple observation of all the very expensive monos that exist. Presumably, every $250-$500K+ mono is owned by a person that could have afforded a cat if they wanted one, but still chose a mono.

Different strokes.

For my part, cats simply don't interest me. I hate the aesthetic, and I happen to LIKE the "feel" of a mono, close-hauled and powered-up with her shoulder dug into the sea (yes, I like to go upwind). Sure cats cost more, but even if they didn't and/or money was no object for me, I'd still choose a mono.

That's not to detract from folks who love their cats - I won't try to talk them into a mono. I'm just trying to show that the choice of a mono is not necessary, primarily, or even at all a consideration of cost.


----------



## smj (Jun 27, 2009)

zzrider said:


> Hmmmm.. I think that assertion is faulty, based on the simple observation of all the very expensive monos that exist. Presumably, every $250-$500K+ mono is owned by a person that could have afforded a cat if they wanted one, but still chose a mono.
> 
> Different strokes.
> 
> ...


I would agree, there are people that prefer monos over cats. But if a similar


----------



## smj (Jun 27, 2009)

Sorry, to fast with the fingers! If a similar sized cat cost the same as a mono, there would be a whole lot more multis in the world today. Truth is, a well designed and built cat costs a heck of a lot more than a well designed and built mono.


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

smj said:


> Sorry, to fast with the fingers! If a similar sized cat cost the same as a mono, there would be a whole lot more multis in the world today.


And, if fuel were cheaper, I'd bet a whole lot of them would be power cats...


----------



## smj (Jun 27, 2009)

JonEisberg said:


> And, if fuel were cheaper, I'd bet a whole lot of them would be power cats...


Seems as if your bringing the CF thread over here! From my experience, the majority of sailboats are used as motor sailers these days.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## JonEisberg (Dec 3, 2010)

smj said:


> Seems as if your bringing the CF thread over here! From my experience, the majority of sailboats are used as motor sailers these days.


I couldn't agree more... Monohull, multihull, makes no difference as far as I can see...

;-)


----------



## TropicCat (Oct 14, 2008)

zzrider said:


> Hmmmm.. I think that assertion is faulty, based on the simple observation of all the very expensive monos that exist. Presumably, every $250-$500K+ mono is owned by a person that could have afforded a cat if they wanted one, but still chose a mono..


I've been sailing a whole lot of years and have owned a cruising catamaran for more than 10 of them. All my friends own monohulls, and we sail our boats together ... a lot. Sometimes as many as 12 boats. When the anchor drops, guess whose boat is the center of activity? Mine. They all love my boat for her stability and entertaining room, which are the two points I made. Those weren't my views, those were the views of folks who have sailed monohulls for years.


----------



## TropicCat (Oct 14, 2008)

JonEisberg said:


> And, if fuel were cheaper, I'd bet a whole lot of them would be power cats...


I figure when I hit 70, and too weak to man the winches, I'll remove the mast...voila, instant multihull trawler.


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Before doing the Outbound we looked into a Catana, Outremer, Neal, Chris White and a Gunboat. The Gunboat was quickly eliminated as out of our price range. The Chris White was just too weird as regards the two masted rotating rig but really liked the layout and helm. Didn't like the inside as with too many multis it seemed too industrial. Instead of being either high up or in weather or both the helm allowed good sight lines and protection which is so much better than the boats with helm elevated over the house. 
The Catana and Outremer make more sense. They can actually go to weather, will tract downwind and have a decent offshore sail plan. Problem remains "you take care of a multi- a mono takes care of you". The Neal would be my first choice as it sails well and is so livable with pretty good access to systems. . Still all are weight sensitive and access for maintenance or repair is problematic when underway. Getting to engine and steering gear in particular.
Have close long term friend who sells multis. Put the wife on a tri and sailed around for a week. She didn't like the motion. There are two types of people when it comes to sea sickness. Those who respond to low frequency rolling and those how respond to high frequency jerks. Be real certain which one you and your significant other fall into before cruising on a multi. Wife never gets sea sick but she couldn't time the jerks. Activities of daily living (potty, cooking, showering etc.) were more difficult for her than on a mono. I've raced on multis and have come home black and blue from banging into things. Just clumsy but doesn't happen on monohull passages.
I have trouble with bridgedeck slamming. I have spent to many years on monos so cant sleep when the boat slams. Keep thinking something will break. Seems unavoidable but much less on the C, O or N than any made with fat hulls and fixed keels. Especial those made for the charter market.
All in all multis cruise. Including long range cruising. Once you get over 45-50' they make terribly good sense. Beyond cost of purchase the cost of ownership puts it out of reach for over 90% of the cruising community


----------



## TropicCat (Oct 14, 2008)

outbound said:


> The Neal would be my first choice as it sails well and is so livable with pretty good access to systems. . Still all are weight sensitive and access for maintenance or repair is problematic when underway. Getting to engine and steering gear in particular.


What's a "Neal"



outbound said:


> All in all multis cruise. Including long range cruising. Once you get over 45-50' they make terribly good sense. Beyond cost of purchase the cost of ownership puts it out of reach for over 90% of the cruising community


I might agree some of this as When I was 30 I was always soakin wet and hard on the wind... at 40 not so much as the little lady needed accommodating and at 50 I was the one in need of accommodating as 'camping' on the water was no longer an option.

Now in my 60's and looking back, I made the right choice going to a catamaran.


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

NEEL trimarans

Sorry got spelled wrong


----------

