# Really? PHRF ratings Nauticat et al.



## SPC (Nov 26, 2009)

I continue my search for the right boat and am increasingly looking to PHRF ratings for guidance as a first indicator of the boat's ability to sail to weather. (My limited experience in autos suggests that racers are very careful about such things in spite of politics.)

I was surprised to see a 35 Nauticat at 180 which is similar to Hans Christian 38 at 192, Hallberg Rassy 35 at 180, Island Packet 35 at 186, Tayana 37 at 180, and much better than a Westsail 32 at 213 or Island Packet 32 at 198. 

The reviews that I have read say that the Nauticat will need auxiliary support going to weather with less than about 10 knots true wind, but I am surprised that it would sail as well or better than the other boats that I listed. Can you affirm that the Nauticat sails as well to weather as the PHRF suggests? If so, then two cabins, two heads, an independent galley, and a very nice second helm cabin look pretty good.

Does the Nauticat PHRF of 180 in comparison to the others listed make sense to you?


----------



## seabreeze_97 (Apr 30, 2006)

Design characteristics of boats yield different performance characteristics in various seas and winds. PHRF does not address these differences.


----------



## blt2ski (May 5, 2005)

If you are going to compare PHRF, better ad in a 1D35 at about 30 or there abouts, melges 32 in the very low double digits, they go to weather quite well.

PHRF will not address the how close you can sail to the wind for the most part. For that, you need to look at deck gear, ie how close to centerline is the jib tracks, 8-9 degrees, you will tack quite close, start talking 12-15* not as close, altho it might be abit faster, as 12* off is faster than 8*.

Marty


----------



## bobmcgov (Jul 19, 2007)

Nauticat may not be the bee's knees to weather, but it's a demon on a reach and decent sail area keeps it trucking downwind. It has a pretty good reputation that way.

None of the boats you list in your post are exactly rockets in their class. I would expect a 35-footer with good all-around sailing qualities to carry a PHRF of 160 or lower. That's for a coastal racer/cruiser with some offshore credentials. As you shift toward the all-weather HCs, expect to slow down a bit. Toward the Omegas, things get a little bit quicker. (Omega 36 = PHRF 117) Toward the Farrs ... the boat will probably make it home before you do. (Farr 36 ODR = *PHRF 9*.)


----------



## blt2ski (May 5, 2005)

bobmcgov said:


> ........Toward the Farrs ... the boat will probably make it home before you do. (Farr 36 ODR = *PHRF 9*.)


How about more like, finish before you start the race, if they do a fat boats first, slow last! I did an 18 miler awhile ago, I was the last start, 50 min after multi's, 45min after the Melges 32 bunch, they were all 1/2 -3/4 of the way towards the finish with a 4 mile upwind, then 12 mile down wind in 15-25 knots. They could hold full sail up, doing 7-10, downwind 15, I'm lucky to do 7-8 downwind with my 30' fin keeler that rates 169 ave in the US< 192 local, but we have upped all ratings 10% across the board. I was not even at the first mark when the fast boats were finishing, as the last two miles to the north buoy, the wind shifted to the north, then all down wind to the finish which had the S to N shift in the middle of the sound.......NOT FUN! Now I know why I like reverse starts!

Other factors, keel depth, rig height, more luff, better upwind, less less, more boom, better reach to down wind to a degree. SA to disp, the boats you are looking at are in the 15 or 16-1 range, Melges 32 mid 20to 30-1 for upwind, and 60-1 for down wind along with planing hull forms.

many many items can make or break a rig.

marty


----------



## JomsViking (Apr 28, 2007)

The Nauticat 35 is very different from the 33 - So what you have heard might actually have been about the 33, which is not a good sailboat on any point of sail. (the newer versions are better).
The NC35 is also very different from a Westsail 32, as it has a totally different underwater profile (fin-keeled), but still a bit conservative - which explains the PHRF rating being high(ish) but still lower than the Westsail.


----------



## christyleigh (Dec 17, 2001)

Something that most people don't know is that Nauticat makes 2 quite different lines of boats. I'm not going to be able to quote all the model #'s correctly but - 

* Traditional Motor Sailors - These are the traditional looking, boxy if you wish, classic pilothouse types - Starting with the 30 year old 33, the modified version of the 33 that started in '99 (mine) the 331 and on up through the 37, and on..... These have the sliding side doors that keep the rating down to B.

* Pilothouse Sailboats - These actually look more sleek like the new 'raised salon' types that have been around for the last 10 years by a few makers. Most are S & S designs and although they Do Have real pilothouses with a second steering station they are - Sailboats - Starting with the fairly new 321, then the fairly old 40, and on up...... These are the ones that do well in distance races etc.... and are rated A - Open Ocean (no sliding side pilothouse doors).


----------



## JomsViking (Apr 28, 2007)

In all fairness, the modified 33(1) sails way better (for what it is) than the original 33.
The 35 is a Deck Saloon/Pilothouse boat.

Sorry about that, Stan..


----------



## tommays (Sep 9, 2008)

At least on Long Island Sound the PHRF is about its all around performance and is not really a good indictor of a boats ability to point 

In the recent 190 mile Around Lond Island race at the 100 mile point (more or less) the crusie boats were hanging with the race boats due to very little dead upwind sailing (boats in the 100 to 150 range)


----------



## zz4gta (Aug 15, 2007)

SPC said:


> two cabins, two heads, an independent galley, and a very nice second helm cabin look pretty good.
> 
> Does the Nauticat PHRF of 180 in comparison to the others listed make sense to you?


1. If you want all that in a small package blue water boat, than PHRF ratings should be the last thing on your list.

2. Yes it does make sense. The NC35 is slow, and all the other boats you listed are slow. Even for their size/class.

For example *my 25 footer rates 174*.


----------



## CBinRI (May 17, 2004)

Not to quibble, but I'm not sure that PHRF necessarily measures how a boat sails "to weather." It is more of an all around rating. So a light boat that goes great downwind but doesn't point or go to wind all that well might still get a decent rating, because the rating, in theory, is going to combine those attributes.

Another thing that people forget about PHRF ratings is that they are intended to apply at 15 knots. So if you are racing in the evenings in a 9 knot breeze, it will favor a certain category of boats. Almost everyone complains about PHRF but it is uncanny how accurate the ratings can be. On a 7 knot night, our fleet will be extremely spread out but on a recent night it was blowing 15 throughout and one minute separated the first seven boats in my class. So maybe they do know what they're doing.


----------



## JimsCAL (May 23, 2007)

As noted, the PHRF rating is an average considering upwind, downwind, reaching, light air, heavy air, etc. Every boat will have conditions when it can easily sail to its rating and conditions when it cannot. It is a very useful indicator of overall speed capability in a variety of conditions, but tells you little about specific conditions like upwind or light air. You have to look more deeply at other things like SA/D ratio and D/L ratio etc.


----------



## JomsViking (Apr 28, 2007)

IMnsHO PHRF - or another figure based on empirical data - is one of the parameters worth considering for a bluewater boat - Not the primary parameter, but given two boats with the same "score" for all other of your criteria, by all means choose the one with the best (lowest) PHRF. Just make sure you understand how it is derived, and thus can be totally off for a type that is not well-known (or not raced).


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

I think that there are valid uses for a PHRF rating in selecting a blue water cruiser but only if you understand how a PHRf Rating is generated. A PHRF rating is supposed to represent the relative speed of a well prepared boat, sailing a triangular (olympic style) course in the prevailing winds in that region. It is not about upwind or downwind performance across a broad spectrum per-se', but about overall performance on various points of sail across a narrow range of windspeeds. 

In a general sense, if you are comparating two boats with relatively close ratings and of a similar type, the PHRF numbers should be helpful. So for example, if you see a Pacific Seacraft 40 with a rating of 174 and a Valiant 40 at 186, (those are not the real numbers) the PS 40 would probably be faster on most points of sail and have faster passage times. 

Where this falls apart, is when you talk about boats of vastly different types. So for example there is no fair way to handicap boats as different as say a Beneteau 40.7 at 51, vs my out of date 38 foot performance cruiser at 87, vs a pretty nice and recent coastal cruiser like the Hanse 37 at 121, vs heavy cruising boats like the Tayana 37, or Hans Christian 38 which are all the way up in the 180-190's. 

This range in numbers represent a very big difference in speed between these boats, but it does not address the basis of that speed difference. A boat like the Beneteau 40.7 will have and enormous speed advantage upwind in almost all condition, but perhaps not as much of an advantage reaching in winds that might be called hull speed winds where the 40.7 can't surf but there is enough winds for all the boats to approach hull speed. 

In a general sense, although these boats are similar in length the big differences in speed across the range of these boats means that they are sailing in different portions of the venue. This can be a significant advantage to the faster boat in a long passage where it may be able to sail through light air where the slower boat might have to sit or motor or sail a little further to get into better conditions. Even in coastal conditions, in confined bodies of water, the faster boat would typically end up taking fewer tacks or covering more of the distance when the wind was at its best. 

My point being, that there is no easy fair way for a single number rating to fairly balance those kinds of 'tactical' issues and it makes it hard to compare the real world speed relationship between say a very fast 32 footer (as cited above) or a very slow 35-40 footer as mentioned in the original post. 

Jeff


----------



## COOL (Dec 1, 2009)

SPC said:


> I was surprised to see a 35 Nauticat at 180 which is similar to Hans Christian 38 at 192, Hallberg Rassy 35 at 180, Island Packet 35 at 186, Tayana 37 at 180, and much better than a Westsail 32 at 213 or Island Packet 32 at 198.
> 
> Does the Nauticat PHRF of 180 in comparison to the others listed make sense to you?


Despite the ratings listed, I would guess that the Nauticat will be
slower than all these other boats, including the W32, on most points of
sail and in most conditions.
PHRF ratings are initially arrived at by a little educated guesswork,
then generally refined by observed performance. For a type of boat
that is commonly raced, the rating will be a pretty good indicator 
of a boats potential. All of the boats listed would have difficultly
sailing anywhere near their ratings on a windward / leeward course.
I doubt that a N35 would ever make it to a windward mark under sail
in light air. Most of these boats will only have a rating, because they
decided to enter a point to point race. Many of these sorts of boats 
that are listed in the So Cal PHRF roster have a rating mainly because
they plan to compete in the Newport to Ensenada Race. They are not
raced any other time, so there is no emperical basis to their rating.
If the race happens to be a windy reach, these boats may sail to their
rating and then some. This one reason why So Cal PHRF wisely uses
a three number rating system with ratings for Bouy W/L, Random Leg,
and Off the Wind. Under this scheme, I would give the Nauticat 35
provisional ratings of 264/ 192/198.


----------



## JomsViking (Apr 28, 2007)

*Thanks for the way better explanation*

Jeff,

Thanks for clarifying this. While I did say


> Just make sure you understand how it is derived, and thus can be totally off for a type that is not well-known (or not raced).


I totally missed the depth you provide in your post.



Jeff_H said:


> I think that there are valid uses for a PHRF rating in selecting a blue water cruiser but only if you understand how a PHRf Rating is generated. A PHRF rating is supposed to represent the relative speed of a well prepared boat, sailing a triangular (olympic style) course in the prevailing winds in that region. It is not about upwind or downwind performance across a broad spectrum per-se', but about overall performance on various points of sail across a narrow range of windspeeds.
> 
> In a general sense, if you are comparating two boats with relatively close ratings and of a similar type, the PHRF numbers should be helpful. So for example, if you see a Pacific Seacraft 40 with a rating of 174 and a Valiant 40 at 186, (those are not the real numbers) the PS 40 would probably be faster on most points of sail and have faster passage times.
> 
> ...


----------

