# Rush's Boat Search



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

This thread is being created for topics related Rush2112's boat search. To date Rush's boat search has led to discussions containing a large collection of posts on a broad range of topics that contain a lot of very useful information from a wide range of points of view. All of that is a very good thing.

But these discussions are spread across a profusion of threads with titles that do not relate to many of the posts. That doesn't necessarily do Rush as much good as it might, or other members researching a similar topic for that matter. Also some of the discussions have migrated between multiple threads losing context and making them harder to follow.

Hopefully, this thread will provide a more useful framework to continue the discourse to assist Rush in his search for the right boat.

Jeff


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

I have been thinking about Rush's boat search for a while now. Like many people who are new to the sport, Rush's initial questions were exploring desirable and undesirable characteristics of a potential boat purchase by dissecting features of boats into their component parts. And while cases can be made for and against almost any design element in almost any particular boat, for most normal people the choices fall somewhere in the matrix between the ideal and the seriously compromise. For most of us, we tend to buy the boat that is closest to the ideal rather than the most compromised as we perceive our various choices. 

Rush's search is a little different than most of the "I am new to sailing, I want to buy a boat, what boat should I buy?" threads in that he is sailing a venue in which the sailing conditions can be more challenging than many, his long term goals for the boat are ambitious, and his personal preferences do not necessarily align with his goals and budget. 

As Rush has described his goals for this boat, they would include:
-A reasonably comfortable live aboard 
-A platform to learn to sail
-A boat optimized for sailing in a frequently hash environment
-Robustness
-A good single-hander
-A boat capable of long distance voyaging
-Low deferred and long term maintenance cost 
-An initial "ready to go" cost around $30,000

And looking at this list, in many ways these are seemingly mutually exclusive goals that therefore suggest that whatever boat he buys will require some level of compromise. To give an example to illustrate why I say there is a degree of mutual exclusivity in that list, I suggest that we think about the characteristics associated with some of these points. So, if we start with a boat that is a reasonably comfortable live aboard, that would normally be a boat with a lot of space for its length so that slip fees are smaller for the amount of accommodations. Normally that might mean a full bow and maximizing the percentage of the boat that is used for living accommodation. 

But those same characteristics are at odds with a boat that is intended as a long range cruiser, where storage becomes more important than open accommodations, where small passage ways, galley and head permits bracing oneself while using these spaces, where the full ends compromise motion comfort and seaworthiness. Similarly, leaning too strongly towards the needs of a live-aboard overly compromises the platform to learn to sail, since a reasonably ideal platform to learn to sail is an easily handled and responsive design. 

In any given year I seem to end up assisting somewhere between a half dozen and a dozen people locate a boat that makes sense to them and find and work their way through the process of buying that boat. Pretty much all of these require a a degree of compromise somewhere, and sometimes (rarely) that person's goals are so contradictory that that there is no acceptable choice for that person. But I typically suggest any particular choice be viewed on a matrix of that person's goals, and that any particular boat be considered in terms of how well it balances the conflicting characteristics of the various goals. 

In Rush's case, I would suggest that his boat search be thought of as a square with the four corners labeled: 1) Live aboard, 2) Distance Voyager, 3) Optimized for a harsh environment, and 4) Platform to learn to sail on/ good single-hander. 
The sides of the square might be viewed as being A) between 1 & 2:: large carrying capacity. B) between 2&3: Robustness, seaworthiness, good motion comfort, and able to shift gears quickly for changing weather, C) Between 3&4: easily handling, forgiving, responsive to sail trim, easily driven hull to allow smaller sail area. and D) between 4&1: there are fewer mutual characteristics except that robustness becomes less important and while reliability and low maintenance becomes a little more critical. 

The reason that I suggest that this matrix of seemingly contradictory ideas is important to a boat search such as this, is that it can serve as a filter in considering any particular boat and better understanding its compromises and assets. Up to now much of the conversation has explored a zone between side A & B of the matrix. I suggest that the choices be expanded to a zone that also acknowledges the ideal characteristics of side C of the matrix. 

But also, in many of the threads there is tremendously useful information , but some, if not most of which is 'worst case'. Take the high cost maintenance items thread as an example. Someone quoted the price to replace chain plates as being around $12,000. There is no doubt that is the case on boats that you have to disassemble much of the interior and which have complex chain plates, for uppers, fore and aft lowers, backstay and stem fittings embedded in the glass work. But while that may be true in many cases, it should perhaps add a criteria to the search that emphasizes either looking for a boat that has had the chain-plates replaced by a prior owner or else find a boat, which has a simpler chain-plates type that are simply a stainless steel bolted to a fiberglass reinforced bulkhead, and perhaps which has fewer attachment points. That would bring the ease of inspection and the price down enormously. For example, a few years ago I was quoted a price to replace all of the chain plates (except the stem fitting) on my 38 footer for well less than $2,500. That installation method allowed us to remove, inspect and reinstall the same chain-plates, then tune the rig in a little more than half a day. Only the welded fitting for the backstay needed to be replaced and cost around $600 at the time. 

My point being that perhaps it is important to provide ways to mitigate and avoid the "worst cases" as well. 

Jeff


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Hi Jeff,
Thanks for the thread and the posts. It's kind of awkward transitioning as there are a lot of people still posting in the other thread, so maybe I'll make a link from there to here.
Anyway, I found this thread then lost it and couldn't find it, then I found it from your profile ;-)
So I'll do my best to catch up- thanks again.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

MikeOReilly said:


> ...they are solid, simple, but well built boats. Nothing fancy about either the interior or exterior, but easy to work on, and tough as nails. My understanding is that they were designed as coastal cruisers, but obviously many have crossed the Atlantic.
> 
> As for price, it is listed at almost double what it would probably go for in the Great Lakes. But I assume the UK market is different, and if it's in exceptional condition, it may be worth considering.


Mike, thanks for the feedback on the Grampian. There is so little online about these boats so it's definitely good to hear from prior owners. It is certainly a bit more expensive than others I've seen but then again as you note, it is in exceptional condition. The advice from the boat maintenance thread that I started a little while back was very revealing to say the least, and put a whole new perspective on boat ownership for me- in fact dramatically changing my whole priorities list, so 'exceptional condition' is something that I now know is not just a matter of a little elbow grease and paint, but numbers like 60 grand of maintenance work! Yikes! So yeah I'll keep this one in the hopper for now ;-)


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Minnewaska said:


> I'd speak to them, in order to better assess the answers. Allowing for careful editing of an email, or vague answers that drive followup questions, doesn't help as much.
> 
> I see above the price may be high, then again, it may well reflect the amount of current work. It may also reflect an insurance repair. Sort it out.


That's a good point. I am still really wondering what happened that the boat needed a whole new keel. I was able to verify that the keel is in fact a replacement 'clone':

"Keel: brand new completely replaced in 2013 with solid newly patented clone & new keel bolts etc at a cost of over £10,000 inc VAT by Irons brothers The U.K's best keel maker in Wayde bridge Cornwall..."

And I'm still wondering why? Also the inconsistency of the ad saying it's a 1984 boat when production ended in 1977...

And another inconsistency, in the data section of the ad it says the engine is a 1999, then in comments below on the same page it says:

"Original ENGINE replaced with new professionally installed 2007 beta marine 28hp very low hours bomb "proof", Diesel (powerful) meticulously maintained by beta engineer, oil changed annually impellers replaced annually, filters replaced annually Professionally winterized each year. "

In fairness I have to say it does look you could eat off that engine, so I don't know...


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

mstern said:


> Rush, my friend, if there is one thing I've learned in twenty plus years of sailboat shopping, it's this: there's always another "perfect" boat out there. If you pass on one, there's another that will come along that is just as good if not better...
> FWIW, my limited experiences with Grampians have been good.


Thanks for the feedback on the Grampians mstern, good to know that on their home turf they seem to have a pretty good reputation, it seems that they are on the more durable side of coastal cruiser. Still it's good to keep my head level, and not be afraid to pass on a boat as another one will always come sailing by ;-) Thanks again.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Minnewaska said:


> Turns out it was a BS move during a divorce. He was never going to sell it...
> I've also known many who have listed their boats at pay it or forget it prices. They're only interested in selling at top dollar.


Yeah it's hard to tell what the real deal is here. I have to admit a 'company director' sinking 70 grand into a 25 grand boat doesn't exactly sound like good business practice, and why it's being sold is a little bit of a mystery, he was going to sail the Med then changed his mind. Then again, maybe he figured it would be better to upgrade a fixer upper than to buy a boat already in great shape. Apparently he didn't spend much time on sailnet.com LOL.

And who knows, maybe he's one of these guys who sailed once around England then discovered it wasn't for him, wouldn't be the first time I've heard that story. I'll give them a call tomorrow as you've suggested.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

olson34 said:


> Depends on where you boat. In the Pacific NW we get fog, and I notice that radar has become quite common in the last 20 years. We have it and appreciate how it reports reality, unlike the plotter. So both both are wonderful to have, but it's worth remembering that they do different things... Wonderful Things!
> 
> Edit: our current Lowrance digital unit, also requires less amps by far compared to our original klystron tube model(s).


Great information olson34 thanks for sharing. Perhaps especially for single handed sailing a radar would in fact be very nice. Oddly I'd never even considered the fog. Actually if you are out where big shipping boats are passing through, in the fog, it could be properly terrifying not have good visibility. Seems like almost every day somebody mentions something that I hadn't considered at all. Thanks again!


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

Rush2112 said:


> Mike, thanks for the feedback on the Grampian. There is so little online about these boats so it's definitely good to hear from prior owners. It is certainly a bit more expensive than others I've seen but then again as you note, it is in exceptional condition. The advice from the boat maintenance thread that I started a little while back was very revealing to say the least, and put a whole new perspective on boat ownership for me- in fact dramatically changing my whole priorities list, so 'exceptional condition' is something that I now know is not just a matter of a little elbow grease and paint, but numbers like 60 grand of maintenance work! Yikes! So yeah I'll keep this one in the hopper for now ;-)


Have you looked at the Grampian owners website: Grampian 26 Home Page


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Jeff_H said:


> As Rush has described his goals for this boat, they would include:
> -A reasonably comfortable live aboard
> -A platform to learn to sail
> -A boat optimized for sailing in a frequently hash environment
> ...


Yep, that sums it up pretty well.



Jeff_H said:


> In Rush's case, I would suggest that his boat search be thought of as a square with the four corners labeled: 1) Live aboard, 2) Distance Voyager, 3) Optimized for a harsh environment, and 4) Platform to learn to sail on/ good single-hander.
> The sides of the square might be viewed as being A) between 1 & 2:: large carrying capacity. B) between 2&3: Robustness, seaworthiness, good motion comfort, and able to shift gears quickly for changing weather, C) Between 3&4: easily handling, forgiving, responsive to sail trim, easily driven hull to allow smaller sail area. and D) between 4&1: there are fewer mutual characteristics except that robustness becomes less important and while reliability and low maintenance becomes a little more critical.


That's true, I pretty much came into this wanting all four sides of the quadrant! LOL, and didn't see the natural trade-offs in different boat designs.
And in fact I would have put my early preference probably at line B, between 2 and 3. 
The only thing I knew for sure was the North Sea has a mean reputation for turning nasty in a hurry and get surprisingly rough surprisingly often. Since then I have come around to the idea that it really is a 'cruising' lifestyle off the hook as they say that I'm really looking for, and while sailing performance is sometimes appreciated by cruisers, liveable comfort is a daily blessing. So 1 is higher on my list now. Then finally I was hit smack in the face with maintenance cost data and (oh boy!) was that a wake up. Also since then it has been suggested that most 'cruisers' simply do their best to watch the weather carefully and avoid the worst of the nasty stuff, staying close to the coast, and always having a go to ditch out location in mind if things turn for the worse. So I have also modified my 'blue water' requirement down to a 'relatively durable coastal cruiser'.

So I would say today my (dramatically revised) priorities would be:
1. Maintenance work up to date, good value for money. New engine, standing rigging, running rigging, wiring, and a good hull with osmosis work already done, and a good AP to help with solo reefing, changing sails, etc. Cold and hot pressurized water is a nice have, as is modern electronics. I can add a coal stove if it has no heating, but some kind of heat would be nice also as I am far north and the winters are cold up here.

2. After not being financially obliterated (and having this put an early end to my adventures!) I would say 1 a good live aboard and 2 durability and stability would about tie. I really very much like the idea of a heavier more sea kindly boat, and if I give up a fair share of performance for that trait then so be it. This is not only for me, but also for a few friends that I will like to occasionally drag along for day cruises, who have emphatically expressed their disappointment in the stability of lightweight rental boats, which turned them off to the whole idea of sailing. But I think they can be brought around 

3. Easy of learning, and solo sailing. I suppose this one may have to go the wayside. If lines can be run aft and I can setup a flexible sailplan to keep me in the cockpit as much as possible (even if this means giving up a fair share of performance) then I suppose that might just be good enough. At this point it seems that aside from lines run aft, the best 'solo' feature would probably be a good AP. Almost no boats in my price range have a below decks AP, and I have been pretty well persuaded about the benefits of a good AP esp to a solo sailor so I am braced to deal with this upgrade if necessary.

4. So in dead last simply by law of trade-offs I suppose we have light weather performance, responsiveness, long distance carrying capacity, pretty lines or interiors, and anything luxury. If it looks like an absolute dog and has a particularly cheap interior I'm fine with that. This isn't a fashion show by any means.



Jeff_H said:


> My point being that perhaps it is important to provide ways to mitigate and avoid the "worst cases" as well.
> Jeff


So yeah you're correct again in how my preference in the 'quadrant' has shifted. And you make good points about the variability of some of these potential nightmare maintenance items, and possible mitigation. I sure wish I could know in advance how accessible the chain plates are- I'll certainly add it to my list of questions for the selling owner. It's good to know that these are not always a bank breaking job.

So finally I wonder if you've had a chance to have a look at my latest love interest. She is attractive from a pure dollars poured into her perspective, although I am following up with the owner to try and figure out why the keel was fully replaced, I wonder what you think of her general shape and design:






Grampian boats for sale - YachtWorld


Find Grampian boats for sale in your area & across the world on YachtWorld. Offering the best selection of Grampian boats to choose from.




www.yachtworld.com







https://sailboatdata.com/sailboat/grampian-2-34



So thanks for all the info and detailed responses you've provided this whole time. And apologies for the late response in this thread I found it and lost it and found it again. This thread is actually living in a different part of the forums, anyway... I just wanted to take a moment and say that I really do appreciate it. I may have been a little bit argumentative at first, but I'm sure you understand that there's a lot of conflicting data out there, and I just want to get to the bottom of things. This research project has been in many ways more detailed than my last house purchase! But then again, my last house didn't float ;-)
Thanks again!


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

MikeOReilly said:


> Have you looked at the Grampian owners website: Grampian 26 Home Page


I had not. Thank you, I'll check it out.

Edit: looks like a pretty informative site, I'll spend some more time.
Interesting I found that one registered owner has a 2-34 built by a different builder in 1982, so I guess a 1984 is not out of the question. That's a strange thing in the boat world how a builder can just pick up and build a discontinued boat. Can you imagine a car company today just picking up the plans and building say a 65 Corvette?

Anyway, the 34 is a decent looking boat actually. The big aft cabin looks a little awkward with no dodger and the sails down, but with a dodger and sails up it actually looks kind of cool- its different and I kind of like it. I wonder what you thought of how it sailed compared to your current boat. Did it track well? Did it roll much? How would you rate the overall stability and sea kindliness?


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

Rush2112 said:


> I had not. Thank you, I'll check it out.
> 
> Edit: looks like a pretty informative site, I'll spend some more time.
> Interesting I found that one registered owner has a 2-34 built by a different builder in 1982, so I guess a 1984 is not out of the question. That's a strange thing in the boat world how a builder can just pick up and build a discontinued boat. Can you imagine a car company today just picking up the plans and building say a 65 Corvette?
> ...


I used to be more up on Grampian lore back when I owned one, but my fading memory tells me that Grampian went out of business in the late 70s. Some of the hull molds were then sold off. I'm pretty sure the Gramp 34 hull molds went off to another builder who did a small run, calling them something else. I'll attach an old magazine article written about the Gramp history.

The Gramp 34s are not the prettiest of boats, for sure. But I can tell you that aft cabin is pretty nice for making the boat a great living space. I still miss it.

It was a good sailing vessel. The ketch rig is quite versatile, and easy to manage. Its modified fin with skeg allows for good tracking, making it easy on the helm. She wasn't the fastest boat, and didn't point as high as modern racers, but she was no slouch. For her size she seemed pretty seakindly. She's only got a 10' beam, and a 12,000# displacement, but I don't recall feeling she rolled much.

The major things I disliked about the Grampian was the small side decks going forward, and the tiny ones going aft. The cabin going forward has two step ups, making it harder to move around on deck, although once up by the mast the work space was good.

It was a good all-round boat which I had planned to upgrade to the point of making her truly 'blue water capable'. I would have done so had I not found my current boat, a Rafiki-37.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

Grampian is a bit of a strange company to define. As a teenager, I actually worked in the Grampian booth at the 1965 New York Boat show. My job was polishing the bronze hardware, handing out literature and explain the company to U.S. sailers. I later owned a Grampian 22 footer. 

In the 1960's Grampian was a company that was hard to define In those days Grampian was building four different center cockpit, Angle designed motorsailers. They built a beautiful CCA style VanDyne designed 31 footer, a 27 foot Folkboat style boat, and a lovely high performance for the day C&C designed 22 footer.
The odd part was that the Grampian was surprisingly advanced in terms of building techniques. In the 60's Grampian was one of the first companies to use closed cell foam coring, and one of the first companies to use molded internal framing and a molded pan. 
I have always understood that the reason for the advanced construction was a collection of disconnected factors. For reasons that are not clear to me, at one point in the 1960's Canada was one of the largest producers of industrial fiberglass products like fiberglass seats for subways and busses, frames used inside office seats and other industrial uses. The plant manager at Grampian in 1965 came out of the industrial fiberglass industry. But also it is my understanding that Peter Van Dyne was an aeronautical engineer which might explain the internal framing.
As to the Grampian 34-2, I have not actually seen one in real life but unlike the other Grampians of the era, it was a Van De Stadt design from a time when Van De Stadt was a highly respected design firm producing pragmatic and effective cruising boats. 
I doubt that this design would have been intended as an offshore cruiser, but compared to many boats from that era, it would be a reasonable choice for cruising in a rough sailing venue even if not a perfect choice in an absolute sense.
I would like to comment on the the new keel. My guess is that the original keel was a lead keel with stainless steel J-bolt keel bolts. Replacing J-bolts is next to impossible and while it can be done, it is often less expensive to cast a new keel than to replace and fair the J-bolts in an existing keel. 
I would also note that some Grampians were sold as kits. Given that the 34-2 was designed in Europe it would not surprise me if this boat was shipped to Europe as a kit and finished in Europe which may explain may explain the late launch date 
It also isn't that odd for particular model boats to be built in multiple countries. For example, my boat was built in 6 different countries, the Laser also was built in 6 counties. J-24's were built in 4-5 counties. 
Jeff


----------



## colemj (Jul 10, 2003)

If it really is a 1984 boat, then there will be a HIN embossed on the transom that will confirm this.

Mark


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Rush, do you have a goal for when you buy a boat?


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

MikeOReilly said:


> The Gramp 34s are not the prettiest of boats, for sure. But I can tell you that aft cabin is pretty nice for making the boat a great living space. I still miss it.


Yeah it's definitely an eye of the beholder thing.
At first I saw this one and thought well, that's definitely not a looker:









And then I saw this one with a dodger and sails up and thought, well actually that looks pretty good:









In any case looks are far from my priority list. Especially since the boats I found the prettiest - the IOR era with the short waterlines Jeff_H has convinced me to avoid. And my favorite lookers include the Scandinavian folkboats and the Tayana 37 so what do I know. Haha-



MikeOReilly said:


> It was a good sailing vessel. The ketch rig is quite versatile, and easy to manage. Its modified fin with skeg allows for good tracking, making it easy on the helm. She wasn't the fastest boat, and didn't point as high as modern racers, but she was no slouch. For her size she seemed pretty seakindly. She's only got a 10' beam, and a 12,000# displacement, but I don't recall feeling she rolled much.


Good to know, thanks.



MikeOReilly said:


> The major things I disliked about the Grampian was the small side decks going forward, and the tiny ones going aft. The cabin going forward has two step ups, making it harder to move around on deck, although once up by the mast the work space was good.


Funny that you should say that, I noticed that these rails seem to be in exactly the wrong spot, thus making the rather narrow sides here a bit challenging. I saw a boatshed video review where the cameraman was having some minor issue getting past this spot, which made me take notice:









I see what you mean by the two steps up. And it sure looks like that rail could be a real toe-stubber. Still I'm sure its the kind of thing I'd get used to as one of those quirks that every boat has.



MikeOReilly said:


> It was a good all-round boat which I had planned to upgrade to the point of making her truly 'blue water capable'. I would have done so had I not found my current boat, a Rafiki-37.


Well I can definitely see why you upgraded, the Rafiki 37 is a very nice boat. Looks super solid and has the reputation to match. Might even be on my list for second or third boat ;-)

Anyway, thanks again for the feedback on the G34, very nice to know.

Edit: Oh and I read the pdf, also quite interesting. Too bad they were on a comeback from being punished by the USD/Canadian dollar ratio, and making great sales progress when the financiers pulled the plug. Also interesting to see the different mergers and acquisitions that were on the table at different points. A fun read thanks.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Jeff_H said:


> Grampian is a bit of a strange company to define. As a teenager, I actually worked in the Grampian booth at the 1965 New York Boat show. My job was polishing the bronze hardware, handing out literature and explain the company to U.S. sailers. I later owned a Grampian 22 footer.


LOL, I'm having a hard time coming up with a boat manufacturer that you don't actually have direct experience with 



Jeff_H said:


> As to the Grampian 34-2, I have not actually seen one in real life but unlike the other Grampians of the era, it was a Van De Stadt design from a time when Van De Stadt was a highly respected design firm producing pragmatic and effective cruising boats.


Good to know about Van De Stadt, I've seen the name around a lot here, so I take it he's Dutch.



Jeff_H said:


> I doubt that this design would have been intended as an offshore cruiser, but compared to many boats from that era, it would be a reasonable choice for cruising in a rough sailing venue even if not a perfect choice in an absolute sense.


OK well in my current revised preferences, that would fit in the 'good enough' category- nice.



Jeff_H said:


> I would like to comment on the the new keel. My guess is that the original keel was a lead keel with stainless steel J-bolt keel bolts. Replacing J-bolts is next to impossible and while it can be done, it is often less expensive to cast a new keel than to replace and fair the J-bolts in an existing keel.
> I would also note that some Grampians were sold as kits. Given that the 34-2 was designed in Europe it would not surprise me if this boat was shipped to Europe as a kit and finished in Europe which may explain may explain the late launch date
> It also isn't that odd for particular model boats to be built in multiple countries. For example, my boat was built in 6 different countries, the Laser also was built in 6 counties. J-24's were built in 4-5 counties.
> Jeff


So I followed through on these points with the owner by email proxy through the sales rep (as the owner was not directly available for conversation) and the response I got was interesting:



> > As you know the add is misleading, it was indeed only the Keel bolts
> that were replaced. The historical receipts confirm this. I was not
> aware of any damage etc.
> >
> ...


I responded that 'only keel bolts' was a bit strange:


> The ad says "Keel: brand new completely replaced in 2013 with solid
> newly patented clone & new keel bolts etc at a cost of over �10,000 inc
> VAT by Irons brothers The U.K's best keel maker in Wayde bridge
> Cornwall..."
> ...


And he responded that the original owner probably passed it along incorrectly:


> In truth I don't know?
> 
> We take the information from owners and the previous owner had passed
> on this note to the current owner who in turn handed the file to us
> ...


Yeah a bit weird. They were so specific about the 'newly patented clone' keel, the cost, etc.

Also the ad said in one part the engine was 1999, and in another part it was a 2007. 
They confirmed it is a 2007 and again fixed their ad.

Not exactly confidence inspiring when I find multiple errors in their ad, hmm...
Also I found the boat was up for sale first in September of 2019 (on another site, but definitely the same pics, same boat. Odd it has been for sale so long... Though it wouldn't be the first time I found an older ad of the same boat I was looking at.

In any case, the amount of money invested is definitely attractive. Not to have to worry about standing rigging, running rigging, engine, wiring, or electronics is pretty nice! And its encouraging to hear that it's a VDS design. The VDS Seal has a pretty good reputation from what I've read.

In my last question I asked:
"Finally, can you describe what kind of chain plates the boat has, how are they mounted, and if they have been serviced/replaced at any point. " 
So I'm waiting to hear back on that.

Thanks again, as always for the detailed response. Every time the football moves just a little bit further down the field


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

colemj said:


> If it really is a 1984 boat, then there will be a HIN embossed on the transom that will confirm this.
> 
> Mark


I guess there is a Porter and Haylett marking on the boat.
So what is a HIN? Hull ID number? Something like a VIN on a car?
Is there a place I can lookup these numbers online, like a car and see if it has a salvaged title or something?


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Minnewaska said:


> Rush, do you have a goal for when you buy a boat?


Good question. I did. But like everything else it has been revised with new information and the passing of time.
I wanted to have gotten my learning phase over by the end of this summer, then hunker down in the Ijsselmeer living aboard and sailing on the nicer days until spring, then head for Sweden.

Now I'll be happy if I get something by next spring. I'm not in a rush really.
I'd rather make a good informed decision, and the longer I wait the more I save up, so by spring I'll also have a little bit more to work with.

Still I'd rather if possible be on the boat right now 
Just trying to be disciplined and informed in this purchase as I feel it will pay off in the long run.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Rush2112 said:


> Not exactly confidence inspiring when I find multiple errors in their ad, hmm...


This is how you shake out a potential purchase. Keep at it.

Replacing keel bolts alone is common. Frankly, it's a huge advantage, being done already. I dare say, it is the most deferred maintenance item in all old sailboats.

It is very common for listings to be incorrect. Brokers often just publish whatever the owner sends them. I was once in contract for a boat that turned out to have neither the inflatable, nor dive compressor that were listed in inventory. They were supposed to arrive for the survey and only then was told the seller would credit for them. Still, that ad was pretty specific about the new keel, so it's a bit hard to imagine it was an error.



Rush2112 said:


> Just trying to be disciplined and informed in this purchase as I feel it will pay off in the long run.


Discipline is good, but I've often seen this level of engagement lead to no purchase at all. Every boat is a compromise, so you'll never find one tick all the boxes of your research. Don't frustrate yourself.

Frankly, one the best learning experiences is your first survey. Go into contract on the one that comes closest to your needs and attend the survey. Don't fall in love, unless the title is in your hands. Walk away and write off the cost to an education, if you're not satisfied. A surveyor is not going to review whether a spade rudder is better or worse than a skeg, etc, but you'll learn what to look for that might be a problem.

Jump in. The water feels great.


----------



## colemj (Jul 10, 2003)

Rush2112 said:


> I guess there is a Porter and Haylett marking on the boat.
> So what is a HIN? Hull ID number? Something like a VIN on a car?
> Is there a place I can lookup these numbers online, like a car and see if it has a salvaged title or something?


Yes, HIN is like a VIN on a car. It gives the date of manufacture, the model number, and the maker. But since this boat appears to be built in the UK now, it will not have a HIN embossed on the transom. Those didn't start there until late 90's.

Mark


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

Rush2112 said:


> Yeah it's definitely an eye of the beholder thing.
> At first I saw this one and thought well, that's definitely not a looker:
> View attachment 136812
> 
> ...


Fun, not sure where you found those pics ... you do realize both these pics are of my old boat. The first one on the hard is actually taken after we replaced all the old, unseaworthy portlights with proper sea ports. So the top picture shows a rather unique Grampian 34 cabin.

I too love the Tayana 37. They're almost as nice as my Rafiki 37 😀. Actually, they are very similar. We often get mistaken for one, or for a Baba.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

MikeOReilly said:


> Fun, not sure where you found those pics ... you do realize both these pics are of my old boat...


LOL, wow that's fantastic. What a small world!
So there you go, it's a boat that looks better on the water, where it belongs ;-)



MikeOReilly said:


> I too love the Tayana 37. They're almost as nice as my Rafiki 37 😀. Actually, they are very similar. We often get mistaken for one, or for a Baba.


Yep, I noticed the similarity. I don't know what you call that 'style' of boat but they sure are pretty.
And look tough as nails too!


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

So I found yet another 'inconsistency' in the Grampian 34.
One picture shows the hours on the engine at over 1880. And here I thought it was a like new engine.
looks brand new in the photos, super clean (see photo above), then you look at the hours and it's like yikes! It's old!









As a cruiser I expect to be using the engine a lot- when winds are low, for recharging batteries or taking a hot shower. So I'd set a goal of about 900 hours or less with documentation of good maintenance. So this is a disappointment...


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

1,880 hours is not an old engine. Especially, on a 40 year old boat.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Minnewaska said:


> 1,880 hours is not an old engine. Especially, on a 40 year old boat.


Well it's supposed to be a 2007 engine...
Anyway I had the idea that 200-500 was relatively new, 500-1000 was worn, and 1000-1500 was well used, and anything over 1500 if you don't know for sure the maintenance schedule it could very well be completely shot.

The oldest I've ever seen in an ad was 3000, and I thought it was a miracle it was still running.

Where would you set the ranges of tolerance for a purchase decision? Mind you I expect to be using the engine a lot and will need one sure to last at least several years.


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

mine has over 5,000 from 1985 and it's running fine. Could it use work? Yes... it does smoke at start up and burn a bit.. very little oil... but it starts right up. Volvo MD17D


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

You simply can’t establish engine condition and likely longevity by hours alone. If new in 2007, that’s a bit over 100 hrs per year, which seems like proper usage to me. If well maintained, an engine that like could be in its prime. If it had, say, 500 hours, I would be worried it sat around too much. Engines rot when they sit. They rot when poorly maintained. 

There is nothing about those hours that would scare me away. Many run just fine for many thousands of hours (with good maintenance). I would have a good engine survey performed.


----------



## MikeOReilly (Apr 12, 2010)

The rule of thumb is that diesels will need a major servicing every 10,000 hours, so one with 1800 hrs has lots of theoretical life. The usage does not seem heavy to me for a 2007 engine, but you really need to see and test it yourself to know for sure. Hours are just one measure of the state of the engine.


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

My use averages 150 hrs /yr including 5 years living aboard. Lately it's way down at around 50 - 75.


----------



## colemj (Jul 10, 2003)

Rush2112 said:


> Well it's supposed to be a 2007 engine...
> Anyway I had the idea that 200-500 was relatively new, 500-1000 was worn, and 1000-1500 was well used, and anything over 1500 if you don't know for sure the maintenance schedule it could very well be completely shot.


We recently bought a 2005 boat with 1800hrs on each diesel (two of them), and considered that a low number of hours. Our previous boat was a 1998 and we sold it with 3000hrs on each engine, and considered that to just be entering middle age. I would consider high hours as starting around 6-7,000hr, and would be negotiating an engine replacement price drop at 8-10,000hrs.

Of course, as others have correctly pointed out, engine hours are not the only way to judge the condition of an engine. Many generators that were always run loaded are in perfect shape at 10,000hrs, while many main engines used for 10min at a time to get out of a slip can be a mess at 2,000hrs.

Mark


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

OK, thanks for the replies all. I am starting to sound like a broken record, but again, I am shifting my expectations. Too bad I have written off quite a number of boats already with 1000-2000 hours on engine. Oh well... live and learn! So I guess now I'm just waiting on a response from my latest batch of questions, which include chain plates how they're mounted and if they've been replaced or serviced.

Since he has stated so much new stuff- standing and running rigging, engine, full electrical rip and rewire, plumbing, heating, keel bolts, lighting, batteries, etc, I wonder if it would be rude to request receipts at this stage? He has also claimed that the boat has been put on the hard and has been fully winterized every year. I suppose he should have receipts for that as well.

If we move further along I'll have to consider finding an inspector, whether I'll fly over to see the inspection or buy sight unseen, taxes and how to handle that internationally, and how to actually get the boat home to The Netherlands from the West Coast of England!


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Not sure why you’re focused on the chain plates, nor why you’d ask for receipts. Your surveyor checks the work.

No one asks for winterizing receipts, nor should care.

You hire a delivery a Captain, who is familiar with moving boats between countries.

You must go see the boat yourself. I find it hard to imagine, with all this anxiety, that you’d even consider buying sight unseen. 

Go. See it. You May love it, you may be disappointed. Part of the game.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Minnewaska said:


> Not sure why you're focused on the chain plates, nor why you'd ask for receipts. Your surveyor checks the work.


Well if I bought a car with a 'new transmission' I'd ask to see the receipts. That's normal with cars, I guess not with boats. Seems a lot of faith is put in the surveyor. Maybe I should be asking how to find a good surveyor!

Chain plates because it seemed agreed in the maintenance costs thread that this was a potentially huge cost and most boats around 40 years old will most likely need them replaced, re-bedded, or at least looked at. I sure don't want to buy a 30k boat then immediatly have to face a 15k chain plate bill because the surveyor missed something. I was also told surveyors often miss chain plate issues so I guess that's why I asked.



Minnewaska said:


> No one asks for winterizing receipts, nor should care.


Well he does make a big deal out of winterizing the sails and the engine and the water and fuel tanks, as evidence it's been cared for. Again, I suppose the surveyor is critical in verifying condition if one doesn't demand receipts for the claims.



Minnewaska said:


> You hire a delivery a Captain, who is familiar with moving boats between countries.


Any idea how much would be normal for this job, from England to The Netherlands?
Are captains paid by the mile or the day or..?



Minnewaska said:


> You must go see the boat yourself. I find it hard to imagine, with all this anxiety, that you'd even consider buying sight unseen.
> Go. See it. You May love it, you may be disappointed. Part of the game.


Well I like to think of it as making an educated purchase instead of 'anxiety', but maybe I'm doing more research than the average person, fair enough I guess. These Dutch tell stories of the North Sea and they can sure scare the careful into you! And considering the horror stories from the maintenance costs thread, I'm definitely highly concerned that the boat is in the condition stated.

I'm beginning to think I need to start seeing some local boats, so I at least have a few points of reference.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Rush2112 said:


> Maybe I should be asking how to find a good surveyor!


Absolutely. You're going to need to spend money. It's good to see you asking questions and accepting advice. However, you'll never think of them all. You have to make some compromises, learn a couple lessons the hard way, just like most things in life.

You really have to go see some boats. I'd spend some money to go see the one that appeals to you above, then ask for receipts, or make your offer subject to them, if they seem warranted. Maybe hire someone to do a cursory look with you.

Good luck.


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

Bad idea to import a boat. Look local... buy local.


----------



## olson34 (Oct 13, 2000)

SanderO said:


> Bad idea to import a boat. Look local... buy local.


Perhaps you had a bad experience. (?) 
We imported our previous boat from BC Canada, and titled it in Oregon. Back in the 80's we even had to pay duty on a Canadian built vessel. We had no real problems, altho creating a new title tok a couple letters back n forth with our state Marine Board. 
It was a Niagara 26, and was a wonderful little performance cruiser that we raced and cruised on for a decade. 
That said, it's gonna be easier to buy locally, usually, except when it isn't.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

SanderO said:


> Bad idea to import a boat. Look local... buy local.


I'd be more inclined to stay local (what exactly is local), in the US. In Europe, I doubt that's as luxurious an option. It would be like living in NY and not looking in CT.


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

If you can find a local boat... within say.... 100 miles... makes things a lot easier.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

Rush,

Buy this boat 1979 Kalik 33 Sail New and Used Boats for Sale - www.yachtworld.co.uk The price is right and the pictures are such a mess that you should be able to negotiate further. These were good all around boats built for the area in which you are sailing.

Plan 'B' would be 1987 X-Yachts X-99 Sail New and Used Boats for Sale - www.yachtworld.co.uk. These are pretty versatile designs. They take more skill to sail and have less room than the Kalik, but you will learn to sail more rapidly and these are extremely robustly built boats also designed for your neck of the woods. The Buhk 1 cyl is easy to work on (I had one in my Laser 28) and parts should be easier to get in the EU than they are here.This would be an extremely easy boat to sail short-hand. While this is a fast boat, once reefed down and flying a small jib, they can stand up to some pretty brutal conditions.

The point being that you can sail the living daylights out of either of these boats. they should be easy and cheap to maintain. They make a good platform to learn to sail, live aboard and learn to maintain a boat. When done, you should be able to sell the boat for close to what you paid for it. Boats like these will remain popular and marketable, where as most of the older boats will be very hard to find a buyer for.

Jeff


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

SanderO said:


> If you can find a local boat... within say.... 100 miles... makes things a lot easier.


That's about exactly the distance across the North Sea, from the Netherlands to the UK.

I'm not encouraging Rush to buy a particular boat, but I am encouraging him or her to go see some. Since the entire coast of the Netherlands is barely over 100 nm, it's almost certain they'll have to venture to neighboring countries.


----------



## mstern (May 26, 2002)

Jeff_H said:


> Rush,
> 
> Buy this boat 1979 Kalik 33 Sail New and Used Boats for Sale - www.yachtworld.co.uk The price is right and the pictures are such a mess that you should be able to negotiate further. These were good all around boats built for the area in which you are sailing.
> 
> ...


Ya don't see too many boats with signal flag cubbies. That alone should shoot it to the top of the list.

Rush, how great is it that you are getting free yacht consultant advice from an actual (former) yacht designer?


----------



## olson34 (Oct 13, 2000)

Jeff,
Nice find!
A friend of mine has been sailing a Kalik 30 for about 20 years. Won oodles of races. Tiller with "tread master" non skid.
Interior like a Danish furniture display. 
It is a fast boat that goes to weather wonderfully.

Damned good looking boat, too.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Minnewaska said:


> Absolutely. You're going to need to spend money. It's good to see you asking questions and accepting advice. However, you'll never think of them all. You have to make some compromises, learn a couple lessons the hard way, just like most things in life.
> 
> You really have to go see some boats. I'd spend some money to go see the one that appeals to you above, then ask for receipts, or make your offer subject to them, if they seem warranted. Maybe hire someone to do a cursory look with you.
> 
> Good luck.


Well I was getting ready to take action, but I haven't heard from the seller for two business days now. When I asked about the chain plates and a couple other details, the line went silent. Maybe he's waiting to hear back, we'll see. I'm starting to look locally, just to get out there and actually spend a little time 'hands on'. Great ideas thanks.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

SanderO said:


> Bad idea to import a boat. Look local... buy local.


Casting a wider net at first seemed like a great idea. But now I see that it ads a whole lot of complexity, esp in these wonderful flu days. Just to look I have to book a flight and hotel. Hmm, Netherlands has tons of boats, it's literally a sailing culture, maybe I should bring in that net a bit...


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Minnewaska said:


> I'd be more inclined to stay local (what exactly is local), in the US. In Europe, I doubt that's as luxurious an option. It would be like living in NY and not looking in CT.


Well that's not a bad point. Netherlands is tiny.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Jeff_H said:


> Rush,
> 
> Buy this boat 1979 Kalik 33 Sail New and Used Boats for Sale - www.yachtworld.co.uk The price is right and the pictures are such a mess that you should be able to negotiate further. These were good all around boats built for the area in which you are sailing.
> 
> ...


Hmm, OK, well the first one is a mess LOL. Maybe that could lead to a great deal.
Neither boat has had anything at all replaced, so that's a bit troubling. But, it wouldn't hurt to at least start getting out to see a few. Thanks for the recommendations.


----------



## colemj (Jul 10, 2003)

That first one isn't as big of a mess as you think, although the engine might be toast. Since you are focused on chainplates recently, both of those have easily accessible and inspectable ones. The X-Yacht has about the most serious chainplates I've seen - running 6' down main bulkheads and gusseted at deck level. Dude, you aren't going to find chainplates that robust on any other boat.

You also won't find any other boat that sails, and is as much fun to sail, as that X-Yacht. You will be pressed to find a boat within your parameters that cruises as well as the Kalik.

Two concerns on the Kalik - the engine, and I think these originally had screwed teak decks. If the faux teak was just laid over that, or the original was removed but a wet deck remains, then there will be issues soon. The faux teak will make determining a wet deck difficult now, although it looks like enough of the overhead is removed to probe from beneath. It would be the more roomy and comfortable cruising boat, and the new paint and deck make it a real looker.

The X-Yacht was obviously raced, and probably rode hard, but is a simpler boat that can shrug off much of that type of use - hose it down and go again. Unlikely systems like the stove, engine, and other "cruising" gear were used much. It would be more spartan for cruising, but not bad at all.

These were good finds, and are much better cruising and sailing boats than the heavy crab-crushers you originally considered. They are about the opposite of what you are looking for, but you shouldn't dismiss them without wrapping your head around them first.

Mark


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

Rush2112 said:


> Hmm, OK, well the first one is a mess LOL. Maybe that could lead to a great deal.
> Neither boat has had anything at all replaced, so that's a bit troubling. But, it wouldn't hurt to at least start getting out to see a few. Thanks for the recommendations.


I don't think that the Kalik is a mess. You are seeing a boat that is near the end of a major rebuild project. The cabin has everything piled up in it, but it seems to be in decent shape for a boat of that age. The Kalik had all of its ports and hatches replaced. It has had its primary winches replaced as well some of its deck hardware. The keel was faired and may have had its keel bolts replaced based on the paint extends onto the base plate of the keel. The deck repair appears to be a comprehensive replacement and looking at the quality of the work over the deck, more likely than not the repairs were thoroughly performed. There appears to be new compasses and updated instruments. The halyards and control lines have been routed to the cockpit. The traveler looks modern as well. The chainplates are visible and easily replaced. While there obviously wear patterns in the interior, any boat that has had any use will be marked by wear and tear. The Kalik does have a lovely interior for a boat of this size.

The X-boat has new sails and lots of new running rigging. The chainplates are easily replaced and pretty cheap to buy.

But to be clear, these are newer boats and likely to be better engineered and in better shape than the boats that you have previously been considering.
But also these boats are in your backyard and would be easy to inspect and easier to buy, and that in itself adds value.

Jeff


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Rush2112 said:


> Well I was getting ready to take action, but I haven't heard from the seller for two business days now. When I asked about the chain plates and a couple other details, the line went silent. Maybe he's waiting to hear back, we'll see. I'm starting to look locally, just to get out there and actually spend a little time 'hands on'. Great ideas thanks.


I hope they are researching your answers for you. However, asking for winterization receipts before you even saw the boat may have sent an unintended signal. The broker may or may not have other interest in that boat, but they most certainly represent many others, who probably aren't demanding that kind of time, prior to ever viewing. Once a broker knows you're serious about buying a particular boat, they devote more time to satisfy the little details.


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

Weatherization receipts? I do all the winterization of the engine which involved an oil and filter change and some antifreeze added to the fresh water and engine raw water circuits. I also do some projects during winter store and do keep receipts for spendy items. I only had the engine worked on by a mechanic a few times in 35 yrs and I do have the receipts in a folder I never look through at home. I've been keeping a log which is very comprehensive in ExCel since the late 90s. Back further my maintenance was not well documented.... but it was mostly upgrades... not repairs.... new sails, running rigging, new dinks and OBs, new winches. "replacements" came in the well documented period... life lines, stanchions, hatches and ports... head, water pumps, electrical system, exterior teak...

I never thought about the need to present this to the next owner... as I never thought about a next owner. Now I am thinking about it.


----------



## Ninefingers (Oct 15, 2009)

That Kalik is a long way from a mess actually. I you are new to sailing it's easy to get hung up on clutter, old interiors, etc. But those are the things that make a boat a great value, because they are relatively easy to upgrade and won't sink your boat or your budget.

Also, when you're buying a used boat, it's important to inspect the owner as well. Judging from the fact that the boat is stored indoors, and there is a picture of two kids on the deck, you can assume the owner is a risk adverse sort. It's not a boat owned by a knucklehead for what that is worth.


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

If Rush is looking for a learn to sail boat it hardly matters about many of the details. He'll learn to sail, to maintain a boat, discover how much space he needs in the interior... tankage and so forth and if he wants to take the next step. If he does he'll sell and buy the right boat armed with experience. If he doesn't he can sell and exit.

If he doesn't want a starter boat... then he should spend the time... and the money, even if it means a loan/mortgage and get the right boat. Trading up is a financially losing endeavor. It consumes times.. and you have to repeat almost everything you did once again.

Those seem like OK coastal cruisers but a bit small to live aboard. AP for tillers would be a consideration too.


----------



## Arcb (Aug 13, 2016)

Do they give loans on a 40 year old boat? Buying a boat that age on credit doesn't sound ideal. Wouldn't be for me. Lots of people live on boats that size. Tiller pilots are a thing. Those boats look good possibilities to me.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Thanks for the feedback all. I am having a bit of a hard time wrapping my head around these two latest boats. Here I had just adjusted to the idea that new standing rigging, running rigging, wiring, and engine would be paramount, and now I feel like I'm shifting gears again. I think the recommendations to actually get out there and see boats is a good one. At least I can then develop some ideas what I like and don't to help anchor my search. So that's my focus now- to get out and see.

Also I saw that Elijah raised his budget from 30k to 45k and I'm thinking I may do the same. I really wanted a very stable boat, not only for the North Sea, but hopefully to get a few friends on board for day sails at least who are a bit averse to sailing and not at all liking 'when they lean suddenly'. And I also like the idea of as stable and firm a boat as possible in case I'm solo and changing sails or reefing I just want as stable a platform as possible. So by descriptions the Kalik sounds more interesting to me than the x-boat. Fun and exciting is not the 'vibe' I'm going for, more like chill and relaxed 

And Sander O's idea of it being difficult to upgrade has been on my mind lately. It seems some boats sit for months or even years before sale, maybe with problems, maybe just looking for a match to a new owner, but they seem to be a lot more trouble to step up with than say a car, which can be a weekend deal. So maybe it is best to slow down the search and save up a bit more. I am going to try to get out and see a couple this weekend though, just to get some ideas.

By the way the Grampian salesman just disappeared- two emails following up, and he's ghosting me. Never asked for receipts, only the chain plate design, and if inspected. Guess he doesn't like people who ask questions? Geez it was only three emails before he disappeared. Anyway!

Well thanks again for all the wonderful feedback as usual. Eventually I'm going to nail one of these boats down!
For now I'm actually pretty excited about some hand's on inspection ;-)


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

Rush2112 said:


> Thanks for the feedback all. I am having a bit of a hard time wrapping my head around these two latest boats. Here I had just adjusted to the idea that new standing rigging, running rigging, wiring, and engine would be paramount, and now I feel like I'm shifting gears again. I think the recommendations to actually get out there and see boats is a good one. At least I can then develop some ideas what I like and don't to help anchor my search. So that's my focus now- to get out and see.
> 
> Also I saw that Elijah raised his budget from 30k to 45k and I'm thinking I may do the same. I really wanted a very stable boat, not only for the North Sea, but hopefully to get a few friends on board for day sails at least who are a bit averse to sailing and not at all liking 'when they lean suddenly'. And I also like the idea of as stable and firm a boat as possible in case I'm solo and changing sails or reefing I just want as stable a platform as possible. So by descriptions the Kalik sounds more interesting to me than the x-boat. Fun and exciting is not the 'vibe' I'm going for, more like chill and relaxed
> 
> ...


I've been away from this thread all week because I'm just too busy to keep up. But coming back after a week and reading this message and recalling the ones I've read over the past month or so, I can glean the following, which may or may not be inaccurate and/or unfair:

You've made 213 posts with all sorts of questions
Many of these questions have been micro-focused on your most recent "issue of the week" instead of looking at the big picture
You apparently haven't gone to actually see any boats yet
You've worn out your welcome with the Grampian salesman by sending too many emails without going to look at the boat(s).
You need to realize that brokers are easily annoyed by "tire kickers", and even more annoyed by emailed questions. They have a lot of experience at identifying who is likely to actually purchase a boat, and it's their job to do so. They're not in the business for charity. At a certain point they may conclude you're not worth their time.

I don't think you're going to be taken seriously unless you go look at some boats, and keep an open mind to the total balance of features (plusses and minuses) of each design, without overly focusing on one design feature. If they sense that you're inclined toward "paralysis by analysis" you will get labeled as a "tire kicker".

I apologize if I sound harsh, but I just thought I should share the perspective that a broker is likely to have. (No, I am definitely not a broker, I just play one on TV. lol)


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Rush2112 said:


> By the way the Grampian salesman just disappeared- two emails following up, and he's ghosting me.


It could be due to a number of things: boat could be sold, broker could be busy closing a deal or away on holiday or the seller is non-responsive. The thought that they are focused elsewhere, due to just an email interaction is quite likely too. Can you give the broker a call? That substantially increases their attention level.

Just a heads up. Be prepared that the brokers are going to ask you questions, most likely in a friendly conversational way. A good salesman tries to size up the buyer. Are they worth the time. Are they likely to buy something, although, it doesn't have to be the specific boat you' re calling on. They'll happily sell you another, if more likely to close. They'll probably ask something about your job, or similar, trying to determine if you can afford what you're looking at too.

Give honest answers, but express confidence that you can and are you're going to buy, if you want to keep their attention. Don't get too far in the weeds, until you think it's a boat you really want.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

TakeFive said:


> I've been away from this thread all week because I'm just too busy to keep up. But coming back after a week and reading this message and recalling the ones I've read over the past month or so, I can glean the following, which may or may not be inaccurate and/or unfair:
> 
> You've made 213 posts with all sorts of questions
> Many of these questions have been micro-focused on your most recent "issue of the week" instead of looking at the big picture


Fair enough. Though I have to say with how much I've learned in those 213 posts, I figure I've saved myself a fortune of both time and money in trial and error and learning the hard way. If I had bought a boat it most certainly would have been a Nicholson 38, because I thought it was pretty, and looked like it was in good shape. Now I realize it had literally nothing replaced, would have cost me 2-3x purchase price to get usable, wouldn't have sailed well, and would have been a terrible live aboard.



TakeFive said:


> You apparently haven't gone to actually see any boats yet


Well I've seen hundreds online, including videos, and owner reviews. And I walk by a marina and oggle every day..



TakeFive said:


> You've worn out your welcome with the Grampian salesman by sending too many emails without going to look at the boat(s).


If that's true, and I'm not saying it's not, then boat salesmen are in for a no effort grift, it couldn't have been a half hour of his time in total answering my questions. And I'd think he'd be more motivated considering it's been for sale for over a year.

It wouldn't be the first time that I've heard that many of these guys _really_ don't earn their money. Hence the market for apolloduck.com and sailboatlistings.com.

Besides most of my questions surrounded discrepancies in the ad itself- one part saying that a fully custom keel was created at a specific cost, from a specific manufacturer, then later saying they just replaced the bolts. That was bizarre... Another part said the engine was 1999 and well maintained, while in description it said it was 2007 and replaced. Hmm...

I found it more than a little bit off putting that they never bothered to read their own ad. 
It appeared to be either highly unprofessional or shady. That ad begged for 'shaking the tree'.

Again not saying you're wrong. It would appear that their target is somebody who asks fewer questions ;-)
Maybe I should be selling boats! 
When you see a market doing a less than adequate job, that's a business opportunity- Richard Branson.

Anyway, point taken. Go see the boat if you want to get taken seriously. Thanks.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Minnewaska said:


> It could be due to a number of things: boat could be sold, broker could be busy closing a deal or away on holiday or the seller is non-responsive. The thought that they are focused elsewhere, due to just an email interaction is quite likely too. Can you give the broker a call? That substantially increases their attention level.
> 
> Just a heads up. Be prepared that the brokers are going to ask you questions, most likely in a friendly conversational way. A good salesman tries to size up the buyer. Are they worth the time. Are they likely to buy something, although, it doesn't have to be the specific boat you' re calling on. They'll happily sell you another, if more likely to close. They'll probably ask something about your job, or similar, trying to determine if you can afford what you're looking at too.
> 
> Give honest answers, but express confidence that you can and are you're going to buy, if you want to keep their attention. Don't get too far in the weeds, until you think it's a boat you really want.


Good points thanks.
Phone call > email.
Questions are a two way street, as the value of their time is also involved, I am also being interviewed.

Funny thing about that Grampian, I was ready to jump on it. If their ad had been more in order, and the salesman happy to inspire confidence by following through with detailed responses, I might have got a good surveyor, ordered up a captain, and bought sight unseen! I had a good sense about the boat fulfilling my needs from Jeff_H and MikeOReilly's feedback, and the sheer amount of money poured into it was practically a deal sealer.

OK, I probably would have flown over to supervise the inspection as suggested. But geez did that ad, and their handling of the discrepancies really specialize in undermining confidence.

Oh well, you guys are probably right I should be looking closer to home anyway, so its not such a drama just to go and see it.


----------



## colemj (Jul 10, 2003)

Rush2112 said:


> Also I saw that Elijah raised his budget from 30k to 45k and I'm thinking I may do the same. I really wanted a very stable boat, not only for the North Sea, but hopefully to get a few friends on board for day sails at least who are a bit averse to sailing and not at all liking 'when they lean suddenly'. And I also like the idea of as stable and firm a boat as possible in case I'm solo and changing sails or reefing I just want as stable a platform as possible. So by descriptions the Kalik sounds more interesting to me than the x-boat. Fun and exciting is not the 'vibe' I'm going for, more like chill and relaxed


Again, this beats all others for those requirements: Sailing Catamarans - Miriam Sagitta catamaran

Mark


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Rush2112 said:


> I was ready to jump on it. If their ad had been more in order, and the salesman happy to inspire confidence by following through with detailed responses, I might have got a good surveyor, ordered up a captain, and bought sight unseen!


It's not unheard of to sign a purchase and sale agreement and put a deposit down, sight unseen. Especially, when the boat is in another country. I've done it.

However, I'd never complete the sale, without laying eyes on it. That's insane, unless is highly specialized, well known and you have a very personal reason to trust the players. In my case, my offer was accepted and I booked a flight to attend the survey. Then I rejected the boat and got my deposit back. Good lesson.


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

Rush2112 said:


> If that's true, and I'm not saying it's not, then boat salesmen are in for a no effort grift, it couldn't have been a half hour of his time in total answering my questions. And I'd think he'd be more motivated considering it's been for sale for over a year.
> 
> It wouldn't be the first time that I've heard that many of these guys _really_ don't earn their money...


Well, if you heard this on the internet, then it must be true. 

IMO, boat brokers are no different than other salesmen. There are good ones, and bad ones. But don't be so quick to judge. It may be that he knows something that indicates that you will not like this boat. He can't tell you that because he is contractually and ethically obligated to represent the seller's interests. So he tells you nothing. Maybe he thinks that you're too far away, and lacking the skills to get it home, and/or lacking the money to hire someone to do it for you.


Rush2112 said:


> Besides most of my questions surrounded discrepancies in the ad itself- one part saying that a fully custom keel was created at a specific cost, from a specific manufacturer, then later saying they just replaced the bolts. That was bizarre... Another part said the engine was 1999 and well maintained, while in description it said it was 2007 and replaced. Hmm...


OK, I bit and looked at the ad. I couldn't find the discrepancies that you mentioned. I did see that it has a 2007 Beta, so I think it's the right boat that I'm looking at.


Rush2112 said:


> Funny thing about that Grampian, I was ready to jump on it. If their ad had been more in order, and the salesman happy to inspire confidence by following through with detailed responses, I might have got a good surveyor, ordered up a captain, and bought sight unseen! I had a good sense about the boat fulfilling my needs from Jeff_H and MikeOReilly's feedback, and the sheer amount of money poured into it was practically a deal sealer.


The boat is still there for you to buy if you want it. The only thing apparently standing in the way is your unwillingness to actually go see it. It looks like a nice boat online, but the Internet is full of nice looking boats that have a fatal flaw when you go to see them. But once again, the broker represents the seller, and may not be able to disclose it unless you build his trust enough to get him to open up. Rather than try to find "gotchas" in the ad, you could ask, "Tell me everything you know about the boat that is not in the ad." That's worked for me before with some brokers, though I've also driven hundreds of kilometres to see boats where the broker didn't disclose something. It's part of the expense and hassle of shopping for a boat. 


Rush2112 said:


> ...Hence the market for apolloduck.com and sailboatlistings.com.....Maybe I should be selling boats!


Things are different in different regions, but around here in my part of the US, the typical broker's sales commission is 10% of sales price, with a minimum commission of $3000. That was as of 10 years ago - the minimum may have gone up since then. With your $30,000 price limit, you really are bottom fishing. Often the boats you find at that price are listed by the broker as a favor to a friend (trying to unload a boat as a favor to the widow of a deceased friend - I've seen a few like that) or as a "back end deal" to sell the boat for someone who bought a bigger boat from him (which appears to apply to this boat). Regardless, if this guy has a fresh inquiry for a $500,000 sportfisher or a third email picking on discrepancies in his ad for a $30,000 boat, guess who jumps to the front of his list? It's not laziness, it's just business.

At your price range, you might find better selection on sailboatlistings.com or even Craigslist. My prior boat, which I bought for $14,000, was purchased off of sailboatlistings.com. A broker friend suggested that I look there in my price range (for the same reasons I described above), so I'm just paying it forward with his advice.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

TakeFive said:


> Well, if you heard this on the internet, then it must be true.


Well the argument I heard was that they do nothing for the buyer, anything they say you will want to verify with a surveyor anyway, they're not in your court, and for the seller as in my case they brush people off if they think it's not worth their time. I wonder if the seller himself would have answered my questions, after a year of trying to sell.. probably.



TakeFive said:


> It may be that he knows something that indicates that you will not like this boat. He can't tell you that because he is contractually and ethically obligated to represent the seller's interests.


I think with the details I was asking, that this is certainly possible.



TakeFive said:


> OK, I bit and looked at the ad. I couldn't find the discrepancies that you mentioned. I did see that it has a 2007 Beta, so I think it's the right boat that I'm looking at.


He updated the ad for both the keel misinformation and the bad engine dates. He told me he had done so. So I guess I'm their official proof reader. The quotes that I posted earlier were direct quotes, they're gone now.



TakeFive said:


> The boat is still there for you to buy if you want it.


Yeah I had read about people buying boats sight unseen so I thought it was normal- just trust the surveyor I guess. Also I didn't think it would matter as I don't think I could add anything to the inspection- I wouldn't have a clue what I was looking at anyway. I think the community here has convinced me to see the boat first, and to get out and see some to get ideas/preferences and a referance point. That's basically where I'm at now.



TakeFive said:


> Rather than try to find "gotchas" in the ad, you could ask, "Tell me everything you know about the boat that is not in the ad." That's worked for me before with some brokers, though I've also driven hundreds of kilometres to see boats where the broker didn't disclose something. It's part of the expense and hassle of shopping for a boat.


Good point I'll take it onboard.



TakeFive said:


> Regardless, if this guy has a fresh inquiry for a $500,000 sportfisher or a third email picking on discrepancies in his ad for a $30,000 boat, guess who jumps to the front of his list? It's not laziness, it's just business.


Fair enough I suppose.



TakeFive said:


> At your price range, you might find better selection on sailboatlistings.com or even Craigslist. My prior boat, which I bought for $14,000, was purchased off of sailboatlistings.com. A broker friend suggested that I look there in my price range (for the same reasons I described above), so I'm just paying it forward with his advice.


Thanks yeah maybe the brokerless deals are better for my price range.

So yeah I've been out to see a few this weekend because they were at the marina by my house. All of the viewings now are by appointment and I didn't want to bother as they were both far outside my price range.

One of the ones Jeff_H mentioned, the cruiser is near Monikendam which is pretty close to here. There is also a Trintella 3 which was on his earlier blue water list, in Huizen, which also is not too far. I'll try to see both of those this week.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

colemj said:


> Again, this beats all others for those requirements: Sailing Catamarans - Miriam Sagitta catamaran
> 
> Mark


I thought catamarans had lower limits in high seas. A very vague statement I know, that's my vague understanding. I just know very little about them vs monohulls, and in The Netherlands I literally haven't seen a single one.


----------



## paulk (Jun 2, 2000)

Tough going for catamarans in the canals, one might think?


----------



## colemj (Jul 10, 2003)

paulk said:


> Tough going for catamarans in the canals, one might think?


I missed the part about wanting to travel the canals. Yes, a catamaran might not be best for that. The one I listed is 19.5' beam.

Mark


----------



## colemj (Jul 10, 2003)

Rush2112 said:


> I thought catamarans had lower limits in high seas. A very vague statement I know, that's my vague understanding. I just know very little about them vs monohulls, and in The Netherlands I literally haven't seen a single one.


I thought you were now planning to stay out of high seas and gale winds? Either way, not a problem with a catamaran. Probably better than a mono for this if one is single handing, or have crew that are not experienced - a stable, flat, and wide platform in comparison. All I was pointing out is that your newest criteria is best fulfilled by this boat than the others so far.

Mark


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

Rush2112 said:


> I really wanted a very stable boat, not only for the North Sea, but hopefully to get a few friends on board for day sails at least who are a bit averse to sailing and not at all liking 'when they lean suddenly'. And I also like the idea of as stable and firm a boat as possible in case I'm solo and changing sails or reefing I just want as stable a platform as possible. So by descriptions the Kalik sounds more interesting to me than the x-boat. Fun and exciting is not the 'vibe' I'm going for, more like chill and relaxed


While it is true that the X-boat is a sportier boat, it is also a wildly more stable and an easier to sail boat than anything that you have looked at so far. If you have concerns about heeling, then that would be the boat to buy because a boat like that can get by with smaller sails and will teach you to sail well in a much shorter time so the surprise knockdowns will occur less often. Easy to sail boats may look less chill, but if you had more experience sailing you would find them to be more chill to sail since you have the tools to quickly adapt to changes in wind speed. The Kalik a little less so, but its masthead rig is little harder to sail shorthanded.



Rush2112 said:


> If that's true, and I'm not saying it's not, then boat salesmen are in for a no effort grift, it couldn't have been a half hour of his time in total answering my questions. And I'd think he'd be more motivated considering it's been for sale for over a year.It wouldn't be the first time that I've heard that many of these guys _really_ don't earn their money. Hence the market for apolloduck.com and sailboatlistings.com.


I respectfully suggest that the role and compensation of the broker is a little different than you imagine. To begin with, if you are looking for a $30,000 sailboat, assuming that you spend the full $30,000, the entire commission will be somewhere between $2,100 and $3,000. That $2100 to $3,000 gets split 50%-50% between the listing brokerage company and the selling brokerage company. The individual selling broker typically gets 40-50% of what the selling brokerage company gets. And the individual buyers broker typically gets 40-50% of what the buyer brokerage company gets. But since almost no one pays the asking price for a boat, the broker knows that the Grampian will probably sell for somewhere between $23,000 and $27,000. So the individual buyers broker is looking at taking home ($25,000 x .05 x .5) about $625. If the broker was the listing and selling broker then the individual broker might take home as much as $1,250.

What that broker does for that is to pay for advertising to list the boat in multiple places, shows the boat to a bunch of prospective buyers, and will attempt to negotiate a several low ball contracts between the owner and potential buyers, each time sitting in hours long meetings writing contracts.Often the Broker acts as an advocate for the two parties, performing delicate shuttle diplomacy as needed to bring the parties together. Once a deal is made, the brokerage escrows the funds (escrow accounts do not come free). The brokers is typically present for the sail trial and survey, Then begins the next round of negotiations, as the buyer and seller work out terms to address the items discovered during survey. That often means that the broker coordinates with a repair facility to price the needed corrections. The broker also typically coordinates the registration/documentation, tax escrows, financing and funds transfer. Collectively there can easily be 40-80 hours even in a simple deal. But then you add a international purchase, with a buyer who is peppering the broker with questions (no matter how valid they may be), and a seller who is not making this easy on the broker, and a boat that is clearly a wreck, an experienced broker would conclude that its highly unlikely that you are a real buyer and that the risk that you are a real buyer is greater than the chance that he will make a commission on the deal, so he is cutting his losses.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Jeff_H said:


> While it is true that the X-boat is a sportier boat, it is also a wildly more stable and an easier to sail boat than anything that you have looked at so far. If you have concerns about heeling, then that would be the boat to buy because a boat like that can get by with smaller sails and will teach you to sail well in a much shorter time so the surprise knockdowns will occur less often.


Really? I find that surprising. The X-99 strikes me as an unstable racing boat.
Its displacement/length is 129, which is ultralight. I would imagine it would be thrown all over in rough seas.
Why do you say it's stable?
I've seen several videos with people hanging and sitting legs off the side and one entire side in the water.
I've seen videos of people doing 18 knots.
All of that is precisely what I hope to never do!
If I'm doing over 15 knots then something has gone terribly wrong.
And this guy doesn't look relaxed in the least. Sure it's in fast motion but his effort seems almost manic.
Far from they style of sailing I see myself doing...





Regarding brokers, OK points taken, they do a lot more work in the sales process than I was aware of. And I could see why it might not be worth their time at all to sell a boat for under say 75 grand.

Really curious why you say the X-99 is stable. I would have expected the Trintella 3, Contest 34, The Rasmus, and the Westerlies to all be more stable.


----------



## colemj (Jul 10, 2003)

I think JeffH meant more form stability - less heel, less roll, etc. You should try to get out on a lighter, more easily driven boat than a crab-crusher to see what it is like. They really are more stable, more nimble, and more fun to sail. They are also safer in bad weather. There is nothing worse than being slammed and rolled around at the mercy of the sea in a boat that can't get out of its own way. That is not stability, that's just blind faith in scantlings. A boat that can really sail is far better in bad conditions, and provides one with more options for coping with the conditions. Including getting out of those conditions.

The above is anathema to everyone who grew up with, or drank the koolaid of the Pardey, etc line. If that was ever true, it is no longer the case with more modern designs and equipment.

Mark


----------



## mstern (May 26, 2002)

Rush2112 said:


> And this guy doesn't look relaxed in the least. Sure it's in fast motion but his effort seems almost manic.
> Far from they style of sailing I see myself doing...


Do you really think that the video shows manic effort? That sailor seems to me to be a model of efficient movement for a solo sailor. I don't see any wasted energy. Granted, once the sails are up and you have chosen a course, you can just sit back and not worry about fine tuning the trim. But you have to do all of the things shown in the video when you raise sail or tack, even if you are just out for a relaxing day sail. And once you get good at it, you'll look like this guy. Until then, count on looking herky-jerky and yes, maybe even a bit manic.


----------



## Arcb (Aug 13, 2016)

Just looks like sailing to me.

I would expect you will be up and moving more on the slow boats you like because they are less efficient to weather. Will result in more tacks to acheive the same distance as a faster more efficient hull.

If you want to sit back and relax, get a boat that sails well.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Rush2112 said:


> I've seen several videos with people hanging and sitting legs off the side and one entire side in the water.


That's simply what racers do and would do do on any boat. It is not required to hold the boat up on a ballasted keel boat. It's only marginally taking out some of the heel to either reduce leeway, or allow for more speed, if leeway isn't negatively impacting speed to waypoint (ie velocity made good).

Having not learned to sail yet is a major disadvantage. Intuition is very unreliable.



> I've seen videos of people doing 18 knots.
> All of that is precisely what I hope to never do!
> If I'm doing over 15 knots then something has gone terribly wrong.


One can overpower any sailboat. While every other sailor I know would drool over the thought of 18 kts (and never see it) you can easily learn how to keep this under control. Start sailing an unballasted dinghy and it will become second nature.



> And this guy doesn't look relaxed in the least. Sure it's in fast motion but his effort seems almost manic.


Of course, you recognize the beginning of that video is in fast forward. Afterward, it looks like normal sailing, in a good breeze, to me. You're not required to sail hard on the wind, or in stiffer wind, like that video, until you're comfortable doing so. Everyone builds that tolerance quickly, assuming they take to the sport.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

I am not going to quote post #69 since I am only have time to address the issue of why the X-99 would have a much greater useful stability and motion comfort than the older overweight boats previously under consideration. I think others have done a good job of explaining why that video (which was presented as a primer on single-handed racing an X-99) is not representative of how a new sailor, daysailor or cruiser would sail the same boat. But I would quickly add that if you a new sailor who was sailing that boat in those conditions, you would be using a AP #3 genoa and not a genoa that is as large a sail as shown in the video. (For clarity, the term AP #3 means an All Purpose #3 genoa which on most fractional rigs would be roughly a 110% jib that is cut to be good across a wide wind range, rather than the typical #3, which is cut flat for high winds. These sails work on fractional; rigs because they can be depowered quickly eliminating the need to furl, reef, or do a sail change. Tacking and trimming an AP #3 sail would be wildly less difficult and frenetic as compared to tacking the larger overlapping headsails required by the boats you had originally been considering.)

But back to the stability question....(I recently answered these same sort of questions for someone else and so in the interest of time I am quoting the answer I gave them. I hope you and they don't mind.)

Although this may seem counter-intuitive, the heavier the boat (L/D) the less usable stability it is likely to have. Useful stability is tough to visualize so non-designers tend to focus on the easily quantifiable numbers without having a way to evaluate how the realities of the design actually impacts the behavior of the boat. Dangerously useless surrogate formulas like the Capsize Screen Formula, and Motion Comfort Index simply add to the confusion since neither contain any useful information about the behavior of a boat and have formulas do that not consider the majority of the most critical factors that do control stability and motion.

To explain why a boat with a high L/D tends to be less stable within the usable heel range (i.e.tends to be relatively tender compared to boats that have a lower L/D), you need to think of a boat as a system. When a boat has a high L/D it either needs to be some mix of being beamy at the waterline and/or have a hull that is comparatively deeper in the water to be able to have a lot of displacement in a short length.

On a narrow boat, such as the older designs that you had been contemplating, the only way to carry that larger displacement is to push the volume of the hull deeper into the water. All other things being equal, the deeper hull volume means a lowering of the vertical center of buoyancy. Since stability is the displacement of the boat times lever arm between the center of gravity vs the center of buoyancy, and that lever arm can be quite small when the vertical center of buoyancy and gravity are close together, this results in a boat that has comparatively little stability. The net result is that it needs to heel further to produce the same stability as a boat whose vertical center of buoyancy is higher. This deeper hull and lower vertical center of buoyancy is generally the case with narrower boats that have long overhangs.

Back to the boat as a system, as a boat gets heavier and the hull gets deeper in the water, it develops a lot more drag, and with that drag the boat needs a lot more sail area to move through the water. So these boats with high L/D's not only do not much stability, and/or does not develop a much stability until it heels a lot and can get its topsides are in the water, but which also needs a lot of sail area to move. That needed added sail area combined with a proportionately small amount of form stability makes a boat that wants to heel excessively mostly because of its L/D being so high.

The other piece of this is how SA/D plays into this. While this is also counter-intuitive, the higher the SA/D the easier a boat is to handle. This is significant since the SA/D on the X-99 is quite large (SA/D=24). And so its easy to think "_If I go with a lighter boat with higher SA/D, doesn't it become more challenging in the worst weather conditions?" _That is a complex question to answer, one which also falls heavily in the "boats are designed as a system' category. I will try to give you the Cliff's Notes version.

First of all, in and of itself, adding weight to a boat does nothing positive for the inherent stability, motion comfort, or strength of the boat. What really counts is the weight relative to stability. Since a heavier boat tends to have more drag, that means a heavier boat needs more stability in order to carry big enough sail area (per above). As a boat gets heavier, it gets harder to create enough stability to permit the boat to safely carry enough sail area to be able to even sail in light air to moderate winds and on the other hand to punch through waves in heavy air. Typically, because a lighter boat has less drag, it can get by with much less sail area than a heavier boat. But because the the canoe body (the portion of the hull in the water that is not the keel or rudder) is shallower on a lighter boat, and on boats with longer waterlines, the amount of usable stability is often greater on a lighter boat relative to its drag and relative to its sail area. (per above)

That greater stability (relative to drag) allows the lighter boat to carry a more efficient sail plan than a heavier boat, and in theory (and in reality) safely carry proportionately less sail area in any particular condition. That might suggest that a lighter boat should have a smaller L/D than a heavy boat. That would be the case if SA/D were measured differently, but its not. Properly measured SA/D uses the 100% foretriangle of the boat. (By typical convention, the 100% foretriangle is triangular area measurement from the point at which the forestay hits the mast, the point at which the line of the forestay hits the deck, and the point at which a line drawn in the leading edge of the mast hits the deck at the rail.) Similarly the sail area for the mainsail is also the triangular area measurement from the point at which the maximum hoist of the mainsail occurs on the mast, the point at which the line of the top of the boom hits the mast, and the point at which the foot of the sail terminates on the boom. By convention all curves and overlaps are ignored.

To sail in light winds, it takes an SA/D minimally around 22-24 and in moderate winds minimally around 20-22. So a boat like the X-99 can by with minimally overlapping headsails and sail well in lighter winds.

In order for boats with lower SA/D's to get to that much sail area, they need to use larger overlapping headsails (jibs that overlap with the mast further aft) . But larger overlap headsails have lower aspect ratio and so are way less efficient than minimally-overlapping headsails. As a result a sail plan that depends on large overlapping headsails needs to have considerably more sail area to produce the same drive as a sail plan that does not depend on overlapping headsails.

Sails with larger overlaps tend to be more expensive per square foot, much much harder to tack, have shorter useful lives, and have a much smaller wind range that they can safely be used in.

To explain why this is so, by example, in a general sense, if a larger overlap sail uses the same weight fabric as a minimally overlapping headsail, because there is a more sail area in the larger overlap sail, the sail will physically weigh more. That added weight means that the larger overlap sail will be more likely to droop under its own weight and not hold a proper flying shape in light air. In order to help the sail hold its shape, larger overlap headsails tend to be made of a lighter fabric than a smaller overlap sail of the same sail area. In heavy air, no matter what their overlap, all of the sails need to be as flat as possible to minimize heeling, weather helm, and leeway. But all sails stretch and as the wind speed increases, the forces that cause that stretch increase non-linearly as well. So at the time that you need to have your sails as flat as possible, they are stretching out and becoming fuller. All sails do that.

But because larger overlap sails tend to use lighter cloth, and have more area than a smaller overlap sail, the stretch is amplified greatly. That combination of greater stretch and larger sail area means that these sails have a narrower wind range before they overpower the boat (i.e. too much heel, too much weather helm, too much leeway, not as much speed through the water.) The typical response to that is initially to partially furl the sail. When a sail is partially furled, and to a lesser extent even with a foam luff, the sail basically rolls flatly onto the furler, pushing the curvature of the front of the sail back into the smaller area of the exposed part of the sail. The bigger the overlap the more that area gets pushed into the exposed unfurled remnant of the sail, and the more the exposed part of the sail gets rounder and wants to heel the boat relative to driving the boat forward. On most sails, even with a foam luff, the most that you can furl a sail is perhaps 15-20% of the sail area, after which sail shape becomes a serious determent to safe sailing.

On the other hand, mainsails are much easier to flatten out and to quickly reduce in sail area while maintaining a desirable sail shape. Because most boats develop increased weather helm in higher winds, flattening, or reefing the mainsail results in more control over the steering as well.

So getting to the bottom line, the larger the SA/D that a boat has, the less it is dependent on large overlap headsails. The less the boat is dependent on larger overlap headsails, the easier it is to tack and jibe, the easier it is to quickly and safely adapt to changeable weather conditions and the less expensive the boat is to maintain. Plus a boat that has a larger SA/D typically is designed with more usable stability in order to be able to carry that larger SA/D in a breeze, all of which are all good things.

Lastly, when a new sailor looks at a boat like the X-99, they are often concerned that the boat has a lot of control lines. While seemingly intimidating, those controls are tools that allow adjustments that can be made easily and that result in the sailing being more docile. In other words, it is easy to think at first, "I surely don't want all of that stuff since I won't want to use any of it, and its way too much to learn." As a beginning sailor, the idea that you won't use that stuff, may initially be 100% correct since your goal it to learn the board strokes of sailing. But over time, after you have built basic sailing skills, you might begin to experiment with some of those controls..... A little here and there. You may never use all of them, but the ones you use you will find to be very handy to have and make the sailing more comfortable, easier, and safer.

To visualize why this is might be so, think of this example, if you were an amateur mechanic rebuilding an engine, you might look at the tools in a professional mechanic's tool box and consider them excessive and too complex to deal with. Before you have done any mechanical repairs, you might think that you could get by with a vice-grip and a couple screwdrivers. Pretty soon, you would realize that its much easier to work with a good set of box wrenches and socket wrenches, perhaps adding extensions and universal joints. Maybe then adding higher quality screw drivers with different tips, adding a torque wrench and feeler gauges,. and so on. Over time, as you got more skilled, you would end up owning or borrowing a variety of increasingly specialized tools. And with each tool, there is a little learning curve but quickly you find that these tools make the job easier, maybe safer, and faster. Its the same with the control lines on a boat. Starting out you can ignore them and keep it as simple as you want. But over time once you have learned the broad strokes, you will begin to experiment and as you learn to use the tools, the boat (any boat) will get easier and safer to sail.

Jeff


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

colemj said:


> I think JeffH meant more form stability - less heel, less roll, etc. You should try to get out on a lighter, more easily driven boat than a crab-crusher to see what it is like.


Yeah I really need to get this one first hand, its just not clicking.
I think some experience on different boats will go a long ways.



mstern said:


> And once you get good at it, you'll look like this guy. Until then, count on looking herky-jerky and yes, maybe even a bit manic.


Yeah I'm sure once I actually understand what he's doing it won't look like so much busy work.



Arcb said:


> If you want to sit back and relax, get a boat that sails well.





Minnewaska said:


> Having not learned to sail yet is a major disadvantage. Intuition is very unreliable.


Well I can handle the little rental boats all right, but they really are very simple compared to larger boats.
I don't think I've seen a field where intuition was less reliable than with sailing!
This topic is always throwing me curve balls.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Jeff_H said:


> I am not going to quote post #69 since I am only have time to address the issue of why the X-99 would have a much greater useful stability and motion comfort than the older overweight boats previously under consideration...
> Jeff


Well as usual I'm going to have to chew on your post for a while.
Thanks again for the detailed response


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Jeff_H said:


> I am not going to quote post #69 since I am only have time to address the issue of why the X-99 would have a much greater useful stability and motion comfort than the older overweight boats previously under consideration. I think others have done a good job of explaining why that video (which was presented as a primer on single-handed racing an X-99) is not representative of how a new sailor, daysailor or cruiser would sail the same boat. But I would quickly add that if you a new sailor who was sailing that boat in those conditions, you would be using a AP #3 genoa and not a genoa that is as large a sail as shown in the video. (For clarity, the term AP #3 means an All Purpose #3 genoa which on most fractional rigs would be roughly a 110% jib that is cut to be good across a wide wind range, rather than the typical #3, which is cut flat for high winds. These sails work on fractional; rigs because they can be depowered quickly eliminating the need to furl, reef, or do a sail change. Tacking and trimming an AP #3 sail would be wildly less difficult and frenetic as compared to tacking the larger overlapping headsails required by the boats you had originally been considering.)
> 
> But back to the stability question....(I recently answered these same sort of questions for someone else and so in the interest of time I am quoting the answer I gave them. I hope you and they don't mind.)
> 
> ...


Jeff_H,
OK, well you made quite a number of points there so I'll do my best to catch up. BTW, thanks again for all the data points. The voyage of discovery continues 

Regarding overlapping Genoas, since many boats I'm looking at have them, if I've got this straight, it seems that one way to make them more versatile is to go with less overlap, in other words say 110% overlap instead of 150% overlap, as this will allow for: 1) a thicker more durable sail to be used, 2) more wind range of usability of that sail, and 3) greater ease of tacking. But this will be at the expense of SA/D and therefore stability, so there's a tradeoff (as always it seems!)

Re: fractional vs masthead rigs, fractional rigs according to your arguments should be worse for stability than masthead rigs since they will need more sail overlap to get the same sail area to displacement and power, and being lower aspect they will be less efficient.

Regarding the lever arm between center of buoyancy and center of gravity, the longer that lever arm, you say the greater the stability. But this seems counter intuitive as that lever arm is longer when a boat has say a lot of weight on deck, and a higher center of gravity. Yet we know this makes a boat more tippy and unstable. Also, a long lever arm is problematic as the more leverage is being applied when a boat heels too much, the lever switches sides, and becomes a lever of capsizing. In other words by this logic of the longer the lever arm, the more stable a boat, but when it gets too far heeled, the longer the lever arm, the more likely it is to capsize.

So the more stable a boat, the more likely to capsize when pushed to extremes. That's quite a trade-off to consider. And if true, perhaps a less stable boat is better for blue water. Definitely some irony in there.

Also, I get the center of buoyancy vs center of gravity argument you are making, however there is a problem with the experience of sailors, and in discussions of safe stable blue water boats pretty much everywhere that I'm having trouble reconciling, that the consensus still seems to be that the best thing for blue water is a heavy boat. Just look at bluewaterboats.org:





__





Bluewaterboats.org - Sailboat reviews for offshore sailing







bluewaterboats.org





Literally every one of them is a super heavy tank.

Even look at the offshore cruiser list posted here some years ago:









Updated Offshore Cruising Boat List - January 2008


I have the updated boat list from Mahina Expeditions. The last list was dated2002 posted on the website and this is the new revised (January 2008) list. I will see if I can upload here as it is not yet available on the site. I get an invalid file..can someone direct me how to update. It is a...




www.sailnet.com





Again bunch of heavy tanks.

And on researching a different subject (secondary rudders) since I'm now considering boats with spade rudders I found this circumnavigator who said he had no choice but to heave to in bad weather because his boat was "too light" to stand up to the conditions:









‘How self steering could have saved my yacht’ - Yachting Monthly


The moment his beloved yacht sank in the North Sea, Julian Mustoe started thinking about ways he could avoid it happening again




www.yachtingmonthly.com





Again, I don't know how to reconcile these two opposing positions, when so many circumnavigators still swear by their tanky heavy boats.

One additional piece of data I was able to dig up on the subject that may explain this disparity at least to some extent is the argument that a heavily built boat is less affected by a lot of weight of stores and tankage typical of long distance cruisers. They say a light boat when weighed down for cruising with all the extra gear- solar panels, dinghys, davits, radars, wind generators, extra batteries, food, water, fuel, etc, is highly affected by the weight and sails much worse, while a heavy boat is less affected by all the extra weight. So that argument at least partially bridges the gap. However they still swear that the heavy boat is more stable, sea worthy and sea kindly. And that I'm having trouble reconciling with the science and physics of what you've presented.

This one is a real mind bender for sure.


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

Definitely paralysis by analysis. 

How many boats have you actually gone inside? And refresh my memory: What boats have you actually sailed?


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

TakeFive said:


> Definitely paralysis by analysis.
> 
> How many boats have you actually gone inside? And refresh my memory: What boats have you actually sailed?


So far I've sailed a Cal 39 once, a Laser once, and Polyvalks about a dozen times now. Polyvalk in case you don't know it's the most popular rental sailboat in The Netherlands:








Polyvalk huren - Ottenhome Heeg


De Polyvalk is de meest verhuurde open zeilboot op de Friese Meren. Met de Polyvalken van Ottenhome Heeg bent u verzekerd van jonge, schone en veilige boten.




ottenhomeheeg.nl





I get what you're implying, but there is one thing special about this particular boat search which is a bit limiting- there is a bit if a flu going around which has a lot of people kind of freaked out, a lot of places have been closed, all boat viewings are by appointment only, and they prefer if you are very serious, not just window shopping. The whole just go out and see a bunch of boats and volunteer crew on boats for exposure is kind of out the window right now, and unfortunately in these times, more learning than what might ordinarily be normal must be done online, books, etc.

I'd love to just go casually browsing boats and window shopping. But it really is more than a little frowned upon at the moment. So I want to know that the one's that I go see I am well educated as I can be, and have my questions ready and waste as little time as possible from the salesperson.

Unfortunantly analysis paralysis is the order of the day.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

The Trintella 3 I wanted to see is under offer. 

The X-99 looks like a truly fantastic performance boat, but is unfortunately too lightly equipped for a liveaboard / cruiser with no heater, no hot water, no bimini or dodger or sun protection, 36L water tankage and 24L fuel, no anchor or chain or windlass, a tiny galley and heads, no refrigerator or freezer, or holding tank, or solar or extra batteries or AP. All that extra 'stuff' doesn't sound like much but add it up and you're buying another boat!

The Kalik is a similar story unfortunately. 
Its a tricky business trying to get into cruising on this budget.

Truth be told I'll take all of these considerations in mind, but I'll probably just end up getting any one of the boats Jeff_H has recommended so far, or a Contest, that happens to be in the best condition and is the best equipped. The pure cost of equipping for cruising can be more than the cost of the boat. 

And to find a boat that already has all the equipment, in good shape means I'll probably end up buying from somebody currently cruising as they tend to be the ones where everything is actually working now. In a few months time I'll be able to raise my budget a bit to deal with the financial realities of cruising that keep hitting me in the face. Or I'll end up settling for a well equipped, frankly crappy performing boat.

This information is still totally useful as it has tremendously limited and refined my search to about a dozen or so boats. It's just a matter of time now until I nab one.


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

Rush2112 said:


> all boat viewings are by appointment only


In my part of the world, boat showings have always been by appointment only, even pre-COVID. The solution is to make some appointments. You claim you are serious about getting a boat, but also say you're window shopping. Which is it?

I still think you should stop quarreling about stability ratios and other theoretical minutiae and focus the overall balance of features that you need. I thought you decided to start with a coastal cruiser because bluewater is out of your price range, but you're back to looking at bluewater and offshore websites. You're going to get whiplash if you don't start to focus.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

TakeFive said:


> You claim you are serious about getting a boat, but also say you're window shopping. Which is it?


I'm taking my time, and keeping my mind open.
I would like to do some window shopping to see where the theory meets reality.
Like I said I was about to jump on that Trintella 3, but like the Contest 34 before it, I waited too long and now it's under offer.



TakeFive said:


> I thought you decided to start with a coastal cruiser because bluewater is out of your price range, but you're back to looking at bluewater and offshore websites. You're going to get whiplash if you don't start to focus.


You're probably right.
Once I've seen a few boats in real life I'm sure I'll have a more fixed set of opinions.
Time to make some appointments ;-)


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

I went to see a boat this week. We all wore masks and stayed 6 ft apart. Nothing stopping anyone. Boat sales are at a modern high point right now. Do the analysis on whether you'll ever buy a boat, if you hesitate to go see them.



Rush2112 said:


> it seems that one way to make them more versatile is to go with less overlap, in other words say 110% overlap instead of 150% overlap, as this will allow for: 1) a thicker more durable sail to be used, 2) more wind range of usability of that sail, and 3) greater ease of tacking.


This quote is partially correct at best. The point I really want to make is that a sailor of your experience will never know the difference. Buy a boat, clean it up and sail the heck out of it. Many years down the road, you might ask yourself if very specific things would be different, with a bigger or smaller headsail.

I'm sure, by now, your analysis has come across the immutable law that all sailboats are a compromise. There is no boat that can accommodate all theory, in reality.

Go see some boats.


----------



## colemj (Jul 10, 2003)

Rush2112 said:


> So the more stable a boat, the more likely to capsize when pushed to extremes. That's quite a trade-off to consider. And if true, perhaps a less stable boat is better for blue water. Definitely some irony in there.


Kind of, but you are only thinking about one aspect, and an unusually catastrophic one at that. Consider a multihull - extreme stability, but a sure capsize when pushed over the edge, and no coming back, but it takes extreme conditions to do so. Now compare to an old style lifeboat - almost no stability, readily rolls 360* in moderate conditions, but is designed to do so with complete integrity and return to upright.

So a capsize is more likely with a tender boat, in less extreme conditions, but that boat is more likely to come back upright. In theory. In practice, an open companionway or a stoved hatch/portlight, or an unsealed cockpit locker, etc will sink that boat before it rights.

And that is without taking in the human factor - rolling one's guts out for hours/days in a tender boat leaves one more vulnerable to not reacting properly when needed or making an error in judgement.



Rush2112 said:


> And on researching a different subject (secondary rudders) since I'm now considering boats with spade rudders I found this circumnavigator who said he had no choice but to heave to in bad weather because his boat was "too light" to stand up to the conditions:


You've taken an extreme example and assigned to it a general judgement. That boat was only 25', had no self steering, and in large seas with a broken tiller connection. The point of the article wasn't that the boat was light, it was that the boat had gotten into conditions that were too much for it because it couldn't sail well upwind and get out of the area fast enough. No amount of weight or design was going to change that. The further point was that the author admitted he should have paid more attention to the tiller connector, and that if he had some sort of self-steering he would have been able to continue. I doubt that last point, because he admitted that the boat could not sail to windward and he hove to because of that before his tiller connection broke.

So the simplistic takeaway from that is buy a big boat that sails well and has good self-steering.

Mark


----------



## colemj (Jul 10, 2003)

Rush2112 said:


> Its a tricky business trying to get into cruising on this budget.


That is a very important lesson/point and I applaud that you have discovered it so quickly and honestly. Threads abound on sailing forums where people never come to this realization and argue endlessly that it is not the case.

Mark


----------



## Ninefingers (Oct 15, 2009)

Just make an appointment with a broker and tell him your plans. He will get an assistant to show you the boats so it doesn't use up his time too much. The assistant probably won't know much, but who cares.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

colemj said:


> That is a very important lesson/point and I applaud that you have discovered it so quickly and honestly. Threads abound on sailing forums where people never come to this realization and argue endlessly that it is not the case.
> 
> Mark


Well this forum is annoying every time I have to change my mind on something, but has certainly facilitated quick learning ;-)


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Quick Update:
Well I'm trying to see boats! 
They just keep selling out from under me...
I just got an email that the Trintella 3 I was supposed to see tomorrow received an offer today and they are holding off viewings- ugh... Again...

This one looked fantastic, fully outfitted for cruising (check), lots of recent maintenance (check), one Jeff_H's list (check), available to view in The Netherlands (check) no wait! Under offer...








1971 Trintella III for sale at Botentekoop.NL.


1971 Trintella III for sale at Botentekoop.NL. Botentekoop.nl is the site with the best selection in the Netherlands.




www.botentekoop.com





This one had a new, well literally almost everything, and was quite well outfitted for cruising- and was a great price:








Yacht Charter - 2Yachts


Rent and charter yachts and other types of ships from owners around the world - 2Yachts




2yachts.com





And I waited too long...

Then this one popped up, not so great on maintenance and upgrades, but at least I could see the boat and get ideas:





Trintella 3 Boat ID:1945801 | TheYachtMarket


Trintella 3 Boat ID:1945801 | TheYachtMarket




www.theyachtmarket.com





And they cancelled today...

Something I can't quite put my finger on is telling me I need to move just a _little_ bit quicker. LOL


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

Rush2112 said:


> Regarding overlapping Genoas, since many boats I'm looking at have them, if I've got this straight, it seems that one way to make them more versatile is to go with less overlap, in other words say 110% overlap instead of 150% overlap, as this will allow for: 1) a thicker more durable sail to be used, 2) more wind range of usability of that sail, and 3) greater ease of tacking. But this will be at the expense of SA/D and therefore stability, so there's a tradeoff (as always it seems!)


I am afraid that you are not understanding what is being said on this and seem to have this backward. To clear this up:
1) Boats with lots of stability relative to their drag can tolerate a much larger SA/D.
2) Boats with a lots of stability relative to their drag and an SA/D up over 20, can get by with minimally overlapping headsails.
3) Minimally overlapping headsails tend to be more efficient, easier to handle (on all points of sail), cost lest to build, and have a much wider wind range.
Conversely,
1) Boats with inadequate stability relative to drag, require smaller SA/D's (which was the case with the majority of those so-called tanks that you were originally considering)
2) In order to sail in light to moderate winds (The prevailing condition on the North Sea) boats with small SA/D's need very large overlapping headsails.
3) In order for those large overlapping headsails to work in lighter to moderate winds, they need to be a lighter fabric.
4) Due to the larger sail area and lighter fabric those large overlapping sails have a narrower wind range before the boat is heeling too much, and has too heavy weather helm,. and so will need a sail change to smaller jib made from a heavier fabric when the wind builds (another frequent occurrence in the North Sea).
5) If you chose to only use the smaller overlap headsail on a boat with a SA/D in the teens, the result would be that in the vast majority of otherwise ideal sailing days you will end up motoring due to lacking the sail area needed to overcome drag and take advantage of the wind.
6) And so when you are considering these boats with SA/D's under 18-20 or so, the required overlapping headsails will be less efficient, meaning the boat needs more sail area to sail. That makes the sails harder to handle (on all points of sail), requires a larger sail inventory and more frequent sail changes since you need the larger overlap jib for light to moderate winds, and a smaller sail for heavier going and lastly,. the larger overlap sail itself will cost more to build, and have a much tinier wind range.



Rush2112 said:


> Re: fractional vs masthead rigs, fractional rigs according to your arguments should be worse for stability than masthead rigs since they will need more sail overlap to get the same sail area to displacement and power, and being lower aspect they will be less efficient.


With all due respect, you appear to have that backward as well. Generally, fractional rigs are designed with more sail area than a masthead rig on the same hull. Fractional rigs can carry that larger sail plan since they are much easier to 'depower', Because of the geometry and the larger SA/D of the typical fractional rig, they tend to get by easier with smaller overlapping, higher efficiency headsails It is the reason that virtually all of the new models from pretty much all major cruising boat builders have pretty much universally switched over to fractional rigs.



Rush2112 said:


> Regarding the lever arm between center of buoyancy and center of gravity, the longer that lever arm, you say the greater the stability. But this seems counter intuitive as that lever arm is longer when a boat has say a lot of weight on deck, and a higher center of gravity. Yet we know this makes a boat more tippy and unstable.


It sounds like you may have that one reversed as well. On a well designed keel boat, the center of gravity is below the center of buoyancy. As most modern boats heel, the center of buoyancy moves to leeward while the center of gravity does not shift, therefore remaining to windward of the center of buoyancy. The righting moment is the horizontal lever arm between the center of gravity (pushing down) to windward and the center of buoyancy (pushing up) to leeward. If the center of gravity is raised, (i.e. weight on deck) you are correct that there would less stability, because the lever arm would get shorter.



Rush2112 said:


> Also, a long lever arm is problematic as the more leverage is being applied when a boat heels too much, the lever switches sides, and becomes a lever of capsizing. In other words by this logic of the longer the lever arm, the more stable a boat, but when it gets too far heeled, the longer the lever arm, the more likely it is to capsize. So the more stable a boat, the more likely to capsize when pushed to extremes. That's quite a trade-off to consider. And if true, perhaps a less stable boat is better for blue water. Definitely some irony in there.


On any boat there comes a point on the stability curve where every boat has negative stability (the boat wants to invert more than it wants to right itself). The point that the this shift occurs is the 'Limit of Positive stability' (LPS). I prefer the term LPS to the term AVS since it more accurately describes what is happening. By modern standards, LPS wants to be somewhere around 120 Degrees for an offshore boat. But LPS only tells a part of the story, and this is where useful stability comes in, and which is one of the bigger changes in yacht design theory. Even more important than LPS in predicting the likelihood of being rolled over and recovering, is the amount of force required to turn the boat over vs the amount of force needed to right the boat again. When you look at boats designed in the past 20-25 or so years, these boats take a huge amount of force under the positive side of the stability curve needed to heel them to their LPS, and a substantially smaller amount of force to right them. This is especially true when compared to your so-called tanks.



Rush2112 said:


> Also, I get the center of buoyancy vs center of gravity argument you are making, however there is a problem with the experience of sailors, and in discussions of safe stable blue water boats pretty much everywhere that I'm having trouble reconciling, that the consensus still seems to be that the best thing for blue water is a heavy boat.


That is a very outdated consensus and was based on pretty thinking that has been refuted by the science. Outliers aside, it is hardly a consensus amount serious long distance cruising community. If you look at new offerings from historically conservative cruising boat builders like Hallberg Rassey or Amel, they have almost exclusively shifted over to boats with lighter L/D's and higher SA/D's with fractional rigs.

This reflects more accurately reflects the consensus of those who pay attention to the science. What the science has shown is that one of the few factors that is a key determinant of seaworthiness is the length of the waterline. Within reason, the longer the waterline the more seaworthy a vessel will be. Obviously, there are a caveats to that, but in general, comparing two boats of equal displacement, but one with a shorter waterline to the one with the longer waterline, the boat with the longer water line, will be more seaworthy, track better, have a better motion comfort, have more stability, and have a greater carrying capacity (since carrying capacity is controlled by a mix of the overall displacement of the boat and the area of its water plane. Longer waterline boats tend to have much larger water plane area, do they can typically carry a larger percentage of their displacement as carrying capacity.).



Rush2112 said:


> And on researching a different subject (secondary rudders) since I'm now considering boats with spade rudders I found this circumnavigator who said he had no choice but to heave to in bad weather because his boat was "too light" to stand up to the conditions:


Without knowing the specific type of boat or the context, it is hard to address. Weight itself has no bearing on whether a boat needs to hove to or use some other storm strategy. The need to heave to is more a product of the design of the boat, in terns of weight and buoyancy distribution, damping and so on. For example on many of the so-called tanks, the forces are huge because of the sheer amount of mass that is being tossed about. Even on one of these tanks it is possible that the by 'too light' the circumnavigator was referring to being too lightly built (i.e. not structurally capable) of resisting the forces involved. But the weight of the boat itself has no bearing on whether the boat had to be hove to. Webb Chiles is doing a circumnavigation on an ultra-light Moore 24 at nearly age 80. He has weather quite a few gales along the way.



Rush2112 said:


> One additional piece of data I was able to dig up on the subject that may explain this disparity at least to some extent is the argument that a heavily built boat is less affected by a lot of weight of stores and tankage typical of long distance cruisers. They say a light boat when weighed down for cruising with all the extra gear- solar panels, dinghys, davits, radars, wind generators, extra batteries, food, water, fuel, etc, is highly affected by the weight and sails much worse, while a heavy boat is less affected by all the extra weight. So that argument at least partially bridges the gap. However they still swear that the heavy boat is more stable, sea worthy and sea kindly. And that I'm having trouble reconciling with the science and physics of what you've presented.


I touched on the waterplane part of this a paragraph or two above and won't cover that part here, but this gets to a much broader topic. In picking a boat, I suggest that the process should start out by focusing on how much displacement you need adding up the weight of 'stuff' that you will need. Short of that historically, general rule of thumb recommendation for distance cruisers seemed to recommend around 2 1/2 to 5 long tons (roughly 5500 to 11,000 lbs per person). Over time that number has crept up some as better sail handling hardware and demands for more 'comforts of home' has become the norm.

Once you have chosen the displacement that you need, the next step should be to look for the boat (within reason) that has the longest waterline length for that displacement that you can afford. That longer boat for the same displacement will be more stable, sea worthy and sea kindly, plus be easier to handle, and and perform better.

Jeff


----------



## mstern (May 26, 2002)

Rush2112 said:


> Something I can't quite put my finger on is telling me I need to move just a _little_ bit quicker. LOL


Ding, ding, ding, ding, ding! We have a winner! One other important lesson you can take from this: there's always another boat. No matter how many you pass up, no matter how many you miss out on: there's always more where that came from. I myself procrastinated for years. I had a boat; it was fine for my purposes, my wife wasn't really into it, and nothing I saw for sale pushed my buttons; there was always something wrong or not quite right about whatever boat was available. But when my current boat popped up in a casual search, it felt like a smack in the face: "Here I am dummy! You were looking for this make and model with these features in this condition at this price! And to top it off, I'm located only 30 minutes from your house! What are you waiting for?!?! Buy me!" It may take longer than you might like, but it will happen (more or less) for you too.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Jeff_H said:


> I am afraid that you are not understanding what is being said on this and seem to have this backward. To clear this up:
> 1) Boats with lots of stability relative to their drag can tolerate a much larger SA/D.
> 2) Boats with a lots of stability relative to their drag and an SA/D up over 20, can get by with minimally overlapping headsails.
> 3) Minimally overlapping headsails tend to be more efficient, easier to handle (on all points of sail), cost lest to build, and have a much wider wind range.
> ...


Jeff, I'm going to package up all of the things I've learned from our discussions and put them in a book and make a bunch of money- and that's going to pay for my longer waterline upgrade


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

mstern said:


> Ding, ding, ding, ding, ding! We have a winner! One other important lesson you can take from this: there's always another boat. No matter how many you pass up, no matter how many you miss out on: there's always more where that came from. I myself procrastinated for years. I had a boat; it was fine for my purposes, my wife wasn't really into it, and nothing I saw for sale pushed my buttons; there was always something wrong or not quite right about whatever boat was available. But when my current boat popped up in a casual search, it felt like a smack in the face: "Here I am dummy! You were looking for this make and model with these features in this condition at this price! And to top it off, I'm located only 30 minutes from your house! What are you waiting for?!?! Buy me!" It may take longer than you might like, but it will happen (more or less) for you too.


Yeah it really is true- I missed the perfect boat then I missed the perfect boat... Another great one is sure to come along.

Funny thing about that Contest 34 though having checked all the right boxes it just didn't grab me. I really prefer the Contest 36 and the 38, and even for some reason the 31HT. Same for the Grampian- just didn't grab me somehow, something about the giant arch with radar on the back I just thought was ugly- too big for the boat IMO. Anyway that first Trintella though was screaming at me. I think you were the first person to say it, I think in the last thread that finding a boat is like dating, there is a spark of 'magic', something intangible.

Today I have to say was a bit disappointing. I was really looking forward to getting out to see this one.
But no worries, I'll just keep looking...

I think I'm getting to the point where I'm steered in the right direction, it's just a matter of stumbling across the right one, and like dating being quick enough before she gets snapped up


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

Rush2112 said:


> Jeff, I'm going to package up all of the things I've learned from our discussions and put them in a book and make a bunch of money- and that's going to pay for my longer waterline upgrade


It's funny about that. There was a yacht brokerage who collected a bunch of my posts and collected them into a section of their site labeled something like 'Boat Buying Criteria'. It was strange because I began getting emails asking questions about those articles for a little while before I figured out that they were posted on the Broker's webpage.

Over the years, I have written articles for sailing magazines, for CHESSS (Chesapeake Short-handed Sailing Society) and for a yacht club news letter. I have kept the draft of those and many of my posts on general yacht design theory, and have thought about putting them into book form, either online or in hardcopy when I retire.

Jeff


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Jeff_H said:


> It's funny about that. There was a yacht brokerage who collected a bunch of my posts and collected them into a section of their site labeled something like 'Boat Buying Criteria'. It was strange because I began getting emails asking questions about those articles for a little while before I figured out that they were posted on the Broker's webpage.
> 
> Over the years, I have written articles for sailing magazines, for CHESSS (Chesapeake Short-handed Sailing Society) and for a yacht club news letter. I have kept the draft of those and many of my posts on general yacht design theory, and have thought about putting them into book form, either online or in hardcopy when I retire.
> 
> Jeff


Why wait to retire? Write it now in your spare time and let it help fund your retirement ;-)
Call it something catchy like '101 Things You Didn't Know about Sailing' or 'Sailing Surprises: The Most Common Things First Time Buyer's Get Wrong.'
I don't think you'd have much trouble with it- just write an outline of the topics you want to cover and fill in a little bit every day.
Your answers are long and detailed, that's a sign of someone who is natural at writing.

These days you don't even need a publisher, just upload it in a Kindle friendly format to Amazon and get all the profits yourself.
Some people even upload a mini guide in that way, to hook people into the full book, or to get a publisher's deal signed.
Just a thought...


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

On topic with the whole waterline discussion, I have to say I was a bit surprised at what I found:








Beneteau First 32 from 1984 for sale on BotenBank.nl.


Beneteau First 32 from 1984 for sale on BotenBank.nl. BotenBank.nl is the site with the best selection in the Netherlands.




www.botenbank.com





Funny thing is that this is exactly the kind of boat that I told myself I would not buy, when I started this search.
But regarding criteria, it actually does pretty well!

LWL *27.92*
LOA *32.50*
LWL/LOA *.859*
A 28 foot waterline in only a 32 foot boat, wow. The Nicholson 38 only has a 27 foot waterline.
Also it appears to be quite spacious inside, larger than many other 32-34 foot boats I've looked at.
And the SA/D is a good bit higher than what I was looking at before.

Beam 10.8
SA/D 19.4
Bal/Disp 39.45
The ballast however appears to be a bit light compared to many others I've seen.
And it's probably not nearly as durable and seaworthy as others. Then again I think the best argument I heard about weather was avoid it, stay near the coast, and tuck into a bay or sheltered area if things get a bit dodgy. And consider this a first learning boat if anything, where another model might someday take me further afield.

And best of all it's got a new main, new genoa, new standing rigging, basic electronics including GPS and VHF and tiller autopilot, and it's under 20 grand. Also it appears that all lines are led aft so I won't have to deal with setting that up. And its sitting in Loosdrecht which I happen to know is fresh water.

Now for the bad news- this boat like most I've looked at have one fatal flaw- they are not setup for cruising.
IE almost none of the boats I look at have all of these. In fact most have few or even none:

AIS
EPIRB
Secondary Anchor
Windlass
Dinghy and Engine
Sun Shelter
Holding Tank
Pressurized Hot Water
Heater
Solar Power
Shore Power
Large Cap. Battery Bank
Inverter
Freezer
Life Raft
Radar
Large Tankage
Sure not all this stuff is required for cruising but most of it is.
And recent discussion threads and research has shown that even after you have the boat sorted, setup for cruising can easily cost you 20-30 grand. Ouch!

So I'm now thinking I really do have to increase my budget. Still 30K for the boat, but at least 15-20K more for cruising equipment and maintenance items.

Anyway, I'm curious what you (and others) think of this boat?


----------



## mstern (May 26, 2002)

Rush: I think you may be going about this backwards. Instead of using the rather subjective "design" standards as your first cut on deciding which boats to look at, I think you should be concentrating on the non-subjective factors of what makes a boat "cruisable" for you. 

If your aim is to live aboard, then you'd be better off making a list of the features that you really feel you can't do without (e.g., tankage, large battery bank space, separate shower), and look for boats that meet those criteria. You can easily add AIS, EPIRB, a bimini, a windless or a heater to any boat. You can't add 200 gallons of fuel capacity if it wasn't designed in to begin with. 

In short, start with the non-negotiables, and work from there. I remember one guy asked here for advice in choosing a new boat; he set out his criteria, one of which was it can't be more than x feet long. The predictable avalanche of suggestions poured in, many of which commented on the length restriction and urged him to look at other options. Our intrepid OP explained that his slip couldn't accommodate anything longer, so that was that.

I think you should start thinking like that guy: if you need x (whatever x may be), don't look at boats that don't meet that criteria. You'll make yourself crazy. This Beneteau is a good example. It is not a live-aboard or long range cruiser; it wasn't designed to be, and without major surgery, it never will be. Do you want to be able shower in hot water in a separate compartment? If so, don't look at boats that don't have hot water and a separate shower. Establish a minimum tankage capacity that you can't do without. Use those as your initial criteria, not waterline length or amount of ballast. You can start thinking about those after you establish that it meets your minimums.


----------



## RegisteredUser (Aug 16, 2010)

Good post


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

mstern said:


> Rush: I think you may be going about this backwards. Instead of using the rather subjective "design" standards as your first cut on deciding which boats to look at, I think you should be concentrating on the non-subjective factors of what makes a boat "cruisable" for you.
> 
> If your aim is to live aboard, then you'd be better off making a list of the features that you really feel you can't do without (e.g., tankage, large battery bank space, separate shower), and look for boats that meet those criteria. You can easily add AIS, EPIRB, a bimini, a windless or a heater to any boat. You can't add 200 gallons of fuel capacity if it wasn't designed in to begin with.
> 
> ...


Yeah I hear ya. The truth is the world of tradeoffs is savage I tell you.
I mean here you have the Beneteau, it's at least on paper everything that Jeff has described- long waterline, not too heavy, pointy nose, large sail area. With a little heating and hot water it could be very livable, in fact more so than many narrower 36 footers I've looked at.

Then you have the cruiser boats with big tankage and much of the cruising gear I would find necessary for my goals, but then they tend to be older, very heavy, full keel, ketch or very large overlapping genoa sloop, probably won't move in less than 15 knots wind, and are overall a performance dud.

You nailed it though. This is a time for prioritizing.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

Rush2112 said:


> On topic with the whole waterline discussion, I have to say I was a bit surprised at what I found:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That looks like a real winner. That boat seems to be in good shape and has a nice layout for a short-handed cruiser and live aboard. It looks like the boat owner is asking around $23,000, so if you got her for around $20-21,000 that would give you some headroom to make improvements.

I have not sailed the First 32 but I spent a lot of time on the First 345 of the same era and thought it was a very nice design for that period. (I did meet a couple who sailed one to the States from Britain and who was heading to the Islands. It would not be my first choice for that) It would make a near perfect platform to learn to sail and explore your region on. This boat is located in the Netherlands (if I understood the advertisement properly) so it should be convenient to inspect, purchase and bring home.

It is an IOR boat so you will need to learn not to heel too far and watch yourself on run in a breeze and big waves. That said these are pretty stable boats since they are pretty deep. Some of these boats had lead keels on their deep draft models. I don't know what that boat has.

Beneteaus tend to get subjected to a lot of trash talk on the internet, but the First series of that era seemed to be pretty well built and sailed quite well. They had nicely finished interiors and well thought out with features that US boat builders never quite figured out. I loved the aft heads on these boats which allowed you to dive below in wet gear and not have to go through the entire interior. plus there was a wet locker right behind the head. The galley is convenient to the companionway which is good, but it is a little small. You will learn to use the chart table as part of the counters.(I do that on my boat as well) This boat has a flip up counter next to the sink which is nice. There are hand holds and crash bars where they are needed which is a good thing. It sounds like there are storm sails as well. (Hopefully you won't need those.)

The boat seems to have a lot of instrumentation.

This boat has a large enough L/D that you should be able to get by with a 110% jib while you are learning to sail and that will make short-handing much easier The jib is on a furler and most (or all) of the control lines are lead aft which also makes life much easier There is an almost new tiller pilot and tiller steering will help you learn faster than a wheel. It is also much easier to single hand a boat this size with a tiller than a wheel.

Looking at your list of stuff: Here is my take.

AIS (Unless you are in an area with a lot of commercial shipping, or traffic that also uses AIS, you don't need this. But you just plain need to stay alert)
EPIRB (If you are not going offshore and out of VHF range, then you can wait on this)
Secondary Anchor (Its a nice to have. Mine lives in a locker in the main cabin and has not seen the light of day in over a decade. Its there in case I lose my primary anchor)
Windlass (You don't need a windlass on a boat this size. My boat is a couple thousand pounds heavier, has a lot more windage and I am old man, and I have never needed a windlass. There are tricks that you can use when things get tough, but a windlass isn't one of them.)
Dinghy and Engine (That is a tough one on a boat this size. I use an inflatable Kayak for what I need, but I don't recommend that where you are. You could probably get by with a fold-bote.)
Sun Shelter (Well you have a dodger and with the traveler on the bridge deck you should be able to rig a bimini. I don't really get why you think you need one that far north, but you can buy a lot of wide brimmed hats and sunblock for the price of a bimini. On the other hand, you might want a harbor awning.) 
Holding Tank (I would be surprised if that boat doesn't have a holding tank. By 1984 holding tanks were pretty universal. It won't be big, but none of them were.)
Pressurized Hot Water (That boat has pressure water, and I would be surprised if it did not have hot water, That was standard on that model in the States. But hot water is pretty easy to install, and not all that expensive. The heater would go in the sail locker and would be heated by the engine or when tied up at a dock.)
Heater (that is a tougher one. You probably could install a small diesel heater on the forward bulkhead of the main salon on the port side. If you think that you will be cruising in weather under 50 degrees it sure is a nice thing to have. But if its only to heat the boat at the dock, a single portable radiant space heater would certainly go a lobg way towards taking the chill down. 
Solar Power (I don't think that you will be taking this boat across the Atlantic any time soon. Boats like these have small electrical demands and you can probably get by running the engine less than an hour a day when you are away from the dock)
Shore Power (I ma not certain but in the picture of the tiller pilot it looks like this boat has shore power.)
Large Cap. Battery Bank (Similar to above, boats like these have small electrical demands and you can probably get by running the engine less than an hour a day when you are away from the dock. You could probably get by with a pair of group 27 or 31 AGMs)
Inverter (That depends on what you need it for. Inverters are not all that efficient. I have almost nothing that needs line voltage on the boat. I purposely bought a laptop which could run on 12 volt so there is less draw. I do have a very small inverter that plugs into a cigarette socket. I pull it out every five or six years to run a power tool or something like that.)
Freezer (There usually is a very small freezer compartment behind the refrigerant coils I can't help you with this one since I am a vegetarian and so never bothered to have refrigeration)
Life Raft (Yes that is another one of those judgement call things. If you are going into truly remote areas then a liferaft is a very good idea. Life rafts are expensive to buy and maintain. I never had one but if I was sinking, I would certainly want one. That boat does a life raft compartment below the tiller.)
Radar (If you are in a notorious foggy area or an area with lots of traffic, its nice to have. I never had radar and there have been some times where it would have been nice to have -like the sudden snow storm that popped up before I could clear the shipping channel. I don't think that I would spend the money to put it on a boat that size until and unless you end up making more serious passages.)
Large Tankage (12 gallons of fuel and 53 gallons of water is pretty big tankage for a 32 footer. A sistership of my boat sailed from South Africa to the Caribbean on les than 12 gallons of fuel. If you decide to make longer passages, then you might add a 20 gallon fuel bladder and a 20 gallon water bladder for the passage.)
My point to all of this above, is that for now, you will spend years developing the broad range of skills to a point where you could actually safely do a major offshore voyage. I know that sounds long and tedious.

I am helping a friend restore an old wreck of a race boat. The long list of stuff was daunting at first and he was getting frustrated. I told him that restoring a boat (or in your case learning to sail) happens the same way as eating an elephant. You do it one bite at a time.

A boat like this is a dandy platform to live on and build skills. If you live modestly, and have a decent income you should be able to put aside a decent cruising kitty. This probably won't be the boat that you sail to the new world, but it should be a boat that could take you anywhere in Europe or north Africa. If you take care of her, when the time is right a boat like this should be easy to sell for close to what you paid for her. At that point you can buy whatever tickles your fancy with the experience to guide you in your decision towards the absolute right boat from your experience based tastes for the next chapter of your adventure. If you aim your sights slightly lower for a little while, you will probably have an easier time hitting your long range target.

At least that is how this old guy sees it.

Jeff


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

I think Jeff summed up the Bene perfectly. Your priority should be a boat you can afford to learn on. Incredible detail, like AIS and multiple spare anchors is very premature. I think one of the characteristics that makes a successful cruiser is the ability to overcome obstacles. Any of these features, even refrigeration, could break or fail, which is no different than not having them in the first place. One learns to deal with it.

Most that I know, who set early goals too high, became grossly disappointed. I worry you're doing that, with you list of needs. Not unlike those who focus on a circumnavigation and then end up disappointed only seeing 1000 miles of coastline or cruising the Caribbean. What they actually accomplish is more than 99% of people get to enjoy, but they set themselves up for failure. The secret is to get in the game and see where it goes. 

If you don't at least go see it, you're kidding yourself that you want to do this.


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

Looks like a good boat but perhaps to small to live aboard and cruise. My suggestion is look at boats that offer space/accommodation/living comfort as the "entry" point in your search. The of course the boat would have to be the right price and have sound bones as they say... and good rigging, sails, and engine. Other systems you can upgrade asap,,, anchoring, electrical, plumbing and navigation. You can usually get by for a while with old sails... You can upgrade ANY system... you can "upgrade" the hull, or the accommodation plan. You're stuck with that unless you do an expensive and skill heavy spendy gut rehab.

Having cruised, sailed offshore and lived aboard for 5 years and owned the boat for 35... I would assert that you would be better served by a good design in the mid 30s. As I have written many times on this forum... I bought a new 36 without any experience. I then decided to prep myself (learn to truly sail and handle the situations I would encounter out there)... and prep the boat for the type of sailing I would do. 
I started with new sails and rigging.. new engine... and ice box.. hot water heater, anchor and nylon rode and even an alum frame dodger with some weird material not sunbrella.
So the boat was ready to use. And if did.
I spent about 5 years using and doing the following upgrades (not in order of time)
storm sails, added removable inner forestay and running back stays and trysail track on mast
electric windlass and chain rode, 2nd and 3rd anchors
nav instruments: loranC then GPS, radar, fluxgate compass, more dash instruments. wfax, high seas radio, hand held vhf
below decks AP
upgrade head
roller furling
secondary winches
winch at mast
adjustable pole for head sail
sunbrella dodger w/ss bows
cockpit cushions
engine drive refer/freezer
Espar forced air diesel cabin heater
solar panels
various joinery projects (not mission critical - aesthetics)
assym spinnaker (with sock)
assembled extensive spares

Many of the above are now in 2nd, 3rd or 4th upgrades.
Upgrades NEVER STOP... it IS what owning a boat involves.


----------



## VIEXILE (Jan 10, 2001)

Boy I could do a GREAT Pearson 10M for $30K that would qualify. Balanced, comfortable, changeable and with a bridge deck traveler to singlehand (Garhauer replacement, of course). You just have to deal with the stanchions right off the bat and make them more secure where the deck gets logy if the bedding wasn't well maintained. Oh, and tiller steered, of course. I used to be able to singlehand in 30kn (steady), lock the tiller, run forward to deal with the headsail (hank on) and she'd track like she was on a rail. Destroyed a 150 genoa doing that in the Thankspigging Regatta one year, but one. Kept blowing out the hanks while a giant tear formed in the genny. Lock tiller, run forward, tie down the tack, run back, pass the next boat with sailcloth flagging. That old headsail was done anyway. But it was FUN! Barely won, since the last leg was downwind into Coral Bay and I was coming in under handkerchief and Main. But a couple of those trophies in the cabinet at Skinny Legs are mine.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Jeff_H said:


> This boat is located in the Netherlands (if I understood the advertisement properly) so it should be convenient to inspect, purchase and bring home.


One would think so, but I'm finding appointments to be difficult to get.
Not sure why, I'll keep following through.
Definitely going to try to see this one though, and thanks again for the detailed response.



Jeff_H said:


> It is an IOR boat so you will need to learn not to heel too far and watch yourself on run in a breeze and big waves. That said these are pretty stable boats since they are pretty deep. Some of these boats had lead keels on their deep draft models. I don't know what that boat has.


Yeah, when I read 'lead keel' I thought it meant lead inside, IE lead balast, but apparentlly not. I guess the keel itself is made of lead. One owner said they had some maintenance issues with it. Other's have said they avoid lead keels, I wonder what are your thoughts on this?

Also I thought that since it had a LWL/LOA of .85 that meant it was not IOR. Now I'm confused.
Is it because the bow doesn't have much rake to get through waves, and might dig in?



Jeff_H said:


> Beneteaus tend to get subjected to a lot of trash talk on the internet, but the First series of that era seemed to be pretty well built and sailed quite well. They had nicely finished interiors and well thought out with features that US boat builders never quite figured out...


While I haven't seen it yet, I have to say that I totally agree on the interior. It looks clean and functional and to have more usable space than others this size. I also really like the aft heads, forward facing and wet locker as you mentioned. I also noticed the hand holds and thought 'why don't so many other boats have these' seems like a no brainer.



Jeff_H said:


> Looking at your list of stuff: Here is my take...
> 
> My point to all of this above, is that for now, you will spend years developing the broad range of skills to a point where you could actually safely do a major offshore voyage. I know that sounds long and tedious.
> You do it one bite at a time.


Yeah maybe I don't need all that cruising stuff to begin with. I am happy to just learn on the Ijmeer. It's kind of like a small great lakes basically. Perfect actually for learning. Big enough to be interesting, and with consistent 15+ winds, but without all the heavy weather dramas of The North Sea on the other side of the dam.



Jeff_H said:


> A boat like this is a dandy platform to live on and build skills. If you live modestly, and have a decent income you should be able to put aside a decent cruising kitty. This probably won't be the boat that you sail to the new world, but it should be a boat that could take you anywhere in Europe or north Africa. If you take care of her, when the time is right a boat like this should be easy to sell for close to what you paid for her. At that point you can buy whatever tickles your fancy with the experience to guide you in your decision towards the absolute right boat from your experience based tastes for the next chapter of your adventure. If you aim your sights slightly lower for a little while, you will probably have an easier time hitting your long range target.
> 
> At least that is how this old guy sees it.
> 
> Jeff


You know that actually sounds like a pretty good plan 

Now if I can just get a few darn appointments.
BTW I'm planning to see at least three boats just so I have a little perspective. 
Here are the other two I'm trying to get an appointment for, mostly because they are really close to home:





__





boten te koop - boats.com


Vind boten te koop. 104996 boten. Recensies, bronnen. 1 van 250 pagina's.




nl.boats.com













Jeanneau SO 33


Jeanneau SO 33 in Waterland tweedehands boten - Top Boats




nl.topboats.com





The Jeanneau is a little bit out of my price range but not too far. BTW, my budget is in Euros not Dollars ;-)

Anyway I wonder how Jeanneau compares to Beneteau? It also looks pretty nice, but for almost twice the money I'm not so sure it's twice the boat, esp since the Beneteau has new sails and rigging.

I hope I can get a few appointments booked tomorrow.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Minnewaska said:


> I think Jeff summed up the Bene perfectly. Your priority should be a boat you can afford to learn on. Incredible detail, like AIS and multiple spare anchors is very premature. I think one of the characteristics that makes a successful cruiser is the ability to overcome obstacles. Any of these features, even refrigeration, could break or fail, which is no different than not having them in the first place. One learns to deal with it.


Well at least I can get into a boat and then decide after a while whether to upgrade it over time with more cruising gear or to just get another boat.



Minnewaska said:


> Most that I know, who set early goals too high, became grossly disappointed. I worry you're doing that, with you list of needs. Not unlike those who focus on a circumnavigation and then end up disappointed only seeing 1000 miles of coastline or cruising the Caribbean. What they actually accomplish is more than 99% of people get to enjoy, but they set themselves up for failure. The secret is to get in the game and see where it goes.


Well I'm just trying to cover the bases. I was a boy scout. They really hammered that 'be prepared' into me ;-) Jeff gave pretty good answers to all the bullets so I have a few things to investigate and a few alternate options to consider. That's enough for now...



Minnewaska said:


> If you don't at least go see it, you're kidding yourself that you want to do this.


Now now let's not get carried away. Though a little push can be helpful from time to time


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

SanderO said:


> Looks like a good boat but perhaps to small to live aboard and cruise. My suggestion is look at boats that offer space/accommodation/living comfort as the "entry" point in your search.


Well it certainly sounds like you did your fair share of upgrading!
Yeah my main concern at this point is whether I can live on it. 32 is a bit smaller than I had intended. I have a 31 and a 33 I'm also trying to see. And I'd like to throw a 36-38 footer in there as well just for perspective. I'm afraid if I just see the 32 I'll say 'oh I can live on this' and if I see a 36 first I'll say 'no way I can live on this'. I'm actually pretty flexible, but we'll see. Truth is I just want to get out there. So I'm trying to be disciplined about this.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

VIEXILE said:


> Boy I could do a GREAT Pearson 10M for $30K that would qualify.


I was very much interested in a few Pearsons earlier on, until I discovered how hard they are to come by on this side of the pond. That goes for a lot of makes that are common Stateside. Honestly I sure wish I was buying in The States, far better selection, and far better prices. Oh well you do the best you can with what you've got...


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Rush2112 said:


> Yeah, when I read 'lead keel' I thought it meant lead inside, IE lead balast, but apparentlly not. I guess the keel itself is made of lead. One owner said they had some maintenance issues with it. Other's have said they avoid lead keels, I wonder what are your thoughts on this?


Some people have strong opinions about iron vs lead. I think there are pros and cons and I would just get whatever the boat I wanted came with.

Lead is more efficient, as it weighs more. Less material, less drag, to get the same job done. The downside to lead is the bolts needs to be cast into the material. Typically a bolt that is shaped like a hook is cast inside with threads protruding out the top. When these need to be replaced, it's labor intensive. They have to be melted out. They are often made of stainless steel. If you keep them absolutely dry, they'll outlive you. If they get wet, say from a keel seem intrusion, stainless steel corrodes quickly.

Iron keels are less efficient, but bulb designs have argued they do a pretty good job. They can rust, although, good primer and barrier coating hold that at bay. Their advantage is that steel is strong enough to hold threads, so the bolts are just studs screwed in from the top. If they need to be replaced, it can be as easy as removing them from inside the boat and replacing them. Iron keels use either stainless or galvanized steel bolts. Personally, I prefer galvanized, as they are stronger and less susceptible to crevice corrosion.

Let us know what you think of the Beneteau. Be sure the broker understands you are a serious buyer, with the means to pay, not a picky buyer. You can get picky later, if they accept your offer.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

Rush2112 said:


> Yeah, when I read 'lead keel' I thought it meant lead inside, IE lead balast, but apparentlly not. I guess the keel itself is made of lead. One owner said they had some maintenance issues with it. Other's have said they avoid lead keels, I wonder what are your thoughts on this?
> 
> Also I thought that since it had a LWL/LOA of .85 that meant it was not IOR. Now I'm confused.
> Is it because the bow doesn't have much rake to get through waves, and might dig in?


Lead keels are generally preferable in terms of stability, motion,band performance. Lead is much denser and so a smaller volume of lead is required for the same weight allowing it to be lower and with less surface area. In a grounding lead will generally absorb the impact and transmit less of the impact into the structure of the boat.

The IOR Rule, like most measurement rules attempts to predict the relative performance of a boat from a limited number of measurements. And like any measurement rules, designers quickly learn how to trick the rule into thinking the boat is slower than it really is by distorting the shape of the boat and it's rig from what is ideal from a Seaworthiness, ease of handling, or performance.

And while we talk about the IOR Rule like it is one thing, it was actually a series of distinctly different rules with a gang of tweaks in between.

The Beneteau appears to be a an IOR II derived design. IOR II produced some of the better hull forms of the IOR era.

But even so, they still suffer from hull and rig distortions that are less than ideal compared to many of the designs which came later and which were not distorted for some racing rule.

As far as the other two boats, I don't know the Jenneau SO 33. I only know the Contest 31 (Connyplex) in passing so it's hard to comment other than from what I can see in the pictures. The hull form looks like it would be rolly and not especially stable. The rig is consistent with the more typical IOR proportions of big jib and small mainsail, which is less convenient to short hand.

Jeff


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Well the Jeanneau already has an offer and my appointment is postponed to a 'maybe' on Monday. Geez, all this analysis and the boat I buy might just be the one that I get to in time and am allowed to actually see! I don't know about the USA right now, but the market here is just crazy. I should be able to see the Beneteau Monday or Tuesday, am awaiting confirmation. The saga continues...


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

I've said the many times before, and perhaps even in this thread:

Don't believe the people who tell you that there are thousands of boats out there ready to be snatched up at bargain prices. Attractive boats priced right sell very fast. That's not just "right now", it's always been that way. Many of the boats out there are crap, overpriced, and have fatal flaws not shown in the pictures or listings. That's why you need to visit them to find out.

The good news is that if you get one of those good boats and care for it properly, you'll be able to sell it very quickly. That's why I've suggested that you get the boat you need to learn on now, not the boat you'd like to cross oceans with in 5-10 years.

When you find the right boat, don't ruin your opportunity by offering 50-70% of asking price, or some other insulting practice. If the boat is priced right, then asking price might be the fair price. If the owner knows the boat is truly worth what he's asking, he'll wait for it, and may not have to wait for long.

My first boat was purchased at 100% of asking price (though owner had reduced asking price by 20% just before I came looking). My current boat was purchased at 93% of asking price (though owner had reduced asking price by 22% just before I came looking). If you see a trend here, there is. Those boats were initially overpriced enough that they didn't even pop up in my search criteria. For both, I was the first buyer to come along once the price was lowered, and I recognized that they were priced appropriately.

Remember, purchase price is just the "initiation fee". Maintenance and fixes (which you will have a lot of on even the best boat) are huge. If you save $5,000 on purchase price and later find you need a new engine, you haven't saved any money at all. It's a crap shoot, because there is stuff that you'll never know, even with a good surveyor. But I'd gladly spend a few extra thousand on a better boat than take a risk with a bargain-priced boat the has signs of issues.

If you are on a budget, I strongly recommend going smaller/newer instead of bigger/older. Your ongoing costs will be much less, and you'll be able to save up for your next boat.

FYI, Jeanneau and Beneteau are the same company. I recently heard that Jeanneau is higher end (better hardware, etc.) than Beneteau, though even if true, that may just be their current product line for new boats. I've seen some really nice older Beneteaus.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

Minnewaska raises a very good point about keel bolts in iron vs lead keels that is very relevant to a discussion of older boats. It used to be thought that lead keels with stainless steel bolts were a 'forever thing'. They are not. And it used to be thought that an iron keel with steel or stainless steel was a maintenance nightmare. But if changed regularly, (10-15 years) they are not either. 

If they are swapped out on a regular basis, it is moderately easy and not all that expensive to replace steel keel bolts in an iron keel. On the other hand, if the bolts are sized in place, replacement of steel bolts can be a miserable job. One of the worst boat repairs I ever did was replacing the iron keel bolts in the iron keel of my Folkboat.

While it is generally thought that stainless steel keel bolts in a lead keel has a much longer lifespan, eventually they need to be inspected and ultimately replaced. 

Replacing keel bolts in a lead keel is generally substantially more difficult than iron keel bolts that are decent shape.

There are four ways to replace keel bolts in a lead keel. On a small boat of perhaps 25-28 feet or less, long lag bolts or studs with course threads into the lead and fine threads for the nuts. 
But anything bigger, the process gets much harder and expensive, often more expensive than the boat is worth. 

The least expensive way to repair keel bolts in a lead keel is old school. The technique requires that the old bolts are cut off flush with the top of the lead. New bolt holes are drilled vertically in different locations than the old bolts and a larger hole is drilled horizontally across the keel at the end of the bolt holes. That larger hole gets chiseled to a flat for a nut and bearing plate. 

The old bolt holes are structurally filled and the keel sump reinforced. The new bolt holes are drilled for the new bolts, and the whole collection of parts caulked and reassembled.

A more extensive method is the melt the J-bolts out of the lead, make new J-bolts and then lead them back in. While not cheap, if done with monel or titanium bolts, it is a forever repair.

The most dramatic repair is to cast a new keel. Often the design of the keel is updated at the same time. Mostly this is done on valuable performance oriented designs. 

Jeff


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

I have NO (edited) experience in buying a used boat. 
I would make a list of MUST HAVE FEATURES and equipment
You likely will not find them all in any boat.
You can ADD or MODIFY to get these features on the boat you own/buy.
You're not going to change a keel, hull, the steering, engine, rig and of course you can't change the size and accommodation plan.
Virtually every boat is a PROJECT BOAT... some minor projects and some major projects
You need to have an idea of what the MUST HAVE features you want will cost... as they may be your initial projects.
Learning on one boat, selling it and starting again may not always be the best approach. You will need to learn the new boat and do many of the same projects again and likely waste a lot of time.
You can do the projects and upgrades AND sail locally and learn and when you have things together and confidence sailing... you can venture off. You WILL discover new projects and change your idea.
My boat was new and "vanilla" and I decided to upgrade it with things like AP, refer, heating, gps plotter, DSC VHF, roller furling, windlass and chain... solar panels, dink and OB and so on. But I used, learned, worked on and enjoyed the boat from the minute the contract was closed. My plans evolved and after 5 years I decided to sail away. But those first 5 years were full on immersion in / with the boat... including courses in celestial, piloting and meteorology.
Smaller boats are slower and make fewer miles in a day, THAT matters. They carry fewer stores, fuel and water... and are not as sea kindly as a larger boat.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

TakeFive said:


> FYI, Jeanneau and Beneteau are the same company.


They started as separate companies, but Bene bought Jene along the way. It's been a long while, but I can't recall how long. They initially committed to allowing Jene to continue their manufacturing process, which differed from Bene. J was hand laid at the time, while B was much more "production". Something like that, I don't recall the specifics.

Ultimately, Beneteau Group started making smaller hulls (B's and J's) in the US, so I'm not sure this segregation remained along the way. Ironically, they just announced they are close one of these plants (only one?) in the US.

Best analogy I could think of was Bene = Honda. Jene=Acura. It's not perfectly accurate, they are far more similar, since the great recession cost saving redesigns around 2010.


----------



## mstern (May 26, 2002)

I asked a Beneteau salesman at a boat show about the different design parameters between Beneteau and Jenneau; he told me that the Jenneaus were supposed to be the more sporty and fashionable models. Seems about right to me.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

TakeFive said:


> Don't believe the people who tell you that there are thousands of boats out there ready to be snatched up at bargain prices. Attractive boats priced right sell very fast.


Confirmed!



TakeFive said:


> FYI, Jeanneau and Beneteau are the same company. I recently heard that Jeanneau is higher end (better hardware, etc.) than Beneteau, though even if true, that may just be their current product line for new boats. I've seen some really nice older Beneteaus.


Good info thanks.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Jeff_H said:


> Minnewaska raises a very good point about keel bolts in iron vs lead keels that is very relevant to a discussion of older boats. It used to be thought that lead keels with stainless steel bolts were a 'forever thing'. They are not. And it used to be thought that an iron keel with steel or stainless steel was a maintenance nightmare. But if changed regularly, (10-15 years) they are not either.
> 
> If they are swapped out on a regular basis, it is moderately easy and not all that expensive to replace steel keel bolts in an iron keel. On the other hand, if the bolts are sized in place, replacement of steel bolts can be a miserable job. One of the worst boat repairs I ever did was replacing the iron keel bolts in the iron keel of my Folkboat.
> 
> ...


It sounds like either way- lead or iron, it can be very expensive to deal with keel bolts.
And by the sound of it I'm not really seeing a clear 'winner' between the two. The nod perhaps goes to iron simply as if it was maintained well and bolts were replaced at some point or at least re-seated the likelihood of it being frozen up with rust and corrosion is relatively small, and worst case scenario the bolts can be replaced one by one with little drama. The idea of melting out lead bolts to replace them sounds like the kind of horrific labor intensive job that would cost a fortune in The Netherlands. This is one of the worst places on the planet to need a highly skilled specialist to do a labor intensive job, believe me!

I think I may be best served to have my surveyor put extra attention on this area.

Also it must be said that this discussion definitely puts a few more points in favor of the Contest boats, as they have a fantastic reputation for issue free keels.


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

Rush2112 said:


> It sounds like either way- lead or iron, it can be very expensive to deal with keel bolts.
> And by the sound of it I'm not really seeing a clear 'winner' between the two. The nod perhaps goes to iron simply as if it was maintained well and bolts were replaced at some point or at least re-seated the likelihood of it being frozen up with rust and corrosion is relatively small, and worst case scenario the bolts can be replaced one by one with little drama. The idea of melting out lead bolts to replace them sounds like the kind of horrific labor intensive job that would cost a fortune in The Netherlands. This is one of the worst places on the planet to need a highly skilled specialist to do a labor intensive job, believe me!
> 
> I think I may be best served to have my surveyor put extra attention on this area.
> ...


I think you're micro-focusing again. Thare are great (and lousy) boats with both kinds of keels. Fe vs Pb should not be on your list. The care and condition of each individual specimen is all that matters.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

SanderO said:


> I have experience in buying a used boat.
> I would make a list of MUST HAVE FEATURES and equipment
> You likely will not find them all in any boat.
> You can ADD or MODIFY to get these features on the boat you own/buy.
> ...


Point taken. You can (and will!) upgrade almost everything on the boat at some point in time, except the hull itself which you're stuck with. And having lived aboard for five years I believe you when you say a live aboard needs to be livable first and sail-able second. Because you'll be living on it a lot more than you'll be sailing it! And longer- mid 30's plus is definitely better for livability, and (generally speaking) waterline and therefore distance per day.

The true challenge at this point is actually getting out and seeing boats and discovering my space and livability tolerances. I've camped a lot, slept in tiny RVs, etc so I think my tolerance is better than most. Still I have to get out there and this is proving a frustrating challenge.

I think I need to follow TakeFive's advice and in my intro email response say something like :
"Hello I saw boat X and just love it. Passionately. I have cash money right now and am eager and happy to throw my money indiscriminately in literally any direction at all, just to be briefly on a boat of any kind, floating or sinking- really doesn't matter. In fact this money is getting heavy. Can you just hold it for a little while? What a relief! For a call back within 48 hours I will include a free box of chocolates and two tickets for the movies!"

OK, that may be a _small_ exaggeration. But geez I can't get the time of day from these people. Literally haven't asked a single question since the Grampian 34. And I am leaving voicemail follow ups.

Maybe just a few keywords added to my response like "have cash ready", "looking to buy ASAP", would help ;-)


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

Rush2112 said:


> Point taken. You can (and will!) upgrade almost everything on the boat at some point in time, except the hull itself which you're stuck with. And having lived aboard for five years I believe you when you say a live aboard needs to be livable first and sail-able second. Because you'll be living on it a lot more than you'll be sailing it! And longer- mid 30's plus is definitely better for livability, and (generally speaking) waterline and therefore distance per day.
> 
> The true challenge at this point is actually getting out and seeing boats and discovering my space and livability tolerances. I've camped a lot, slept in tiny RVs, etc so I think my tolerance is better than most. Still I have to get out there and this is proving a frustrating challenge.
> 
> ...


Camping or weekend in an RV is not living aboard. Time span is very very different and therefor stowage needs are not comparable. Camping you don't need a 2 or 3 burner stove... living aboard you do. You can get by with a portable cooler camping... but not so for living aboard. Same for comfort of berths.


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

Rush2112 said:


> Point taken. You can (and will!) upgrade almost everything on the boat at some point in time...


Not if you buy the right boat. My instruments are all 19 years old, but work fine. And since they follow NMEA 0183, I've been able to integrate them into an open source navigation system that displays chartplotter and wirelessly multicasts speed/wind/autopilot data on one screen. I can even have the boat automatically follow a route that comes from this freebie chart plotter. Even better, I had set up this navigation system on my prior boat 10 years ago, but brought it to my new boat with me because it followed the same standard.

Why would I replace all this with new, when it's perfectly functional for my needs? Granted, if you're crossing oceans you need radar and a whole bunch of bulletproof systems, but you're not going to be doing that for at least 5 years.

I suggest you throw out your long list of upgrades. You don't even know yet what you're really going to need. The boat, and your own experience, will tell you that, and it will likely be a totally different list from anything you can anticipate now. Inverters and stuff like that are probably unnecessary and will just add failure modes.



Rush2112 said:


> ...except the hull itself which you're stuck with...


Why are you stuck with it? If you properly care for it, you'll be able to sell it for about what you paid, and move on to your next boat, at which point you'll be a much smarter boat shopper.


----------



## olson34 (Oct 13, 2000)

Given similar maintenance, always pick the lead keel. Lots more dense and this rewards you with lower wetted surface. I have looked at our boat in the yard, near a similar Bene- 30 something. The iron keel on the Ben. was huge/fat.  Lumpy cast surface. The casting was wider at the bottom to try to put more ballast lower, which is good, but the cost saving for the builder sure did no favors for the owner.
Amazing difference when compared to the eliptical lead fin on our boat.
This directly affects pointing ability, and being able to efficiently sail to weather is an important function of any sailboat. I realize that the old saying was that "gentlemen do not sail to weather" .... but unless you choose to own a motor-sailor, this is worth considering when you are shopping. And no, our boat is not "special" but is on a short list of performance cruisers.... along with the Ericson 32-200, and the C&C 32 that we did not manage to make a deal on when we were shopping.
To reiterate again, if you are buying a Sail Boat then find one that actually sails.... 

BTW, another boat in this size range that was sold more in Europe than the US (and amazingly there are two in our club) is the Yamaha 33. Strong and fast. They built a 36/37 that is well regarded , too.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Just a quick update to say that after mentioning in email follow ups that I am a serious buyer and have cash money, and am looking to buy as soon as possible, I have two viewings scheduled. One surprisingly casual where I will go to the marina, pick up the key and just go see the boat (the Contest 31) myself. And a second one on Tuesday when I will see the beneteau 32 with a broker. I have to say, I'm pretty jazzed!


----------



## SchockT (May 21, 2012)

olson34 said:


> Given similar maintenance, always pick the lead keel. Lots more dense and this rewards you with lower wetted surface. I have looked at our boat in the yard, near a similar Bene- 30 something. The iron keel on the Ben. was huge/fat.  Lumpy cast surface. The casting was wider at the bottom to try to put more ballast lower, which is good, but the cost saving for the builder sure did no favors for the owner.
> Amazing difference when compared to the eliptical lead fin on our boat.
> This directly affects pointing ability, and being able to efficiently sail to weather is an important function of any sailboat. I realize that the old saying was that "gentlemen do not sail to weather" .... but unless you choose to own a motor-sailor, this is worth considering when you are shopping. And no, our boat is not "special" but is on a short list of performance cruisers.... along with the Ericson 32-200, and the C&C 32 that we did not manage to make a deal on when we were shopping.
> To reiterate again, if you are buying a Sail Boat then find one that actually sails....
> ...


Yes, I agree a lead keel is better than an iron keel, but that doesn't mean that the boat with an iron keel won't sail well. There are lots of lumpy poorly faired lead keels out there too.

My boat has an iron keel, which was a compromise that I made reluctantly, but there was so much more to like about the boat that I made the trade off.

My biggest complaint about the iron keel is the increased maintenance. There are inevitable rust spots that appear and need to be dealt with before painting.

Lead fins are preferable, but iron keels should not be a deal breaker.

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

olson34 said:


> Given similar maintenance, always pick the lead keel. Lots more dense and this rewards you with lower wetted surface. I have looked at our boat in the yard, near a similar Bene- 30 something. The iron keel on the Ben. was huge/fat.  Lumpy cast surface. The casting was wider at the bottom to try to put more ballast lower, which is good, but the cost saving for the builder sure did no favors for the owner.
> Amazing difference when compared to the eliptical lead fin on our boat.
> This directly affects pointing ability, and being able to efficiently sail to weather is an important function of any sailboat. I realize that the old saying was that "gentlemen do not sail to weather" .... but unless you choose to own a motor-sailor, this is worth considering when you are shopping. And no, our boat is not "special" but is on a short list of performance cruisers.... along with the Ericson 32-200, and the C&C 32 that we did not manage to make a deal on when we were shopping.
> To reiterate again, if you are buying a Sail Boat then find one that actually sails....
> ...


Sure lead is more dense...cast iron is 7,800 kg / m*3, *lead is 11,340 kg / m*3....... *so what would the additional wetted surface actually be. Rather than do complex 3d geometry of curved volumes.... we see that lead is roughly 32% heavier for a the same volume.
So take a slab... say 10' long and 5' high and 6" thick in cast iron... the same weight would be a volume of 10' long and 5' high and 4" thick. So the sides are the same... and the difference would be the short vertical sides. 
Sure this is a not a real world comparison but I think... a guess... that the added wetted surface LOOKS more than in fact it is. It IS larger.... But I believe some more curved shapes can add lift more than a thinner blade would. Here's my 6K cast iron keel... It doesn't look huge, fat and "slow"... does it?

__
Sensitive content, not recommended for those under 18
Show Content


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

SanderO said:


> Camping or weekend in an RV is not living aboard. Time span is very very different and therefor stowage needs are not comparable. Camping you don't need a 2 or 3 burner stove... living aboard you do. You can get by with a portable cooler camping... but not so for living aboard. Same for comfort of berths.


Fair enough. I'll keep these things in mind and try to be realistic about a boat where I can actually live.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

TakeFive said:


> Not if you buy the right boat. My instruments are all 19 years old, but work fine. And since they follow NMEA 0183, I've been able to integrate them into an open source navigation system that displays chartplotter and wirelessly multicasts speed/wind/autopilot data on one screen. I can even have the boat automatically follow a route that comes from this freebie chart plotter. Even better, I had set up this navigation system on my prior boat 10 years ago, but brought it to my new boat with me because it followed the same standard.
> 
> Why would I replace all this with new, when it's perfectly functional for my needs? Granted, if you're crossing oceans you need radar and a whole bunch of bulletproof systems, but you're not going to be doing that for at least 5 years.
> 
> ...


I just meant that some boats seem to sell like hot cakes while others sit for sale for literally a year or more. Then there are taxes and transaction costs. I really would prefer to make a decision that I can live with for at least a few years. It's tough, as you say- you don't really know what preferences you'll have until after you've put in the time. But we'll see what I gather from a few viewings. I'm really curious what my impressions will be. Exciting stuff


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

SanderO said:


> Sure lead is more dense...cast iron is 7,800 kg / m*3, *lead is 11,340 kg / m*3....... *so what would the additional wetted surface actually be. Rather than do complex 3d geometry of curved volumes.... we see that lead is roughly 32% heavier for a the same volume.


Actually, lead is closer to 60% denser in seawater, when you subtract out the bouyancy effects per Archimedes. That's a LOT of extra volume needed for iron.


----------



## SchockT (May 21, 2012)

TakeFive said:


> Actually, lead is closer to 60% denser in seawater, when you subtract out the bouyancy effects per Archimedes. That's a LOT of extra volume needed for iron.


I wasn't aware that sea water could change the density of a metal....please explain!

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

SchockT said:


> I wasn't aware that sea water could change the density of a metal....please explain!


My words were sloppy, and my calculations were hurriedly done in my head and thus inaccurate. So here goes round two:

Buoyancy reduces the net downward force on a submerged object in accordance with the weight of the liquid that it displaces (Archimedes principal). So for seawater at a density of 1025 kg/m^3, a cubic meter of submerged iron would have a net downward force of 7800-1025=6775, and submerged lead would have a net downward force of 11340-1025=10315, which is 52% higher. (I've used kg sloppily here, since it's a unit of mass not force, but it all washes out in the quotient.) So when submerged in seawater as ballast, an equivalent net weight of iron would have to have a 52% larger volume than lead, not 32% as previously implied by SanderO.

I said "closer to 60%", but the more precise number is 52%. You can play games with keel shape (bulbs and wings) to provide more lever arm to optimize heeling resistance with less weight, but that can be done with either lead or steel, so that's a wash. In the end, a lead keel of a given weight requires less volume than an iron keel of the same weight, and can therefore be more streamlined than the iron one. And as Jeff H pointed out, lead has other benefits (better shock absorption in an underwater collision) and detriments (harder to replace the keel bolts). As for the latter, re-torquing keel bolts annually to their specification (or whenever on the hard), keeping your bilge dry, and regularly inspecting for cracks and refairing can minimize opportunities for water intrusion to the bolts. AutoZone has free loans on torque wrenches, and I borrow one every March during spring commissioning.

My prior point still stands - Rush should not be getting too worked up about this. Look for a well cared-for boat regardless of what material was used to construct the keel.


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

There are multiple factors in a cost benefit analysis of lead vs iron bolt on keel. Lead is more expensive, but more dense and not as voluminous as cast iron, more forgiving perhaps in grounding and collisions. Attachment of lead is more complex than with cast iron. And being more dense cast iron will have slightly more wetted surface and drag.
I would be curious to know of manufacturers who offer the option of lead or cast iron... or the impact for sailors who hanged their keels from cast iron to lead or the reverse. And what is informing manufacturers from offering either lead of cast iron keels? Is it performance? Cost? or both?
Found this quote of a surveyor:

"....if I had to choose between the two options I would choose iron for the simple fact that it has low maintenance if you properly prime and paint the iron correctly. Iron also is very strong so if you hit little things here and there (which everyone does at some point) its not going to mess up your sailing due to the fact that iron does not deform on impact. Others have indicated that lead absorbs some impact on grounding. My opinion on this is that if you are grounding a sailboat the keel is not absorbing anything in fact if the same boat with two different types of keels grounded exactly the same. The same result would happen..a damaged hull. So that argument comes down to how hard you hit.

I also would choose iron because the benefits of lead do not out weigh the cost of lead. Simply put, I do not see enough difference between the two to choose the more expensive option of lead. I have inspected many iron keeled sailboats and rarely see major damage on them to sway my opinion. "


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

Cost of the raw material is irrelevant on a used boat. Selling price is dominated by other design features and the boat’s overall condition.


----------



## olson34 (Oct 13, 2000)

TakeFive said:


> Cost of the raw material is irrelevant on a used boat. Selling price is dominated by other design features and the boat's overall condition.


Good (basic) point. And design is the part that newbies often overlook. Having lead ballast, even cast to a faster profile, will not make up for a coffee-can hull to deck joint with ancient glue and a bunch of rivets, and perhaps the adhesive power of prayer.

Look underneath the decks on the upper tier boats and then crawl around the less-often-viewed parts of the cheap boats and note the differences.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Well I saw my first boat today, yeah success!
In fact I ended up bumping into the owner of the Jeanneau 32 and saw that one briefly as well.
So my thoughts on the Contest 31? 

Unfortunately SanderO is right, this baby is too small to live aboard. At least for me it is. In fact I was pretty surprised at how small it was inside. Looks much larger in the photos online. My first thought after leaving the boat and seeing a Beneteau 45 (very nice BTW!) motor by was- yep I need one of _those_ ;-)
I think the 31 would be perfect for a day out on the water, or perhaps even a weekend, but any more would be pushing it, especially if I was not alone.
The V-birth was tiny and no way I could sleep in it. In fact I couldn't even bring myself to crawl in and check the leg room. I would have to convert the port settee to a twin bed so sleep aboard as the quarter birth was also quite small and claustrophobia inducing.
Even the starboard settee was too small for me to sleep on as it was too narrow, or I'm too round these days!
The cabinets and interior wood work was of nice quality, very solid, and closed with a reassuring click.
The cockpit was a bit small but OK.
The chart table station was very large, comfortable, and would probably become my mobile office.
The heads was OK and I've decided that others are right- I don't want too much space wasted on that anyway.
In reality, my next step will be a 36 footer, and I'm even wondering if that will be too small. But I believe I will skip 32-35 entirely based upon what I saw today.

Other interesting notes- after making a wrong turn, I met the marina repair yard foreman and had an nice chat. He said that he used to work for Contest, and he did know quite a lot about the different boats. His advice was 'be very careful' which he said after a long and dramatic pause. Then he offered two other pieces of advice: 1) On a boat this age be sure to get one with a new engine and transmission, and he recommended Yanmar first and Volvo second, for durability, and ease of getting parts in far away locations. Whereas with some other engines a person can end up stranded for months waiting for a part. He was especially fond of the newer Yanmars. 2) He also suggested buying a boat with new standing rigging. He said there are enough that come through that have these upgrades, and they never get their money out of it, so the buyer benefits. He seemed quite knowledgable and gave me his card in case I should have any further questions.

Then upon leaving I saw a Jeanneau that looked just like the one in the photos online, and sure enough that was it. I told him that I just missed his boat by days. We had a little laugh and he said he had just put the boat up for sale and the first person to see it bought it. He had been very happy with the Jeanneau. The main thing I noticed about the Jeanneau is how much more comfortable the interior was vs the Contest, and the windows low on the side of the boat made a huge difference in making it light and airy and feel larger inside. Still not big enough to live aboard IMO, but a substantial upgrade over the older, narrower, and smaller Contest.

The owner did some business with the marina and I started chatting with another person who was upgrading some navigation equipment on the Jeanneau, who also had some interesting advice. He took a long dramatic pause and (I'm not kidding) said 'be very careful'. LOL this was getting like the Twilight zone. His advice was to keep it as simple as possible, with minimum 'kit' necessary. He met a guy who started his circumnavigation by buying a 'fully loaded' boat and as stuff inevitably broke he threw it away and never replaced it, instead learning to get by with less and less. He said if you want to sail far and wide on a budget, simple as you can stand is the way to go.

Both of the marina techs wholeheartedly endorsed the Contest yachts as durable and sea worthy. Noting significant design decisions in the hull, the keel and the rudder, which I barely followed but could tell at least they both knew quite a bit about the design and build process. BMW and Mercedes have the Nürburgring, Contest has The North Sea. Fair enough I thought.

On the way out I turned in the Contest keys to the marina receptionist, she said that I was more than welcome to come back any time. I think she was flirting with me ;-)

All in all, it was a pretty nice day out


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

Borrowing the keys for an unsupervised inspection is a huge gift. I got that on the second visit when shopping for my current boat. I was able to review the boat’s total service history, and also found the owner’s financing documents. From that I was able to calculate how much he owed the bank for the boat, and that’s exactly the amount we negotiated to. He wasn’t going to sell for less than he owed on the loan - he would have kept the boat.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

TakeFive said:


> Borrowing the keys for an unsupervised inspection is a huge gift.


Yep, it was nice that they trusted me with the keys.
He also had an engine maintenance log under the chart table.

I can't help but wonder if I spent enough time on it, could I get used to the confines?
I'm not even so sure it was the size now that I think about it, but it was dark as a cave down there.
The Jeaneau was only a foot longer and felt like an entirely different experience due to the light...

I think any sailboat would be a really major adjustment for me to live aboard.
Still I'll keep looking and see if I have a different feeling on a larger boat.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Well it's a good thing I didn't go see the Beneteau 32, because there was a mistake at the brokerage, and the boat sold last Saturday, and was under inspection yesterday. Apparently I was a backup. 

So it seems there are three basic categories of boats on the market:
1. Junk that sits for years.
2. Overpriced boats that sit until a major price drop.
3. Those just posted today in decent condition at a reasonable price, which will most certainly be gone tomorrow.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Rush2112 said:


> So it seems there are three basic categories of boats on the market:
> 1. Junk that sits for years.
> 2. Overpriced boats that sit until a major price drop.
> 3. Those just posted today in decent condition at a reasonable price, which will most certainly be gone tomorrow.


You have passed the course and are ready to move to the next level. 

I always ask the broker, if there is other interest in the boat, after I get an appointment. Of course, they want to play it up, but I'm trying to get to whether there is an offer and contracts out. I did just learn of one like that and immediately told them I didn't want to bother. I'm not getting in a bidding war, nor think it's fair to disturb a deal, if an offer has been verbally accepted. I learned, however, that it was a foreign owner, who accepted and offer last Spring, from another foreign buyer. Neither can get to the US, so they haven't signed a contract. I felt a bit better about nudging in on that one and will go see it.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Minnewaska said:


> You have passed the course and are ready to move to the next level.


Well it has been an education, that's for sure!



Minnewaska said:


> I always ask the broker, if there is other interest in the boat, after I get an appointment. Of course, they want to play it up, but I'm trying to get to whether there is an offer and contracts out. I did just learn of one like that and immediately told them I didn't want to bother. I'm not getting in a bidding war, nor think it's fair to disturb a deal, if an offer has been verbally accepted. I learned, however, that it was a foreign owner, who accepted and offer last Spring, from another foreign buyer. Neither can get to the US, so they haven't signed a contract. I felt a bit better about nudging in on that one and will go see it.


I wasn't going to mention this but after your post I can't resist.
Ready for a soap opera drama? Here goes!

So I got a call this morning from the broker who represented the Jeanneau 32 that I saw yesterday.
Turns out the guy I met wasn't the owner. He was the new buyer!
So he lied, and ran me off by saying the deal was done. No wonder he acted nervous and funny and hustled off to talk to the marina folks right after I asked him about his ownership experience with the boat! LOL.
He probably just wanted to avoid a bidding war...

So here I thought I was at a gentleman's club and I discover it was more like a reality TV show where we're all trying to stay on the island! Wow. I'm still absorbing it.

Anyway I won't pay it too much mind, but just to remember for the good boats it really can be competitive ;-)


----------



## VIEXILE (Jan 10, 2001)

I have a Jeanneau 40 under contract over the phone, and the broker had to chase off several people. Deposit is in, but it's remote, and the contract hasn't made it beyond verbal. Should be all locked up today, subject to survey. Now, I have to finish this Tartan 37 in another location and decide whether that one is going cruising next May (or sell) or the Jeanneau (with double aft cabins, 2 heads and a world of parts and goodies in storage) might suffice. Both could stand new standing rigging. It's a friggin' disease.


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

Rush2112 said:


> So I got a call this morning from the broker who represented the Jeanneau 32 that I saw yesterday.
> Turns out the guy I met wasn't the owner. He was the new buyer!
> So he lied, and ran me off by saying the deal was done.


If he had the boat under contract, the deal _was_ done.


Rush2112 said:


> He probably just wanted to avoid a bidding war...


Wouldn't you want the same thing? A reputable broker would tell you the boat was under contract and wouldn't let you see it. Oh wait, isn't that what the broker did? I think the buyer was being rather nice to you letting you on to see the boat. You really need to see as many boats as possible because right now you are overly influenced by the last boat you've seen.

Remember, you didn't want the Jeanneau 32 anyway because you think it's too small.

FWIW, I think you need to realize that living on a boat involves a lot of compromises, the biggest one being space. You're headed to a size range that will be way out of your budget. Even if you find something at your purchase price, repairs and maintenance are going to be huge on a budget-priced large, old boat.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

TakeFive said:


> A reputable broker would tell you the boat was under contract and wouldn't let you see it. Oh wait, isn't that what the broker did? I think the buyer was being rather nice to you letting you on to see the boat.


I'm not sure this is exactly centered. Personally, I don't want to bother with a boat that is under contract, but brokers see many deals come apart, during survey, so they often want to line up a plan B. Reputable brokers will let you know, less reputable won't, but most will let you see it. Indeed, it helps them push deal A, telling the first buyer that they shouldn't get too picky in the survey, with another interested buyer standing behind them. To be clear, signed contract language should bind the initial deal, but as soon as you send an updated offer, post survey, the seller is often no longer obligated to sell to you. You are only secure in buying the boat, as is, for the contract price. The buyer's protection is they can walk away. This is why brokers push hard to get you to spend money on the survey, as you're now invested.

The other scenario is a verbally accepted offer, but not signed P&S agreement. These also fall apart often, so brokers always answer the phone during that phase. It's really up to the buyer to vet out where they are in the pecking order.


----------



## mstern (May 26, 2002)

Rush: was the Jeanneau 32 the Sun Fast or the Sun Odyssey? Either way, the design philosophy between the Contest and the Jeanneaus are night and day.


----------



## olson34 (Oct 13, 2000)

Difficult as it is, you need to 'vet' the broker(s). In my fair city, there are only about three sailboat brokers, and just thru dock talk at our YC I can find out who seems to be better, and which person there to call.
And this is not limited to sailors in on-the-water yacht clubs.... my previous yacht membership for years was a dry land yacht club, owning only an RC mark boat. i.e. a "paper yacht club". I knew a lot of sailors there and attended their monthly meetings. Info like this was exchanged all the time, but no gossip I assure you!

Brokers vary a LOT. Some are really honest and very hard working, and others are just going thru the motions while awaiting their next "remittance man" check from an old family inheritance trust fund and also awaiting their next tee time. I have met both kinds..... 

Hang in there, your next boat is out there somewhere.....


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

mstern said:


> Rush: was the Jeanneau 32 the Sun Fast or the Sun Odyssey? Either way, the design philosophy between the Contest and the Jeanneaus are night and day.


what are the design philosophies of these builders?


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

SanderO said:


> Sure lead is more dense...cast iron is 7,800 kg / m*3, *lead is 11,340 kg / m*3....... *so what would the additional wetted surface actually be. Rather than do complex 3d geometry of curved volumes.... we see that lead is roughly 32% heavier for a the same volume.
> So take a slab... say 10' long and 5' high and 6" thick in cast iron... the same weight would be a volume of 10' long and 5' high and 4" thick. So the sides are the same... and the difference would be the short vertical sides.
> Sure this is a not a real world comparison but I think... a guess... that the added wetted surface LOOKS more than in fact it is. It IS larger.... But I believe some more curved shapes can add lift more than a thinner blade would. Here's my 6K cast iron keel... It doesn't look huge, fat and "slow"... does it?
> View attachment 137046
> ...


Here is the problem with that analogy, it does not represent typical yacht design practice.

Typically the shape of the keel is set by the designer's sense of the hydrodynamic requirements for the boat, so the keel's profile and horizontal sections would more typically be the same no matter what material is used. But because lead is denser, the vertical height of the center of gravity of the ballast would be much lower (maybe 6-8 inches on a boat the size that we are discussing). Being able to lower the vertical center of gravity even and inch or so, has a huge impact on stability at larger heeled angles (over 20 degrees or so), so the vertical difference in center of gravity height, would result in a very noticeable difference in stability and motion comfort between the lead and the iron keel.

On a separate matter, someone mentioned that they saw an iron keel that was a lumpy mess. That brings up one of the bigger maintenance items on iron keels. When you see a smooth and fair iron keel, it typically has had a lot of fairing work done. By that I mean that some form of thickened resin filler has been used. If the resin is epoxy based, it can last quite a few decades. But most times the filler is polyester and has a lifespan closer to 10-15 years before it begins to lose adhesion and break down Re-fairing a keel is a big expensive job,, so often owners will peel or blast off the filler ending up with the cratered look that some people associate with iron keels. Obviously that badly hurts performance in light air and the amount of heeling in heavier air (boats disburse a gust by a mix of accelerating and heeling. If the keel is rough and has more drag, then the boat will heel more.)

Jeff


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

TakeFive said:


> If he had the boat under contract, the deal _was_ done.


I don't think so. The broker said that they had not yet made a deal on the boat.
Considering the broker was straight with me and did not try to start a bidding war, and my general feeling is that he is a stand up guy.



TakeFive said:


> Wouldn't you want the same thing? A reputable broker would tell you the boat was under contract and wouldn't let you see it. Oh wait, isn't that what the broker did? I think the buyer was being rather nice to you letting you on to see the boat. You really need to see as many boats as possible because right now you are overly influenced by the last boat you've seen.


No it's really not how it happened. I really think the broker was straight. And the 'owner' definitely lied, multiple times.
Let me explain, I didn't mention for brevity that I told the 'owner' that the broker was explicit that he was not accepting new offers, and that I was not allowed to even see the boat until the new buyer made his final decision. What I took to be a gentlemen's agreement as the buyer was shelling out money for the inspection. I told him that I only mentioned this as my impression was that the broker was in fact a 'stand up guy'.



TakeFive said:


> Remember, you didn't want the Jeanneau 32 anyway because you think it's too small.


Fair enough.



TakeFive said:


> FWIW, I think you need to realize that living on a boat involves a lot of compromises, the biggest one being space. You're headed to a size range that will be way out of your budget. Even if you find something at your purchase price, repairs and maintenance are going to be huge on a budget-priced large, old boat.


Not a truth that I want to accept right now!
But I know you're right...


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

VIEXILE said:


> I have a Jeanneau 40 under contract over the phone, and the broker had to chase off several people. Deposit is in, but it's remote, and the contract hasn't made it beyond verbal. Should be all locked up today, subject to survey. Now, I have to finish this Tartan 37 in another location and decide whether that one is going cruising next May (or sell) or the Jeanneau (with double aft cabins, 2 heads and a world of parts and goodies in storage) might suffice. Both could stand new standing rigging. It's a friggin' disease.


Congrats on your new boat. I know I'd be excited!


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

SanderO said:


> what are the design philosophies of these builders?


Mstern: it's a Sun Odyssey.
SanderO: I'm guessing he means the Contest is for blue water durability and the Jeanneau is for coastal cruising comfort? That's my impression anyway.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

New priorities:
1. A good hull- no osmosis, soft spots, rotten bulkheads, leaks, keel issues, etc.
2. Rebuilt or new engine and transmission- in the last 10 years.
3. New standing rigging- in the last 5 years.
4. Decent condition sails.
5. The best general condition I can find for the money.
6. The longest waterline I can find with the other conditions being met.
7. The best performance, speed, and durability I can find with the other conditions being met.

Sorry old-schoolers I know this last one is blasphemy. But wood interiors make a large space cozy and refined, while making a small space tiny, dark and claustrophobic, so:

First purchase, post- boat delivery: A giant can of white paint for the interior!

Just moved up the general preferences list: Large Windows.
If I've got to settle for a 32 footer, I'm gonna make the most of it!


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

Jeff_H said:


> Here is the problem with that analogy, it does not represent typical yacht design practice.
> 
> Typically the shape of the keel is set by the designer's sense of the hydrodynamic requirements for the boat, so the keel's profile and horizontal sections would more typically be the same no matter what material is used. But because lead is denser, the vertical height of the center of gravity of the ballast would be much lower (maybe 6-8 inches on a boat the size that we are discussing). Being able to lower the vertical center of gravity even and inch or so, has a huge impact on stability at larger heeled angles (over 20 degrees or so), so the vertical difference in center of gravity height, would result in a very noticeable difference in stability and motion comfort between the lead and the iron keel.
> 
> ...


Thanks for this response... I am still baffled by it... I am stupid... try again.
So take the same hull, rig etc... everything above the keel... now ask owner... what material keel you want? What would be the difference in shape, draft and so on? If more weight is on the bottom.. of the moment arm.... the boat would be stiffer, I presume this is why these bulbs are designed... make the lever more efficient for righting.

I do have a cast iron keel. After owning a few years I had the entire keel including the recessed flange sandblasted and immediately coated with "tar epoxy". When the epoxy was set I use West epoxy with "fillers" to fair the keel which did have some large holes. That was in 1987 or 1988, The fairing has held up for the most part but I did apply and interlux barrier coat (2) in 2009. This time the hull and keel were soda blasted and a the keel did require a bit of fairing... this is what the keel looked like after the soda blasting. You can see the brownish color which is the West fairing. The dark spots are holes showing the old tar epoxy and these were filled with West fairing.















Barrier coated:








bottom painted:


----------



## colemj (Jul 10, 2003)

_Rush said: 
New priorities:
1. A good hull- no osmosis, soft spots, rotten bulkheads, leaks, keel issues, etc.
2. Rebuilt or new engine and transmission- in the last 10 years.
3. New standing rigging- in the last 5 years.
4. Decent condition sails.
5. The best general condition I can find for the money.
6. The longest waterline I can find with the other conditions being met.
7. The best performance, speed, and durability I can find with the other conditions being met.

Sorry old-schoolers I know this last one is blasphemy. But wood interiors make a large space cozy and refined, while making a small space tiny, dark and claustrophobic, so:

First purchase, post- boat delivery: A giant can of white paint for the interior!

Just moved up the general preferences list: Large Windows.
If I've got to settle for a 32 footer, I'm gonna make the most of it!_

I keep telling you, you are describing this boat: Sailing Catamarans - Miriam Sagitta catamaran

As you narrow down what is important to you, the description gets closer and closer...

Mark


----------



## mstern (May 26, 2002)

Rush2112 said:


> Mstern: it's a Sun Odyssey.
> SanderO: I'm guessing he means the Contest is for blue water durability and the Jeanneau is for coastal cruising comfort? That's my impression anyway.


Not exactly. The designs of Contests and many if not most boats that big of that vintage were still heavily influenced by wooden boats and the CCA rule: narrower hulls, swooping sheers, and interiors that reflected the notion that safety and comfort at sea were paramount. So cockpits are small and interiors were designed to keep people upright, and safe in their snug berths while bouncing around. Portholes are small to minimize the chance of a breach by waves.

By contrast, Jeanneaus are designed with a more modern approach: beamier, with the beam being maintained well aft, lots of portholes and windows to maximize natural light below, and more creature comforts designed in from the get-go. The beamier form allows for much more room below, with more storage space, more comforts, wider aft berths, etc. With all that extra room below, you have further to fall in a rough sea, but that's one of the big tradeoffs you make for the greater comfort at anchor and in calmer seas.

For sure, some of the Jeanneaus were built more for coastal cruising than blue water voyages, but I think you're finding out here that more modern hull forms can actually be safer than the traditional forms in rough weather.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Rush2112 said:


> New priorities:
> 1. A good hull- no osmosis, soft spots, rotten bulkheads, leaks, keel issues, etc.
> 2. Rebuilt or new engine and transmission- in the last 10 years.
> 3. New standing rigging- in the last 5 years.
> ...


Paint over the teak of your purchase and you'll immediately devalue your new boat. Once painted, always painted, and you introduce a maintenance item the next owner often will refuse to inherit. Buy a plastic interior, if this is important to you. It should not be.

#2 and #3 are far too specific.

There are 10 year old engines that are in far better shape and cared for than some 3 year old engines. Age should not be the issue, use and condition should be. Possibly, I'd set an outside for hours. Rebuilt is even less good qualifier, as there is zero definition for what that means.

I understand that the EU requires standing rigging to be replaced every 10 years. Is that actually done consistently? If so, you'll presumably find many boats with younger rigging. However, it should mathematically and directly correspond to value. The newer the rigging, the more expensive the boat should be and vice versa. Therefore, you're paying either way.


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

I think your priorities are wrong, and reflect your lack of experience. Still too much micro-focusing. You’re going to give yourself (and sellers/brokers) whiplash, because you’re too heavily influenced by the most recent person you’ve talked to.

Go look at a lot of boats and decide what you like. Once you’ve found it and had your offer accepted, let the surveyor tell you about stuff like motor, rigging, and sail condition.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

SanderO said:


> Thanks for this response... I am still baffled by it... I am stupid... try again.
> So take the same hull, rig etc... everything above the keel... now ask owner... what material keel you want? What would be the difference in shape, draft and so on? If more weight is on the bottom.. of the moment arm.... the boat would be stiffer, I presume this is why these bulbs are designed... make the lever more efficient for righting.


Okay, I will try again. When designing a boat the keel profile and sections would be chosen by the designer irrespective of the material being used. Similarly, if there is a bulb that would also be included in the design. But since cast iron is 2/3 the density of lead, it would take a greater volume of cast iron than lead. Because of that the center of gravity of the lead keel would be considerably lower.

By way of an example, if we visualize a simplified keel that the leading edge was parallel to the trailing edge, and has the same foil section all the way up the keel, and we assume that the lead ballast extended 3 feet (~91cm) up the keel, the cast iron ballast would need to extend 4 1/2feet (~137 cm) up the keel to be the same weight. The lead keel would have its vertical center of gravity 1 1/2 foot (44 cm) from the bottom of the keel, while the iron keel would have its vertical center of gravity 2 1/4 feet (~67 cm) above the bottom of the keel, in other words 3/4 foot (~23 cm) higher than the lead keel..

So if we are looking at a boat where the ballast is 35% of the overall weight of the boat, the center of gravity of the whole boat would be nearly 4 inches (~10 cm) higher on the cast iron keel than it would be on the lead keel. That is a huge difference in terms of stability and motion comfort.. On a 35 foot boat that could be a difference of 15-20% greater righting moment at a 20 degree angle of heel.

The choice of material is even more dramatic on a bulb keel, where pretty much the entire ballast of the lead keel might fit into the bulb whereas the cast iron ballast may fill most of the fin and bulb.



SanderO said:


> I do have a cast iron keel. After owning a few years I had the entire keel including the recessed flange sandblasted and immediately coated with "tar epoxy". When the epoxy was set I use West epoxy with "fillers" to fair the keel which did have some large holes. That was in 1987 or 1988, The fairing has held up for the most part but I did apply and interlux barrier coat (2) in 2009. This time the hull and keel were soda blasted and a the keel did require a bit of fairing... this is what the keel looked like after the soda blasting. You can see the brownish color which is the West fairing. The dark spots are holes showing the old tar epoxy and these were filled with West fairing.


Regarding your description of the process that you used on your keel, you used epoxy originally and it sounds like it has lasted the typical "quite a few decades" that one would expect out of a proper epoxy repair project. By the same token that repair done in epoxy today would be two or three times the cost of doing it polyester, but of course 10-15 years out the polyester would need to be done again.



Minnewaska said:


> Paint over the teak of your purchase and you'll immediately devalue your new boat. Once painted, always painted, and you introduce a maintenance item the next owner often will refuse to inherit. Buy a plastic interior, if this is important to you. It should not be.


That is 100% correct. I would also add that once you paint the wood, you cannot monitor for moisture. By the time that you realize that a structural bulkhead has rotted out, it is a major repair rather than a bit of darkened wood. I would also note that Formica on bulkheads can be a problem for the same reason. Formica does not allow the wood to dry so often the wood can rot out behind the formica and you don't know it until something serious fails



Minnewaska said:


> I understand that the EU requires standing rigging to be replaced every 10 years. Is that actually done consistently? If so, you'll presumably find many boats with younger rigging. However, it should mathematically and directly correspond to value. The newer the rigging, the more expensive the boat should be and vice versa. Therefore, you're paying either way.


I do not believe that the EU does have a uniform standard for rigging replacement. There was an article in the British publication Yachting World this month that said that European insurance companies can and generally do set the requirement for rigging replacement and that some require either a professional inspection or replacement after 10 year. Disregarding any changes associated with Brexit, I understood the article as sounding like the EU doesn't actually require replacement and that the 10 year re-placement and/or inspection may only apply to EU yachts going offshore.

Jeff


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

You wrote:

So if we are looking at a boat where the ballast is 35% of the overall weight of the boat, the center of gravity of the whole boat would be nearly 4 inches (~10 cm) higher on the cast iron keel than it would be on the lead keel. That is a huge difference in terms of stability and motion comfort.. On a 35 foot boat that could be a difference of 15-20% greater righting moment at a 20 degree angle of heel.

The choice of material is even more dramatic on a bulb keel, where pretty much the entire ballast of the lead keel might fit into the bulb whereas the cast iron ballast may fill most of the fin and bulb."

++++++

So... make this something we can visualize... You see what my keel looks like... what would a lead keel look like on THIS boat... less draft? shorter fore and aft?... thinner?


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

Okay, Visualize this, if your boat had a lead keel, from the outside the keel would look identical to how it looks now since that is how the designer wanted it to look. The only differences would be that the boat would have a deeper sump, and the boat would have much greater stability, and a much better motion comfort. That would mean that you could reef later, carry more sail area in a more efficient sail plan, and so have smaller overlapping headsails. The net result is that boat would be more comfortable to sail in heavier winds and big waves and would sail better in light air. It would also be easier on the crew, autopilot and/or helmsperson.(The lead keel version would roll through a smaller angle and a slower speed. Since weather helm increases with heel angle so a boat that rolls through smaller angles at a slower rate needs less steering input.)

I hope that is a little clearer. 

Jeff


----------



## colemj (Jul 10, 2003)

Jeff_H said:


> When designing a boat the keel profile and sections would be chosen by the designer irrespective of the material being used.


Not meaning to put words in Jeff_H's mouth, and he does allude to this later on, but here he means that the designer drafts a foil with specific sections and planform that allow the boat to sail well and properly. The foil planform and section (and location of the foil) are the only thing that matters at this point, and will not change based on the material the keel is constructed from. The keel ballast weight and its placement decisions are independent of the foil design.



SanderO said:


> So... make this something we can visualize... You see what my keel looks like... what would a lead keel look like on THIS boat... less draft? shorter fore and aft?... thinner?


Containing ballast is a secondary function of a keel (at least on modern boats like yours). The main function of the keel is as a foil. You could put 10,000lbs of lead on the end of a 6' pipe, but that boat wouldn't sail well. Consider a multihull where the keel has no ballast (in fact, the keels are actually buoyant). The purpose of the keels there are for sailing ability, just like on a monohull.

Of course, ballast is also important for a monohull, and determines other design decisions like sail plan. However, monohulls do exist with ballast primarily in the hull itself and a centerboard used as the foil for sailing. A steel keel would be somewhere between this type of boat and a lead keel in stability (closer to lead), but have polar sailing angles almost exactly the same as the lead keel.

Mark


----------



## SchockT (May 21, 2012)

On a production boat I would think that the designer would design the keel knowing what material the keel will be made of wouldn't they?

Are keel sumps even a thing on a modern fin keeled boat? Most of them are solid, and bolt flush to the hull.

Does iron give the designer any advantage regarding design of the fin since lead is so much softer? I am surprised how thin my iron keel is compared to my old boat's lead keel. Is that something they can get away with using iron more than if they used lead?
















Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

WOW... I ask a simple question and I am not getting the answer. I'll try one more time.
I am going to remove the cast iron keel on Shiva. it is about 6k # and has a flange on top. The hull has steel belts which cross over the keel. I believe there are 14 keel bolts which are are encased in the bilge and so they would be opened up to unbolt.

Now.... what does the lead keel I am going to put on this boat *look* like? 
Is it as long?
is it thicker? 
Is the draft the same?

how much would it weigh approximately?

and then for bonus points.....

what would be the *noticeable* changes in performance?


----------



## colemj (Jul 10, 2003)

SchockT said:


> On a production boat I would think that the designer would design the keel knowing what material the keel will be made of wouldn't they?


Probably no part of design is done in a vacuum, and in the case of your boat, for sure the designer knew the keel foil would be steel with a lead bulb for ballast. Otherwise, he couldn't have designed such a high aspect, thin, low drag foil.

Mark


----------



## colemj (Jul 10, 2003)

SanderO said:


> WOW... I ask a simple question and I am not getting the answer. I'll try one more time.
> I am going to remove the cast iron keel on Shiva. it is about 6k # and has a flange on top. The hull has steel belts which cross over the keel. I believe there are 14 keel bolts which are are encased in the bilge and so they would be opened up to unbolt.
> 
> Now.... what does the lead keel I am going to put on this boat *look* like?
> ...


I think you did get the answers, but maybe not concisely.

IMO, your new lead keel will look exactly like your old steel keel (provided that is the way you had it made).

It would weigh proportionally more than the steel one. I don't know the specific difference between cast iron and lead immersed in seawater.

There would be no noticeable change in performance to a first approximation because the foil shape is exactly the same. However, the boat will be more tender and might not carry the same sail area as far, so there will be a performance difference when you reef to maintain the same heel angle as for your steel keel.

Perhaps some of this is incorrect - pay more attention to what Jeff_H says.

Mark


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

SanderO said:


> I am going to remove the cast iron keel on Shiva.


Hey, I think you're overreacting a bit. Keep that keel on! ?


colemj said:


> ...However, the boat will be more tender and might not carry the same sail area as far, so there will be a performance difference when you reef to maintain the same heel angle as for your steel keel.


I think Jeff said the opposite. The lead keel would be attached to a larger stub (same keel weight), lowering the vertical center of gravity and making the boat LESS tender. The boat would sail flatter, allowing the full sail plan (reef later) and keeping both the keel and rudder more vertical, giving both more lift. Vertical rudder would reduce leeway, so point higher with better VMG to weathe. Less weather helm to fight against would also allow keeping the rudder straighter and the boat would have less drag, so sail faster.


----------



## colemj (Jul 10, 2003)

TakeFive said:


> Hey, I think you're overreacting a bit. Keep that keel on! ?
> 
> I think Jeff said the opposite. The lead keel would be attached to a larger stub (same keel weight), lowering the vertical center of gravity and making the boat LESS tender. The boat would sail flatter, allowing the full sail plan (reef later) and keeping both the keel and rudder more vertical, giving both more lift. Vertical rudder would reduce leeway, so point higher with better VMG to weathe. Less weather helm to fight against would also allow keeping the rudder straighter and the boat would have less drag, so sail faster.


Oops, I meant just the opposite! I got mixed up as to which keel SO was removing, and which one he was replacing with!

Mark


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

colemj said:


> _Rush said:
> New priorities:
> 1. A good hull- no osmosis, soft spots, rotten bulkheads, leaks, keel issues, etc.
> 2. Rebuilt or new engine and transmission- in the last 10 years.
> ...


Yeah you know I'm trying to figure out the right answer to give you but all I can say is for some reason I'm just not very interested in catamarans. Logically I could say that marina costs are higher and I don't even know if they can be easily found here in The Netherlands. Speaking of The Netherlands I actually live right off of the water and between two marinas and go down almost daily and sit and watch the boats go by and have literally never seen a catamaran in The Netherlands, and I don't know why, but somehow that seems like something that should be taken as a clue LOL  Maybe they're not as good on The North Sea or in the harsh conditions up here? I don't know honestly. But mainly I just have a fondness for the classic mono-hull sailboat look. Although I do appreciate the recommendation- thanks. I can use all the tips I can get!


----------



## colemj (Jul 10, 2003)

Rush2112 said:


> Yeah you know I'm trying to figure out the right answer to give you but all I can say is for some reason I'm just not very interested in catamarans.


There's no problem in that. Since you have taken a huge turnaround or two in how you think about and approach this future boat, I was feeding your education, or at least widening your horizons. To not like a certain type of boat is perfectly fine, even if it does have maximum interior volume for length, longest waterline, lots of light and windows, best performance and speed, etc.

After all, we would all have powerboats if we didn't draw the line somewhere...

Mark


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Minnewaska said:


> Paint over the teak of your purchase and you'll immediately devalue your new boat. Once painted, always painted, and you introduce a maintenance item the next owner often will refuse to inherit. Buy a plastic interior, if this is important to you. It should not be.


Well I know I probably couldn't have spent another hour sitting in that 31 ft cabin. It felt like I'd crawled into a cave at the bottom of a mountain and the whole thing was about to fall down on me. It was kind of creepy in fact.

Here's the Contest 31, obviously with a flash because it was very dark in there and the wood looked more like a dark chocolate in the available light:









This was the Sailing Uma project, and obviously its bigger and more modern, but the white just works wonders on making the whole interior less cave like:









Especially if my budget sticks me with a 31-32 footer, I don't think I'll have much choice on this one. Hopefully if I can do a reasonably tasteful job, I might even improve the valuation or break even. But at the very least I'll make it much more livable.



Minnewaska said:


> #2 and #3 are far too specific.


Well I have to come up with some baseline criteria don't I?
I want a newer engine, looking very clean with good maintenance records. It's one of the few things I know for sure. In fact I don't even want a rebuilt or overhauled model, I want a new modern engine.
It can get me away from storms and all kinds of sticky situations that a novice sailor might get into. It can charge batteries and be used to cruise when winds are low. A really good engine is definitely a top priority to me.

And I want the rigging good for at least 5 more years, so this is also important to me.

These are both big ticket items, related to safety, and I don't want to be bothered with them.



Minnewaska said:


> I understand that the EU requires standing rigging to be replaced every 10 years. Is that actually done consistently? If so, you'll presumably find many boats with younger rigging. However, it should mathematically and directly correspond to value. The newer the rigging, the more expensive the boat should be and vice versa. Therefore, you're paying either way.


True, but paying at a discount at least, and for items that are important to me ;-)


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

mstern said:


> For sure, some of the Jeanneaus were built more for coastal cruising than blue water voyages, but I think you're finding out here that more modern hull forms can actually be safer than the traditional forms in rough weather.


Yeah again, I'm coming to the realization that I may not have the luxury to chose which make and model I get. 
It is going to come down more to the maintenance and condition of the boat for the price I'm afraid.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Jeff_H said:


> That is 100% correct. I would also add that once you paint the wood, you cannot monitor for moisture. By the time that you realize that a structural bulkhead has rotted out, it is a major repair rather than a bit of darkened wood. I would also note that Formica on bulkheads can be a problem for the same reason. Formica does not allow the wood to dry so often the wood can rot out behind the formica and you don't know it until something serious fails


Maybe a light stain or white wash or something? I don't know. But I don't think I'll have much choice on this one. 
I certainly couldn't spend a night in that cave that I saw yesterday, let alone live in it. If it was a 36 footer or so the wood might be nice, but in this size boat, it's oppressively dark. And that size space can't afford to feel any smaller, and wood makes it smaller!



Jeff_H said:


> I do not believe that the EU does have a uniform standard for rigging replacement. There was an article in the British publication Yachting World this month that said that European insurance companies can and generally do set the requirement for rigging replacement and that some require either a professional inspection or replacement after 10 year. Disregarding any changes associated with Brexit, I understood the article as sounding like the EU doesn't actually require replacement and that the 10 year re-placement and/or inspection may only apply to EU yachts going offshore.
> 
> Jeff


One of the techs at the marina repair shop yesterday cited a case where a piece of rigging failed which led to a bigger failure, and the insurance company refused to cover the boat due to aged rigging. So apparently even if not required to get insurance, they can use it to deny payment. In any case, I want new standing rigging, preferably already done.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

My latest interest:




__





Hallberg Rassy Monsun 31 boten te koop - YachtWorld


Vind Hallberg Rassy Monsun 31 boten te koop in uw regio en over de hele wereld op YachtWorld. Maak een keuze uit de beste botenselectie van Hallberg Rassy.




nl.yachtworld.com





A few things that I like:
1. A new engine, 2010 with 275 hours.
2. A hard dodger.
3. A deep cockpit.
4. Large windows.
5. Autopilot and heating which are on my necessities list.
6. Radar, and electric windlass are nice.
7. Lots of money recently spent, implying maintenance and care.
7. .8 LWL/LOA

Negatives: probably an IOR boat, long keel, probably a large overlapping genoa, 2005 sails.


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

Rush2112 said:


> 1. A new engine, 2010 with 275 hours.


Lots of luck with that. A diesel motor with under 500 hours is barely broken in (some would say under 1000). A 10 year old motor with only 275 hours would be a concern over being under-utilized (stale fuel leading to mucked up tanks, etc.).


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Rush2112 said:


> Hopefully if I can do a reasonably tasteful job, I might even improve the valuation or break even.


I'm afraid you're just rationalizing this. Given how budget conscious you are, I'd think resale value would high on your radar. There is no way you're going to paint and have it look anything like Uma. They literally tore out every stick of lumber and rebuilt it. If you must have a light colored interior, then buy one built that way, but you are "painting yourself in a corner". Ha, good one.

I love being down below, hunkered away from weather, watching the world go by through the port lights. My wife and I refer to it as being in our tree fort.

If dark wood isn't your thing, there are plenty of boats with light wood or laminate interiors. I'd stop with the IOR, sail plan overlap, keel, etc, focuses. You are not going to be able to tell the difference for many years of learning to sail. Don't paint, unless you have money to burn.



Rush2112 said:


> I want a new modern engine.


Then you'll need to save up for a modern boat. How many older boats have you seen listed with brand new engines installed in the last 10 years. It's nearly a unicorn.



Rush2112 said:


> I want the rigging good for at least 5 more years


It seems you follow the math. You're going to pay for the younger rigging in the purchase price, but that's fine. If you can find it. That said, there is nothing about buying rigging under 5 years old that assures it will be good for at last any specified period of time. As with the engine and everything else, it's going to be function of how the boat was used and how well it was maintained. There is a sweet spot, a boat that is raced hard will age quickly and a boat that sits unused, will rot quickly.

Keep looking at boat and buy one that will makes you feel good stepping aboard. Then go out and sail the heck out of it and find out what you truly like and dislike. I'd make a huge wager that most of what you think today will change.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

TakeFive said:


> Lots of luck with that. A diesel motor with under 500 hours is barely broken in (some would say under 1000). A 10 year old motor with only 275 hours would be a concern over being under-utilized (stale fuel leading to mucked up tanks, etc.).


Well I have seen literally nothing about the boat buying process which isn't 'a concern'. No offense. It's just that sometimes this whole boat buying process can be exhausting. This is one of those times...

It's like I'm trying to get to the moon, but math isn't allowed.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Minnewaska said:


> I'm afraid you're just rationalizing this.


Yes. I'm trying to find something actually logical that I can put in a list and apply to this process.
I'm literally trying to make it 'rational'.



Minnewaska said:


> I love being down below, hunkered away from weather, watching the world go by through the port lights. My wife and I refer to it as being in our tree fort.


Well maybe you have a light airy tree fort, what I saw the other day was more like crawling under a sofa.



Minnewaska said:


> If dark wood isn't your thing, there are plenty of boats with light wood or laminate interiors.


I don't mind dark wood, in fact in some applications I quite like it. But in a boat cave with the little windows and the size of what I saw the other day, it just simply didn't work.

Plenty is a big word to describe boats with light colored interiors in this price range.
In all of my searches I've literally seen one which fit the budget, it was in France and I can't find it now...



Minnewaska said:


> I'd stop with the IOR, sail plan overlap, keel, etc, focuses.


IOR, sail overlap, long keel is no longer a 'focus' or even a matter of preference, it's simply a matter of budget.
The vast majority of boats under 30 grand fit this description.



Minnewaska said:


> Then you'll need to save up for a modern boat. How many older boats have you seen listed with brand new engines installed in the last 10 years. It's nearly a unicorn.


Not really actually, I've seen quite a few boats with new engines in the price range. Most of them had engines replaced from 1995 - 2005, which is weird considering the supposed long term durability of diesel engines, because most of these boats were just around 20 years old when the engine was replaced. That's the most common age I've found for engine replacement, by a big margin. I've pondered this fact a number of times, always thinking well if the new one is 20 years old now, why wouldn't it also be due for replacement? It has also made me think, OK so if boat x hasn't had a new engine and it's now 40+ years old, then statistically speaking, the risk is extremely high.



Minnewaska said:


> It seems you follow the math. You're going to pay for the younger rigging in the purchase price, but that's fine. If you can find it. That said, there is nothing about buying rigging under 5 years old that assures it will be good for at last any specified period of time. As with the engine and everything else, it's going to be function of how the boat was used and how well it was maintained. There is a sweet spot, a boat that is raced hard will age quickly and a boat that sits unused, will rot quickly.


The thing about this argument is- you might as well say don't apply any logic at all because you never know, the boat could have been abused into the ground. And that's true, but you have to try to minimize risk somehow don't you?

And it's impossible to tell if a boat was well maintained. In The Netherlands I hate to say it but they don't take care of anything- bicycles, scooters, cars, presumably boats. They buy stuff and drive it till it's practically done, then sell it. They keep their purchases clean, but don't put a dime into them- almost universally speaking. So knowing the culture, seeing that they have actually bought a new engine, new rigging, etc is an indication in itself that they took infinitely more responsibility for maintenance than the average Dutch person. I'm sorry to say it but it's true.



Minnewaska said:


> Keep looking at boat and buy one that will makes you feel good stepping aboard. Then go out and sail the heck out of it and find out what you truly like and dislike. I'd make a huge wager that most of what you think today will change.


You're probably right. But that doesn't make this any easier for me. You're also right that yes- I do like to 'follow the math', use logic, minimize risk, etc.

You know I've seen the word 'stamina' mentioned several times in relation to the boat buying process. Boy they weren't kidding!


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Rush2112 said:


> You're probably right. But that doesn't make this any easier for me. You're also right that yes- I do like to 'follow the math', use logic, minimize risk, etc.


As you've pointed out, there is some art to this. I prefer to know the boat's story, how it was used, cared for, why it's being sold, more than apply "if-then" logic to very specific hours, years, etc.

Ultimately, the applicable math is chaos theory, not algebra. I'm very serious about that analogy. Look it up, if that doesn't resonate.



> You know I've seen the word 'stamina' mentioned several times in relation to the boat buying process. Boy they weren't kidding!


Sure thing. Some have a tendency to try to solve for too much and make it even harder.

Can't wait to hear of your first sail one day.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

SanderO said:


> WOW... I ask a simple question and I am not getting the answer. I'll try one more time.
> I am going to remove the cast iron keel on Shiva. it is about 6k # and has a flange on top. The hull has steel belts which cross over the keel. I believe there are 14 keel bolts which are are encased in the bilge and so they would be opened up to unbolt.
> 
> Now.... what does the lead keel I am going to put on this boat *look* like?
> ...


I understood you to be asking the question: "what would my keel look like if it was lead vs iron and how would that impact performance?" I understood that question to be about a simple change of material and answered that question above But the simple answer is that merely changing from lead to iron, the keel could look virtually the same as it does now.

But if I understand the quoted post, you are also asking a second question that might be paraphrased. "If my keel were being redesigned, what would it look like?" 
To start to answer that question, I will note that whether the keel were lead or iron, the shape of the redesigned keel would look identical from the outside of the boat because the shape would be controlled by hydrodynamics rather than stability. The basic design assumptions are that the draft would remain the same and the goal would be to improve the way the boat sailed. I would assume that the weight of the keel and its longitudinal center of gravity (relative to the center of buoyancy) would need to remain the same so that the boat sat on her lines.

To begin with, If I were redesigning your keel, I would reshape the plan form of the keel so that the trailing edge was more vertical and the leading edge was also closer to vertical, considerably reducing the area of the keel at the root (the area at the hull) and then to a lesser extent increase the area of the keel near the tip. I would do this because the root of the keel is operating in a turbulent layer near the hull and therefore is comparatively ineffective relative to its greater drag. (If I needed a longer root for structural reasons, I would add a fillet at the hull on the aft end of the keel.) The net result would be less volume and surface area in the foil itself and more of the foil (wing) acting in a undisturbed water flow.

Instead of the bulging bottom of the keel on your current keel, I would add a distinct bulb that when seen from forward looking aft would be a horizontal oval with a comparatively flat top. Above that bulb, the foil would have a nearly constant horizontal section That section would maintain the same ratio of chord length to thickness throughout the entire span of the foil. So while I would not necessarily purposefully make the keel thickness any thinner, because the average fore and aft chord length was shorter, the average thickness would be reduced some. The volume of that bulb would be equal to whatever volume was shaved out of the keel due to the change in the plan form of the foil and the thickened area removed from the lower keel area.

That would do a number of things.
-Those changes would reduce wetted surface,

It would extend the span of the foil portion of keel increasing lift and reducing leeway
It would increase the area of the keel operating in undisturbed water flow making the keel more efficient (lift to drag)
It would lower the vertical center of gravity of the foil portion of the Keel.
The bulb would serve as an endplate, reducing tip vortex, and thereby reducing drag, but also increasing the efficiency of the lower portion of the keel by reducing bleed off.
-The bulb would further lower the vertical center of gravity.
-The increased area lower on the planform would increase the amount roll damping, reducing roll speed and roll angle.

In addition to changing the design of the keel, if the redesigned keel were lead vs. cast iron, a portion of the span of the keel would be a keel stub molded within the hull since the volume of the lead would be 2/3 the volume of the iron. In the case of the redesigned keel, the switch to lead would have a much more dramatic improvement to stability and motion than it would if your keel shape was maintained. This is the case because the lead keel version would have the vertical center of gravity that is far lower than the iron version relative to the vertical distance in your current keel design. But also structurally the lead keel would be far superior as well since it would allow larger transverse framing and the keel stub would act as a fore and aft stiffener.

I would think that the change in keel design would dramatically improve the sailing ability, seaworthiness, seakindliness, and result in easier sailing techniques for your boat. But because boats act as a system, once you made the keel changes, you would want to update the sail plan as well in order to fully recoup the benefits of the keel redesign.

I hope that answers the matrix of questions that you seem to be asking.

Jeff


----------



## SchockT (May 21, 2012)

Rush,

As far as dark interiors go, that was the norm in the era that falls within your price range. On the bright side many of those old boats have beautiful teak millwork that you just don't find in newer boats. It would be a real shame to paint over it with white paint, and would more than likely ruin the resale value of the boat.

A much simpler solution is to invest a little bid of money on lighting upgrades. LED accent lighting and a well placed lamp would do wonders for a dark interior.

You make a couple of references to feeling claustrophobic. If that is an issue for you then you are going to find that with a great many boats in the size range you are looking at. Even a pilot house boat might have better natural lighting in the salon but other areas will still feel closed in and claustrophobic. That is the nature of small boats. 



Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

Jeff_H said:


> I understood you to be asking the question: "what would my keel look like if it was lead vs iron and how would that impact performance?" I understood that question to be about a simple change of material and answered that question above But the simple answer is that merely changing from lead to iron, the keel could look virtually the same as it does now.
> 
> But if I understand the quoted post, you are also asking a second question that might be paraphrased. "If my keel were being redesigned, what would it look like?"
> To start to answer that question, I will note that whether the keel were lead or iron, the shape of the redesigned keel would look identical from the outside of the boat because the shape would be controlled by hydrodynamics rather than stability. The basic design assumptions are that the draft would remain the same and the goal would be to improve the way the boat sailed. I would assume that the weight of the keel and its longitudinal center of gravity (relative to the center of buoyancy) would need to remain the same so that the boat sat on her lines.
> ...


Excellent! I get it. Thank you!

One last question... about changing from iron to lead.
What would be the performance impact of simply reducing the draft... essentially maintaining the same horizontal section... but eliminate volume because the lead is more dense, The draft of course would be reduced I suspect more than a foot.
Contest has a shoal draft and a wing keep for this boat. I suspect the shoal draft is longer. The wing is shallower draft with more mass at the base of the keel, I think those are also cast iron.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

SanderO said:


> Excellent! I get it. Thank you!
> 
> One last question... about changing from iron to lead.
> What would be the performance impact of simply reducing the draft... essentially maintaining the same horizontal section... but eliminate volume because the lead is more dense, The draft of course would be reduced I suspect more than a foot.
> Contest has a shoal draft and a wing keep for this boat. I suspect the shoal draft is longer. The wing is shallower draft with more mass at the base of the keel, I think those are also cast iron.


A designer would need to work that out with the lines of the boat.. My sense is that with a properly configured lead keel you might lose maybe 6-9" without impacting performance all that much over your current keel.

Jeff


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Widening my net, I've found that all of the following are pretty common here in Europe. 
I wonder how folks here would rank them as far as durability and seaworthiness, and any relevant comments also appreciated.

Jeanneau - 
Beneteau - 
Gib'sea - 
Moody - 
Dehler - 
Bavaria - 
Dufour -


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Any will do. Many changed quite a bit over the years, so the answer is not easy to give. Buy one in good shape that you like to be aboard and sail away. 

All but Gib‘sea are still in business (I think), which I find to be of value. Not mandatory, but some factory support comes in handy. I’ve used it, for sure.


----------



## GlanRock (Feb 26, 2013)

Rush2112 said:


> Widening my net, I've found that all of the following are pretty common here in Europe.
> I wonder how folks here would rank them as far as durability and seaworthiness, and any relevant comments also appreciated.
> 
> Jeanneau -
> ...


I've seen that kind of question open up all sorts of discussions that usually devolve into ugliness. Pitting the lovers of one brand against the other.

Only you can answer which of those types suit your tastes, needs, wants, and desire. Take that list and apply your 7 or 8 criteria you mentioned and then find the ones in your price range that are also available in your area and make appointments to go see them.

And remember as you have just learned, you aren't the only person looking! If you see something that ticks the boxes in your list, ask a bunch of questions *after *you make a refundable down payment pending survey. Or expect that it might not be there the next time you want to go look at it.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

Rush2112 said:


> Widening my net, I've found that all of the following are pretty common here in Europe.
> I wonder how folks here would rank them as far as durability and seaworthiness, and any relevant comments also appreciated.
> 
> Jeanneau -
> ...


Here is the problem with that question, many if not most of these manufacturers have made some good boats and some really bad boats. The exception to that is Dehler, I don't think that I recall seeing Dehler build a bad design, and build quality has always been exceptional. I would say the same for X-Boat which should be on your list (X-312 and X-342 were performance cruisers with an interior that was actually little more bright and airy feeling) .

Companies like Beneteau have various lines such as the Idyle and Oceanis which were value oriented boats, First Series which were better quality performance cruisers, First Class which were 'we are not joking' race boats, Figaro which are short-handed race boats. At one time or another Beneteau owned Jeanneau, Gibsea, and Dufour. Jeanneau similarly have had multiple lines of boats from some pretty crummy bargain basement cruisers aimed at the charter fleet, some value oriented designs that have very simplified hardware and finishes, to some beautifully executed performance cruisers, to some high quality, race oriented designs like the JOD, and the 3300. Early Dufour were goofball designs badly executed. They did a series of German Frer's designs in the 1980's or so that were really nice boats, they had a few pretty strange boat when they teamed up with Beneteau that I never understood, and now the seem to be producing some nice performance cruisers.

Gibsea was a venerable company at one time producing a mix of boats that ranged from the idiosyncratic but nicely designed Gibsea 31, to a range of very strange designs that must have filled some small niche somewhere. During Beneteau's ownership they seemed to have become dumbed down designs with minimal hardware. It looks like Gibsea maybe one of the lines that Beneteau is thinking of closing down. I have not seen enough of the older ones to comment on build quality.

Moody's in your price range are not worth looking at. The design and build quality of these boats is appalling. The more recent boats seem to have come up a lot in build quality, but those would be outside your price range.

Bavaria has never impressed me either in terms of the quality of their designs, or their build quality., Crawling around the back corners of the interior where there are no liners, for all of their claims about quality through automation there are a lot of crudely done details that do not seem all that reliable.

Jeff


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Minnewaska said:


> Can't wait to hear of your first sail one day.


I've sailed a fair number of times, maybe a dozen or so now.
But I still consider and label myself a complete novice ;-)


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Minnewaska said:


> Any will do. Many changed quite a bit over the years, so the answer is not easy to give. Buy one in good shape that you like to be aboard and sail away.


Yeah I hear you- condition is more important than make and model. In my price range anyway.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Jeff_H said:


> Here is the problem with that question, many if not most of these manufacturers have made some good boats and some really bad boats. The exception to that is Dehler, I don't think that I recall seeing Dehler build a bad design, and build quality has always been exceptional. I would say the same for X-Boat which should be on your list (X-312 and X-342 were performance cruisers with an interior that was actually little more bright and airy feeling) .
> 
> Companies like Beneteau have various lines such as the Idyle and Oceanis which were value oriented boats, First Series which were better quality performance cruisers, First Class which were 'we are not joking' race boats, Figaro which are short-handed race boats. At one time or another Beneteau owned Jeanneau, Gibsea, and Dufour. Jeanneau similarly have had multiple lines of boats from some pretty crummy bargain basement cruisers aimed at the charter fleet, some value oriented designs that have very simplified hardware and finishes, to some beautifully executed performance cruisers, to some high quality, race oriented designs like the JOD, and the 3300. Early Dufour were goofball designs badly executed. They did a series of German Frer's designs in the 1980's or so that were really nice boats, they had a few pretty strange boat when they teamed up with Beneteau that I never understood, and now the seem to be producing some nice performance cruisers.
> 
> ...


Thanks again for the detailed response. Very helpful!

I look back now and that Bavaria 32 was the first one that we both felt really good about.
Then I ran some numbers and found that it has more interior volume than many older 34 and 35 foot boats that I've looked at, and has a longer waterline than the Nicholson 38 which is 6 feet longer!
The price was fantastic too at under 20K with new sails and rigging. I really wish I'd had an opportunity to see it before it sold just to compare interiors to the Contest 31. On paper it should be a fair bit larger not to mention better lit. I'm really going to see if I can't find another one of these close enough to have a look.

Also, it's great to hear that Dehler has a good build quality because I see those sail by my local perch pretty much daily, and I've seen a good number for sale already so I'll keep an eye out if I can find one close to view. The Dehler 34 seems to be quite popular in these parts and this is another boat I really like on first impressions. It has the fin keel, fine entry, good build quality, and pretty good looking interior space and layout.

In the mean time I've decided to save up for a little while and see if I can't raise my budget just a bit. 
It sure seems that an extra 10-15K, bringing my budget up to 40-45K could work wonders for my boat search as far as getting the condition and interior space that I want. Perhaps I wasn't entirely realistic as to what all I could expect to get for a 30K budget. No worries though, I'm not deterred very easily. And nothing is quite as rewarding if there aren't at least a few road blocks along the way ;-)

I'm also really curious what happens with prices this winter. I wouldn't be surprised if more than a few long term cruisers hang it up and lay low for a while. Especially as many cruisers are older and may not want to take the risks associated with travel with all the current flu bug stuff going around. European countries travel restrictions are also a wild card to keep an eye on.

So I'm not really in 'Rush' mode anymore ;-)
Then again, if a super deal comes along, there's a decent chance I'll jump on it.
The saga continues...


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Rush2112 said:


> I've sailed a fair number of times, maybe a dozen or so now.
> But I still consider and label myself a complete novice ;-)


I meant hearing of your first sail on your new boat.

Of course, a dozen sails is a complete novice, but that doesn't matter one bit. It only means that some of your research isn't going to matter. Find a boat that doesn't have a fatal flaw, live with whatever else it has and sail your brains out. It's the only way you'll really know what you want, for the long term.

If you eventually buy, you're guaranteed to get this advice. Change nothing during your first season with your new boat. You will change your mind on your priorities. It's happened to all of us.

Good luck.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Yes, you have to be willing to spend money on surveys that don’t work out. Especially, when you're new at this. It’s just the price of admission. 

As for claiming you didn’t want to get political, you did a lousy job. Especially with the facts. I’m no Trump supporter, but it drives me nuts to read distorted stuff. We actually paid people so much, for a while, they refused to go back to work, when their job became available. Small busnesses got hundreds of billions of dollars too. Before we assume they were all underpaid poor people, many were second incomes, side jobs, etc. I even had family members collect these benefits, while actually working for someone else off the books.


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

Survey of a smallish boat costs as much as a largish boat I am thinking... I don't know. Boatpoker is a surveyor... ask him. But the ratio of survey cost to that of low priced boat will be high compared to a costly larger boat. The survey should be done on a boat you are seriously thinking of buying and want to find things that can lower the asking price as well as inform you of projects that must be done.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

SanderO said:


> Survey of a smallish boat costs as much as a largish boat I am thinking... I don't know. Boatpoker is a surveyor... ask him. But the ratio of survey cost to that of low priced boat will be high compared to a costly larger boat. The survey should be done on a boat you are seriously thinking of buying and want to find things that can lower the asking price as well as inform you of projects that must be done.


You know it just seems to me that both parties should share the survey. I don't see why the buyer should take all the risk that the seller is honestly presenting their boat. A strange convention IMO.


----------



## colemj (Jul 10, 2003)

Rush2112 said:


> You know it just seems to me that both parties should share the survey. I don't see why the buyer should take all the risk that the seller is honestly presenting their boat. A strange convention IMO.


If the seller is hiding something, this will become immediately apparent to any surveyor worth his salt. Most surveyors are willing to go into it in stages - a quick perusal to see if it is worth continuing, with a nominal charge if it is immediately apparent that a full survey is a waste of time.

Many sellers are caught unawares of problems with their boats when a surveyor finds them. After all, many owners aren't that knowledgable and haven't had the boat surveyed since they bought it.

A survey is part of the buyer's research and decision, so it is the buyer's responsibility.



SanderO said:


> Survey of a smallish boat costs as much as a largish boat I am thinking


All of our surveys have been charged by the foot, although there is a minimum charge, and the difference between a 30' and 35' would be a small one. Bigger differences are in needing to pay travel costs if necessary.

Mark


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

colemj said:


> If the seller is hiding something, this will become immediately apparent to any surveyor worth his salt. Most surveyors are willing to go into it in stages - a quick perusal to see if it is worth continuing, with a nominal charge if it is immediately apparent that a full survey is a waste of time.


Sounds like a great reason to be present for the inspection.
I think somebody mentioned this once, but its starting to make sense now.



colemj said:


> Many sellers are caught unawares of problems with their boats when a surveyor finds them. After all, many owners aren't that knowledgable and haven't had the boat surveyed since they bought it.


Fair enough.



colemj said:


> A survey is part of the buyer's research and decision, so it is the buyer's responsibility.


Sure. But if the deal falls through, the buyer loses his survey money, while the seller gets a free inspection of their boat, with which they can fix it before the next surveyor comes. So it seems to be of value to both parties.
Also, and this may seem a strange one- but boat surveys should be public property. I should be able to look up any boat and see the last survey. I have seen boats a number of times now where the deal fell through after survey. It sure would be nice to know what the survey found without paying for another! And consider the sleazy salesman. If the problem is not so very easy to find, they can just keep it on the market, until a buyer comes along who's surveyor misses it! The seller might not try this trickery if they had to pay half of every survey and the survey was publicly available. Just a thought...



colemj said:


> All of our surveys have been charged by the foot, although there is a minimum charge, and the difference between a 30' and 35' would be a small one. Bigger differences are in needing to pay travel costs if necessary.
> 
> Mark


What did you pay on average? And did it include an engine and rigging survey? I've heard these can cost more.


----------



## olson34 (Oct 13, 2000)

Be careful of viewing a survey as a binary (go or no go) decision. Unless the surveyor uncovers a problem so severe as to unexpectedly render the boat unusable, a survey is a road map for your stewardship of that vessel.
With rare (actually turn key boat) exceptions, ALL used boats are going to need to have deferred maintenance and overdue upgerades addressed by the new owner.

I am mindful of a friend that owned three sailboats over the decades, and he kept them all up to a high standard. We would joke that the best boat to own was (his name...) a "Fred boat" because the next owner could use it for years with little no required outlay for repairs. He always got top dollar for his boats, too. IIRC he did not need a broker to sell them, either.

Alas, he was the statistical rarity in boat owners..... If there were any 'lesson' to learn, it might be to look for the best maintained boat that minimally meets your true needs -- and it will likely be shorter than the ones you started out looking at.
And, of course, the additional advice from NA Bob Perry to also buy all the waterline length you can within a given size since DWL is what produces basic speed.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

olson34 said:


> Be careful of viewing a survey as a binary (go or no go) decision. Unless the surveyor uncovers a problem so severe as to unexpectedly render the boat unusable, a survey is a road map for your stewardship of that vessel.


Well that's an interesting way of looking at it...



olson34 said:


> With rare (actually turn key boat) exceptions, ALL used boats are going to need to have deferred maintenance and overdue upgerades addressed by the new owner.
> 
> I am mindful of a friend that owned three sailboats over the decades, and he kept them all up to a high standard. We would joke that the best boat to own was (his name...) a "Fred boat" because the next owner could use it for years with little no required outlay for repairs. He always got top dollar for his boats, too. IIRC he did not need a broker to sell them, either.
> 
> Alas, he was the statistical rarity in boat owners..... If there were any 'lesson' to learn, it might be to look for the best maintained boat that minimally meets your true needs -- and it will likely be shorter than the ones you started out looking at.


Hmm that Beneteau 32 is looking better every day.



olson34 said:


> And, of course, the additional advice from NA Bob Perry to also buy all the waterline length you can within a given size since DWL is what produces basic speed.


Yep, Jeff_H also drove this one home pretty hard. Both in terms of speed, and sea kindliness of not going with the IOR typical .7 LWL/LOA. And more for .75-.85 type ratios.

Again that Beneteau 32 is looking pretty great. 
Then again the Contest 34 from way back, which had basically new everything setup for an Atlantic crossing, as well.

One thing's for sure, if I ask all the right questions and have a major showstopper gotcha in the survey, I won't be exactly thrilled to not have the owner share in the survey costs.

I wonder does anybody ever ask the seller to share the survey costs?
And what about the cost of putting it on land for inspection, and back in the water for a test sail? Both are done by the surveyor right? So do I pay for that as well?


----------



## colemj (Jul 10, 2003)

Rush2112 said:


> Sure. But if the deal falls through, the buyer loses his survey money, while the seller gets a free inspection of their boat, with which they can fix it before the next surveyor comes. So it seems to be of value to both parties.
> Also, and this may seem a strange one- but boat surveys should be public property. I should be able to look up any boat and see the last survey.
> 
> What did you pay on average? And did it include an engine and rigging survey? I've heard these can cost more.


Doesn't work that way. The seller never sees the survey beyond any issues the buyer demands addressed as part of the negotiation. The buyer purchases the survey and it is their private property.

By the time a survey is performed, there should be a hard contract on the boat with deposit money in escrow and the seller locked in with penalties clauses. So a seller couldn't use the survey as a "freebie" anyway.

If a seller won't fix or negotiate valid survey issues, it is unlikely they will do so before the next buyer's survey.

I don't know of any survey/inspection of anything that is public property. Selling data often are public record, but not survey/inspection.

I don't remember what our surveys cost, and don't care to search my records. Besides, an average wouldn't be useful because the purchases were made over several decades on vastly different types of boats.

They did not include engine or rigging survey beyond cursory inspection by the surveyor like running the engine to temp, backdown test, inspection of rigging on deck for obvious things (we did have one surveyor go up the rigging). Likewise with other equipment - it is noted and recorded, and determined if running or not.

Surveys are a strange thing for me. By the time it comes to a survey, I've already extensively surveyed the boat myself as part of the negotiation and know exactly what any issues are. I'm competent in scantlings, engineering of boat structures and systems, electrical, electronics, plumbing, etc, and have yet to find a surveyor who has caught all that I have (beyond expiration dates and other minor things I don't care about in a purchase).

I typed the above just to underscore the additional point that I ALWAYS GET A SURVEY. Sure, it is necessary anyway if the boat is to be financed or insured, but I would anyhow. Another pair of cold eyes by an uninvolved person with experience is a good and inexpensive check on a purchase where the buyer has potential emotional bias and may have been buried in details too far to see obvious large picture stuff.

In the scheme of buying a boat - even a smaller less expensive boat - the cost of a survey is inconsequential. The value of a survey could range from zero to saving your bank account (or more). It is a good hedge.

Mark


----------



## colemj (Jul 10, 2003)

Rush2112 said:


> I wonder does anybody ever ask the seller to share the survey costs?
> And what about the cost of putting it on land for inspection, and back in the water for a test sail? Both are done by the surveyor right? So do I pay for that as well?


I've never heard of that, and being a seller of boats I would have told the buyer to pound sand if he asked me to pay for the survey. After all, by the time you find a boat in reasonable shape at a reasonable price, the seller will have already paid to get it to this point - either in a lot of maintenance/upgrades or in dropping the price of a tired boat low enough to sell.

The cost of haul out/in is paid by the buyer. Why should the seller pay for this? If the boat is already hauled, then there is no cost to the buyer if the sale commences that day, or the seller agrees to leave it in the water regardless of the result of the purchase. The surveyor does the out of water work, then the launch for in-water work has already been paid as part of the earlier haulout. Most yards have much lower rates for a survey quick haul and launch - they usually leave it in the slings over lunch.

Mark


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

colemj said:


> Doesn't work that way. The seller never sees the survey beyond any issues the buyer demands addressed as part of the negotiation. The buyer purchases the survey and it is their private property.
> 
> By the time a survey is performed, there should be a hard contract on the boat with deposit money in escrow and the seller locked in with penalties clauses. So a seller couldn't use the survey as a "freebie" anyway.
> 
> ...


Well it's interesting that the seller does not get a copy of the survey, I always thought they did. Maybe they just get the highlights in the form of complaints of the buyer for price leverage. I know my knowledge of boats is so minimal even with reading a few 'do it yourself' survey sights I feel like I'm just checking a lot of things if they look good or not. I'll definitely get a survey on any boat I purchase as I don't really have a choice.

The thing that gets me are the boats that are on the market for a long time, or that I've googled and seen the pictures and been like hey, that's the same boat for sale today, and discovered they've been trying to sell it a long time. And I wonder if it has a fatal flaw, and even if it was disclosed in a dozen surveys so far, I have to hope my surveyor is sharp enough to catch it.

It seems like the boat market needs some kind of Better Business Bureau to protect buyers from scammer sellers who just keep putting it on sale until somebody misses the fatal flaw. There is no shortage of stories on the internet of people hiring a surveyor, buying a boat, and later discovering the fatal flaw that was definitely there at the point of sale. It seems this information should be shared somehow, when a survey finds a boat has substantial problems. Considering the costs associated with sailboats, it would seem a reasonable consumer protection program. Perhaps one could pay a fee for a period of time for access, and all surveyors are required to upload their reports. Seems reasonable.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

colemj said:


> I've never heard of that, and being a seller of boats I would have told the buyer to pound sand if he asked me to pay for the survey. After all, by the time you find a boat in reasonable shape at a reasonable price, the seller will have already paid to get it to this point - either in a lot of maintenance/upgrades or in dropping the price of a tired boat low enough to sell.
> 
> The cost of haul out/in is paid by the buyer. Why should the seller pay for this? If the boat is already hauled, then there is no cost to the buyer if the sale commences that day, or the seller agrees to leave it in the water regardless of the result of the purchase. The surveyor does the out of water work, then the launch for in-water work has already been paid as part of the earlier haulout. Most yards have much lower rates for a survey quick haul and launch - they usually leave it in the slings over lunch.
> 
> Mark


Hmm, well I guess it's good the seller has some skin in the deal. I don't imagine the haul out/in is exactly cheap, especially considering the liability.

BTW, ever heard of anybody dropping a boat? I saw a video once of a guy being hauled out on his boat and I thought 'well that's confidence in the crane operator!'


----------



## colemj (Jul 10, 2003)

Rush2112 said:


> The thing that gets me are the boats that are on the market for a long time, or that I've googled and seen the pictures and been like hey, that's the same boat for sale today, and discovered they've been trying to sell it a long time. And I wonder if it has a fatal flaw, and even if it was disclosed in a dozen surveys so far, I have to hope my surveyor is sharp enough to catch it.


The only fatal flaw all boats have that have been on the market for a long time is that they are not priced correctly. A surveyor will not find this flaw. Ironically, the act of bringing a boat to survey as part of a purchase agreement immediately remedies this flaw.

There is no seller hiding a fatal flaw trying to get a buyer to bite. Instead, they are just unreasonable in their pricing, or don't really want to sell but need to look like they are trying for whatever reason (wife, lack of introspection, etc). They are paying a lot of money for that boat to sit around, so it isn't cheap to do this.

In the US, at least, a seller cannot legally withhold critical information about a boat. This includes hurricane or other significant damage that was repaired, accidents resulting in claims, etc.

There can certainly be a case of difference of opinion about who should be responsible for something like a wet deck, old rigging, leaking keel bolts, etc, but again, this comes down to a pricing flaw.

There simply are not enough boats having multiple surveys and still on the market to make a database worthwhile, or even possible. There is no shortage of surveyors missing problems, even major ones, but also no way of proving sellers knew about them and didn't disclose them. Then there is the real possibility that perfectly working stuff - even brand new stuff - will break the moment you take ownership.

Mark


----------



## colemj (Jul 10, 2003)

Rush2112 said:


> Hmm, well I guess it's good the seller has some skin in the deal. I don't imagine the haul out/in is exactly cheap, especially considering the liability.
> 
> BTW, ever heard of anybody dropping a boat? I saw a video once of a guy being hauled out on his boat and I thought 'well that's confidence in the crane operator!'


I know someone who had his immaculate Hylas 54 dropped from a travel lift with significant structural damage. Took a year of full on professional work to get it repaired properly. It isn't common, but it does seem to happen every so often. It is very unlikely that a smaller, lighter boat like you are considering will tax a lift or crane.

Quick haul/launches are dependent on area, time, marina, etc. I've had them range from free (I needed 10 minutes in a mom&pop place) to ranging from $100-$300 (the latter a Hinckley yard).

Mark


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

colemj said:


> The only fatal flaw all boats have that have been on the market for a long time is that they are not priced correctly. A surveyor will not find this flaw. Ironically, the act of bringing a boat to survey as part of a purchase agreement immediately remedies this flaw.
> 
> There is no seller hiding a fatal flaw trying to get a buyer to bite. Instead, they are just unreasonable in their pricing, or don't really want to sell but need to look like they are trying for whatever reason (wife, lack of introspection, etc). They are paying a lot of money for that boat to sit around, so it isn't cheap to do this.
> 
> ...


Remember that Grampian 34 I was considering?
I'll bet that one has a fatal flaw.
It was so bizarre they way they said it had a new keel from a specific British builder, for a specific price, then later said oh that was just a typo, it has only new keel bolts. Then they removed all mention of the keel entirely from the ad. It was for sale for a long time, and I wouldn't be surprised if it had been grounded hard and caused structural damage, perhaps hard to see, that they were not mentioning.
It definitely wasn't price holding it back, they had at least 40 grand of new goodies in a 27K boat.

Besides cases like this a survey database would provide a record of the boats history.
It's funny you should mention hurricanes. This guy goes in depth about hurricane boat scams:
*


Hurricane Sandy and the Used Boat Market


*
It seems the main problem consumers face is that there is no 'salvage title' database or process for boats as there is far cars, leaving consumers unprotected from scammers.

Edit: The original add "
Keel: brand new completely replaced in 2013 with solid 
newly patented clone & new keel bolts etc at a cost of over �10,000 inc 
VAT by Irons brothers The U.K's best keel maker in Wayde bridge Cornwall... "
Then later- keel work? What keel work? No no that was a typo. Uhh gee... right.


----------



## colemj (Jul 10, 2003)

Rush2112 said:


> It seems the main problem consumers face is that there is no 'salvage title' database or process for boats as there is far cars, leaving consumers unprotected from scammers.


This isn't true completely. Insurance companies definitely know which boats have been totaled or salvaged and will refuse to insure them. They will also tell you up front about them as your insurance company if you are pursuing one. Outside of that, the seller and broker are legally obligated to tell you this, even if they speak highly of the subsequent repair and commissioning. Bad stories you hear are almost always from those with stars in their eyes who enter into these purchases thinking they can make them work financially. Few turn out that way, no matter what the youtubers are telling you.

I think you are over-thinking this and appear to be a bit hung up on it. Even you, with your self-admitted lack of experience and knowledge, sussed out that Grampian in short order. A surveyor would catch it immediately.

It is difficult to actually scam a boat and get away with it. If a boat is sold in the US without disclosed hurricane damage, the seller and broker are legally on the hook. I don't know about other countries. Most all other "scams" are easily discovered. The only ones that work are because there are people who delude themselves and don't listen to the obvious klaxons ringing in their heads ("This guy doesn't know what he has - I can get a 600k boat for 30k!"). While surveyors can and do miss a lot of important things, they all can spot a scam a mile away.

Mark


----------



## olson34 (Oct 13, 2000)

Rush2112 said:


> Hmm, well I guess it's good the seller has some skin in the deal. I don't imagine the haul out/in is exactly cheap, especially considering the liability.
> 
> BTW, ever heard of anybody dropping a boat? I saw a video once of a guy being hauled out on his boat and I thought 'well that's confidence in the crane operator!'


Way back about 20 years ago, a local yard had a crane 'accident' and dropped one boat... on another boat. It was, as they say, quite a day. No injuries, and we speculated that their insurance premiums went up a wee bit the next year.... !

Another thing: When a sale falls thru because something important came up in the survey, the selling broker (as well as the owner) has a new problem. Now he/she is duty bound to disclose the known defect whether the owner likes it or not. He/she is liable.
Once in a while I have seen a sketchy boat wander from broker to broker, and wonder what the owner tells the new guy.


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

I'll go out on a limb and predict that OP will not end up purchasing a boat. 324 messages over 3 months, and he's just barely looked at a couple. Clear paralysis by analysis, and collecting a list of constraints that virtually no boat anywhere close to his price range will meet, and now he's convincing himself that boat prices are going to collapse dramatically "if I only wait long enough."

Those of us who have been here awhile have seen this before. A number or people have come and gone, collecting (and ultimately ignoring) a lot of well intended advice from members here, and tying themselves up in knots with the search for a "perfect boat" whose owner is just dying to give away to a deserving buyer.

Good boats cost some money, and while not totally immune to price fluctuations, the ones at the top of the bell curve are always in limited supply and thus sell at a fair price even when the economy is suffering. It's the ones at the bottom end of the bell curve that can't sell because their owners fail to recognize that they may have negative value.

I genuinely hope that (and will gladly admit if) I am wrong about this prediction, but I've seen it enough before to recognize the telltale signs.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Rush2112 said:


> Edit: OK, I'll bite.


Not worth discussing (biting). Full of gross political inaccuracies. You may or may not be right about impending economic issues, but you have many underlying facts wrong. This post should just be deleted.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Rush2112 said:


> You know it just seems to me that both parties should share the survey.


If you were competent enough, you could do the survey yourself. Most are not, so they hire a professional. The buyers degree of competency is not the seller's liability.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

TakeFive said:


> I'll go out on a limb and predict that OP will not end up purchasing a boat.


I haven't wanted to be so blunt, but we have seen this pattern many times. Burnout and no boat. The dream exceeds the reality for some, or they just struggle to commit. Whatever it is, the risk is pretty high here. I hope our efforts have not been in vein, but someone lurking may have benefited one way or the other.


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

TakeFive said:


> I'll go out on a limb and predict that OP will not end up purchasing a boat. 324 messages over 3 months, and he's just barely looked at a couple. Clear paralysis by analysis, and collecting a list of constraints that virtually no boat anywhere close to his price range will meet, and now he's convincing himself that boat prices are going to collapse dramatically "if I only wait long enough."
> 
> Those of us who have been here awhile have seen this before. A number or people have come and gone, collecting (and ultimately ignoring) a lot of well intended advice from members here, and tying themselves up in knots with the search for a "perfect boat" whose owner is just dying to give away to a deserving buyer.
> 
> ...


You could be correct. Clearly when someone wants something that they can't afford they hunt around for a bargain or a sale. But hot items don't remain on the sale rack long because savy buyers snatch then up.

A used boat is more complex than buying a pair of shoes! Virtually everyone boat is in a state of being improved, maintained for sure, and upgrading goes with the territory. Then you need to somehow factor in the matrix of various differences that even the same hull may involve,,, basic gear, equipment upgrades, age, finishes, general condition. Trying to compare types of apples is hard enough.... but comparing different fruits take this to a whole other level of complexity.

I think Rush may have at least determined that he needs to accept that most boats will sail well enough for his purposes... and this can be tweaked such as better sails. Most boats can be sailed with aging but working "technology" as tech is something which is always getting better and all boat owners deal with this treadmill.

What he needs is to, IMO, find the plan down below which works for his "lifestyle". THEN survey what boats that have these sorts of interiors are selling for. Now he has a realistic idea of what his budget starting point should be. And of course he needs to have a "project budget" . So for Rush his budget will be SALE price (and associated costs) and PROJECT budget, And this doesn't even include the inevitable mooring/slip feels and insurance that come with ownership.

What to do?
Look at yachts for sale and see what looks right. Do NOT focus on anything else.
Visit boats to see if they are as good as they look... or maybe they images were deceptive or misread.
NOW Rush will have a decent idea of what ball park he is playing in. Then he needs to figure out how to pay for this type of boat... knowing that SALE price is not the only price....and then there is a PROJECT price for every boat. And finally he needs to money to maintain the living aboard lifestyle.

There is no real analogy to buying a car... or maybe even an RV. And for sure someone who has little to no experience with boats has a disadvantage and needs to acquire experience and knowledge to inform their decision process. Experience/wisdom takes time!


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

For me, the biggest red flag, whether here, Facebook, or elsewhere, is someone who has never even owned a boat wanting to live aboard. You need a stepwise learning process, and can’t just jump from A to Z immediately. This was proven in his “OMG, it’s so small!” moment.


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

TakeFive said:


> For me, the biggest red flag, whether here, Facebook, or elsewhere, is someone who has never even owned a boat wanting to live aboard. You need a stepwise learning process, and can't just jump from A to Z immediately. This was proven in his "OMG, it's so small!" moment.


This is because people watch sailing vlogs and SEE people out there living aboard. Years ago when I bought Shiva there was no internet. You could read books, magazines... but that was no comparison to watching a sailing YouTube channel. Those YTs about life aboard are of little to no interest to me. I prefer YTs which feature boat "work", repairs etc, or travelogues where I can see places...

So year people catch the sailing bug from media (vlog) exposure... and think... why can't I do that?


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

2 posts deleted as they veered off into politics - theres a forum for that.

Also, to everyone, if you don't agree with someone put it in a way that doesn't sound insulting. Of you will be on vacation from Sailnet


----------



## mstern (May 26, 2002)

I would also caution about relying on your survey too much. I'm not talking about a surveyor missing a potential flaw; I'm talking about your survey report not accurately reflecting the results of the survey. Case in point: my last survey. There were several (important) points that were discussed while aboard that didn't make it into the survey report, and there were a couple of things that were just flat out factually incorrect in the report.

When testing the engine, my surveyor used a timing light and determined that the tach was misreading the rpms; not by a ton, but by a measurable and potentially significant amount. At the time, I was in the cockpit with the PO, talking about the boat, and when the surveyor told me "the tach is running off by X", I was only half paying attention, assuming that little tidbit would be noted in the report. It was not. So now I don't know if the tach is running too high or too low.

The surveyor also noted that the coated lifelines were showing signs of rust and that this was an important safety feature that needed to be addressed. Again, not in the report. 

I get that sometimes people forget; or maybe his note taking was imperfect. But he included things that weren't there. For example, the PO, surveyor and I discussed how there wasn't a battery charger on board and how it would be a good upgrade. However, in the survey report, it was noted that there was a battery charger, and it went so far as to name the make, model and location of the unit on the boat. It wasn't there; believe me, I looked for it later. He also noted the lack of a smoke/CO detector, yet included pictures in the report of the smoke/CO detector on the cabin bulkhead.

This is not to say that the report was useless; I was there when he sounded the hull and deck, used a moisture meter, took apart the electrical panel, tested the systems, etc. He found a leaking water pump. All of that was good. It's just --- weird.

Why didn't I call him immediately after the survey to get it revised? Because I didn't read the report carefully until a month or so later; I was really only concerned about it wasn't until the insurance company called me to ask how I was going to address the issue of the lack of a smoke detector, etc. that I realized the shortcomings of the report. 

Moral of the story: get a survey, and take your own notes during the process. Look at the report closely to make sure his recollection matches yours; have him fix the mistakes as it could impact your insurance coverage.

To respond to your question about surveyors and engines and rigging: If the mast is down, a survey should include an inspection of the mast and all of the standing rigging. If the mast is up, they will look at what they can reach and note that the rest should be inspected when the mast is down. Engines are a completely different ball game. They should start the engine, run it under load, check the accuracy of the tachometer, check that the transmission works, that the stuffing box isn't a danger, and check to make sure the alternator is putting out juice. Anything more than that will require a separate engine survey. This will almost always be a different surveyor with special expertise. For one of those, they will put the engine through a lot more, including sampling the engine oil, coolant and transmission fluids, looking for contaminants and any problems. They should also check the exhaust system from stem to stern.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

MarkofSeaLife said:


> 2 posts deleted as they veered off into politics - theres a forum for that.
> 
> Also, to everyone, if you don't agree with someone put it in a way that doesn't sound insulting. Of you will be on vacation from Sailnet


I thought I was just posting economic facts. Sorry if that hurts some people's political feelings. It wasn't my intention. But it really wasn't fair to delete my posts then leave Minnewaska's (sorry but frankly untrue) summary of my posts standing.



Minnewaska said:


> Yes, you have to be willing to spend money on surveys that don't work out. Especially, when you're new at this. It's just the price of admission.
> 
> As for claiming you didn't want to get political, you did a lousy job. Especially with the facts. I'm no Trump supporter, but it drives me nuts to read distorted stuff. We actually paid people so much, for a while, they refused to go back to work, when their job became available. Small busnesses got hundreds of billions of dollars too. Before we assume they were all underpaid poor people, many were second incomes, side jobs, etc. I even had family members collect these benefits, while actually working for someone else off the books.





Minnewaska said:


> Not worth discussing (biting). Full of gross political inaccuracies. You may or may not be right about impending economic issues, but you have many underlying facts wrong. This post should just be deleted.


If my post is to be deleted then this false summary of 'inaccuracies' should be as well.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Minnewaska said:


> Not worth discussing (biting). Full of gross political inaccuracies. You may or may not be right about impending economic issues, but you have many underlying facts wrong. This post should just be deleted.


THIS post should be deleted.
If not, leaving his summary of what is a 'gross political inaccuracy' is literally to say who is politically accurate.

And again I wasn't trying to be political, in one case I was actually just joking. But I will say that the (deleted) empirical data I posted was accurate, however one might politically feel about it, which again, was not the point.

I didn't expect the sensitivity levels to data would be so high. And again apologies to anyone who was offended by my economic projection.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Minnewaska said:


> I haven't wanted to be so blunt, but we have seen this pattern many times. Burnout and no boat. The dream exceeds the reality for some, or they just struggle to commit. Whatever it is, the risk is pretty high here. I hope our efforts have not been in vein, but someone lurking may have benefited one way or the other.


You keep attacking me for not buying right now. I told you why that ECONOMICALLY is probably a bad idea and you couldn't stand the truth. So you attack me personally for being non commital or burned out, which is false. You don't know me. You have no right to judge. I'll bet dollars to donuts boats will be cheaper in 6 months to a year, and FAR cheaper. It's YOUR politics that can't deal with my economic decision.


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

Re Tachometers....My ancient tach decided to under report the rpms... about a year ago. I could tell it was off based on how fast I was motoring in flat seas and what the tach said. I got a laser tach and I was correct. So I set about to get a replacement. No longer stocked. So I tried to find used tachs and found that they were also inaccurate... all reading low... so now I know how far off the tach is and it's not something I can't live with. I just don't understand why this is the case. I DID change the transducer.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

SanderO said:


> You could be correct. Clearly when someone wants something that they can't afford they hunt around for a bargain or a sale. But hot items don't remain on the sale rack long because savy buyers snatch then up.
> 
> A used boat is more complex than buying a pair of shoes! Virtually everyone boat is in a state of being improved, maintained for sure, and upgrading goes with the territory. Then you need to somehow factor in the matrix of various differences that even the same hull may involve,,, basic gear, equipment upgrades, age, finishes, general condition. Trying to compare types of apples is hard enough.... but comparing different fruits take this to a whole other level of complexity.
> 
> ...


Well first I agree with everything you say. I know I want a sailboat, that much is certain. The complexity of buying and the costs of gotchas and maintenance are far greater than implied in a book that I read about sailing, compounded with exponentially higher costs as boat sizes increase, and I will either need to increase budget which will take a bit of time, or look for a sale.

In my mind the solution is simple. Wait.

I have looked at the data, and historically:
1. Sailboats have a high variation in price relative to the economy. When the economy goes down their prices plummet.
2. So I expect medium term prices for boats to fall substantially
3. Therefore I will wait and buy when the prices are lower.

This is just common sense. If you think prices will drop, wait. That's all I meant to say, perhaps a bit too colorfully or on the nose for the more politically sensitive.

Again I'm a numbers and data guy- I'm not political in the least. Really!


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

Buying a boat is always a poor economic decision. You'll always save money by not buying a boat. No slip fees, no maintenance, more money in your pocket. But then, you don't have a boat to enjoy. You need to really love sailing to own a boat, because the economic analysis will never make sense. Which is why I think you'll never own a boat. If you base this on economics, you'll do what many very intelligent people have done: WAIT FOREVER.

I disagree politically quite strongly with some people here. But I agree that there's a subforum here dedicated to such issues. We all slip up occasionally and have our posts deleted or moved. As a relative newcomer here, you seem to be acquiring a know-it-all attitude toward virtually everything: LWL/LOA ratios, who should pay for surveyors, global database for boat defects, and now how the moderators should run the forum. I'd say that you're coming very close to offending some people who have given you a lot of patient advice.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

TakeFive said:


> For me, the biggest red flag, whether here, Facebook, or elsewhere, is someone who has never even owned a boat wanting to live aboard. You need a stepwise learning process, and can't just jump from A to Z immediately. This was proven in his "OMG, it's so small!" moment.


I'm not sure that moment proved anything except that Sander O was right, under mid 30s is too small for a live aboard. I've sailed and to me the worst part was giving it back at the end of the day. I cannot charter because I do not have enough experience or certificates, so I have no choice but to buy if I want to be able to stay aboard.

Worst case scenario that I see is that I have trouble sleeping aboard. Apparently nobody knows if they can until they try. Then I just keep my house for a while until I'm sure I'm OK with it, not a drama really. The buying process and getting a good value for money is the real drama. As long as the boat isn't junk theoretically it can be sold for a boat that better suits me if that's a problem.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

TakeFive said:


> Buying a boat is always a poor economic decision. You'll always save money by not buying a boat. No slip fees, no maintenance, more money in your pocket. But then, you don't have a boat to enjoy. You need to really love sailing to own a boat, because the economic analysis will never make sense. Which is why I think you'll never own a boat. If you base this on economics, you'll do what many very intelligent people have done: WAIT FOREVER.


I don't consider 6 months or so to be forever. And my savings will only go up in that time, so I'll have more options whether boat prices go down (as I totally expect) or not.



TakeFive said:


> I disagree politically quite strongly with some people here. But I agree that there's a subforum here dedicated to such issues. We all slip up occasionally and have our posts deleted or moved. As a relative newcomer here, you seem to be acquiring a know-it-all attitude toward virtually everything: LWL/LOA ratios, who should pay for surveyors, global database for boat defects, and now how the moderators should run the forum. I'd say that you're coming very close to offending some people who have given you a lot of patient advice.


Well apologies if you or others were offended. I can assure you that was not my intent. A joke at the expense of a Treasury Secretary, whom I didn't think anybody would care about anyway, and an economic analysis, which I believe is spot on.

But I think the response I got was far more offensive than what I said. The response was personal and derogatory, and worst of all, was left up as a (frankly untrue) summary of what I said. Not fair. Not really.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Minnewaska said:


> Not worth discussing (biting). Full of gross political inaccuracies. You may or may not be right about impending economic issues, but you have many underlying facts wrong. This post should just be deleted.


What I said was deleted. Fine. 
But if you think it was bad data, then look for yourself. 
Literally everything I stated can be verified here:








U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics


The Bureau of Labor Statistics is the principal fact-finding agency for the Federal Government in the broad field of labor economics and statistics.




www.bls.gov





This is a non partisan, non political, economic data site.
You might be surprised which of our opinions is off base!


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

I am not looking to buy a sailboat and I may be looking to sell Shiva outright or sell a "partnership" which to me has advantages for me and a partner. But that is hard to find. I digress. 
It does appeal that the economy is acting crazy and unpredictable. This may mean some market segments take a huge hit....but there also appears to be a increase in demand for boats in the time of corona... probably because it can be a socially distant activity and can also be used as a home... unlike a golf course... or a new car. Living a board with some level of comfort was one of the key reasons I bought the boat I did.... and there have been many weekends I spent aboard and did not sail


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

SanderO said:


> I am not looking to buy a sailboat and I may be looking to sell Shiva outright or sell a "partnership" which to me has advantages for me and a partner. But that is hard to find. I digress.
> It does appeal that the economy is acting crazy and unpredictable. This may mean some market segments take a huge hit....but there also appears to be a increase in demand for boats in the time of corona... probably because it can be a socially distant activity and can also be used as a home... unlike a golf course... or a new car. Living a board with some level of comfort was one of the key reasons I bought the boat I did.... and there have been many weekends I spent aboard and did not sail


Ugh geez now I'm scared to respond. Well let's just say I think you have a valid point, but based upon the data I mentioned earlier (which I won't post again!) I think that side will have a heavier weighting on the market. Hope that makes sense.

Honestly, even if I didn't expect to come, what I expect to come down the pipeline, I would still hold off and save for a while. Comparing the Cal 39 that I sailed on to the Contest 31 I saw last week, there is no question I need a little more budget to do what I want to do. And you were pretty much right all along that just a few feet extra length of boat adds quite a bit more interior volume and living comfort. I think 35-36 feet will be the sweet spot with enough room to live on, and without going too exponential with costs.


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

Rush2112 said:


> Ugh geez now I'm scared to respond. Well let's just say I think you have a valid point, but based upon the data I mentioned earlier (which I won't post again!) I think that side will have a heavier weighting on the market. Hope that makes sense.
> 
> Honestly, even if I didn't expect to come, what I expect to come down the pipeline, I would still hold off and save for a while. Comparing the Cal 39 that I sailed on to the Contest 31 I saw last week, there is no question I need a little more budget to do what I want to do. And you were pretty much right all along that just a few feet extra length of boat adds quite a bit more interior volume and living comfort. I think 35-36 feet will be the sweet spot with enough room to live on, and without going too exponential with costs.


The adding a few feet makes a radical difference in interior volume applies to shorter LWL boats. going from 30' to 33' will be significant and obvious.... going from 54 to 57... you might not even notice the change in volume.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Rush2112 said:


> You keep attacking me for not buying right now. I told you why that ECONOMICALLY is probably a bad idea and you couldn't stand the truth. So you attack me personally for being non commital or burned out, which is false. You don't know me. You have no right to judge. I'll bet dollars to donuts boats will be cheaper in 6 months to a year, and FAR cheaper. It's YOUR politics that can't deal with my economic decision.


You've got your shorts in quite a knot. I'm fine, if the mods want to delete my responses to your political posts.

At the least, understand the flaw in your manners. You are not a US citizen, but cast dispersion on the US and expected impunity.

I certainly did not intend to attack you for not buying right now. Many of us have spent a good deal of time giving you advice, as we've done for many others. There is nothing about predicting the future economy today that would have been much different a month or two back, when you were ready to go. This pattern simply does not often result in a boat owner. You could consider paying for a live aboard sailing course and get a much better sense of the sport than you will here. They are, however, expensive and will eat materially into your budget. Good luck in your search, whenever it resumes.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

I cannot or will not try to predict what will happen in Europe, but in following what is happening here in the U.S., boat prices are expected to continue to increase over the next few years pretty much no matter what the economy does. It is a perfect 'supply and demand' storm. To explain, there is a huge bulge in the number of Americans at or near retirement age, and in that cohort there is a large number for whom sailing is a part of their retirement plans. 

By the same token, world wide and in the US, the largest number of sailboats were built in the 1970's and early 1980's, and those boats are increasingly reaching a stage where they are in need of serious repair making them economically beyond salvage, and uninsurable. So, this creates a situation where demand is rising quickly, and supply is falling nearly equally as rapidly.

The retirement age cohort entering sailing are only minimally impacted by any wobbles in the economy in that they have budgeted retirement funds to buy a boat and that money is mentally set aside and available rather than coming out of cash flow. The increase in boat buying due to Covid-19 thinking is only making that problem worse as people facing their version of Covid thinking are taking a large quantity of boats off the market.

Current sales rates, and industry projections suggest that the usual just before winter price drop is not going to happen this year. This is the time of year when those price drops typically occur, and New England broker friends tell me that instead of that, they are seeing full price offers and even bidding wars on unexceptional boats because there are so few on the market. A quick scan of CraigsList shows a much smaller number of sailboats listed with boats that have been on the market for years suddenly showing up marked as sold, (something I don't recall seeing before) or the ads missing. 

So, while Covid may cause a major decline in the economy at large, the way that the split in the Covid employment and income impact minimally on higher wage- college educated Americans vs much harder on working, lower middle class, mainly non-college educated Americans, means that the group who would normally have disposable income to buy a boat are still likely to be in a position to continue buying boats. 

I will note that at any given time, I typically am riding shotgun, helping one or two people find the right boat for their needs. At the moment, I am helping 6, two of which have purchased boats in the last month. During the spring, I helped 3 people find boats. While very anecdotal, from my experience. this is a very different marketplace, especially for boats under around $50,000. . 

In any event, at least in the states, I would not count on a price drop anytime in the next year or so, and maybe not for another 2-3 years. . 

Jeff


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Minnewaska said:


> You've got your shorts in quite a knot. I'm fine, if the mods want to delete my responses to your political posts.
> 
> At the least, understand the flaw in your manners. You are not a US citizen, but cast dispersion on the US and expected impunity.
> 
> I certainly did not intend to attack you for not buying right now. Many of us have spent a good deal of time giving you advice, as we've done for many others. There is nothing about predicting the future economy today that would have been much different a month or two back, when you were ready to go. This pattern simply does not often result in a boat owner. You could consider paying for a live aboard sailing course and get a much better sense of the sport than you will here. They are, however, expensive and will eat materially into your budget. Good luck in your search, whenever it resumes.


Who got who's shorts in the knot is debatable...
But my verbiage might have been a little bit colorful, for the purposes of entertaining not offending, but it was technically correct I can assure you, although perhaps a little bit too 'on the nose'.

And how do you know I'm not a US citizen? Careful. Ever heard of expats?
In all fairness I can see now how you might have seen a foreigner attacking your country and felt the need to speak up. Fair enough. I get it. Again apologies, I probably went a bit far with the tone of those comments.

All I meant to say was merely that global economic trouble is IMO definitely coming. 
And historically speaking that means cheap boats.

What's changed in the past few months with me? To answer your question IMO what's coming could have easily been avoided, and was expected to be avoided, but hasn't. I don't think I can say more without risking it being interpreted as political and I really don't want to go there again. So I guess anyone can PM me if they want clarification, but I'll just leave it at that 

Again, I'm not political, not in the least. I'm just a numbers guy really.
And just from a data perspective, personally I think fantastic boat deals are on the horizon.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Rush2112 said:


> All I meant to say was merely that global economic trouble is IMO definitely coming.
> And historically speaking that means cheap boats.


Time will tell. This, however, is what most expected would happen back in late Winter - early Spring 2020, based simply on the identified recession and it's historic impact on prices. Exactly the opposite occurred.

Timing the market rarely works, but it can. Good luck.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Jeff_H said:


> I cannot or will not try to predict what will happen in Europe, but in following what is happening here in the U.S., boat prices are expected to continue to increase over the next few years pretty much no matter what the economy does. It is a perfect 'supply and demand' storm. To explain, there is a huge bulge in the number of Americans at or near retirement age, and in that cohort there is a large number for whom sailing is a part of their retirement plans.
> 
> By the same token, world wide and in the US, the largest number of sailboats were built in the 1970's and early 1980's, and those boats are increasingly reaching a stage where they are in need of serious repair making them economically beyond salvage, and uninsurable. So, this creates a situation where demand is rising quickly, and supply is falling nearly equally as rapidly.
> 
> ...


Well, we shall see...
I recognize the factors you suggest as valid, except for one minor data point- that a full 50% of college educated people today (IE Millennial) don't actually earn a higher salary post graduation than they did before. That's a fact. Today for a Millennial it's literally a coin toss if college makes you better off (eventually after paying off all the debt) with a higher paying job, or far worse off with huge student loan debts, while back to the waiting tables job, and basically financially cursed- forever.

That's why Sailing Uma is not exactly a believable back story. At least one of them is probably from a wealthy family. Because even if they are the lucky 50%, they're still carrying that debt for decades, and not likely to be buying boats any time soon ;-)

Still the basic supply and demand you mention of retired boomers could very much inflate boat prices. Also the aging boats dilemma you mention is real for sure. How many 70s and 80s boats are for sale right now that need basically everything. A lot! Many of them probably will be retired as it just isn't worth a new engine and sails and rigging, and wiring, and electronics, etc

The retired boomers could be the main supply and demand factor- that's possible.
Unless, Covid gets worse this winter, as the flu generally does, and closures and lockdowns and such get worse- scaring off older people who are more at risk. Although it's debatable whether a person is actually safer on a 'distanced' boat. I would argue that as long as you're careful when in port, that you're actually safer out on a boat.

The other factor for retirees is if the markets crash. Which I think they will. And this could put a crimp on many people's retirement budgets, and influence boat sales.

Personally I think this winter is going to be rough, both with the flu, and even worse, with the global economy, which tends to lag far behind economic decisions. The decisions made this past spring and this summer for example will not be fully reflected in say BLS data sets until this winter to coming spring, and even after.

There are definitely opposing forces in the markets, and you make good valid points. My money is still on net lower boat prices in coming months. That being said if I see a super deal come along, there's a good chance I'll pounce on it.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Minnewaska said:


> Time will tell. This, however, is what most expected would happen back in late Winter - early Spring 2020, based simply on the identified recession and it's historic impact on prices. Exactly the opposite occurred.
> 
> Timing the market rarely works, but it can. Good luck.


Yeah time will tell. At the very least I'll have more savings which definitely can't hurt.


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

Rush2112 said:


> All I meant to say was merely that global economic trouble is IMO definitely coming.
> And historically speaking that means cheap boats...I'm just a numbers guy really.


Please share your historical data that proves your assertion about boat prices.


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

TakeFive said:


> Please share your historical data that proves your assertion about boat prices.


That is not called for... people can speculate about these things... no need to demand proof.


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

SanderO said:


> That is not called for... people can speculate about these things... no need to demand proof.


He says he's "just a numbers guy", so it seems reasonable to ask to see the numbers.


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

TakeFive said:


> He says he's "just a numbers guy", so it seems reasonable to ask to see the numbers.


Let it go... not worth the bad vibes.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

TakeFive said:


> He says he's "just a numbers guy", so it seems reasonable to ask to see the numbers.


LOL Seriously?
So you want me to prove that luxury goods see the largest declines in demand during economic downturns?
All right I'll bite. But just out of good faith and not assuming that everybody has an interest in economics and would know this.

During times of economic crisis, people hold off on buying bit ticket 'non-necessity' items.
So while the food industry is not generally very hard hit, 'durable goods' such as refrigerators and furniture, and automobiles get very hard hit, and these industries suffer greatly.
At the far extreme of industries hardest hit in these times are 'luxury goods' which include designer clothes, 10 thousand dollar watches, and you guessed it- yachts.

If you really want to dig into the empirical data, again, I have already provided you with the link ;-)








U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics


The Bureau of Labor Statistics is the principal fact-finding agency for the Federal Government in the broad field of labor economics and statistics.




www.bls.gov





While you're there maybe have a look at the difference between official 'unemployment' which does NOT mean the number of people not employed, and 'labor force participation rate' which is a far more accurate 'unemployment' number.
That's a starting clue regarding my earlier conclusions (which I won't mention again!) just providing data points if anyone wants to do their own research.

If you need a little help getting started I've done a very cursory google search:









Pricing strategies during a recession - Economics Help


How does a recession/economic downturn influence how firms will set the price of goods and services? A recession is a period of negative economic growth - falling real incomes and rising unemployment. In a recession, consumers are likely to have lower income and be more sensitive to prices...




www.economicshelp.org








__





Boats take a hit during the recession






archive.jsonline.com












Consumer spending and U.S. employment from the 2007–2009 recession through 2022 : Monthly Labor Review: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics


Although employment related to consumer spending declined during the recent recession, consumer-related employment recovered by 2012 and is projected to support job growth through 2022.




www.bls.gov












How does consumer spending change during boom, recession, and recovery? : Beyond the Numbers: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics


The relative importances of items in the Consumer Price Index tell us how consumer purchases have changed over time.




www.bls.gov












Coronavirus: One of Florida's largest boat builders shutters as sales plunge amid COVID-19; 500 out of work


Some of the nation's largest boat builders, including Pursuit Boats in Fort Pierce, have temporarily stopped production during uncertain economic times.



eu.tcpalm.com








__





Realities of the Boat Sales Business in the Recession


» Realities of the Boat Sales Business in the Recession |




www.marinaappraisal.com












Luxury market rebounding


The luxury goods market is rebounding from the slump caused by the global recession. Global luxury goods industry sales are expected to grow 4% in 2010.




www.luxuo.com


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

Folks,

I don't see how it is fruitful to debate the potential impacts on boat prices due to the Covid-19 pandemic. Above both sides of this discussion have laid out their arguments and made their case. In buying any boat, we all assume certain facts to be true that lead to the selection of one boat or another, and even the timing for buying a boat. The basis of some of those assumed factors can easily debated and perhaps refuted based on the physics, or past experience. Here the debate is which of a broader range of contradictory information will ultimately influence whether the price of boats will go up or go down.

The arguments on both sides are pretty clear. On one side, it is pretty obvious that in any major recession, the prices of elective purchase items do tend to drop as disposable income and demand falls off. It may also be counterbalanced by the situation in the Netherlands where boat demand and availability may be different and retirement ages are younger.

That truth is counterbalanced by the fact that so far in this recession, the economic class that would normally buy sailboats has not suffered the hit that other economic classes experienced, that there is a bulge in the demographic that are retiring and buying boats, that in the last major recession the price and sales numbers for deluxe model boats, and older boats in good condition actually rose while the general market for boats dropped enormously, and that the supply of older boats has steadily been diminishing as older boats become economically beyond salvage and uninsurable. At this point, I doubt that any of us are in a position to unequivocally make a case for a future ending up totally being one side or the other of this argument. In fact, like the 2008 recession, it may prove to be some mix.

In the end, each of us choose the factors that we want emphasize in our boat buying decisions. The bet in this case is on whether the general trends in past recessions will apply or not. We all can have an opinion on this, but Rush is betting with his dollars on what he believes to be the case. If he bet wrong he will lose a few dollars and a lot of months of sailing time. If he bet right, then waiting might save him a few dollars and get him a better boat, albeit at the price of potentially losing another sailing season while he puts whatever boat he buys into safe sailing condition.

I suggest we dial back the discussion of future boat prices. For better or worse, the answer to that question will come in the spring.

Jeff


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Jeff_H said:


> I suggest we dial back the discussion of future boat prices. For better or worse, the answer to that question will come in the spring.
> 
> Jeff


Fair enough. Besides I'm not exactly making a stock market play here. 
I want to buy something and have found what I want to be more expensive than expected.
So I'm keeping an eye out for an especially good deal- which I may or may not find, and saving up in the meantime.

In any case the threads here have been tremendously useful and greatly accelerated my learning process, and honed me in on what boat attributes to look for like:

Good condition hull- no leaks, soft spots, osmosis, rotten bulkheads, keel issues.
Acceptability of fin keels.
Acceptability of spade rudders.
Length of the waterline, also in relation to length overall.
Big ticket items to look out for like engine, sails, and standing rigging.
Size of boat that's best balance of livability and price/maintenance.
SA/D and why a large overlapping (150%) genoa is not the perfect fit for a new single handed sailor.
The advantages of a fine entry.
And many other points.
Including the importance of being present for the survey, and advantages of buying locally.
And a short list of boats that I like and that are readily available in my local market including:
Dehler 
Contest 
Trintella
Beneteau First
Contessa 
Sweden

Who knows, maybe a great deal will pop up. 
In the mean time, I'm looking into some courses, preferably multi day where I can get experience living aboard and training from a professional- which was also recommended here in the forums.

So apologies again for some comments recently that may have taken things a bit off track.
And thanks again to everyone for the time and so many thoughtful and helpful responses!
I'll keep posted on the progress of my search and training and experience


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

Rush2112 said:


> So you want me to prove that luxury goods see the largest declines in demand during economic downturns?


No, I was asking you to back up your claims that this impacts the selling prices of the boats that you are interested in:


TakeFive said:


> Please share your historical data that proves your assertion about *boat prices*.


Your numerous links focused on "luxury items", and nothing about the specific boats that you are looking for (and really no hard data on boats at all). What many of us have been trying to tell you is that the boats that you are interested in (and it is a very selective group among hundreds of possibilities) may not follow your intuition and theories regarding selling price. Even in a down market, the supply of desirable boats in sail-away condition can be very low, and that reduces the impact on their selling prices.

I was shopping for my first sailboat during the great recession, and found that there was no evidence of any dip in prices for boats that I was looking for. Here is some analysis that I did at the time for one of the boats that I was considering (Catalina 320), based on actual sales prices that a broker friend pulled off of soldboats.com. My point is simple: Don't tout yourself as an expert at boat prices when you haven't even looked at boat prices.

Because my analysis included boats of a wide variety of model years and ages, and boat age has a huge effect on value when sold, I normalized all the data vs. NADA book value for each model year. As you can see, there was NO DOWNWARD TREND of boat values through the great recession for this model of boat.










Some raw data:



















I picked a few of these boats and looked up their original MSRP when new. The apparent decline in price of the used boats over time was not really a decline at all - the older boats simply had sold for lower prices when new. In other words, Catalina was increasing the prices of their new boats from 1993-2006. The newer boats were selling for higher prices when they were new, and the selling prices of all these used boats many years later were remarkably close to their original price when new. Boats of all ages were "holding their value quite well" - though boats are still a money-losing proposition because the maintenance, upgrades, and commissioning costs are not recouped when sold.

IMO, there are no "especially good deals" on boats. You may get what you pay for, and a naive buyer may get much less than he paid for if he (or his surveyor) fails to recognize serious flaws. Owning a boat costs a lot of money, and the initial purchase price is a pretty small piece of the total cost. So any attempts to "time the market" might save a few thousand dollars, but that will be overwhelmed by the risk you may take buying an apparent "bargain" that may have hidden flaws. Find the best boat you can, determine if the asking price is fair (and if not, it means the seller may not want to sell, but is probably listing it to make his spouse/SO happy), and make a fair offer. Otherwise, you don't really want a boat enough to take the risk of boat ownership.


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

TakeFive said:


> No, I was asking you to back up your claims that this impacts the selling prices of the boats that you are interested in:
> ....
> 
> IMO, there are no "especially good deals" on boats. You may get what you pay for, and a naive buyer may get much less than he paid for if he (or his surveyor) fails to recognize serious flaws. Owning a boat costs a lot of money, and the initial purchase price is a pretty small piece of the total cost. So any attempts to "time the market" might save a few thousand dollars, but that will be overwhelmed by the risk you may take buying an apparent "bargain" that may have hidden flaws. Find the best boat you can, determine if the asking price is fair (and if not, it means the seller may not want to sell, but is probably listing it at to make his spouse/SO happy), and make a fair offer. Otherwise, you don't really want a boat enough to take the risk of boat ownership.


I would posit that there is no "objective formula" to determine the price of a used boat. If there was there would be no haggling over the price with offers and counter offers. This is not unlike real estate which is often perception.. a meter in Manhattan is worth way way way more than one in Idaho.
Prices are what they end up being and what sellers are willing to accept for any number of reasons. An estate sale will likely be seen as a "bargain" because the estate is basically not moving on to another boat... among other reasons, This may lower the perceived price of that model used boat. And of course the equipment list makes a big difference despite many claiming it is hardly a factor.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

There are many boats out there right now that are incredible values, IMO. But they would cost a fortune to own. There is simply no free lunch in this sport. As someone already said, there is no good financial decision to buy a boat. None whatsoever. It has to be a desired lifestyle one is willing to spend on.


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

SanderO said:


> I would posit that there is no "objective formula" to determine the price of a used boat.


There never has been and objective formula, and never will be, as evidenced by the sellers' rejections of the offer prices shown in my plots above. By the way, both of those boats on which I placed offers eventually sold for less than I offered, and one of them was >$10,000 less than my offer. That seller (who had suffered a heart attack) clearly didn't want to sell, and held onto the boat (by maintaining its inflated asking price) for another year or so until he was apparently convinced he had to sell.

There are no guarantees, but it doesn't mean that one should ignore data and rely solely on hunches. But if it's purchase price that you're worried about, you should use data on purchase price, not use hunches on how prices might correlate with macroeconomic data.


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

Minnewaska said:


> There are many boats out there right now that are incredible values, IMO. But they would cost a fortune to own. There is simply no free lunch in this sport. As someone already said, there is no good financial decision to buy a boat. None whatsoever. It has to be a desired lifestyle one is willing to spend on.


You don't get into the boating lifestyle as a financial investment. It costs and the asset depreciates... some more than others. But there are other ways to look at "boating" as a cost/investment.
My boat IS my weekend home... or whenever I can get away. It also was my 24/7/365 home for 4 years and I had no other housing costs.
A weekend home in the NYC area would probably costs about $15,000 - 20,000 a year. Each year I use the boat as weekend home I do not spend that on a dirt place.
We also did a lot of "vacations" on the boat... instead of flying off to Europe or wherever. Vacations are spendy. Boat vacations are hardly more than normal ownership.
When I sell I will get a decent amount of money. No it will not be what I spent... the cost to but, insure, upgrade, repair, maintenance and mooring. Life has expenses... Unlike real estate boats don't typically appreciate... but rather depreciate.
It's part of the deal.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

TakeFive said:


> No, I was asking you to back up your claims that this impacts the selling prices of the boats that you are interested in:
> 
> Your numerous links focused on "luxury items", and nothing about the specific boats that you are looking for (and really no hard data on boats at all). What many of us have been trying to tell you is that the boats that you are interested in (and it is a very selective group among hundreds of possibilities) may not follow your intuition and theories regarding selling price. Even in a down market, the supply of desirable boats in sail-away condition can be very low, and that reduces the impact on their selling prices.
> 
> ...


I'm not going to respond to the abrasive comments about who or what I think I am, or what I really want, or what my internal drivers are, I just won't go there.

It would appear that you are to some degree venting. Likely over my views expressed about what the USA is doing or not doing for its people, and the expected global consequences of that. I've apologized for those comments multiple times, and although I believe they were entirely true, this is not in fact the appropriate place to express such views. Fine. Fair enough. And I've said I wouldn't do it again. But I won't abide demands to stand up for my character or motivations here- that's also inappropriate.

I will say this however on the topic- that I will stick with my examples of aggregated luxury goods data, including yachts, from the BLS over your more focused and anecdotal data for my purchase decision. It may not be broken down to the granular degree that you are saying that you require, but cumulatively the data and the economics of yachts losing value during economic downturns is literally a textbook example, and with the degree of expected coming economic calamity, I believe it will hold, and is good enough for me to delay my personal purchase decision.

You make a valid point that if a specific boat make and model is extremely popular, and in exceptional condition, it may not be affected quite as much, but with what's almost certainly coming down the pipeline, I wouldn't count on that factor to hold value this time around.

Again apologies if you were offended by prior comments.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

TakeFive said:


> There never has been, and never will be, as evidenced by the sellers' rejections of the offer prices shown in my plots above. By the way, both of those boats on which I placed offers eventually sold for less than I offered, and one of them was >$10,000 less than my offer. That seller (who had suffered a heart attack) clearly didn't want to sell, and held onto the boat (by maintaining its inflated asking price) for another year or so until he was apparently convinced he had to sell.
> 
> There are no guarantees, but it doesn't mean that one should ignore data and rely solely on hunches. But if it's purchase price that you're worried about, you should use data on purchase price, not use hunches on how prices might correlate with macroeconomic data.


Aggregated economic data on luxury goods, including yachts is not 'hunches' it's science.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Minnewaska said:


> There are many boats out there right now that are incredible values, IMO. But they would cost a fortune to own. There is simply no free lunch in this sport. As someone already said, there is no good financial decision to buy a boat. None whatsoever. It has to be a desired lifestyle one is willing to spend on.


On that we can agree 
I'm still going to minimize the immediate economic pain as much as possible.
I want a good boat, big enough to be livable, with the major items in good condition, at a good price.
And I'll deal with the upkeep as it comes.
But actually very much like purchasing a house or a stock, the entry point matters!


----------



## Ninefingers (Oct 15, 2009)

Best thing I read was that "Boats in good shape are underpriced and boats in bad shape are overpriced". More or less true.


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

Rush2112 said:


> ...It would appear that you are to some degree venting. Likely over my views expressed about what the USA is doing or not doing for its people, and the expected global consequences of that...


You clearly don't know me, and are making very wrong assumptions about my political leaning. I guess I've done too good a job at keeping my politics out of the discussion.

I wasn't venting. Actually, I was giving you an example of how you might be able to use data on boat prices to predict how those prices might be impacted by an economic downturn. I did that analysis 10 years ago to address very similar concerns that you have now. (One moral of that story - make friends with a boat broker. They have access to a lot of pricing data that the general public cannot get.) The results of that analysis were counter-intuitive and eye-opening for me. You might want to do a similar analysis on the boats that you're interested in to see if your hunches scientific theories are supported by past history. 

I purchased my current boat (my second sailboat) in June 2016. I specifically remember wondering whether I should make this purchase because of what I saw as a political calamity approaching in November 2016. I took a deep breath and decided to go ahead and embrace the YOLO mentality. The anticipated calamity came in November 2016, and has exceeded my greatest fears so far, but I'm sailing while some others are stuck with no place to go. I have no regrets.

I think your decision to do some overnight sailing courses is a very good one. You will learn a lot, and that will position you to know a lot more about what you want and whether you even enjoy spending extended time on a sailboat. When my wife and I did ASA 105/106 in Grenada in 2017, we also became good friends with our classmates on the boat. Hopefully you can find something like that while the world is still coping with COVID.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

I’m willing to bet the T5 is much closer to your assessment of the US response right now, so I think you’ve misread his pushback. 

Your research has been thorough, but you’ve pushed back at first on folks that clearly understand the subject matter better. I‘ve even defended you as newbie that deserves a break, but you got around to me too, when you didn’t like what I had to say. 

There is really nothing lost on our part, if you never buy a boat. If you hang around long enough, you’ll see the pattern follow, with another newbie: tons of questions, followed by ongoing reasons why they aren’t buying, even though the last reason was resolved. It’s happened many times before. No one should really care, we here to talk about boats, but they might feel they were wasting their personal time.

Let us know how your search is progressing.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

TakeFive said:


> You clearly don't know me, and are making very wrong assumptions about my political leaning. I guess I've done too good a job at keeping my politics out of the discussion.
> 
> I wasn't venting. Actually, I was giving you an example of how you might be able to use data on boat prices to predict how those prices might be impacted by an economic downturn. I did that analysis 10 years ago to address very similar concerns that you have now. (One moral of that story - make friends with a boat broker. They have access to a lot of pricing data that the general public cannot get.) The results of that analysis were counter-intuitive and eye-opening for me. You might want to do a similar analysis on the boats that you're interested in to see if your hunches scientific theories are supported by past history.
> 
> ...


Your plot of boat prices tracks pretty closely with my experience as well. During the years of the 2007-2008 melt down, I helped approximately 8-10 people learn to sail and roughly the same amount find and buy a boat, At that time I traced somewhere between a dozen and couple dozen different makes and models on a variety of boat listing locations, and was able to get access to prior sales for those makes and models that went through brokers. Your graph pretty much matches my recollection of what happened during this period in terms of clean and desirable models staying stable or even creeping up in price, while unknown or trashed models dropped considerably.

In that recession, one of the surprises was people who lost vacation homes or were literally homeless, buying boats as a cheap place to live on to wait out the crisis. They snapped up bigger boats that were not able to be sailed due to their condition. I will note that I am riding shotgun on a lot more deals this time than back then, and there are a whole lot fewer boats on the market, and even fewer in good condition at decent prices.

Jeff


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Just these past six months are evidence enough that recessions and boat prices don't directly connect. I think the price range the OP is considering could be the most insulated, from price decline. It's affordable by many and often approached with more heart than head. I'll bet used boats selling in the half million dollar range are what gets hurt the most in a typical recession. Go up one more level to the mega-yachts at multi millions and I think they could be insulated again. Most of those buyers don't lose their toys/showoff budget in a recession, their portfolios just decline temporarily. 

It's the same logic that follows this...... the lower end of the market pays cash, the mid range (half a million or more) often borrow a chunk of it, the multi million dollar boats pay cash again.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

TakeFive said:


> I wasn't venting. Actually, I was giving you an example of how you might be able to use data on boat prices to predict how those prices might be impacted by an economic downturn.


Fair enough. And apologies. I think I made a wrong take on your motivation.
I may be projecting some of my own disappointment and frustration at this point.
You've actually (like so many folks here!) been really super helpful in this whole great (and totally underestimated!) research project. So thanks for that.

I wanted to be actually on a boat by mid to late summer. It would do me such a world of good at this point.
See how lovely that worked out.
Oh well, I have found something to tide me over - as you mention the overnight sailing courses are probably a really good idea. I'll have to see how Covid factors into all of that. Hopefully its doable.

Perhaps a certification or two will be a good way to focus the energy until I find 'the right one'.

Regarding the economy, and boat pricing, I just see this one as something pretty different.
Get ready for this statement- I'm expecting with a fairly high degree of certainty the biggest inflation adjusted real economic collapse in the history of the world, which will only begin to unfold in the next 6 months to a year. And I've never made a projection like this before. 2008 I was pretty negative but nothing like this. Covid really will be chump change compared to the effects of certain economic decisions upon the global economy. That's pretty much unavoidable at this point, regardless of anybody's politics. That train has left the station.

Instead of being frustrated and disappointed, I should just focus on gratitude for the privileged position that I'm in, that I didn't really earn- my house cannot legally foreclose, my income and health care cannot legally be cut off, but I still feel sad, and a bit guilty about the degree to which so many people are going to suffer. And that weighs on me a bit. And I think that has made a few of my comments lately a little more abrasive than they should have been. So apologies again.

At least I have some ideas for training to keep my mind busy and focused in the mean time 
I'm not the smartest, or the hardest working, and I'm certainly not the quickest (anybody here can see that!) LOL, but I usually make up for it with tenacity.
I'll get that boat eventually ;-)
[/QUOTE]


----------



## bigdogandy (Jun 21, 2008)

Rush - as frustrating as the process seems to be, I commend you for the thorough research you're doing, and as always am amazed at the depth of experience and willingness of the members here to chime in and provide information and advice. I don't have any pertinent boat pricing trend info, or insight on what the economy or the global health outlook may be when summertime rolls around next year, but I did notice something that @TakeFive mentioned above (post #247) that struck a chord with me and I think is worthy of some reflection...none of us know what the future may hold, but if I were you I would be careful to avoid falling into the analysis paralysis syndrome and missing another sailing season because you weren't able to find a boat that perfectly fit all of your criteria.

I have an engineering and construction background, so when I was looking for a my next boat I agonized for about two years about a lot of the same kinds of things that you are, but ended up falling in love with a boat that didn't meet half of the items on my "must have" checklist. 12 years and countless beautiful sailing days, quiet anchorages, and an advanced education in boat maintenance and repair later I don't regret it one bit.

FWIW.


----------



## colemj (Jul 10, 2003)

Rush2112 said:


> I'm expecting with a fairly high degree of certainty the biggest inflation adjusted real economic collapse in the history of the world, which will only begin to unfold in the next 6 months to a year.


Sounds like you are all set to afford the boat of your dreams - a small investment in the right area will have you rolling in dough soon if your convictions are correct.

Mark


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

“The Stock Market Has Predicted Nine Of The Past Five Recessions”

-Paul Samuelson


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

bigdogandy said:


> Rush - as frustrating as the process seems to be, I commend you for the thorough research you're doing, and as always am amazed at the depth of experience and willingness of the members here to chime in and provide information and advice. I don't have any pertinent boat pricing trend info, or insight on what the economy or the global health outlook may be when summertime rolls around next year, but I did notice something that @TakeFive mentioned above (post #247) that struck a chord with me and I think is worthy of some reflection...none of us know what the future may hold, but if I were you I would be careful to avoid falling into the analysis paralysis syndrome and missing another sailing season because you weren't able to find a boat that perfectly fit all of your criteria.
> 
> I have an engineering and construction background, so when I was looking for a my next boat I agonized for about two years about a lot of the same kinds of things that you are, but ended up falling in love with a boat that didn't meet half of the items on my "must have" checklist. 12 years and countless beautiful sailing days, quiet anchorages, and an advanced education in boat maintenance and repair later I don't regret it one bit.
> 
> FWIW.


I'm actually pretty flexible on the boat itself. I just don't want to buy a money pit that needs immediate and massive feeding. With a good hull, sails, standing rigging, and engine, at least a good portion of the big ticket items will be covered. Then it just has to be big enough to live on and I'm pretty much good to go. I consider performance a bonus really, though a longer waterline would be nice. If it had an open v-birth and aft heads, with some white in the interior, especially headliner- what a major bonus!


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

colemj said:


> Sounds like you are all set to afford the boat of your dreams - a small investment in the right area will have you rolling in dough soon if your convictions are correct.
> 
> Mark


Wouldn't it be wonderful if it was that easy.
I wouldn't go shorting the stock market though! The PPT and the Fed have that one covered to infinity and beyond.



TakeFive said:


> "The Stock Market Has Predicted Nine Of The Past Five Recessions"
> 
> -Paul Samuelson


LOL, yeah the stock market has nothing to do with reality anymore.
In fact this time around its already the opposite, the divergence of wall street and main street has never been bigger.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

Rush:
Here's are a few more options in the Netherlands for you. Go out sniff the boats. 
My favorite is this Dehler- Well built and sails well. This one needs some clean up but it looks like its mostly elbow grease rather than parts and materials. She even has a Herreshoff interior.





Boats for Sale - YachtWorld


Find new or used boats for sale in your area & across the world on YachtWorld. Offering the best selection of boats to choose from.




www.yachtworld.co.uk





There seems to be a lot of boats at reasonable prices on this webpage. This Dehler looks like a possible candidate. Dehler Duetta 94 from 1986 for sale at Botentekoop.NL.

This X-boat is well built and sails well. It has a simple interior that should be easy to maintain. The Dacron #3 should be a good sail for you to learn on. The only knock is that the hull form is not great in a chop. 1984 X-Yachts 102 Sail New and Used Boats for Sale - www.yachtworld.co.uk

These boat sail well and have a lot of space and nice details Beneteau First 345 from 1984 for sale at Botentekoop.NL.

This is a wooden boat but Waarschips are well engineered and generally are really good boats. This looks like she is in good shape https://www.botentekoop.com/sailing-yachts/probably-900+/9d0fb9ff-3257-4595-b7d1-dc14eeef181c

Then there is this Baltic. This is C&C design built by Baltic. Baltic was a excellent quality builder https://www.yachtworld.co.uk/boats/1978/baltic-33-3690178/

Then again, if it was me looking for a boat (rather than you), I would snap this one up. https://www.botentekoop.com/sailing-yachts/jeanneau-jod-35/f3fbc7cf-c216-4540-95e9-69818063229f Depending on how the election goes I might end up in the EU and would go look at it,

Cheers,
Jeff.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Jeff_H said:


> Rush:
> Here's are a few more options in the Netherlands for you. Go out sniff the boats.
> My favorite is this Dehler- Well built and sails well. This one needs some clean up but it looks like its mostly elbow grease rather than parts and materials. She even has a Herreshoff interior.
> 
> ...


Looks like a pretty good selection of boats. I really like the Dehler and the Beneteau, both have nice space and layouts, white headliners, and aft heads, fantastic.
And they're priced well, especially the 36ft Beneteau for only 25 grand!
The Beneteaus are really starting to grow on me, especially as a value proposition, and with all the design features into which we've put so much discussion.
And as long as I don't go all Erik Aanderaa across the _middle_ of The North sea, and watch the weather carefully, it shouldn't be a problem.

The problem however with these is the future maintenance liability which could be big gotchas.
None have new engine, sails, or standing rigging (let alone all three!) and that's basically my big ticket short list (after good hull of course). So I could in short order be faced with 20 grand of maintenance, making it a 45 grand boat- which brings me back to the savings plan. If I save, and just wait a bit, I can probably get a boat with all those things already done for 35-40, or perhaps even less, something of which following current affairs I become more and more confident on a daily basis.

The alternative that still fits my current budget is something like this:





Boats for sale - YachtWorld


Find new or used boats for sale in your area & across the world on YachtWorld. Offering the best selection of boats to choose from.




www.yachtworld.com





New standing rigging, sails and engine. Perfect!
Only instead of a 29 foot waterline I get 25 and change, and instead of a wonderful spacious cabin layout I get something relatively tiny.
Not to mention the boat is quite a bit older, and by the waterline to LOA (.73) and general appearance it falls squarely into the IOR category.

Or something like this:





Holman Northney 34 boats for sale - YachtWorld


Find Holman Northney 34 boats for sale in your area & across the world on YachtWorld. Offering the best selection of Holman boats to choose from.




www.yachtworld.com





Which has a new engine and some big ticket items already covered, but falls into the same general IOR design category as the Hustler.

These are perfectly typical of my options at this price point. It's either my big ticket items covered in a full keel, 150% overlapping genoa, 1970s IOR boat or the wonderful livable interior, long waterline more modern boat design, which has little to none of the big ticket items covered. I think you and others said it best early on- it's all a trade off!

So probably the most prudent thing for now is to save up a bit more, bide my time with a few courses and maybe a certificate, and wait to see what fallout inevitably comes, and what silver linings can be found a bit down the road


----------



## mstern (May 26, 2002)

Rush: those boats, especially the Dehler, are worth taking a look at. Remember, just because an engine is older doesn't mean it's not in great shape. I'm not the only one here that has seen 5 year old diesels that have tons of problems, and thirty year old diesels that run flawlessly and will continue to do so for the indefinite future. And while I agree that new standing rigging can be an expensive proposition, new sails are not a safety item. You can get away with older sails while you learn. If nothing else, you can practice your boat inspection skills.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

mstern said:


> Rush: those boats, especially the Dehler, are worth taking a look at. Remember, just because an engine is older doesn't mean it's not in great shape. I'm not the only one here that has seen 5 year old diesels that have tons of problems, and thirty year old diesels that run flawlessly and will continue to do so for the indefinite future. And while I agree that new standing rigging can be an expensive proposition, new sails are not a safety item. You can get away with older sails while you learn. If nothing else, you can practice your boat inspection skills.


Hmm, good points. It wouldn't hurt to go see.
Just going to see that Contest had me feeling like a kid on Christmas morning- I definitely enjoyed the experience!

Edit: Though I'm still highly favorable to a new engine ;-)


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

Rush2112 said:


> Hmm, good points. It wouldn't hurt to go see.
> Just going to see that Contest had me feeling like a kid on Christmas morning- I definitely enjoyed the experience!
> 
> Edit: Though I'm still highly favorable to a new engine ;-)


Go see as many boats as you can... get on, under and inside... The more the better. Keep saving and by seeing and researching you will be a more informed buyer with a proper budget for the right boat.

My Volvo MD17D is 35 years old... the little primer fuel pump leaked and had to be replaced. This had no impact on running,,, only a small diesel leak,,YUCK. The engine started on the first key turn after sitting unused for 1 year (I had surgery and took a pass on sailing in 2018), This engine could probably use an overhaul... rings and so on.. but it runs well enough and has 5,300 hrs. You would probably not want to take a boat with an engine like mine. But if the rest of your wants are ticked off... maybe get a mechanic to give you an estimate on an overhaul of the engine. You often don't know when something will fail.

Don't expect to have no projects with a used boat. Old sails may be OK for short term until you can replace them., A rig with cracked strands would be more concerning and need more immediate attention,


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

You are way over obsessing on the age of the engine. My boat has a 35 year old Yanmar 3gm30F engine, My annual costs are an oil and filter change and a new water pump impeller. (around $30 total) Every 2-3 years I replace belts and coolant. Last year, I was not able to do the work myself since I was out of town. so I had a mechanic replace the shaft, shaft seal, hub, and cutlass bearing, that was a couple $1,000. 8 years ago, I pulled out the engine and replaced the main seal and damper, a few hoses, and high pressure oil line. I did the work myself so that was less than $200 in parts. A couple years before that had a mechanic do the front seal and freshwater pump since I did not have the puller and that was around $350-400. At some point in the next couple years I plan to pull the injectors and get them redone, which looks like a $300-400 line item.

Its similar with rigging and sails.. They have a finite lifespan. You need to budget for that lifespan a certain amount a year. Every 2-3 years you will have an expensive maintenance year. On a 32-35 foot boat that could be a $3,000- 4000 year. In between you might have a $400-500 in maintenance year. If you figure that you will spend a total of around $5,000 every three years on maintenance, and so put aside $1600 each year for maintenance then its not such a big hit. Of course in addition to that there will be storage fees, insurance, bottom jobs, and so on to be budgeted for. You have projected a long list of upgrades, if you learn to sail smarter, you may chose to skip many of these, but they can be spread out over time, 

There is no doubt that boats cost money to own. It is the price of admission if you plan to keep your boat in decent shape.

But there is no point in walking away from perfectly good boats or buying a crummy design because you have fears about costs that you are not likely to incur with an older engine. Marine diesels are incredibly reliable and if taken care of will last a very long time. I don't know what you mechanical skills are like, but if you don't know about engines its pretty cheap and easy to take a rudimentary diesel course and do most of your own work. Similarly you can learn to do splicing and minor sail repair and bring down the cost of doing that. The cost of a spool of line enough to every bit of running rigging on my boat would cost around $500 assuming I did all the splices and reused the existing hardware. A single professionally spliced main halyard for my boat using the existing hardware is over $300. So if you learn to do the work yourself, there are huge savings and as you learn to do things for yourself you are in a position to ,maintain your boat increasingly cheaply.

Jeff


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Jeff_H said:


> You are way over obsessing on the age of the engine. My boat has a 35 year old engine, My annual costs are an oil and filter change and a new water pump impeller. (around $30 total) Every 2-3 years I replace belts and coolant. Last year, I was not able to do the work myself since I was out of town. so I had a mechanic replace the shaft, shaft seal, hub, and cutlass bearing, that was a couple $1,000. 8 years ago, I pulled out the engine and replaced the main seal and damper, a few hoses, and high pressure oil line. I did the work myself but that was less than $200 in parts. A couple years before that had a mechanic do the front seal and freshwater pump since I did not have the puller and that was around $350-400. At some point in the next couple years I plan to pull the injectors and get them redone, which looks like a $300-400 line item.
> 
> Its similar with rigging and sails.. They have a finite lifespan. You need to budget for that lifespan a certain amount a year. Every 2-3 years you will have an expensive maintenance year. On a 32-35 foot boat that could be a $3,000- 4000 year. In between you might have a $400-500 in maintenance year. If you figure that you will spend a total of around $5,000 every three years on maintenance, and so put aside $1600 each year for maintenance then its not such a big hit. Of course in addition to that there will be storage fees, insurance, bottom jobs, and so on to be budgeted for. You have projected a long list of upgrades, if you learn to sail smarter, you may chose to skip many of these, but they can be spread out over time,
> 
> ...


The thing with engines as I see it, is that they are more important to novice sailors who are more likely to need one to get themselves out of predicaments which their poor sailing skills either got them into, or aren't good enough to get them out of, not to mention the need to run from weather, which is even more important now that I'm settling for coastal cruisers over blue water boats.

As far as condition goes, I get it, I really do, a newer engine could be trashed and an old engine could have been well cared for. But not knowing which, a new engine does statistically lessen the odds of a failure. Just like there are smokers in great shape and non smokers who eat McDonalds every meal. If a person IDs as a smoker, their insurance premiums will be higher. And that's reasonable. Likewise I place a premium on a new engine.

It's also a confidence thing. I see a new engine in ads and it increases my confidence in the boat. Not just by having it, but also (even more so!) the willingness it shows that the owner is willing to pay to care for the boat, something which as I've mentioned previously is in notably short supply in The Netherlands.

Most motorcycles and cars never get oil changes. Ever. Unless its new and proof of oil change will affect warranty, you can be all but guaranteed it will never happen. I know a guy who works in a scooter shop, he says almost every time they get a used scooter on trade in, and fix it up to sell all they have to do is clean the air filter, which even in a ten year old scooter has never been cleaned. Ever. But everything is kept shiny and clean on the outside, and sold 'zo goed als nieuw' as good as new. The appaling level of maintenance of mechanical goods in this country is on another level. Almost unbelievable to American or Canadian sensibilities. A new engine is a good sign indeed!

Long story short, I place a high value on a new engine. It's the most expensive maintenance item on a 40 year old boat, and I much prefer if it's done.


----------



## bigdogandy (Jun 21, 2008)

Rush2112 said:


> The thing with engines as I see it, is that they are more important to novice sailors who are more likely to need one to get themselves out of predicaments which their poor sailing skills either got them into, or aren't good enough to get them out of, not to mention the need to run from weather, which is even more important now that I'm settling for coastal cruisers over blue water boats.
> 
> As far as condition goes, I get it, I really do, a newer engine could be trashed and an old engine could have been well cared for. But not knowing which, a new engine does statistically lessen the odds of a failure. Just like there are smokers in great shape and non smokers who eat McDonalds every meal. If a person IDs as a smoker, their insurance premiums will be higher. And that's reasonable. Likewise I place a premium on a new engine.
> 
> ...


Hmmmm........didn't realize there was such a different mindest towards maintenance and upkeep there! Could it also be, then, that if a boat has a new engine its because the previous owner neglected the old one so badly it blew up and he had to replace it, and that same lack of maintenance is going to reflect in other aspects of the vessel that just haven't revealed themselves yet?


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

What is a new engine? Defined only by hours, or calendar too? A "new engine" doesn't mean all the accessories, fuel and raw water hoses, engine mounts, transmission, damper plate, drive train, etc, are new. It also doesn't mean it was installed well and has proven itself, or was broken in properly. Just food for thought.


----------



## bigdogandy (Jun 21, 2008)

Minnewaska said:


> What is a new engine? Defined only by hours, or calendar too? A "new engine" doesn't mean all the accessories, fuel and raw water hoses, engine mounts, transmission, damper plate, drive train, etc, are new. It also doesn't mean it was installed well and has proven itself, or was broken in properly. Just food for thought.


Good point....a "new" engine with say 1,000 hours or so but crappy maintenance may not be as reliable as an older engine that had been well kept.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

bigdogandy said:


> Hmmmm........didn't realize there was such a different mindest towards maintenance and upkeep there! Could it also be, then, that if a boat has a new engine its because the previous owner neglected the old one so badly it blew up and he had to replace it, and that same lack of maintenance is going to reflect in other aspects of the vessel that just haven't revealed themselves yet?


Then they would get an 'overhaul' or top end rebuild, and do the minimum required to get it running to sell.
They wouldn't drop the full price for a new engine in that scenario.

And what I do think you can conclude is that a new engine should last a while, even under local standards of care, or lack thereof, especially if they are as tough as people claim. 
In any case odds are better with a new engine than an old one.

Based on the posts saying you can make older sails last a bit longer, and it's not really a safety issue, I'll drop that one from the criteria list and put it into the rest of the 'nice to haves' list, in the interest of widening the net.

That leaves no hull issues, new standing rigging, and new engine as criteria.
With the longest waterline and most livable interior possible as high priorities.
Jeff found a few boats that I really like, very much, now if a few of those can show up with a few big ticket maintenance items checked off...

I still estimate prices are going to make this a lot more possible a few months down the road.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Minnewaska said:


> What is a new engine? Defined only by hours, or calendar too? A "new engine" doesn't mean all the accessories, fuel and raw water hoses, engine mounts, transmission, damper plate, drive train, etc, are new.  It also doesn't mean it was installed well and has proven itself, or was broken in properly. Just food for thought.


The local shop highly recommended a new transmission as well. He cited the steepness of local waves, and how a boats back end can spend a moment in the air going down the other side, when the engine revs, this stresses the transmission and is a common problem here.
I'll add the other items to the list to ask about if the engine was changed.
I know a proper break in is also important so that's good to ask about as well.

Edit: Hours and Calendar.
I prefer an engine less than 10 years old and 1000 hours. Even if it was not well cared for, I should be able to nurse it along for another decade.

Obviously one year 1000 hours or 10 years 100 hours may be red flags. 1 hour per week is 52 hours per year, enough to keep most engines from falling apart, seals drying out etc I should think.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

bigdogandy said:


> Good point....a "new" engine with say 1,000 hours or so but crappy maintenance may not be as reliable as an older engine that had been well kept.


And a smoker may live longer than a non smoker.
Without any other information, guess who I'd bet on?


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Rush2112 said:


> He cited the steepness of local waves, and how a boats back end can spend a moment in the air going down the other side, when the engine revs, this stresses the transmission and is a common problem here.


I think it's more burying the bow into the oncoming steep waves, that bogs the engine and stresses the transmission. BTDT



Rush2112 said:


> I prefer an engine less than 10 years old and 1000 hours.


Not exactly new, but terrific, if you can find it. I think what I'm realizing is you don't mean new, rather you mean not-original, on the age boats you are researching. Still, I think an engine survey is far more imporant.



Rush2112 said:


> And a smoker may live longer than a non smoker.
> Without any other information, guess who I'd bet on?


Neither based on solely that data. I'd ask a doctor who was the better bet, in the moment, since there can be so many more variables. Just like you should ask an engine surveyor.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Minnewaska said:


> I think it's more burying the bow into the oncoming steep waves, that bogs the engine and stresses the transmission. BTDT


His argument was about the engine spinning up suddenly. He was the shop foreman. In any case transmissions also take a lot of wear around here, apparently.



Minnewaska said:


> Not exactly new, but terrific, if you can find it. I think what I'm realizing is you don't mean new, rather you mean not-original, on the age boats you are researching. Still, I think an engine survey is far more imporant.
> 
> Neither based on solely that data. I'd ask a doctor who was the better bet, in the moment, since there can be so many more variables. Just like you should ask an engine surveyor.


Geez, there's just no limit to the metaphors that you won't just keep trying to shoot down.
I literally said "Without any other information, guess who I'd bet on?" as in all other things being equal.

Like it's hard to get my point that a new less than 10 year old engine will likely last far longer than a 40 year old one.
They call it 'new' in the ads, yes a 'replacement' if that works better for you. A replacement engine that was bought new and put in the boat after the old original engine was removed.

I feel like this part of the conversation is just getting a little unnecessarily cumbersome.


----------



## Arcb (Aug 13, 2016)

Engine over rev can be a concern on power boats. Good power boat operators will haul back on the sticks when the boat crests a wave just before it goes airborne. Failure to do so will lead to engine "barking" (it sounds like a dog barking). 

It generally isn't a major concern on sailboats, at least as far as I know. The exception would be on sailboats with a transom mounted outboard.


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

First, I think you're at an overly impressionable stage where you're obsessing on individual pieces of advice, and overly influenced by the advice that agrees with your cherished beliefs. You are going to get conflicting advice. Some of it will be irrelevant because it's from people who use their boats differently than you do, or have very different boats from what you'll be getting. Some of it is simple "dockside BS", since sailors often like to tell about the most outrageous things they've heard about. Your own personal experience is the best tool to sift through the conflicts. Without that experience, you should tread very carefully.

Frankly, I think your engine age limitation is too restrictive, and your concerns overblown. Many repowers are not "new", although the sellers may portray them that way. They often are rebuilds, of either the original motor, or someone who swapped in a rebuilt model of the same engine in exchange for his old one (which the shop proceeds to rebuild for the next sucker customer). The latter is common for mid-season failures because it results in the least amount of lost sailing time.

Putting in a brand new engine can lead to a number of other problems, since the original model is probably no longer available, and the new model's mounting points, cable lengths, transmission specs, alignment of strut, optimum propeller specs, exhaust elbow design, etc., can all change. For the buyer, there's the question of whether these things were done right, or did the previous owner run into unanticipated problems and decide to cut his losses because he's selling? Maybe the motor is fine, but the prop is a poor match for the new motor so it lugs. You might or might not discover this in survey, but boy, that new motor sure looks shiny!

I would take engine age off your list and hire a mechanic to check out whatever motor your selected boat has. Hopefully, there are written records of service so you can verify that it has been maintained well. Although, I do all my oil, filter, coolant, impeller, belt, and hose changes myself, as well as replacing the raw water and freshwater pumps and descaling my heat exchanger myself too. So I don't have records of a shop doing it, but any mechanic would be able to tell it's in pretty good shape. Of course, it has less than 800 hours on it, so you might love it even if I had abused it.


----------



## SchockT (May 21, 2012)

As much as it would be nice to get a boat with a newer engine, it may unduly limit your options. You could pass up a great boat with a perfectly serviceable original engine. Diesel engines are simple. If there is good compression and fuel they will run. They are workhorses that will run for many thousands of hours.

When looking at boats with old engines I think a more important consideration is whether it is raw water or fresh water cooled. Back in the era of boats you are looking at raw water cooled engines were quite common. As they get old having seawater in all of their passages starts to take it's toll and they start to get corroded and blocked with salt, calcium and the remains of tiny seal life. If the engine is fresh water cooled the engine passages should stay in good condition. If the raw water heat exchanger gets corroded or blocked it is a much simpler fix.

Certainly an old engine will need more attention and care, but that is the same with everything else on an old boat. 

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

TakeFive said:


> First, I think you're at an overly impressionable stage where you're obsessing on individual pieces of advice, and overly influenced by the advice that agrees with your cherished beliefs. You are going to get conflicting advice. Some of it will be irrelevant because it's from people who use their boats differently than you do, or have very different boats from what you'll be getting. Some of it is simple "dockside BS", since sailors often like to tell about the most outrageous things they've heard about. Your own personal experience is the best tool to sift through the conflicts. Without that experience, you should tread very carefully.
> 
> Frankly, I think your engine age limitation is too restrictive, and your concerns overblown. Many repowers are not "new", although the sellers may portray them that way. They often are rebuilds, of either the original motor, or someone who swapped in a rebuilt model of the same engine in exchange for his old one (which the shop proceeds to rebuild for the next sucker customer). The latter is common for mid-season failures because it results in the least amount of lost sailing time.
> 
> ...


Well maybe I am just 'overly impressionable' and totally uninformed and blindly following 'cherished' beliefs (cough nothing dismissive there!) or maybe I have actually heard from a number of very experienced people that a new engine should be high on the priority list for a cruiser, especially a second hand model pushing 40 years old as statistically many are reaching the end of their useful lives.

Rarely is the engine literally brand new, usually it has been replaced at least a few years ago, implying that any seating and alignment issues should be well sorted by now, especially if the rest of the boat is in good condition and well cared for, it would imply this has as well.

And it's actually not exactly rare that the original engine has been replaced. At least a dozen or so boats that I have considered so far have had replaced engines. They say 'new' so I'll take them at their word if they say so until receipts are verified. Most say 'overhauled' or 'rebuilt' if that is indeed the case.

It's also quite common I find that boats with new engines have recent sails and standing rigging, and other work done as well. Where those that have the original engine, especially with 'unknown' hours, very often the word new is not mentioned in their ad at all. There appear to be those who take care of their boats, generally speaking, and those who milk every bit of life out of it before selling. Those who put new engines, seem to fall more often than not into the prior category.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

SchockT said:


> As much as it would be nice to get a boat with a newer engine, it may unduly limit your options. You could pass up a great boat with a perfectly serviceable original engine. Diesel engines are simple. If there is good compression and fuel they will run. They are workhorses that will run for many thousands of hours.
> 
> When looking at boats with old engines I think a more important consideration is whether it is raw water or fresh water cooled. Back in the era of boats you are looking at raw water cooled engines were quite common. As they get old having seawater in all of their passages starts to take it's toll and they start to get corroded and blocked with salt, calcium and the remains of tiny seal life. If the engine is fresh water cooled the engine passages should stay in good condition. If the raw water heat exchanger gets corroded or blocked it is a much simpler fix.
> 
> ...


I think that almost all of the 40 year old boats that I've seen have been raw water cooled. I have seen mention of fresh water cooling and heat exchangers, but it is less common I believe. It's hard to tell. Usually the heat exchangers are only mentioned if they've done work on them. Though I will add it to my list of questions thanks.

Really I would prefer to put a brand new engine, standing rigging, and sails on it myself just for peace of mind, and to know I should have years of sailing ahead with only 'normal' maintenance items, but it's just not economically feasible.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Remember this boat? New engine, sails, standing rigging, solar, electronics, batteries, AP, bowthruster. This is common I find. That if the engine is replaced, the rest of the boat is well sorted. It sold for 27K. Not exactly common, but I've seen a number of these come and go, so they're not completely rare either.


----------



## SchockT (May 21, 2012)

Rush2112 said:


> I think that almost all of the 40 year old boats that I've seen have been raw water cooled. I have seen mention of fresh water cooling and heat exchangers, but it is less common I believe. It's hard to tell. Usually the heat exchangers are only mentioned if they've done work on them. Though I will add it to my list of questions thanks.
> 
> Really I would prefer to put a brand new engine, standing rigging, and sails on it myself just for peace of mind, and to know I should have years of sailing ahead with only 'normal' maintenance items, but it's just not economically feasible.


I totally understand where you are coming from. After 16 years tinkering and maintaining an old engine, and doing the occasional engine repair while on vacation we decided to upgrade. It is certainly nice to have newer everything, but that luxury does not come cheap I can assure you!

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk


----------



## TakeFive (Oct 22, 2009)

I think I'd take a freshwater cooled engine with 4000 hours over a seawater cooled engine with 1000 hours anytime (subject to inspection, of course). In fact, I don't think I'd consider a seawater cooled inboard under any circumstances. If that's what you're considering, I can see why you're worried. Maybe your criterion should be over the type of cooling rather than the age of the motor.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Rush2112 said:


> His argument was about the engine spinning up suddenly. He was the shop foreman. In any case transmissions also take a lot of wear around here, apparently.


Imagine what it would take to air an inboard prop on a displacement hull sailboat. The rudder is going to be airborne too. Cresting tall, steep seas, which would likely be caused by high wind, with no rudder. I bet one would try really hard not to let that happen again. 



> Geez, there's just no limit to the metaphors that you won't just keep trying to shoot down.


Are you talking about the smoking metaphor and are you saying you only want feedback that agrees with you? The intended helpful feedback I was trying to give you is that you're filtering boat engines the wrong way on too limited data. The best way to identify value and reliability is with a pro, not with artificial lines in the sand.



> Like it's hard to get my point that a new less than 10 year old engine will likely last far longer than a 40 year old one.


I thought I specifically acknowledged your point. You aren't really saying new, you're saying it is not the original 40 year old engine. I agree that makes more sense. I do not agree, however, that setting a rigid number of hours or years is the best way to find a good boat in this price range. Yes, a new*er* engine is likely better than an original, all other things being equal. I'd just leave it at that and not set an arbitrary bar of years and hours. Please don't kid yourself that what sellers and brokers call new won't surprise you. Hire a pro to examine the engine, as it's very important to you, but focus on the big picture.

The advice you're getting, from many above, is trying to help you get into a reliable boat for your budget and desired LOA/capabilities. I truly hope you experience the joy of finding exactly what you're looking for. However, you could miss a lot of great boats, looking for a unicorn too.

Good luck.


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

Rush...
What are the things you can change in any boat without lots of difficulty? with some difficulty? Everything will be spendy.
A re power is spendy.
a working engine may be repairable
old sails work
New sails can easily be added
Rigging can be done by you... measure, order and replace one wire at a time.
Plumbing is largely separate bits and can be fixed one bit at a time in many cases.
Electronics s largely separate bits and can be fixed one bit at a time in many cases.
Electrics is largely separate bits and can be fixed one bit at a time in many cases
Anchoring is largely separate bits and can be fixed one bit at a time in many cases..

You're not going to change:
the hull
the mast & boom
the bulkheads
the steering
the rudder
the keel

You can change cockpit canvas... cushions, bimini and dodger, upholstery fabric

Engine can be repaired or replaced...


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

SanderO said:


> Rush...
> What are the things you can change in any boat without lots of difficulty? with some difficulty? Everything will be spendy.
> A re power is spendy.
> a working engine may be repairable
> ...


Well that actually does fall in line with my priority list:
1. Hull, keel, steering system.
2. Engine.
3. Standing rigging and sails.

Although I have to say I'll take your advice and de prioritize the sails.
The rigging I'll keep as a high priority just because insurance companies here are known to challenge claims when rigging is old, though they have no problem taking your money until that event happens!

The fewer the criteria the wider the net, and a lot of this maintenance stuff you mention sounds pretty doable.
I am reasonably 'handy' I've done a fair amount of work on cars and houses- though at my age I really prefer not to anymore. Smaller projects on a boat will be OK. Though I doubt I'll go up the mast for anything unless its absolutely required.

A good condition hull, with a decently performing shape and no steering or keel issues is definitely number one.
And I think I've got a pretty good short list of boats that are readily available in this area so I should have a fairly regular supply of options to consider.

The engine is then the most common biggest ticket item to face.
It's also the single item that the most people I've seen have said they had gotchas with. And there's no shortage of distance cruisers out there recommending a new engine for an old boat as a 'must have'. Many have gotten stranded in very inconvenient or expensive places and had the overall bill be multiples higher than if they'd just replaced it at home before leaving.

Even Eric Aanderaa got taken on this one- inspected it well, thought he had a good maintained one, then with Norwegian taxes ended up with a 20 grand gotcha when his engine blew up. White smoke, water inside, bottom and top end completely blown. And what were the symptoms? Nothing. It just suddenly happened. And he himself touted how lucky he was (indeed!) that he was only a few miles from his home port and heading in when it happened. So it's not like even an expert can give a high degree of certainty on a 40 year old engine.

And this story is not rare at all.

What is rare, and I'll say extremely rare from what I've gathered, is an actually new say Volvo or Yanmar engine less than ten years old doing the same. There are hedges that are iffy and there are hedges that really work. A new engine provides a high degree of certainty. Sure it's going to cost me, I get that. And that cost is going to be fairly painful relative to my overall budget, I get that too. But I think that everybody has certain personal preferences, for whatever reason that give them a greater feeling of comfort. A new engine just happens to be mine 

And I don't mean to belabor this point, but the direction things are almost certainly headed with the economy, I'm expecting some pretty fantastic deals coming down the pipeline in the not so very distant future. So unless I stumble on a 'unicorn' I think I'll hold off for that ;-)

In the mean time I'll see if I can persue some training, experience, and possibly certification.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

OK this may seem a little bit radical at this point, and after all this discussion, but after a step back for a little while, and a fair amount of meditation on the subject, I've decided to get a 'starter boat'. Smaller, cheaper, easier to maintain, and I'll keep my place for now, and take all of the 'live aboard' pressure off. I feel after some consideration that this is where I went too far, and over-complicated things. A long distance live aboard cruiser requires a whole another set of considerations and expenses, and without real experience sailing, I'm just not qualified to make those decisions yet. The amount of stress that I've suffered as a result of this 'requirement' to live aboard should have been a clue that I was on the wrong track.

Several people suggested repeatedly that I just get something and sail the heck out of it, learn where my real preferences really are, and then make the big decision on boat number two. Buying and selling boats can be a pain in the neck, and be costly as well and I was trying to short cut that by hitting a home run on my first boat. I'm taking that pressure off now, and shifting my search to different priorities.

New priorities:
1) Get out sailing ASAP!
2) Find something relatively simple, cheaper, and smaller to learn on.
3) Something with basic facilities, galley, heads, a settee to sleep on and see if I can even sleep on a boat! Perhaps ideal for an overnight or weekend but not necessarily big enough to actually live on.
4) Regarding engines I decided to settle on the prevailing advice of 'indirect' cooling. And a shop manual if things go wrong ;-)

OK, so here goes, round 2!


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

OK so I dropped my budget down, way down, to 10K, and I was surprised that I actually liked what I found!
Both of these have swapped out engines about 20 years old, with indirect cooling. Both have fin keels with skeg hung rudders. Both are about 30 feet.

Dufour Arpege from 1968 for sale at Botentekoop.NL.
More pics of the Dufour:
Dufour Arpege pics

Ohlson Ohlson 8.8 from 1975 for sale on Botentekoop.NL.

I was surprised to find the Dufour was manufactured for 10 years and over 1500 were made. And dang this thing looks clean! That engine looks like new, and the interior and exterior look better than many boats I looked at 20 years newer. Plus I don't know, something about it, I just kind of like it 

The Ohlson has a few features I like, for example the added on hand rails around the dodger look very nice to have, and the arch in back could be added to with a bimini, radar, solar or wind generator eventually. It also appears to have a more modern shape than the Dufour. But I just can't get over the apparent condition of the Dufour!


Price9500​8900​Year1968​1975​MakeDufourOhlsonModelArpege8.8​Length30​28.87​LWL22​23.95​LOA/LWL0.73​0.83​Beam9.92​9.35​Displacement7700​7937​Ballast3050​3086​SA/D15.72​14.28​Bal/Disp39.61​38.88​KeelFin (short with bulb)Fin with bulbRudderSkeg hungSmall SkegVertical (m)12.3​12​Draft4.6​5.2​

I'm really curious what you guys think.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Engines compared:

EngineSole Mini 26, 25hp, 2003, indirect, 480 hours, max speed 8 knots, 3l/hrNanni 2.50 He, 14hp, 1999, unknown hours, 1l/hr


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

Why not join a sailing club? There is one local to us which as a fleet of boats of all sizes! Find a club like that near you. Learn on club boats....about boats . sail with others... and you'll know better what works for you


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

SanderO said:


> Why not join a sailing club? There is one local to us which as a fleet of boats of all sizes! Find a club like that near you. Learn on club boats....about boats . sail with others... and you'll know better what works for you


That's not a bad idea. But I have to say I'm maybe a tiny bit paranoid with the whole flu thing going around. 
Then again, I have to get some actual training at some point. I was actually considering hiring a 'captain' for a day on my boat just to get specific instruction. I'll stay open to all options at this point 

I have to say though, this thing really caught my eye:




































The cushions and stuff are a bit dated. 
But is it just me or is this thing like squeaky clean?
And I wonder how wrong could I go for 10 grand?


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)




----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

And finally one last boat from my latest search. I didn't post this originally because it has an obscure engine which I cannot find any data about, which is scary. It's called a Rugarini, and all I can find is that it is indirectly cooled, but nothing else.

Anyway I really like the interior a large galley and the v birth converted to a storage is just fine with me. It has a very pointy nose and there a good number of posts online about it being 'sea kindly' especially in heavy seas. I don't say that often because 'kindly' is an adverb so you can see the relevant conundrum of 'sea kindly' LOL. Unless the word 'sea' is a verb where you come from. OK moving on...

Anyway I quite like it, but that engine...



https://www.botentekoop.com/sailing-yachts/varne-varne-27/01a96afc-1a31-4236-b27f-47fe453065e9


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

Here is some new food for thought:
Pion: These appear to be a very nice Van de Stadt design built by Frans Maas who si a high quality builder. The fractional rig will make them easier to handle.
Pion Van der Stadt from 1977 for sale on Botentekoop.NL.
Pion Pion from 1974 for sale on Botentekoop.NL.
1979 Pion 900 undefined, Hoorn Netherlands - boats.com

Standfast 30: These were well constructed. I don't have first hand knowledge of these boats other than they look like a reasonably good design.
Standfast 30 from 1978 for sale at Botentekoop.NL.

Dufour 2800




__





Dufour 29 for sale Netherlands, Dufour boats for sale, Dufour used boat sales, Dufour Sailing Yachts For Sale 1979 Dufour 29 - Apollo Duck







yachts.apolloduck.nl





The next few boats are performance daysailors with some overnight capabilities:These have outboards which are easy and cheap to maintain, but less reliable in tougher conditions..
Sprinta Sport: These were well built and sail really well. They may be a little much to start with but would be a fun boat to own if you learn quickly.
Dehler Sprinta Sport from 1983 for sale on Botentekoop.NL.

X79- Similar to above, These were well built and sail really well. They may be a little much to start with but would be a fun boat to own if you learn quickly.
X-yachts X79 from 1979 for sale on Botentekoop.NL.

Dehler 22- And like a broken record These were well built and sail really well. They may be a little much to start with but would be a fun boat to own if you learn quickly. Outboard Motor
https://www.botentekoop.com/sailing-yachts/jaguar-25/23d2901b-326e-4b48-be98-dc3d943baf0e

Folkboats:This is completely different being a 1940's long keel design. I owned a wooden version of this boat, They sail way better than I ever would have guessed and they a great boats in a broad range of conditions. They will get you home rather than you getting the boat home. Versions of this boat have sailed around the world.
Marieholm International Folkboat:
https://www.botentekoop.com/sailing-yachts/marie-holm-if/3835c029-c7e4-447a-a5d2-8315f2c80343
Folkboat (outboard)




__





Boats for sale - boats.com


View a wide selection of all new & used boats for sale in your area, explore detailed information & find your next boat on boats.com. #everythingboats




www.boats.com




https://www.boats.com/sailing-boats/1976-marieholm-if-7-89-7169804/
British Folboat




__





Boats for sale - boats.com


View a wide selection of all new & used boats for sale in your area, explore detailed information & find your next boat on boats.com. #everythingboats




www.boats.com


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Jeff_H said:


> Here is some new food for thought:
> Pion: These appear to be a very nice Van de Stadt design built by Frans Maas who si a high quality builder. The fractional rig will make them easier to handle.
> Pion Van der Stadt from 1977 for sale on Botentekoop.NL.
> Pion Pion from 1974 for sale on Botentekoop.NL.
> ...


OK Jeff, thanks for the new list. I'll look into them.
By the way, I contacted the man with the Ohlson 8.8 that we discussed before in PM.
I'll update when I hear from him. And look into these ones now.
Thanks again.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Jeff_H said:


> Here is some new food for thought:
> Pion: These appear to be a very nice Van de Stadt design built by Frans Maas who si a high quality builder. The fractional rig will make them easier to handle.
> Pion Van der Stadt from 1977 for sale on Botentekoop.NL.
> Pion Pion from 1974 for sale on Botentekoop.NL.
> ...


I like these one's the most from your list. I find performance oriented day sailors a bit intimidating on one hand and too small for even comfortable weekend stays on the other. But these others look great.

I'm thinking of putting down a bid on the Standfast at the minimum 7K, subject to survey, because it's cheap and looks in very nice condition and has a 2011 indirect cooled Sole engine that's worth more than the boat, and perhaps I'll get lucky and nobody else will bid.

Thinking on putting a min bid on the Dufour as well.

So the nicest Pion (which is Dutch for pawn BTW, as in chess game, not pee on as in low level employee LOL just thought I'd mention) for me at least is the one with the hard dodger, unfortunately it sold. Another has an offer on the table now, and the other I haven't been able to reach.

I found another Pion:





» 9,07 m Van de Stadt Pion







panta-rhei-brokerage.nl




With an ugly interior (honestly who cares I can replace cushions and deal with cosmetics), but does have a few things I like:
1. The interior layout of this boat is great. 
2. I love the side windows for extra 'airiness' and light.
3. I love the aft heads and v-birth which can be left open (door removed) for extra roominess. 
4. This one in particular has a 1993 Sole repower with indirect cooling (new priority thanks to community), and only 750 hours. 
5. Basic navigation, depth guage, two anchors, six winches including two self tailing, and autopilot.

The rust on the front motor mount in the photo is a little disconcerting.

I'm scheduled to see this one tomorrow!


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

So I found two others that I really like, they both seem to be a similar shape as the Pion:

A Carter 301:





European Yachting Network - Check this ( from ) € 0,00


Boat details




www.e-y-n.com





It has a sail drive, so I'm not sure about that.

But, I Really like the Carter for:
1. Really nice big windows, lots of light, lots of white, looks in very nice condition, lines led aft, nice dodger, open layout to v-birth.
2. A surprisingly clean looking Indirectly cooled Volvo 2002 with 1500 hours.
3. I know I'll ruffle some feathers with this but I really like the main sheet on the cabin roof, leaving the entire cockpit free. Because this allows for a bimini and/ or a full cockpit enclosure which could be used while underway. This is a fantastic poor man's pilot house feature in the cold rainy North Sea region of The Netherlands ;-)
4. Navigation equipment, auto pilot, shore power.
5. Finally it's got a wind vane!

I really really like the idea of a wind vane, but frankly it fell off of my list ages ago due to budget. So that's a nice extra.

I don't know if this is a good sailor or even of decent quality, but the shape at least looks similar to the more modern designs recommended and I kind of fell for it at first sight 



https://sailboatdata.com/sailboat/carter-30



Finally, A Gib'Sea 30:








Gib'sea 30 from 1976 for sale on Botentekoop.NL.


Gib'sea 30 from 1976 for sale on Botentekoop.NL. Botentekoop.nl is the site with the best selection in the Netherlands.




www.botentekoop.com





This one has:
1. A D1-20 Indirectly cooled Penta from 2007, with 730 hours which looks very clean.
2. A lot of money invested- new rudder blade, batteries, engine, Dometic fridge, life raft.
3. Auto pilot and lots of Nav/Electronics.
4. Heating and pressurized hot water!
5. And my personal favorite, a full cockpit enclosure, which again is very nice in this part of the world, and what I've heard costs a literal fortune if you buy a new one yourself.

It may be a lesser quality boat but it sure is well equipped.


----------



## colemj (Jul 10, 2003)

Rush2112 said:


> 2. A surprisingly clean looking Indirectly cooled Volvo 2002 with 1500 hours.


One of the worst engines you could have.



Rush2112 said:


> 1. A D1-20 Indirectly cooled Penta from 2007, with 730 hours which looks very clean.


One of the best engines you could have.

When looking at boats, you will want to discount the Volvo 200x models. The MD20xx and D-xx are good ones.

Mark


----------



## midwesterner (Dec 14, 2015)

Rush2112 said:


> 2. I really very much like the idea of a heavier more sea kindly boat, and if I give up a fair share of performance for that trait then so be it. This is not only for me, but also for a few friends that I will like to occasionally drag along for day cruises,


That has worked well for me. My wife and kids have been worried about me going to see, and sometimes taking them with me. (Dang landlubbers). I settled on a Bristol 35.5 as my best compromise between comfort, seaworthiness, and performance. I am not disappointed.

It has already paid off with my wife and family. I cannot count how many times in the first weeks of ownership, when we were at the dock, working on the boat, and old sailors would come by and say, "So you're the folks who bought that Bristol. Great boat you got there! That's a boat you can sail anywhere you want to go. Very well-built. You won't win any speed records with that boat, but you can feel very safe on that. It's a great boat for family cruising."

The more this happens, the more I can see the look on the face of my kids where I can tell they are thinking, "Wow, maybe our old dad knows what he's doing".


----------



## lilipad (Jan 8, 2019)

Rush2112 said:


> I'm actually pretty flexible on the boat itself. I just don't want to buy a money pit that needs immediate and massive feeding. With a good hull, sails, standing rigging, and engine, at least a good portion of the big ticket items will be covered. Then it just has to be big enough to live on and I'm pretty much good to go. I consider performance a bonus really, though a longer waterline would be nice. If it had an open v-birth and aft heads, with some white in the interior, especially headliner- what a major bonus!


All boats are money pits: BOAT= Break Out Another Thousand, but what else are you going to spend it on? Never thought of it as an investment


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

colemj said:


> One of the worst engines you could have.
> 
> One of the best engines you could have.
> 
> ...


Remind me what is so bad about the 2002? Is it just the layout of auxilary componants like the fuel filter, alternator, that makes them a pain to change, or is it more with the internal design that the engine itself lacks the reliability of others?


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

So I went and saw the two boats yesterday. 
They both smelled like diesel inside. Is that normal?

Also they both had dry bilges, except under the engine itself they both had some dirty looking water, the Juneau much worse than the Pion, but both really.

I liked the layout of the Pion with the aft heads, with the door open to the v-birth, it really made the salon feel more livable. In fact it felt much airier and nicer inside than the technically larger Contest 31. The 33.1 Juneau while only a few feet longer felt quite a lot larger, but at triple the price! I think I could live with the Pion as a starter boat. Only major downside I noticed was no dodger / cockpit shelter, and that diesel smell.

Also the Pion had some rust/corrosion where the keel meets the boat, and the flat plate with a slight curve where it makes contact was a bit warbled and bent up. Wish I'd taken a photo. The owner said he sanded it down and painted it every year as maintenance and it was due.


----------



## colemj (Jul 10, 2003)

Rush2112 said:


> Remind me what is so bad about the 2002? Is it just the layout of auxilary componants like the fuel filter, alternator, that makes them a pain to change, or is it more with the internal design that the engine itself lacks the reliability of others?


The cooling system is a nightmare design of pipes, orings, and seals that continually leak onto fragile areas. The electrical system is similarly a nightmare. For your usage, these engines do not have glow plugs or a cold-start mechanism, so they are known to be hard to start in cooler weather. It was just a very bad design overall, with poor reliability.

Mark


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

I'd want to find the source of diesel odor, but it should be able to be cleaned up. Unless it somehow spilled behind a floor pan. I'm not super sensitive to diesel smell, but some people are. Still, I don't want my boat smelling like fuel.

If the keel joint is flush up against the hull, not hanging from a stub, it can/should be faired with 4200 or 5200 to take up the normal flexing that causes a crack in the bottom coating and the rusting. You might also want to assure yourself that the keel bolts themselves have not been exposed to sea water. However, if an iron keel on an old boat, you're probably going to want to swap out the bolts eventually anyway.


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

Minnewaska said:


> I'd want to find the source of diesel odor, but it should be able to be cleaned up. Unless it somehow spilled behind a floor pan. I'm not super sensitive to diesel smell, but some people are. Still, I don't want my boat smelling like fuel.
> 
> If the keel joint is flush up against the hull, not hanging from a stub, it can/should be faired with 4200 or 5200 to take up the normal flexing that causes a crack in the bottom coating and the rusting. You might also want to assure yourself that the keel bolts themselves have not been exposed to sea water. However, if an iron keel on an old boat, you're probably going to want to swap out the bolts eventually anyway.


Finding the source of a diesel leak is not as easy as it may seem.
Aside from smell which is not location specific you will want to look for where it "leaks from" which will 
drip straight down
follow a path such until it can drip down... the path can be a hose for example.
If you can smell it there is likely to be a "pool" somewhere

two approaches:
1. place white absorbent material under the engine and fuel system... anywhere the fuel travels
check to locate the drill location and then try to see where that came from... was it under a dip in some hose? Start there.
2. clean and "powder" the engine with something like talc or cornstarch powder. 
Fuel or oil leaks will be revealed

I had a leak which I though was a faulty clamping of a hose. The drip was below it AND what turned out to be the culprit... a faulty fuel primer pump. It wasn't the connect TO the pump/filter assembly but the pump itself! And it was 2 ox / week! YUCK


----------



## sailingfool (Apr 17, 2000)

A uncertain diesel odor in a prior vessel purchase turned out to be a leaking fuel tank which the surveyor failed to identify. Replacement of the tank by the new owner (me) required removal of the four cylinder diesel and made up about $5000 of a much larger yard bill.

So the first thing to check is the bottom of the fuel tank. If you can't get at the bottom of the tank,, well thats a bad sign.



Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

The point about searching for leaks in the tank and hoses are completely valid. Normally, a real fuel leak will be quite strong and will be stronger after the engine has been run. 

I will note that most diesel powered boats that are closed up for a time do have a faint smell of diesel especially in warm weather. If you are using the boat, the normal ventilation from open hatches helps a lot if not completely. In my experience. normally a faint smell its not a fluid leak per se, but saturation of O-rings and hoses. One frequent source of diesel smell on many older boats, (pre CE RCD) is that the hose used for the vent hose was not fuel rated. Non-fuel rated hose will absorb diesel over time and become permeated through to the outside of the hose. The surveyor picked that up on my boat and when I replaced it I could smell diesel when my nose was near the hose as well as the hose felt sticky to the touch. On a boat that I helped fix up, the fuel vent was literally inside the interior of the boat. 

Jeff


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

Rush2112 said:


> So I found two others that I really like, they both seem to be a similar shape as the Pion:
> 
> A Carter 301:
> 
> ...


I would think that either of these boats could work for you. I will note that the Carter 301 is not the same boat as the Dick Carter designed Cater 30 in the SailBoatData link. From the perspective of hull form and rig proportion, neither look like ideal designs for what you want to do, but both could work for what your revised focus has become: "a safe starter boat that can be single-handed."

Jeff


----------



## SanderO (Jul 12, 2007)

Jeff_H said:


> The point about searching for leaks in the tank and hoses are completely valid. Normally, a real fuel leak will be quite strong and will be stronger after the engine has been run.
> 
> I will note that most diesel powered boats that are closed up for a time do have a faint smell of diesel especially in warm weather. If you are using the boat, the normal ventilation from open hatches helps a lot if not completely. In my experience. normally a faint smell its not a fluid leak per se, but saturation of O-rings and hoses. One frequent source of diesel smell on many older boats, (pre CE RCD) is that the hose used for the vent hose was not fuel rated. Non-fuel rated hose will absorb diesel over time and become permeated through to the outside of the hose. The surveyor picked that up on my boat and when I replaced it I could smell diesel when my nose was near the hose as well as the hose felt sticky to the touch. On a boat that I helped fix up, the fuel vent was literally inside the interior of the boat.
> 
> Jeff


There is another "diesel smell" and that is combusted diesel... which is diesel exhaust. I can smell this when I run the Espar heater... I suspect that the exhaust path as some small openings... or the transom exhaust enters the cabin.
I can smell diesel exhaust when the Volvo runs as well. This is a serious concern if the wind is coming from the stern end of the boat. Diesel exhaust is also a very unpleasant odor.
Wind disburses unpleasant odors and hopefully away from not into the boat.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Minnewaska said:


> I'd want to find the source of diesel odor, but it should be able to be cleaned up. Unless it somehow spilled behind a floor pan. I'm not super sensitive to diesel smell, but some people are. Still, I don't want my boat smelling like fuel.
> 
> If the keel joint is flush up against the hull, not hanging from a stub, it can/should be faired with 4200 or 5200 to take up the normal flexing that causes a crack in the bottom coating and the rusting. You might also want to assure yourself that the keel bolts themselves have not been exposed to sea water. However, if an iron keel on an old boat, you're probably going to want to swap out the bolts eventually anyway.


It's a Van de Staadt, the bolts are covered up with fiberglass so you can't even see them.
The bilge looked clean though...


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Thanks for the responses regarding the diesel. I'll try to really sniff around and see if I can locate it next time, checking hoses, etc. I might also take a few paper towels with me in the future to check for leaks around the engine, not exactly thorough, but at least a basic check. 

Also I think I'll see a few more boats. I don't think these last two boats were normal. The smell was quite strong. The Dutch broker I worked with yesterday had an interesting recommendation- he said go and actually see ten boats. Then you'll know what your options and preferences are, and have some perspective but not more than ten boats as you will get stuck too much in the details.

I'll be curious how the next boats smell...


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

Jeff_H said:


> I would think that either of these boats could work for you. I will note that the Carter 301 is not the same boat as the Dick Carter designed Cater 30 in the SailBoatData link. From the perspective of hull form and rig proportion, neither look like ideal designs for what you want to do, but both could work for what your revised focus has become: "a safe starter boat that can be single-handed."
> 
> Jeff


Hmm OK, well as my budget dropped and my needs got more basic, I suppose it might be easier to find a boat now. I'll see if I can make appointments to see these two.
Thanks again


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

So I went took a day trip out to Lelystaad to see the boats mentioned- the Carter 301 and the Gib'sea 30.
The Carter 301 had a strong diesel smell like all of the others before (Contest 31Ht, Jeanneau 33.1, and Pion 30) and the makelaar said that the boat had osmosis from front to back.
They are an interesting makelaar in that they pull out and survey every boat they list for sale, before listing.
Anyway, the buy was pretty honest- he said "all the good boats are gone". A pretty blatant statement from a boat broker, who is there to try and sell me a boat!
He said that with the Corona there was a big rush this season, and all that's left is basically junk. Wow. Didn't expect to hear that from a salesman!
He proceeded to tell me that the Carter could actually be sailed for another couple years before dealing with the osmosis, he said it takes quite some time to de-laminate the boat, and if I was willing to do the labor myself I could fix it for about 1500 Euros, but it would require putting the boat on the hard through the winter. Apparently NL is more dry in the cold.

Anyway, I was actually thinking about it when he steered me to another boat I didn't know about- a Contest 33. He said it was very well maintained, an excellent sturdy well made brand, and would probably last another 50 years. So I went to see it. I have to say I really liked the Contest 33! The sense of quality was very high, compared to others I'd seen and it felt stable, even stepping aboard, it barely moved compared to the others which was reassuring. It also felt noticeably more stable when walking forward to the mast. He said it didn't sell because of the price. The owner did indeed take fantastic care of it- you could sense it in everything in the interior. It had an ancient MD11 Volvo engine, but was probably the cleanest one I've seen so far. The bilge was immaculate, no oil or water under the engine, and no diesel smell inside! I loved it, immediately.

Then I took a trip to the v-birth as I've made a point of actually lying in the setteess and v-births, and I looked up, and there was noticeable moisture. You cold smell it. And the v-birth cushions were moist. I look around the 'ceiling' (sorry I forgot the right word) and in both of the aft corners of the v-birth ceiling were noticeable fiberglass repairs, on the starboard side a piece had actually slightly come off. Then I realized what had actualy happened is it had cracked as though by some kind of pressure or force. I looked to the escape hatch and just aft of it on the 'ceiling' was a fine crack about 18 inches long that ran side to side, parallel with the hatch. I wish I'd taken pictures. Anyway I can only imagine that either he ran into something head on, at some speed, or something heavy was dropped on the forward portion of the deck. I was late for my other appointment as I'd only expected to see one boat with him so I had to run, but was feeling somewhat dejected at this point.

The Gib'sea indeed had a shiny new looking Volvo D1-20. It looked wonderful and started right up. It had cool looking motor mounts with round rubber bits in the center that were like little shock absorbers. You could see them in action. The interior was huge for a 30 footer, almost as big as the Contest 33, until you got to the fore section and the head room disappeared quickly. There is a large country (caugh) that is trying desperately to start a war with his country and I commiserated with him. And he opened up that the D1-20 that was listed as a 19K Euro engine is actually a 6K Euro rebuild. He also pointed out the thick goopy black stuff around the windows to keep them from leaking, and the missing screws on the outside of the windows which he replaced with tape. Yes actual tape! LOL. He also pointed out that the winches were not actually self tailing, but had these round rubber grey bands installed. I would have never noticed... Anyway he basically talked me out of the boat. The heads and v-birth had a distinctly funky smell, there was some water and a lot of hair in the bilge, and overall the boat had nothing of the sense of quality of the Contest, which was off- putting but it was the tape on the window screw holes that was the clincher. I just kept thinking how little maintenance must have been done if he couldn't bother replacing a few screws. It wasn't even the same tape it was two different colors. How does tape even stay on a boat? I didn't even want to know...

Oh geez so I left feeling a little bit dejected and really exhausted. It felt like one time in my younger days when I had three interviews in the same day. Seeing boats is something like interviewing- kind of exciting, you want to be on your toes and do your best, you want to be really perceptive, the communication matters, and- it's exhausting.

Conclusion:
So what can I conclude from all this? Well maybe the makelaar was right and all the good boats got snapped up quickly this year. And anything left out there now, that's been for sale for some time is probably 'junk' or overpriced. But I've also learned a lot- for example I can see some of the clues of a well maintained boat now, and some of the clues of a bad one! I've got a much better sense of what I really want. I want a well maintained boat!

The Pion is probably the best value for money, as they go for around 9-12K Euros. Jeff says it has a good design and I'll take his word for it. And it has an excellent reputation locally for a good performing sea worthy boat that can be sailed to Scotland and Scandinavia. A _well maintained_ Pion with an indirectly cooled engine is definitely on my short list.

The First 32 or Contest 33 are probably going to be second boat goals as they are in a different price bracket from what I want to spend on my starter, though you never know, I'll keep an eye out for deals in the future.


----------



## mstern (May 26, 2002)

Nothing like actually seeing some boats, eh?

I was going to ask you just what a makelaar is, but Google answered first....


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

mstern said:


> Nothing like actually seeing some boats, eh?
> 
> I was going to ask you just what a makelaar is, but Google answered first....


Yeah the pictures just don't do the boats justice, there's no substitute for in person inspections.
It is a bit exhausting, but exciting as well ;-)
I get psyched up every time. Feels like I'm going on a date LOL


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Rush2112 said:


> I look around the 'ceiling' (sorry I forgot the right word)


It's said, when sailing got it's start, it was so dangerous that only the least skilled, least educated crew would take the job. As a result, most things were named by illiterates. The floor is the sole, after the sole of one's feet. The ceiling is the overhead. Port was the side they tied up to port, because early rudders were on the other side and were called the "steer board" (sounds like starboard on old English accent).

Could be folklore, as the Captain and officers were generally well educated.

While it sounds like the visits weren't fully productive, you have to kiss a lot of frogs to find your prince (US reference to Snow White, if that doesn't land anywhere). I'm not sure I'd fully accept the brokers theory that all good boats are gone. New boats alwasy come on the market. Keep it up.


----------



## Rush2112 (Jul 12, 2020)

I'm keeping an eye out, but unless I see a super deal I'm on pause for now.
If I see a model that fits the narrowed search and it's close I'll go have a look.
Otherwise I'm back to saving up, increasing my budget, and basically waiting as I've said for good deals that I expect to see coming down the pipeline for future economic reasons. Even those who bought in the big rush this season to get a 'covid friendly' way to get out and have fun while social distancing, will likely be out weighed by the numbers selling due to uncertainty over future economics as the global condition worsens. It's not all doom and gloom, we'll get through this, but I expect some good deals coming in the mean time.

At least I know what I'm looking for- that Beneteau First 32 (that sold too fast darn it!) or a Pion (Pawn) 30 in good shape with an indirectly cooled engine would be brilliant. Standards lowered (many times!) I'm willing to deal with electronics, cosmetics, minor maintenance issues, older sails and rigging- as needed, over time


----------



## Michael Bailey (Sep 10, 2021)

I've been reading this thread for a while now. I'm new to this community so it is entertaining. What I want to say about buying beautiful and at least fairly expensive boats is: For most of us they are romantic things and you wouldn't buy one if the money was the big issue. At least it is for me and most of the sailors I have known. Long ago I decided that most boats aren't worth it but I'm still at it. The list of attractive boats is just fairly short. My neighbor races a pure Cruiser on a regular basis. I also know others who cruise pure racing machines. Seems kinda crazy. I'm mostly varnishing, painting, fixing, updating etc at the dock when I could be out sailing. Those same folks think that I have my priorities mixed up too. What can I say. I love these guys! Anyway. If you are looking to buy a boat try to be aware of these oddities. Maybe the craziness will make sense. When I was young and sailing my first boat. A Sam Rable Titmouse. I was as happy sailing as I have ever been. My best friends mom counseled me. "Remember it's the journey not arrival that counts." I don't always remember that but she was dead right!


----------



## GlanRock (Feb 26, 2013)

I just keep hoping that RUSH2112 comes back to the forum and is_ out there sailing_! There was a significant amount of time in discussions on the merits of various boat profiles (I was following this thread in real-time though I likely didn't post on it much) because the amount of information coming out was huge.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

GlanRock said:


> I just keep hoping that RUSH2112 comes back to the forum and is_ out there sailing_! There was a significant amount of time in discussions on the merits of various boat profiles (I was following this thread in real-time though I likely didn't post on it much) because the amount of information coming out was huge.


I too would like to hear what Rush ended up doing. I was rooting for him to succeed and get out there sailing. I must admit that I was very disappointed when he pulled the plug last spring since it seemed like he was much closer to finding a boat that would be suited to his needs.

Jeff


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

As I recall, he/she pulled the plug, after convincing themself of an impending Springtime crash in the market. Didn't happen, so I suspect they didn't get in. IIRC, what they wanted might have been a bit above budget.


----------



## SteveKras (Mar 23, 2014)

Whether or not Rush bought a boat, I am thankful for the lengthy discussions he started. There was a lot of information I was able to gather while I was in the middle of an active and successful boat search.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

I think that a number of us put a lot of time into Rush's search since he started at a point where many beginners begin, asked thought provoking questions, and evolved as he absorbed the information that he was provided. Personally, from the start, I hoped that the discussion would prove useful to others in the future. 

Jeff


----------



## 82Crewe (Oct 17, 2021)

This was an interesting read. Sad that there has not been a follow up to it.

jb


----------

