# Whaddya folks think about Kettenburgs?



## CharlieCobra (May 23, 2006)

A K-50 here: http://www.yachtworld.com/core/list...3%3A33173%3A37139%3A1129&is=false&searchtype=

and a K-46 here: http://www.yachtworld.com/core/list...1%3A10856%3A21285%3A1129&is=false&searchtype=

also a K-38 but I don't know if Mama could deal with the mini galley thing here: http://www.yachtworld.com/core/list...1%3A51249%3A53809%3A1129&is=false&searchtype=

I just LOVE this one but it's too much money: http://www.yachtworld.com/core/list...=136&spid=146&slim=quick&is=false&searchtype=

That last one just invokes the romanticism of sailing. Simply stunning.


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

CC,

I love the classic old boats. I love the wood. If you have lots of time and the money/resources, it would be a lot of fun and really rewarding. My concern is the time and resources. But hey, a boat has to touch you. If it does, who cares about the time/resources, right?

What happened to the C380?

- CD


----------



## CharlieCobra (May 23, 2006)

It's still in the running but it's looking to be moving out of our range for now. I can always get something else in a few years.


----------



## CharlieCobra (May 23, 2006)

I'm surprised more folks haven't posted on this one, especially Jeff H. I'd like to know how these boats sail when compared to something like a Catalina 38/380, Beneteau 32.2 etc.. The one I'm most interested in is the K-46 that rates a PHRF of 114 without flying sails, which ain't half bad. I figured some of the folks up here had at least sailed on one of these classics or maybe a Knud Reimers sloop, which is very similar.


----------



## msl (Jul 4, 2001)

I had only read about, and seen photographs of Kettenburgs when, one Sunday afternon, visiting California on a business trip, we happened to be at a Dana Point marina restaurant while a Kettenburg 40 motored in.

We saw it from a distance, several rows of slips away, turning towards us.

It was unmistakeably a Kettenburg - the distinctive coachroof, and those beautiful lines.

The owners, a father and son as they later revealed, docked her, walked up the ramp and ended up sitting near us at the outdoor restaurant. They had been sanding the coachroof and decks, had wood dust on their clothes and varnish on their deck shoes.

"Is that a Kettenburg" I asked. "A forty" they proudly responded. They let us go look her over. A gorgeous marine design, an excellent total restoration, work in progress, and a lot (A LOT!) of work at that.

Worth it? I think so, yes. But only for those with the time, skills, patience and financal resources to do it all right.

That Kettenburg is so beautiful. It must sail "beautiful", too. Designed for the Pacific, for sure.

Mark L.
Wichita, Kansas


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

Of course these are beautiful to look at classic old boats. I have never sailed on a Kettenberg and have only encountered them in written descriptions and seeing a few stray examples over the year. As much as I love wooden boats, and enjoy sailing truly traditional designs, the Kettenbergs represent a type of 1940's through 60's era racer cruiser genre that I really do not particularly like, except perhaps to look at. 

While the Kettenbergs may be the exception, and that is unlikely, based on my experience with similar designs these short waterline, fin keel-attached rudder boats were a bear to sail. They tended towards heavy weather helm in a breeze, they needed to be sailed on their ear in order to get even mediocre speed out of them, they don't track worth a darn, they were awful to sail in heavy air, and very poor sailers in light air. If the boat has not been modernized, the sail handling hardware of the day was often dangerously undersized for the loads and modern safety systems were virtually absent. 

These are the kinds of boats that you buy if you have a lot of money to throw at owning a boat, live in an area with predominantly moderate conditions, you are not interested in racing or cruising other than perhaps roughing it on an occasional overnight or weekend, and you can afford to take you boat out of commission for prolonged periods during the year and enjoy working on boats as much as you enjoy sailing them.

Respectfully,
Jeff


----------



## CharlieCobra (May 23, 2006)

Jeff, these don't have fin keels, they have full keels with a cutaway forfoot and skeg hung rudder. They point with the best and have one more races than many designs out there. I think you confused the K's with something else. Go to http://www.kettenburgboats.com and check it out.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

CC - Last month I met a guy at the Port of Friday Harbor who owns a beautiful Cheoy Lee Alden 32 (very pretty motorsailor from the early 70's) that he uses for charter cruises out of Lummi Island. He told me he was selling it in order to buy a Kettenburg 50 he found in San Diego. Same boat maybe?

On a somewhat saddder note, there was a K-50 berthed in a marina across from me on the Columbia River in Portland, OR about 8 years ago. Beautiful boat, the nicest in the marina. Wasn't used very much at all. Anyway, the ocean tides actually affect the Columbia there 100 miles upstream, but only by a foot or two. During extreme low water periods in the summers (holding back water further upstream at the dams), the level can drop pretty dramatically. Well, this beautiful K-50 had been sitting in it's slip for years, and when the level got low enough, it was resting on the jagged point of a very old piling on the river bottom. One low tide night during a drought, it poked clean through and sunk her in the slip. They raised her about 8 hours later, but I never found out what became of her...


----------



## CharlieCobra (May 23, 2006)

I know that K-50 in SD, no I looked at it but at 82K, it was outta range. I'm looking at a K-46 PCC in Seattle. It was just taken to bare wood last year and redone with Interlux. There was NO rot at all. It also has a brand new (193 hrs) Universal 20HP FWC in it.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

They're beautiful boats that's for sure, but it costs a fortune to fit them out. If you are not willing to update the boat, thereby losing a certain amount of their authenticity and charm, then you are frequently forced to have your fittings and parts custom-made.

There is quite a difference between maintaining a planked/carvel wooden boat and a composite cold-moulded one. Wooden boats need steam-bent planks, grown knees and everything is attached to everything else.

Guess I'm sounding like a wet blanket - sorry. The classic wooden yachts have a grace and beauty that fibreglass has never matched. They are organic creatures and have their own ways of sailing, which always seems to feel a little more peaceful than a lot of the plastic stuff. But you really pay for it in time, money and frustration.

That said - I frequently go to this website just to drool....

http://www.cppyacht.com/


----------



## CharlieCobra (May 23, 2006)

She's fairly up to date with radar, autopilot, depth sounder, GPS. All of it is Raymarine on a Seatalk network except the Furuno, something I need to study. The SS rigging is one year old as is the hull paint since being taken to bare wood in 2006. I spent 7 hrs on her yesterday climbing in every nook and cranny checking for issues. I found 5 ribs with minor cracks that'll need to be sistered but not much else. There's no leaks in the house and the bilges had an inch of water in them right below the bilge pump. The batteries were off so the pump wasn't active. Just a hint of diesel when ya first open the boat which disappears rapidly. Nothing but the smell of fine old wood.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

_*"Jeff, these don't have fin keels, they have full keels with a cutaway forfoot and skeg hung rudder. They point with the best and have one more races than many designs out there. I think you confused the K's with something else. Go to *__*http://www.kettenburgboats.com*__* and check it out."*_

With all due respect, I know the lines of a Kettenberg quite well. While there is a tendancy these days to call any boat with an attached rudder a "full keeled" boat, there is no resemblance between the keel on the Kettenburg and a full keel. In the days when the Kettenburg was designed (and I began sailing) a fin keel was any keel whose bottom was less than 50% of the length of the boat (sometimes quoted as 50% of the horizontal length of the sailplan) whether or not the boat had an attached rudder or not.

Look at the profile of the Kettenberg 38,(visualizing it without its rudder)
http://www.yachtworld.com/core/list...ised_date=1138143112000&photo_name=2D+Drawing

Or the Kettenburg 46 for that matter:
http://www.yachtworld.com/core/list...e=1185855027000&photo_name=Modified+full+keel

and compare it to the Cal 40. 
http://www.yachtworld.com/core/list...w=&boatname=40'+CAL+CAL+40&photo_name=Photo+6

You will see that the Cal 40, which no one denies is a fin keel, actually has a longer horizontal proportion than the Kettenburg. If you read Lapworth's contemporary descriptions of why he went to a spade rudder on the Cal 40, it was because he had been racing fin keeled/attached rudder boats like the Kettenburg and they were so foul handling that he sought a better underbody design that would improve handling and tracking. The Cal 40 was a revolation compared to these fin keeled/attached rudder boat (as they were called at the time that they were designed) because these early fin keeled spade rudder boats actually tracked better and were much easier to steer by virtue of having a much greater longitundinal monent of interia to their lateral plane than the boats with attached rudders.

In terms of hull sections the Kettenburgs had very similar cross sections as well, with comparatively firm bilges for that era, with a comparatively large fillet whether the keel joins the hull.

So while it is popular to rewrite history and deny that these are fin keels and these days to go so far as to call them full keels, that whatever you may chose to call them, it does not change the fact that these extremely short length keels/ with attached rudder boats are a real bear to sail in light conditions and at the heavier end of the wind spectrum. Add in the full ends and short waterline you end up with a boat that will not hold a course without a lot of tending and which is hard on a crew. There is real virtues to a well designed full keel, but calling a boat like this a full keel, even though it lacks all of the virtues of a full keel, is insulting to real full keels.

Respectfully,
Jeff


----------



## CharlieCobra (May 23, 2006)

Wow Jeff, there must be a whole foot of difference in horizontal length between the Cal 40 and K-46 keels if ya take into account to cut 6' off the K-46's bow for comparison. While I agree the spade rudder is better for handling I seem to recall a certain poster here espousing the virtues of a skeg hung rudder with regards to strength and safety. I wonder who that was....

Tell ya what, bring your Cal 40 and I'll bring my K-46 and we'll see who kicks who's ass around the cans, heavy or light. I'll bring a case of good IPA for later.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Charlie-

Don't confuse keel-hung rudders with skeg-hung rudders. Skegs are an underwater appendage that is separate from the keel and having the rudder further aft, hanging off of a skeg will drastically improve the handling of the boat, especially when compared to the rudders on the Kettenburgs, which are hung off a relatively short fin keel and almost under the center of the boat. 

The reason transon hung spade rudders work so well is that they are so far aft that they have far more effect on the steering of the boat than the rudders on the Kettenburgs ever could. Given that the rudders on the Kettenburgs are also keel-hung, it is very likely that they will suffer from a heavy helm than a more balanced spade rudder would. 


CharlieCobra said:


> Wow Jeff, there must be a whole foot of difference in horizontal length between the Cal 40 and K-46 keels if ya take into account to cut 6' off the K-46's bow for comparison. While I agree the spade rudder is better for handling I seem to recall a certain poster here espousing the virtues of a skeg hung rudder with regards to strength and safety. I wonder who that was....
> 
> Tell ya what, bring your Cal 40 and I'll bring my K-46 and we'll see who kicks who's ass around the cans, heavy or light. I'll bring a case of good IPA for later.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

That is my point, the Kettenburgs proportionately foot less distance (I'll take your word for it) is what makes the Kettenburg a fin keel with attached rudder. 

As to the relative speed between the Cal 40 and the Kettenburg 46, you and I don't have to hypthetically repeat history. All you need to do is look at the race results from the mid-1960's when the Cal 40's hit the water. Before the Cal 40 showed up on the scene, boats like the Kettenburgs dominated the race course, but in the first few years that Cal 40's were around, (before further advances were made) the Cal 40's dominated nearly ever major regatta in the country making fin keel/ attached rudder boats (or if you prefer, extremely cut away forefoot and rudder post boats) like the Kettenburgs instantly obsolete as high level race boats. For that matter simply look at PHRF ratings. In So Cal PHRF there are no Kettenburg 46's but there is a Kettenburg 40 which rates 156. Cal 40's rate 114. There is a Kettenburg 50 (which I believe has a skeg hung rudder rather than a keel hung rudder) that rates 114, which would suggest that the Kettenburg 46 probably rates somewhere down around 121. For a boat that is six feet longer giving away 9 seconds a mile does not sound like the 46 is all that fast nor would it beat the Cal 40 around a race course. 

Look, I've spent a lot of time on boats like these. They are gorgeous to look at but they are very hard and uncomforable boats to sail, and certainly are slow compared to the boats that followed them. 

Respectfully,
Jeff


----------



## CharlieCobra (May 23, 2006)

Actually, the PCC or K-46 rates at 114 to 120 depending on the region, which ain't exactly slow. Six to nine seconds a mile can easily be picked up by a decent crew.


----------



## CharlieCobra (May 23, 2006)

Oh, BTW, a little excerpt by Bill Lapworth himself about a Kettenburg PCC (K-46) in the 1964 Transpac:

As a side note, it is my impression that the best sailed boat that year got virtually no attention. It was the PCC "Undine", sailed by Norm Dawley. The PCC's have a PHRF rating of 120, as compared with 114 for the Cal-40's. This 1946 Kettenburg "woodie" that was not designed to surf, out sailed all of the Cal-40's, even finishing ahead of Ariana. They ended up 3rd in class "B". The IOR rule was not kind to that sort of design.

Here's the link:

http://www.cal40.com/index.php?pr=History

Regardless, I love the lines of the boats of that era and plan to keep this one in bristol condition. She'll be making the rounds at the wooden/classic shows in the area and competing once again in events like the Swiftsure and maybe the Vic Maui.


----------



## sailortjk1 (Dec 20, 2005)

Well Charlie,
What is the outcome?
Did you bite the bullet?
(Way too much work/time/money for me, 
I would much rather sail a boat than work on a boat)


----------



## TSteele65 (Oct 19, 2006)

There's a 41' Hinckley Cutter that's been for sale FOREVER in SF. The asking price is down to $69K - it had been as high as $120K. Looks like a gorgeous boat, if you're looking for a classic woody.

http://www.yachtworld.com/core/list...units=Feet&access=Public&listing_id=1741&url=


----------



## CharlieCobra (May 23, 2006)

TSteele65, that's a nice looking boat but it's a bit pricey and not any improvement over the PCC as far as I can tell. I like the Kettenburg's cockpit and fiberglass deck better (there's enough to varnish already) as well as the PCC's v-berth. The PCC is also faster at 120 and you wouldn't believe how much cheaper. I made the offer and am waiting for the response. I'd post a pic but the forum won't let me. I posted them up in my photo album instead. I'll let you guys know if the offer's accepted.


----------



## tdw (Oct 2, 2006)

Cruisingdad said:


> CC,
> 
> I love the classic old boats. I love the wood. If you have lots of time and the money/resources, it would be a lot of fun and really rewarding. My concern is the time and resources. But hey, a boat has to touch you. If it does, who cares about the time/resources, right?
> 
> ...


They certainly would touch you, right in the hip pocket.


----------

