# Looking at these 6 Blue Water Cruisers



## mrybas (Jun 23, 2008)

Hi,
I am looking at 6 boats to be used to sail to the Caribbean (from US East Coast) with the possibility of circumnavigating from there. Most of the circumnavigation will be near the equator (trade winds) as we be looking for warm water and waves for surfing. There be 2 fulltime members with a rotating third or fourth crew member. 
Moody 42
Hallberg Rassey 38
Wauquiez Centurion 42
Island Packet 38
Pearson 424
Passport 42


----------



## jameswilson29 (Aug 15, 2009)

That is interesting. Do you have a question?


----------



## mrybas (Jun 23, 2008)

Yes I would like feedback, comment, suggestions about the listed boats. For example "the fuel tank is small on this boat" or "the Wauquiez doesn't have a skeg hung rudder and more likely to be damaged" or "the IP doesn't sail well in light wind and will require more motoring than the other boats"


----------



## Maine Sail (Jan 6, 2003)

Without question the Passport 42 or the HR 38...


----------



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

I'd add the Passport 40 to your list....


----------



## labatt (Jul 31, 2006)

Agreeing with Faster, the Passport 40, 41 or 43 (the 41 is the 40 with a "sugar scoop", and the 43 adds a large stern storage area) would be my preferential choice over the 42 (a double ender and not a Bob Perry design). The Hallberg Rassy would be my second choice. Also check out the Caliber.


----------



## JomsViking (Apr 28, 2007)

The Wauquiez would be a great boat too, as would the Moody.. However being Scandinavian I have to vote for the HR  The HR38 is an Olle Enderlein design, meaning that it is a nice boat in rough going, but not the fastest.


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

For 200's to 300, I would look at (in my personal order or preference)

Mason 44
Taswell 43
Passport (about any of them)
and Tayana 42 as a tie with the Passport 40. I might push the Tayana 42 ahead of the Passport 40, but it may only be because of my strong knowledge of the boat.

1987 Mason / Pacific Asian Sail Boat For Sale - www.yachtworld.com

1989 Ta Shing Taswell Sail Boat For Sale - www.yachtworld.com

I do not remember if it was the HR 38 I went on, but if it was, I remember it being tight down below - especially compared to a Taswell, Mason and Tayana. Moody's are fine boats but do not appeal to me for long distance cruising, I am not very knowledgeable of the Waiquez or Pearson (I know what they are but have never been on one), and I am not even sure why the IP is on the list.

- CD


----------



## JomsViking (Apr 28, 2007)

CD has a good point there, for a 38 footer, the HR is actually a bit cramped. Beautifully finished, but smallish for a 38' boat 
Not having firsthand knowledge of the Passport's and Tayanas my advice will always be biased (suspecting that others will too )


----------



## labatt (Jul 31, 2006)

Those Taswell's are pretty cool boats... we looked at a couple. Custom interiors, so each one is a bit different. The Taswell 58 is one of my dream boats.


----------



## mrybas (Jun 23, 2008)

Faster- I have never been on the Passport 40. The Passport 42 has 2 decent size cabins and a quarter berth which is appealing since it will be single guys on the cruise. The Passport 40 has a quarter berth cabin? Would a 6'2'' person sleep there comfortably? There are 3 Passport 40's with in a few hours drive...I'm going to make the trip down there and check them out.
1984 Passport Cutter Sail Boat For Sale - www.yachtworld.com
1981 Passport Aft Cockpit Sail Boat For Sale - www.yachtworld.com
1985 Passport Sail Boat For Sale - www.yachtworld.com

CruisingDad- The Ta Shing and Mason are both very nice boats but about 100K above my budget Why don't you think the IP should be on the list? I know they have a reputation for being slow and clumsy in light wind, but with a modern full keel and good build reputation, I hear they do well when things get rough.

JomsViking- Your right the HR is a beautiful boat...really high quality fit and finish. My brother and I are both over 6' and our heads we're scraping down below. Although there isn't alot of volume down below with 11'6'' beam, I thought it was laid out quite well and had ample storage.


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

"our heads we're scraping down below."
I've found that can actually be a GOOD thing. If I can stand upright and brace my head against the overhead, I'm braced and don't need to keep "one hand for the boat". I wouldn't use my spine as the only brace in really bad wx, but there are plenty of times when it is actually quite handy.


----------



## St Anna (Mar 15, 2003)

MryBas,
I am biased, but;
You could do well to look at a Peterson. The 44 1979 Formosa Peterson Center Cockpit Sail Boat For Sale - www.yachtworld.com will be cheaper (and arguably faster). They have 2 stateroom, each with a full bathroom. This should suit you and your brother.

The hull design, I feel is better for all performance but safer for prolonged downwind runs than many more modern designs.

My boat is similar to this one;
1988 Peterson - Center Cockpit Cutter Sail Boat For Sale - www.yachtworld.com


----------



## aferlazzo (Jul 7, 2005)

St Anna said:


> MryBas,
> I am biased, but;
> You could do well to look at a Peterson. The 44 1979 Formosa Peterson Center Cockpit Sail Boat For Sale - www.yachtworld.com will be cheaper (and arguably faster). They have 2 stateroom, each with a full bathroom. This should suit you and your brother.
> 
> ...


That Peterson 46 looks good and is very, very attractively priced at $99k. First question I would ask is what kind of shape are the water and fuel tanks in? If they have not already been replaced the next owner might have to. The second question I would ask is where are the ST winches... the photo of the cockpit shows all regular winches.

Definitely the KP 44 and 46 should be on anyone's blue water cruiser list. They are great boats, and less expensive than other similarly sized blue water boats. Trick is to find one that's either completely ready to go or cheap enough to allow a good refit.


----------



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

mrybas said:


> Faster- I have never been on the Passport 40. The Passport 42 has 2 decent size cabins and a quarter berth which is appealing since it will be single guys on the cruise. The Passport 40 has a quarter berth cabin? Would a 6'2'' person sleep there comfortably? There are 3 Passport 40's with in a few hours drive...I'm going to make the trip down there and check them out.


We have friends currently cruising Mexico on a Passport 40 (V berth layout, quarter cabin, "U" dinette). While the owners (he's 6'4 or more) ordinarily use the V berth, they have used the quarter cabin on occasion. We spent a week in the quarter cabin and found it quite comfortable and spacious (but I confess I'm not 6 feet tall). If not used as a double it would be very roomy indeed. With respect to Stan Huntingford (designer of the Passport 42) - the 40 is a much prettier boat. Also because it's not a double ender, the cockpit is incredibly spacious and comfortable.

There are several layout versions of this boat - a forward head with pullman berth just aft was the original, I believe. Labatt can add to this info of course. The links you posted seem to be forward head versions... with variations. Some people like the forward head, I suspect that using it at sea might be more difficult than heads further aft (due to exaggerated motion) - but then no head is easy to use in a seaway.

Also, a member here Mimsy recently bought a Nassau 42 which is a close cousin also designed by Perry. Other boats with similar pedigrees include the Tatoosh 44, Nordic 40/44 and a Reliance 39 if you can find one.


----------



## jerryrlitton (Oct 14, 2002)

Amel 41? Price seems reasonable with a good track record. It is just hard to find them in the US.


----------



## mrybas (Jun 23, 2008)

Faster- Thanks for the info. The Passport 40 sounds like an ideal boat for our purposes. 
Jerryrlitton- I do like the Amels (hard dodger, good looking, well built) but would prefer a single masted boat.

Does anyone have an opinion on the Bristol 41? Annapolis Sailyard, Inc. (Annapolis, MD)


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

Faster said:


> We have friends currently cruising Mexico on a Passport 40 (V berth layout, quarter cabin, "U" dinette). While the owners (he's 6'4 or more) ordinarily use the V berth, they have used the quarter cabin on occasion. We spent a week in the quarter cabin and found it quite comfortable and spacious (but I confess I'm not 6 feet tall). If not used as a double it would be very roomy indeed. With respect to Stan Huntingford (designer of the Passport 42) - the 40 is a much prettier boat. Also because it's not a double ender, the cockpit is incredibly spacious and comfortable.
> 
> There are several layout versions of this boat - a forward head with pullman berth just aft was the original, I believe. Labatt can add to this info of course. The links you posted seem to be forward head versions... with variations. Some people like the forward head, I suspect that using it at sea might be more difficult than heads further aft (due to exaggerated motion) - but then no head is easy to use in a seaway.
> 
> Also, a member here Mimsy recently bought a Nassau 42 which is a close cousin also designed by Perry. Other boats with similar pedigrees include the Tatoosh 44, Nordic 40/44 and a Reliance 39 if you can find one.


And the Baba 40.

For 100kish, I would try and get into a Tayan 37 that was well cared for. It is a very hardy, go anywhere boat. for 120's to 130's, I would look at a well cared for Passport 40. For 130's to 150's, I would look at a Tayana 42.

No comment on the IP, for reasons I hope you can appreciate.

- CD


----------



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

Cruisingdad said:


> ...And the Baba 40.- CD


The Baba 40, Tayana 37 and similar boats are quite different beasts than the Passport 40, Nassau 42 etc... even though they are from the same designer and probably of similar build quality.

All great offshore boats, and probably none of them backs up well under power, but besides that quite different in spaciousness and esp cockpit comfort.


----------



## aferlazzo (Jul 7, 2005)

mrybas said:


> Faster- Thanks for the info. The Passport 40 sounds like an ideal boat for our purposes.
> Jerryrlitton- I do like the Amels (hard dodger, good looking, well built) but would prefer a single masted boat.
> 
> Does anyone have an opinion on the Bristol 41? Annapolis Sailyard, Inc. (Annapolis, MD)


That looks like a very nice boat, but the stowaway mast is not something I would want if I wanted to do what you propose. I think the ideal mainsail for your purpose might have the top battens as full battens, three reef points, and some kind of dutchman system for easy putaway. Plus I'd have a storm trysail ready to load up on its own track. And a storm jib obviously.

Since you want only one mast I would think you'd have to have a cutter rig. I will again recommend the KP 44-46. Owner's website here:

Peterson Cutter Website - Welcome


----------



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

aferlazzo said:


> That looks like a very nice boat, but the stowaway mast is not something I would want if I wanted to do what you propose.


Completely agree.... fortunately furling mains are not universal among most of these boats, unlike recent production runs from other mainstream builders. (As I understand it, in many cases now a standard main is an option!!)


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

Faster said:


> The Baba 40, Tayana 37 and similar boats are quite different beasts than the Passport 40, Nassau 42 etc... even though they are from the same designer and probably of similar build quality.
> 
> All great offshore boats, and probably none of them backs up well under power, but besides that quite different in spaciousness and esp cockpit comfort.


Agreed, but my thought process was more in line with what I would buy with his budget. Also, none of those boats are exactly rockets in modern terms!!!

On the inmast, I will tell you that my opinions are starting to change on it. I am 'gulp' beginning to like it. We were in a hard blow the other day and I was pretty much singlehanding. I know you have put in a reef in a blow, Fast, it is never fun and verges on being (in my opinion) probably the most dangerous thing a singlehander can do under 'normal operating conditions'.

On the inmast (and inboom), it is merely a matter of cranking the engine, pointing winward for a moment, quickly reefing it in FROM THE COCKPIT, then falling back off and killing the main. Under some circumstances (I believe more appropriate for a crew of two), you can reef without even cranking the motor but I have reasons for not doing that - even if I do not use the motor.

The point being, for all their bad raps, I wonder if the great negatives of these systems do not come from the older inmasts and their periodic failures (and not the newer ones)? The only big gripe I have with the inmast is the loss of power and difficulty getting a good sailshape. But for someone whose is more interested in safety and ease then speed, they do have an appeal.

Thoughts?

BTW, this would probably make a good thread topic and I think I will start one in General. It just made sense to comment here since he brought it up.

- CD


----------



## mrybas (Jun 23, 2008)

One of the boats I'm looking at has a Schaefer in-boom main roller system system. Is this a quality system? Is in boom superior to in mast furling?


----------



## SeanRW (Apr 26, 2009)

CD

_The point being, for all their bad raps, I wonder if the great negatives of these systems do not come from the older inmasts and their periodic failures (and not the newer ones)? The only big gripe I have with the inmast is the loss of power and difficulty getting a good sailshape. But for someone whose is more interested in safety and ease then speed, they do have an appeal.

Thoughts?

BTW, this would probably make a good thread topic and I think I will start one in General. It just made sense to comment here since he brought it up._​
I started the exact thread you mention over on CruisingWorld and there was quite a bit of back & forth about it. General consensus is that people who have them love them, those that don't think they're "units of excrement".

People who like them cite the increased security of sail handling from within the cockpit. Someting to consider when a reef is required and the thought of playing tarzan on the foredeck is unappealing. Also mentioned was the reduced need for strength and agility in order to accomplish a reef.

Those against them cite the potential dangers involved if the mechanism breaks just when you really NEED to reef. Putting your safety in the hands of a mechanical widget that's snapped is unappealing. Cutting the outhaul or halyard is an expensive temporary fix that still requires you to go up front.

Lastly, one need only look at the fact that these systems allow fewer people to handle larger sails (and boats) which explains why many newer boat come with them as standard. Because so many of these systems are being adopted by mainstream builders nowadays (even the prestige ones like Hallberg, Hylas, Oyster, Najad, Regina etc..), I can only assume that they have gotten more & more reliable. The fact that this encourages the wealthier to buy bigger cause it's easier is just a side benefit for the builders though


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

SeanRW said:


> CD
> 
> _The point being, for all their bad raps, I wonder if the great negatives of these systems do not come from the older inmasts and their periodic failures (and not the newer ones)? The only big gripe I have with the inmast is the loss of power and difficulty getting a good sailshape. But for someone whose is more interested in safety and ease then speed, they do have an appeal.
> 
> ...


I have not followed the cruising world forums, but appreciate the insight. I did start a tjhread here about inmast. You are right, many people absolutely hate them and many people that have them love them. What I do not understand is that many of the people that hate them and tell about how prone they are to failure have actually never owned the system.

I will be giving first hand knowledge of how well they handle offshore. I am keeping mine, for the time being. I guess I will come to either prove the nay sayers right, or show them they are dead wrong.

- CD


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

mrybas said:


> One of the boats I'm looking at has a Schaefer in-boom main roller system system. Is this a quality system? Is in boom superior to in mast furling?


I believe that Schaefer makes good products and inboom I believ eis superior to inmast (except in cost).

- CD


----------



## SeanRW (Apr 26, 2009)

Cruisingdad said:


> I believe that Schaefer makes good products and inboom I believ eis superior to inmast (except in cost).
> 
> - CD


CD, I agree about the in-boom vs. the in-mast. I may be a relative newbie but it would seem to me that if you're reefing you're trying to accomplish two things. 
- Reduce sail area
- Get the weight down from on high
In-mast accomplishes the first BUT in-boom accomplished both 

Plus, considering my extensive rocket-science-Lex-Luthor like engineering knowledge, I'd say that rolling something heavy downwards would be easier than rolling someting heavy laterally.


----------



## MJBrown (Apr 1, 2009)

FWIW we have an in mast furling main on our Beneteau 43. It has vertical battens which helps with sail shape and power. The vertical battens can hang up when furling if you're not dead into the wind. So just for kicks I recently started heaving to prior to furling the main. So far I've found that the headsail blankets the main well enough that I can furl it without a problem. Unless I begin to have problems I plan on continuing the practice. No reason it couldn't be done to put a reef in the main. Those with in mast mains might want to try it.
Mike


----------



## mitiempo (Sep 19, 2008)

With a conventional battened main you can reef from the cockpit by properly leading the lines aft to clutches. Engine not required. Trips to the mast not required. Inmast or inboom reefing is ok (especially inboom) except for the cost but a conventional sail offers the best performance dollar for dollar including the cost of clutches needed for cockpit handling. To use an extreme example the main on the open 60 boats is handled from the cockpit as is the main on many weekend cruisers. 
Brian


----------



## SeanRW (Apr 26, 2009)

mitiempo said:


> ....... Inmast or inboom reefing is ok (especially inboom) except for the cost but a conventional sail offers the best performance ...........
> Brian


Ok, once and for all, lets put this in context. Every comment I've heard contrary to in-whatever furling has usually included a statement like the one above. Now it is quite true that performance & sail shape are negatively impacted vs. using a traditional slab reefed system....but to what degree.

If I'm a cruiser, a puddle jumper, a weekend "friends, beer & BBQ" sailor then the extra knot of speed or extra 5 degrees of pointing is NOT going to make or break my day. What will is having to scamper forward on a rockin' deck with sail ties clenched in my teeth. If I'm a Dennis Conner wannabe, then that's a different story.

In-whatever furling offers the lazier, less fit, more laid back or more...seasoned (older ?) sailor the option of staying in the cockpit to NOT ONLY reef but also stow the main....by themselves.

Are they perfect for everyone ? Hell no !

But they certainly have distinct advantages. Can they break ? It's more a question of when but then again, isn't that true of anything on a boat. Will the malfunction happen at the worst time ? Give Murphy a call about that regarding ANYTHING on a boat.

So let's look at the pros & cons in context. MiTiempo has a point...but only a little one IMO....

SRW


----------



## tommays (Sep 9, 2008)

In playing with and inboom system on a CAL 29 it requires that the boom be at and 87 degree angle when furling OR it will jam-up 

Which requires carefull setting of the toping lift BEFORE furling or reefing the sail


----------



## labatt (Jul 31, 2006)

With regards to cruising, a half knot or knot of extra speed can make a remarkable difference. Even on a two day trip, you are looking at saving a significant amount of time on the water, which can make a big difference when you are avoiding weather patterns. So... I would look at every opportunity possible to speed up the boat (I'm not talking racing trim) and get as much out of it as possible.


----------



## mitiempo (Sep 19, 2008)

I see why politicians are upset when they are quoted out of context. Add "dollar for dollar". If there is a in-boom or in-mast furler for the same price as leading lines aft properly I've not seen it. And forgetting cost entirely, say you're hit by a squall and the main jams while reefing or trying to roll it in all the way - what would you do? This scenario alone makes in-mast furlers very iffy. You'd be out the cost of the furler as well as the main you had to cut off to save the rest of the rig. If in-mast you'd have to climb the rig to cut it. In-boom is more logical if they work well and there should be no loss of performance with a properly cut sail. But I can lower my main at any boom angle where as Tommays posted angle is critical with in-boom furlers. One jam-up negates the small hassle of going forward at your leisure and tying off the main you previously dropped from the cockpit between the lazyjacks.
Brian


----------



## SeanRW (Apr 26, 2009)

mitiempo said:


> ....And forgetting cost entirely, say you're hit by a squall and the main jams while reefing or trying to roll it in all the way - what would you do? This scenario alone makes in-mast furlers very iffy. You'd be out the cost of the furler as well as the main you had to cut off to save the rest of the rig. If in-mast you'd have to climb the rig to cut it. .......
> Brian


Umm...why in the world would you have to cut the main ? If the in-mast mechanism fails (possible, just like a regular sail track getting jammed is possible) you would simply cut the out haul and then roll the main 'round the mast.

No need for gorilla-like scaling of masts with lightning, clouds and crashing wave scenarios. Unless you're embellishing a story to be shared after a few cocktails back at the bar. Lets not exaggerate worst case what-if scenarios. If you are planning to reef or stow your sail, you're likely doing so before the situation is critical.

Remember...it's a piece of mechanical kit. Because it is mechanical, it WILL break at some point, just like your halyard WILL jam one day, your sail track WILL jam one day etc...It's a boat and I defy you to name a piece of mechanical gear aboard ANY vessel that is *never* going to break.

As for the cost of fixing a bust-icated furling mast (or any other item aboard), you simply weigh the pros & cons as they measure up for you individually when deciding to include this on your boat.


----------



## SeanRW (Apr 26, 2009)

mrybas said:


> Hi,
> I am looking at 6 boats to be used to sail to the Caribbean (from US East Coast) with the possibility of circumnavigating from there. Most of the circumnavigation will be near the equator (trade winds) as we be looking for warm water and waves for surfing. There be 2 fulltime members with a rotating third or fourth crew member.
> Moody 42
> Hallberg Rassey 38
> ...


We now return you to the original question on this post..... :laugher


----------



## mitiempo (Sep 19, 2008)

I'd choose in order: Hallberg Rassey 38
Wauquiez Centurion 42
Passport 42
Moody 42
Pearson 424
Island Packet 38
All with slab reefing of course 
Brian


----------



## mitiempo (Sep 19, 2008)

I'd choose in order: Hallberg Rassey 38
Wauquiez Centurion 42
Passport 42
Moody 42
Pearson 424
Island Packet 38
All with slab reefing of course 
Brian


----------



## SeanRW (Apr 26, 2009)

mrybas

I would have to second the choice for the Halberg-Rassy 38. 

Just about every review I've read has agreed that they are top notch "Blue Water" vessels. Never been on one but if I had lottery type money, a new HR would be a nice way to spend some  

SRW


----------



## mrybas (Jun 23, 2008)

Don't worry Thread HiJackers....I'm still here  
SeanRW....the HR 38 that I'm looking at doesn't qualify as a lottery money boat as it's quite old. 1981 Hallberg-Rassy C/C Sloop (RECENT PRICE REDUCTION) Sail Boat For Sale -
It's a nice boat....but it's the oldest of the boats I'm looking at (older than me by a year!) And I have heard the the Volvos are expensive to fix. Any other thoughts on this specific boat?
I also like the Wauquiez Centurion 42 1985 Wauquiez Centurion Sail Boat For Sale - www.yachtworld.com.....it's the boat that I find myself day dreaming about. But I would prefer a rudder that has some protection (ie skeg hung) and it has a lot of teak that probably needs replacing sooner or later. I also believe the current owner sailed this one pretty hard.

I'm quickly figuring out there is no such thing as a perfect boat....everything is a compromise! I'm going to try and see a Passport 40 this weekend- maybe she'll be the one.


----------



## SeanRW (Apr 26, 2009)

mrybas said:


> Don't worry Thread HiJackers....I'm still here
> SeanRW....the HR 38 that I'm looking at doesn't qualify as a lottery money boat as it's quite old. 1981 Hallberg-Rassy C/C Sloop (RECENT PRICE REDUCTION) Sail Boat For Sale -
> It's a nice boat....but it's the oldest of the boats I'm looking at (older than me by a year!) And I have heard the the Volvos are expensive to fix. Any other thoughts on this specific boat?
> 
> ...


You're 100% right. There is no such thing as a "perfect boat". But you did say one thing that strikes a chord with me. If after you've looked at stats, compared costs and confirmed that the vessels are all in good condition, the one you should choose is the one that gives you that little grin of contentment and sense of pride.

You're already daydreaming about the Wauquiez and maybe that's the one for you. Even if it's got a few little flaws, if you're "falling" for the boat then that's the most important thing. Afterall, you're going to be spending a lot of time together !!

As for the HR's, all I can say is that they are solid, well respected and capable cruisers. Good performance, good sea handling etc. Are there other boats equally capable ? Sure, but these are definitely nice vessels.

Go with your heart. If you can, see as many as possible and then start comparing them with each other in terms of cost, stats, req'd fixes etc. Will you be happy with it in a few years ? But in the end, after all the numbers have been crunched, it's a gut call.


----------



## mrybas (Jun 23, 2008)

I'm going to take a look at a TaShing Tashiba 40 this weekend. Is anyone familiar with this boat? From what I have read the builder, Ta Shing, is supposed to have a very good reputation. They are also capable ocean cruisers (smallish cockpit, cutter rig, canoe stern, etc). Can any comment on how they sail?


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

mrybas said:


> I'm going to take a look at a TaShing Tashiba 40 this weekend. Is anyone familiar with this boat? From what I have read the builder, Ta Shing, is supposed to have a very good reputation. They are also capable ocean cruisers (smallish cockpit, cutter rig, canoe stern, etc). Can any comment on how they sail?


Ta SHing is top notch, but I am not familiar with that particular boat.

- CD


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

I just checked on that boat online. Perry design. SHould be a good boat. I think we have one of them in our marina, but I have never been on it. It looks, via pics, just like a Tayana 37 to me. Of course, hint-hint, a T37 would be about half that cost.

- CD


----------



## mrybas (Jun 23, 2008)

We bought a Tashiba 40! We just returned from sailing her back from Duxbury , MA (to Philadelphia). The boat sailed beautifully (not that I have much to compare it too...this is my first boat!). We had a couple days of 20-30 knot winds and choppy seas and she felt very solid and safe. We are very happy with our purchase!


----------



## SeanRW (Apr 26, 2009)

Good for you !!!

Congratulations man. You must be happier than a pig in....well...you must be happy  

Let the adventure begin. P.S are we all invited for BBQs and day sails if we visit Philly ?

SRW


----------



## MJBrown (Apr 1, 2009)

Congratulations, she looks like a very nice boat. You certainly had a great chance to learn how she sails in those conditions. Nothing like jumping in with both feet  Good luck with her. BTW where will you keep her in Philly?
Mike


----------



## mrybas (Jun 23, 2008)

SRW- would you settle for a Pat's Cheese Steak and doing some bright work? She's a solid boat, but needs some TLC. And I have a couple major projects planed for her this winter that may carry into the summer.

MJ Brown- I have a dock in front of my house just outside NE Philly. I'll pull her out next week at one of the marinas in the area.


----------



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

Beauty!! and a whole winter of planning & scheming for next season


----------



## mrybas (Jun 23, 2008)

Hey guys- if you get a chance make some suggestions on my new thread about the winter refit. http://www.sailnet.com/forums/gear-maintenance/59006-tashiba-40-help-me-plan-re-fit.html


----------



## scarolinasailor (Nov 3, 2009)

*Why Not Island Packet?*

I just stumbled on this thread, and it's been really helpful as I'm in a similar position to the original poster. Many great suggestions for strong, seaworthy boats in the 38 to 44 foot range for a "reasonable" price. I have just one question though: why did most posters seem to ignore the IP380 (which was on the original posters original list), or at least place it at the bottom of their lists? I'm not trying to start a brand bashing thing here, just looking for honest opinions both good and bad.

Thanks all.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

I can't speak for the others but I would suggest that the hull form and rig proportions of the IP 380 plus its construction details make it a better live-aboard than long range cruiser expecially as compared to boats that are designed for serious offshore use. 

Jeff


----------



## JohnRPollard (Mar 26, 2007)

mrybas said:


> We bought a Tashiba 40! We just returned from sailing her back from Duxbury , MA (to Philadelphia). The boat sailed beautifully (not that I have much to compare it too...this is my first boat!). We had a couple days of 20-30 knot winds and choppy seas and she felt very solid and safe. We are very happy with our purchase!


Mrybas,

I missed your announcement previously. Congratulations!


----------



## scarolinasailor (Nov 3, 2009)

Jeff_H said:


> I can't speak for the others but I would suggest that the hull form and rig proportions of the IP 380 plus its construction details make it a better live-aboard than long range cruiser expecially as compared to boats that are designed for serious offshore use.
> 
> Jeff


Could you be a little more precise? I assume you mean you've found some construction details lacking or weak - such as? I'm not trying to be picky, it's just that I've heard these types of generalized comments before (about IP's and others), and am really trying to get specifics, particularly from people who have spent a lot of time aboard or studying the boats.


----------



## bubb2 (Nov 9, 2002)

Jeff_H said:


> a better live-aboard than long range cruiser expecially as compared to boats that are designed for serious offshore use. Jeff


:laugher :laugher :laugher :laugher


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

Without getting into the hull form issues (high drag, shallow draft, beamy with beam carried to the ends of the boat) or rig proportion (a cutter rig that depends heavily on large over lapping headsails and for which the staysail is too small to balance the main except in in extreme conditions but which is necessary for the sailing ability of the boat in moderate conditions) which have been covered in other places, there are a wide variety of details on the IP and design features that I think make them less than ideal as an offshore cruiser. These would include: 
-The IP 38 post hung rudder that is as deep as the keel bottom fully exposing the rudder post to damage. 
-The propane locker in the side deck where the drains/vents are underwater when sailing heeled.
-The use of the Hoyt boom which tends to leak around its swivel in heavy going.
-The ballroom sized cabin decks without footholds. 
-The general lack of sea berths and the layout of the double berths on the boat. 
-or even small goofy thing like the use of the cheapest Ronstan solid sheeve blocks.

Jeff


----------



## kwaltersmi (Aug 14, 2006)

mrybas said:


> We bought a Tashiba 40!


Awesome choice! I wouldn't mind owning one of her little siblings someday (Baba 30/35 or Tashiba 31). Perry double-enders are some of my favorite yachts of all time.


----------



## tthomson (Jun 3, 2004)

The Passport is great. As a Caliber 40 sailor, I would recommend your taking a look at them. They are made for the sort of thing you are talking about. The Tayana 37 might also be a good bet.


----------



## sailordave (Jun 26, 2001)

Jeff_H said:


> Without getting into the hull form issues (high drag, shallow draft, beamy with beam carried to the ends of the boat) or rig proportion (a cutter rig that depends heavily on large over lapping headsails and for which the staysail is too small to balance the main except in in extreme conditions but which is necessary for the sailing ability of the boat in moderate conditions) which have been covered in other places, there are a wide variety of details on the IP and design features that I think make them less than ideal as an offshore cruiser. These would include:
> -The IP 38 post hung rudder that is as deep as the keel bottom fully exposing the rudder post to damage.
> -The propane locker in the side deck where the drains/vents are underwater when sailing heeled.
> -The use of the Hoyt boom which tends to leak around its swivel in heavy going.
> ...


Let's not forget they don't Point worth squat, the winches are located for comfort not for trimming ease and they're BUTT UGLY! (my experience on a 445) But that's just my .02


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

"-The IP 38 post hung rudder that is as deep as the keel bottom fully exposing the rudder post to damage."
One of the BendyToy First38-series is set up that same way. Some years ago there were some efforts to look into steering control by means of plates or bladders that "bulged out" from the hull, changing the hull symmetry right up at the bow and forcing a turn with no conventional rudder movement. But as I recall that entire area of exploration was banned by racing rules, one of the many things banned because experimenting with it could become a very expensive thing, and "expensive" is supposed to discourage racing participation.

On the other hand, I think it is the Laser28 that has such a shallow rudder that it loses steering very easily once heeled over too far. Horses for courses and all that good stuff.


----------



## elkscout (Feb 12, 2010)

This is a really informative thread, even with the tangent of furling systems, which did add valuable insight, re: blue water capables. I really appreciate JeffH's list of specifics on the IP, enabling novices better understanding of the differences and what to look for in purchasing a boat. I must say, I think there's more pertinent criteria involved when shopping for a sailboat than when searching/purchasing a house, which I did for the first time this time last year.


----------



## elkscout (Feb 12, 2010)

*Is the stern canoe shape?*



mrybas said:


> We bought a Tashiba 40! We just returned from sailing her back from Duxbury , MA (to Philadelphia). The boat sailed beautifully (not that I have much to compare it too...this is my first boat!). We had a couple days of 20-30 knot winds and choppy seas and she felt very solid and safe. We are very happy with our purchase!


Very attractive looking vessel. From the pic, it looks like the stern is canoe shaped. If so, what are the advantages of such a design?


----------



## mrybas (Jun 23, 2008)

> Very attractive looking vessel. From the pic, it looks like the stern is canoe shaped. If so, what are the advantages of such a design?/QUOTE]
> The advantage of a canoe stern is that it presents less area to following seas and breaking waves. The fine shape of the stern allows moving water to flow past the boat rather than drive it forward.


----------

