# Full Keel



## dave6330 (Aug 16, 2006)

At the end of the Summer my wife and I will be moving into the Pac NW (Puget Sound area) and we will begin actively looking for our retirement boat. Previously we've owned a Pearson 365 Ketch and an Omega 36 Sloop.

Question for the masses: Just how bad are full keel boats at making way under sail in light to moderate winds - say 7-15 knots? 

We've never had a full keel before and would be interested in knowing how well they perform in the conditions we can expect in the PNW.

V/R

Dave


----------



## ctl411 (Feb 15, 2009)

The keel is only one part of the boats performance. One full keel boat my be fine another may not move unless its blowing 20. How did you like the performance of your 365 compare that against the specs of the boats you are looking at. Giving the 365 the edge for not being a full keel. Also walk the docks and get a few rides to see what you think.


----------



## dave6330 (Aug 16, 2006)

We loved sailing on our first boat, an Omega 36 sloop. Kind of like a sports car - fun to 'run around' in but not sufficient for what we were looking for in a live-aboard cruiser. We sailed the Pearson across the Gulf of Alaska and absolutely loved the way she felt in a heavy sea. The deal breaker for her was the lack of a dedicated second berth. When we took our son and his family on a weekend cruise we found (to our chagrin) that you couldn't make out the settee into a double without completely blocking the path from the v-berth to the galley. We are looking at yachtworld by way of a preliminary search and have noted several interesting candidates, several of which are full keel boats. Great reputation for heavy weather cruisers but just how bad would they sail under 'normal' PNW weather?


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

Dave:
I would warn you against lumping all full keel boats into the same performance basket.
And I will also warn you that in the PNW we don't consider 7 to 15 knots "light air". Here light air is 2 to 4 knots and we get a lot of it. Couple that with a 3 knots tide current and you can have a challenging few hours.

In light air wetted surface is your enemy and pretty much any full keel boat is going to have more wetted surface than a modern split appendage design. But the term "full keel" is used to describe a wide range of boats and there are full keels and all variations on that theme and some will have less wetted surface and more artfully shaped keel foils.

You should pay attention to the SA/D of the boats you consider. Horsepower is a huge help in light air as is overall height of the rig.


----------



## ctl411 (Feb 15, 2009)

The ones I come across out on the lake are pretty doggy. Island packet 465, CT 41 and the like. My old boat H37c was not light wind rocket but would easily out run the CT and others like it similarly sized. The 465 would walk away once wind speed hit 12-15 kts. 
If you liked the 365 how about a 424? Might be a good compromise as all boats are in one way or the other.


----------



## ctl411 (Feb 15, 2009)

Bob types faster and better. And yes 12-15 true is a good breeze here also. My numbers are for apparent by 15 true my boat is/was powered up.


----------



## dave6330 (Aug 16, 2006)

We'll probably take a look at the P424 - there are apparently a couple in Anacortes. Engine access would have to be better than on the P365 - I didn't mention that one. On the 365 you have to lay on the galley floor, reach thru a hole in the back of the locker under the sink and feel blindly for the engine dipstick. Not a good incentive for doing regular maintenance. Changing the impeller on the backwards facing engine requires getting into the lazarette along with some pretty athletic contortions.


----------



## dave6330 (Aug 16, 2006)

ctl411 said:


> Bob types faster and better. And yes 12-15 true is a good breeze here also. My numbers are for apparent by 15 true my boat is/was powered up.


Thus far our only sailing experience has been in Resurection Bay, Aialik Bay, Day Harbor and across the Gulf. We hope to VASTLY expand the scope of our experience once I retire.


----------



## SloopJonB (Jun 6, 2011)

Around here, they post "Strong Wind Warnings" at 20 knots and most people stay home. 

Listen to the Maestro and get as much sail as you can handle - trust me.


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

Thanks Jon. I'm not sure why the OP is limiting himself to full keel boats. Why not look at some fin keel, more modern designs? There is nothing going on here that makes a full keel more appealing. Just the opposite. When the wind pipes up and it's gusting to 6 knots a nice modern boat will still move you along.


----------



## dave6330 (Aug 16, 2006)

bobperry said:


> Thanks Jon. I'm not sure why the OP is limiting himself to full keel boats. Why not look at some fin keel, more modern designs? There is nothing going on here that makes a full keel more appealing. Just the opposite. When the wind pipes up and it's gusting to 6 knots a nice modern boat will still move you along.


Didn't mean to mislead. We are definitely NOT limiting our options to full keel boats. It's just that I have absolutely NO experience with that design and was hoping for comments/advice from fellow sailnetters. Our Omega was a FAST boat but, due probably as much to our inexperience as her design, was pretty spooky if the winds got above 15 knots and the seas built to anything over 3 foot. However, when the weather was more tame, she was REALLY fun to sail! The P365, on the other hand, handled two gales in our crossing without scaring us too badly but was at a disadvantage in any winds less than 8 knots.


----------



## ctl411 (Feb 15, 2009)

Look for a boat that has the potential to put up clouds of efficient sail but can be reduced easily.


----------



## dave6330 (Aug 16, 2006)

ctl411 said:


> Look for a boat that has the potential to put up clouds of efficient sail but can be reduced easily.


So you're recommendation would be a ketch or cutter rig?


----------



## ctl411 (Feb 15, 2009)

I loved my cutter, the new boat (gulfstar 50 ketch) gets trucked here in 5 more days. So not sure on the ketch rig.I like the idea of the rig, but I also like to use light air sails (drifters spinnakers) so looking forward to mizzen staysails. You can make slower boats perform it's just more work and the ultimate performance is lower.

Did you use any on your 365( mizzen staysails ect)?


----------



## dave6330 (Aug 16, 2006)

Ours was a straight ketch (vice a cutter-ketch) - hence no staysail. We used the mizzen occationally but, frankly (and I'm ashamed to admit) I suspect we flew the mizzen more for how it LOOKED rather than trying to squeeze more speed or balance the rig.


----------



## ctl411 (Feb 15, 2009)

Google mizzen stay sail pictures. It flys off the mizzen mast.


----------



## Seaduction (Oct 24, 2011)

Okay, What gives here??? Did somebody paint a big bullseye on Island Packet sailboats or what? It seems like every post asking "What kind of boat should I buy?" has someone making very disparaging comments about IPs. Mine will sail at 3 knots in 5 knots of breeze! One can state their opinion about various makes and models if they so choose; but it would lend to ones credibility to note that it is strictly an opinion based on little else but hearsay. There are many sailboats that provide great sailing characteristics and some that are not rated for "Category A Offshore Use." Intended usage of the vessel should be the main factor in decision making.


----------



## ctl411 (Feb 15, 2009)

Easy there sea, I stated a specific example. Ip's are fine boats, the op asked about full keel performance and I regularly sailed with a 45 IP.


----------



## Seaduction (Oct 24, 2011)

ctl411 said:


> Easy there sea, I stated a specific example. Ip's are fine boats, the op asked about full keel performance and I regularly sailed with a 45 IP.


I didn't mention any names because there are other threads on here that contain worse comments that yours. When I read your comment, it happened to be the proverbial "straw" that did the camel's back in. 
One of the nicest boats that I sailed on was a Swan 68 but it would be a piece of crap on the Chesapeake. (could have something to do with its 12 foot draft.) OK, we all know that a Frers or S&S design Swan is not a piece of crap, its design is perfect for its intended usage.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

Seaduction said:


> Okay, What gives here??? Did somebody paint a big bullseye on Island Packet sailboats or what? It seems like every post asking "What kind of boat should I buy?" has someone making very disparaging comments about IPs. Mine will sail at 3 knots in 5 knots of breeze! One can state their opinion about various makes and models if they so choose; but it would lend to ones credibility to note that it is strictly an opinion based on little else but hearsay. There are many sailboats that provide great sailing characteristics and some that are not rated for "Category A Offshore Use." Intended usage of the vessel should be the main factor in decision making.


_"Did somebody paint a big bullseye on Island Packet sailboats or what?"_

Yes, Island Packet did when they chose the design approach that they did. Its simply a physics thing; huge amounts of wetted surface, a poorly shaped underbody, and foils, a dearth of sail area and an excessively inefficient rig proportion.

That is not hearsay, its just plain basic physics. And it is easy to quantify the relative impact of that design approach. When you look at the PHRF rating in any Region with light to moderate prevailing winds, the Island Packets are typically 60 to 90 seconds a mile slower than boats of an equal length, and 2 to 3 minutes a mile slower than more normal designs of an equal displacement. Those kind of number are huge difference in speed, and in cruising modes, slower boats generally do worse than their ratings might suggest. PHRF normally spots cruising boats a little time in racing mode, and so while these numbers may do Island Packet a 9-12 second disservice in racing mode but they clearly show that Island Packets are a bit doggie.

And that matches what most of us have observed out there on the water. In reality, my observations sailing IP's and observing 100's of them under sail for decades is that they really do not perform at the low end of the wind range.

While you may be able to crowd a large enough genoa on a Island Packet to close-reach at "3 knots in 5 knots" of true wind, that would result in an apparent wind of somewhere around 7 knots. In the same conditions a decent light air boat, i.e. one that is not a little doggie, without an oversized genoa, would be generating closer to 8 or 9 knots apparent wind in those same conditions and would be moving closer to 5 knots through the water, in other words doing close to the true wind speeds. And that is the precisely the point being made when people say, Island Packets are a little doggie in light air. But not only are they slow in light air, but they also make gobs of leeway compared to boats with more efficient keels.

In the end, what counts is you are satisfied with the performance of your boat, and that is a good thing for you. As such it should not matter to you when other speak of the relative capabilities of the IP's.

But when someone asks for a relative description of the performance of these boats and thier suitability for use in a predominantly light air venue, the alleged offshore capabilities of an Island Packet (I say 'alleged' since the A Offshore rating really does not really define the suitability of a boat for offshore use, just its likelihood of surviving out there) may be relevant for some, offshore characteristics were not the question being asked. What is relevant, is the observable light air performance, and IP's poor light air performance is easily observable by anyone who has sailed one in light air or seen them try to sail in light air.

Jeff


----------



## deniseO30 (Nov 27, 2006)

It does seem it's human nature (at least true of the middle class?) to obtain that which is most impressive, but totally unsuited for the use or need of their immediate or nearby environment. 

Examples 
SUVs Totally impractical for more the a day trip.
Sports cars with 2 seats sitting in front of a 4 bedroom house.
Deep draft boats on Chesapeake Bay
Full Keel boats in light air regions.

Then there are the reverses
Shallow draft and spade rudders expected to do north Atlantic crossings. 
SUVs done up as stretched limos
SUVs with extended cabs.
Hummers. 

Fast is always compared with something that has nothing in common with another. 
"My Vette is faster then your SUV. My fin keel is faster then your full keel."

Then everyone knows full keeled boats can't go in reverse under power. ( I don't know this)


----------



## mitchbrown (Jan 21, 2009)

Dave 

Don't forget about fall, winter and spring. when choosing a boat for the northwest. lots of wind and lots of fun to be had.. Although I have a beneteau 390 and I don't stay home when the wind pipes up. yeeeehaawww


----------



## dave6330 (Aug 16, 2006)

Didn't mean to start a gunfight over brands...

However, now that we've gone down that track...

@Jeff: In your experience, how would you rate an IP38 with a Tayana 37? There are several T37's in our geographic shopping area that look like they might be worth looking into.

@Seaduction: We did look at an IP38 on Oahu that we absolutely fell in love with. However, most of them are either on the East Coast or out of our price range.


----------



## Seaduction (Oct 24, 2011)

Jeff_H said:


> _"Did somebody paint a big bullseye on Island Packet sailboats or what?"_
> 
> Yes, Island Packet did when they chose the design approach that they did. Its simply a physics thing; huge amounts of wetted surface, a poorly shaped underbody, and foils, a dearth of sail area and an excessively inefficient rig proportion.
> 
> ...


Jeff, you are right. They are heavy and have low SA/displacement ratios. They aren't made for racing, have a larger tack angle than others, and the full keel adds to the leeway made under sail. They were designed for comfortable cruising, with roominess and shoal draft. In that respect, they are unbeatable.
Sailing on a day with 20 knots of breeze gusting to 25 knots is a real joy while bounding comfortably along while some popular priced, lighter sailboats are tied to the dock, knowing that sailing in those conditions would be challenging and uncomfortable. Pointing ability is not as good as one may desire, but cracking off the wind by 5 or 10 degrees will provide much more speed than pinching too close-winded. I may have to make an extra tack or two to get to the destination and be 20 minutes later than the other boats, but I enjoy the solid feel and comfortable ride. 
As far as the Offshore A, STIX and other ratings; they are the best we have currently and as you say it defines their "likelihood of survivability" in the offshore realm..... and I will take that as *big plus *for the boats design.
I just object when Sailnetters trash the IP as pigs, etc. when in fact, they meet their design criteria quite well. I'm sure you notice that most people here do not "trash talk" other boats but simply point out commonly known areas of deficiencies in the build. No boat can fulfill every possible intended usage. They are all different, as people are all different.
I don't mean to create ill will here, but honest questions posed deserve honest answers. The OP asked about "light winds" and then gave a range of wind that is more than enough for any IP. 
Cheers,
I'll be quiet now.
Al


----------



## Seaduction (Oct 24, 2011)

Jeff_H said:


> _"Did somebody paint a big bullseye on Island Packet sailboats or what?"_
> 
> Yes, Island Packet did when they chose the design approach that they did. Its simply a physics thing; huge amounts of wetted surface, a poorly shaped underbody, and foils, a dearth of sail area and an excessively inefficient rig proportion.
> 
> ...





dave6330 said:


> Didn't mean to start a gunfight over brands...
> 
> However, now that we've gone down that track...
> 
> ...


Here is one of many reviews of the IP38: Perry Design Review: Island Packet 38 - Features, Boat Reviews and Boat Tests - Boats.com
There are reviews of the others you are considering as well...... just Google away.


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

Sometimes a PHRF rating can tell you loads about a boat's performance.
Valiant 40 132
Passport 40 138
IP 38 168

I do not consider the Valiant or the Passport particularily good light air boats. So given the 
IP 38's rating I would consider it even less good in light air.


----------



## dave6330 (Aug 16, 2006)

So, not wanting to expose my ignorance too much, the lower the PHRF the better the boat will perform in light air? Is there a corrolation between the PHRF and Comfort Rating and Capsise Ratios? I've always sort of used them as the yardstick in comparing boats (as a starter at least).


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

Dave:
No, not really. The PHRF number will give you an indocation of a boats overall performance. There is no correlation between PHRF rating and comfort and capsize ratios (you guys get so obsessed with these numbers!).

If you really wanted to find a good light air boat using PHRF ratings you would have to gather a list of the different ratings for the same boats in different areas of the country. PHRF ratings will vary in different parts of the country.

For instance if a V40 rated 122 in Seattle and 132 in San Fran that would tell me the boat does better in Seattle's light winds compared to San Fran's heavy air. The lower the number the faster the boat.


----------



## ctl411 (Feb 15, 2009)

Most race courses are windward leeward so the ratings tell you how well a given boat does on a straight up wind and back down course. 
Also if you put better/bigger sails on a boat like the 365 it would perform better in lighter air. Large roach main, mizzen and dedicated light air sails drifter, mizzen stay sail, spinnakers.


----------



## dave6330 (Aug 16, 2006)

bobperry said:


> Dave:
> No, not really. The PHRF number will give you an indocation of a boats overall performance. There is no correlation between PHRF rating and comfort and capsize ratios (you guys get so obsessed with these numbers!).
> 
> If you really wanted to find a good light air boat using PHRF ratings you would have to gather a list of the different ratings for the same boats in different areas of the country. PHRF ratings will vary in different parts of the country.
> ...


Bob,

I'll have to admit, I'm a little linier in my thinking and, although I don't think I obsess over the numbers, with little actual experience and a very wide variance in the often anecdotal opinions out there, I do pay attention to them.

Lacking actual on-the-water experience I think the numbers give me a way of comparing apples to apples when looking at different models.

Incidentally, I always use the P365 and O36 as my benchmarks, comparing the various models with boats that I actually know...gives me an indication about the one I'm researching

V/R

Dave


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

Dave:
I agree with you. It's always best to use boats you know well as benchmarks. Numbers are only numbers. It bothers me that people rely so much on numbers that they can barely understand. I understand them and I am always willing to help.

ctl:
"Most race courses are windward leeward"

That is not correct. Most race couses are triangles and variations on triangles. I know. I have been racing for the last 50 years.

Oh, that is painful to admit.


----------



## ctl411 (Feb 15, 2009)

Local weeknight/weekend races around here are just up down no reaching. Regional races they will change it up a little but the emphasis is still windward ability. Hence all the talk about pointing ability. Cruisers fire up the engine or wait. Pointing ability is important from a safety standpoint for cruisers but not to the degree of racers. Nobody wants to sail days on end bashing to windward unless its for the glory of the pickle dish lol. 
Back on topic how does the Op make a comfortable cruiser sail to its best? What's a good compromise?


----------



## GBurton (Jun 26, 2007)

Here is a heavy full keeled boat in Puget sound.










What would the true wind be here Jeff_H?


----------



## shanedennis (Feb 10, 2012)

GBurton said:


> Here is a heavy full keeled boat in Puget sound.
> 
> What would the true wind be here Jeff_H?


There are many reasons the boat speed could be higher instantaneously. Momentum from a earlier gust or catching a wave are two I can think of off hand.

Not sure why we are hell bent on trying to prove Jeff_H wrong. Fighting a losing battle in this case.

There are many reasons to love our beautiful old long keeled boats but performance in light airs is not one of them.


----------



## TomMaine (Dec 21, 2010)

bobperry said:


> Dave:
> I would warn you against lumping all full keel boats into the same performance basket.
> 
> In light air wetted surface is your enemy and pretty much any full keel boat is going to have more wetted surface than a modern split appendage design. But the term "full keel" is used to describe a wide range of boats and there are full keels and all variations on that theme and some will have less wetted surface and more artfully shaped keel foils.
> ...


I've owned two full keel older designs and one is a much better sailer in light air. The former had a SA/D of around 15, the later, nearly 18. Night and day in light air.

Another thing I learned from Bob, "Weight is the enemy". That one I use to advantage to get the most out of my full keeler in light air(I overloaded my first boat which made it even less of a light air boat).

Thanks Bob for these tips over the years, and you give your design experience in refreshingly few words, a real plus on the these forums.


----------



## Seaduction (Oct 24, 2011)

shanedennis said:


> There are many reasons the boat speed could be higher instantaneously. Momentum from a earlier gust or catching a wave are two I can think of off hand.
> 
> Not sure why we are hell bent on trying to prove Jeff_H wrong. Fighting a losing battle in this case.
> 
> There are many reasons to love our beautiful old long keeled boats but performance in light airs is not one of them.


Not trying to prove anybody wrong here. In fact, Jeff is right. Boats are designed to meet the usage the designer had in mind. I only rebutted the "certain model boat bashers" from the standpoint that a boat meeting the designers criteria does not make it an 'all around' poor choice.


----------



## shanedennis (Feb 10, 2012)

Seaduction said:


> Not trying to prove anybody wrong here. In fact, Jeff is right. Boats are designed to meet the usage the designer had in mind. I only rebutted the "certain model boat bashers" from the standpoint that a boat meeting the designers criteria does not make it an 'all around' poor choice.


Yes, for sure. IPs are built for a market that exists for "classic" cruising boats built like brick sh!thouses. They conjure dreams of low pressure cruising in reliable latitudes.

The long keelers are dream makers. They may not win any races around the buoys but they will give you the confidence to get out there.


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

"they will give you the confidence to get out there. "
I think that is very important Shane. I can't imagine sailing a boat I did not have confidence in. As a pal of mine once said, "Different boats for different folks".

Tom:
Thank you.
I'd try and use more words but I have this problem with typing and spelling. When my boys were young I gave them both the collected works of Jack London. I told them that Jack was the master at saying a lot with few words. He probably couldn't type either.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

TomMaine said:


> I've owned two full keel older designs and one is a much better sailer in light air. The former had a SA/D of around 15, the later, nearly 18. Night and day in light air.
> 
> Another thing I learned from Bob, "Weight is the enemy". That one I use to advantage to get the most out of my full keeler in light air(I overloaded my first boat which made it even less of a light air boat).
> 
> Thanks Bob for these tips over the years, and you give your design experience in refreshingly few words, a real plus on the these forums.


I think that there can be big differences in the way that boats with full keels actually sail. Some of these differences can be explained at a macro level in terms of the relative stability, sail area and sail plan efficiency, and displacements of two boats, which just happen to have full keels. On a finer level, some differences can be explained in the way that the boat is modeled (shaped).

But some the differences may occur in the way that the term full keel is defined these days.

To me, this is a full keel:


This is not: It is a boat with a cut away forefoot and raked rudder post with substantially reduced wetted surface as compared to a full keel. It offers a little better performance but does not track as well as a full keel.



Jeff


----------



## GBurton (Jun 26, 2007)

shanedennis said:


> There are many reasons the boat speed could be higher instantaneously. Momentum from a earlier gust or catching a wave are two I can think of off hand.
> 
> Not sure why we are hell bent on trying to prove Jeff_H wrong. Fighting a losing battle in this case.
> 
> There are many reasons to love our beautiful old long keeled boats but performance in light airs is not one of them.


I don't think anyone is hell bent on proving Jeff wrong, rather he is hell bent on trying to prove the older full keel designs are all slow and cannot compare with newer designs. I disagree...and that picture was not taken after an earlier gust or after "catching a wave"

Theorizing is all good and well, but sometimes a picture can be worth a thousand words...


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

No. it's really common knowledge that old, heavy, full keel boats are just as fast as modern boats. That's why you see so many old, heavy, full keel boats on the race course today. A year or two from now you will be hard pressed to find a manufacturer producing a fin keel design.


----------



## GBurton (Jun 26, 2007)

bobperry said:


> No. it's really common knowledge that old, heavy, full keel boats are just as fast as modern boats. That's why you see so many old, heavy, full keel boats on the race course today. A year or two from now you will be hard pressed to find a manufacturer producing a fin keel design.


What is your definition of modern?
PS try not to be so grumpy, its just boats..


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

Of couse it's just boats. That's my whole point.

Enjoy your boat for what it is. Do not try to pretend it is something else.
You don't need to be the fastest or the grandest to enjoy your boat. Just enjoy the old lady for what it is.

And for the record, "modern" is today.

Look back. See that the history of yacht design shows that keels have gotten shorter and shorter. To the point wher the rudder was moved too far forward to control the boat. Then the rudder moved aft, seperated from the keel. Boats went faster and hanled better.

I did not make this up. A clear headed look at the progession of yacht design shows this to be fact.

If I am wrong then we are certainly headed backwards to a day when full keels ruled.

Don't be so absurd.
Just enjoy your boat for what it is. Do not imagine it is something else. I likeall kiinds of boats.

Grumpy? Maybe. Real? Yes.
I am ready and willing to go head to head with you on this if you like. Fletch your arrows.


----------



## GBurton (Jun 26, 2007)

bobperry said:


> Of couse it's just boats. That's my whole point.
> 
> Enjoy your boat for what it is. Do not try to pretend it is something else.
> You don't need to be the fastest or the grandest to enjoy your boat. Just enjoy the old lady for what it is.
> ...


Damnit. Am I going to have to grow a beard and start smoking a pipe?


----------



## kunkwriter (Jan 21, 2013)

I've got a Rafiki 37 and thus far have been happy. She's very similar to the Pacific Seacraft 37 and the Tayana 37. All came out at the same time in the mid 70s and all are full keel with about 13 tons of displacement--Seacraft is a bit lighter. We're in the bay area, so rarely have light winds, but when there's wind in the sails she moves smoothly, even in the lighter wind. I'm real pleased at how well she points to weather, and for rough water, I've never had a boat that was quite so solid. We've only had her since January, but we're on the bay at least once a week. Good luck, Dave.

Kunk


----------



## TomMaine (Dec 21, 2010)

Jeff_H said:


> I think that there can be big differences in the way that boats with full keels actually sail.
> 
> Jeff


Very true. My keel was a "go faster" improvement at one time.

I'm with Bob on PHRF #'s too, and looked at mine before I considered the boat. 156 sounded good for a boat design from this era.

But when I sail next to my friend Georges J35, he points at least 10 degrees higher, while he's going,... faster. 

I think people put too much emphasis on specific design details when it relates to a boats speed. If I put Georges 7' foil fin on my 1961 hull, things wouldn't change dramatically. It's the sum of all the other design differences, hull, rig, sails, etc etc that make his J35 70 seconds a mile faster.

I love Georges J35, I just prefer the feel and experience I get sailing an older style boat. I'm not sure new boat design has improved that aspect but that's just my taste.

My favorite sailing is in light air with boat speeds under 5 knots. 
Racing has spoiled too many good sails for me.


----------



## ctl411 (Feb 15, 2009)

I agree with Tom we also like older boats. For a short day sail I have fun on the newer light boats but it gets tiring. If a full keel design fits your style that's what you should buy. We like the late 70's early 80's fin keel boats. Back in their day they would be considered light like Bob's V40. Now they are over weight tanks to some.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

kunkwriter said:


> I've got a Rafiki 37 and thus far have been happy. She's very similar to the Pacific Seacraft 37 and the Tayana 37. All came out at the same time in the mid 70s and all are full keel with about 13 tons of displacement--Seacraft is a bit lighter. We're in the bay area, so rarely have light winds, but when there's wind in the sails she moves smoothly, even in the lighter wind. I'm real pleased at how well she points to weather, and for rough water, I've never had a boat that was quite so solid. We've only had her since January, but we're on the bay at least once a week. Good luck, Dave.
> 
> Kunk


The Rafiki 37 is a venerable design that is closely derived from the Atkin's Ingrid. The Ingrid was a state of the art cruiser when she was designed and has always been a appealing design for its day. It is much closer in concept to the Tayana 37 than the Pacific Seacraft 37. Both the Ingrid and Tayana are closer renditions relative to their Scandinavian ancestors.


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

"Overweight tanks"?

I agree with you and I chuckle when I think back to 1974 when a noted yacht designer writing an article in YACHTING wrote that the Valiant was "too light to be considered a serious offshore boat".

Early this year (stop me if I told you this already) we raced my buddie's Baba 35, pilot house model, in the Race Your House race in Seattle. It's a race for only liveaboards. It was a very varied fleet with Catalinas, Hallberg Rassy's Ingrids, Cape George cutters and other cruising type boats. We had a good breeze with gusts up over 20 knots at times. We got second in class and sailed boat for boat upwind and down with many fin keel boats and did manage to beat a lot of them boat for boat. It was a testimony to what a good, full keel boat could do. We did not point as well as the fin keelers but we only gave up about 4 degrees of AWA to them. It was a kick in the ass to watch the faces of the competitors as we hung in there with them. "What are yoiu doing here?"

I try not to generalize about boat types. Some of my very best designs are the Tashiba series 31, 36 and 40 full keel boats. They can surprise you with their performance. The tall rig Baba/ Tashiba 40 AIRLOOM is a regular race winner on Puget Sound.


----------



## SloopJonB (Jun 6, 2011)

bobperry said:


> The tall rig Baba/ Tashiba 40 AIRLOOM is a regular race winner on Puget Sound.


Somehow I think that is a critical statement re: full keelers performance.

How many of them have Sa/D ratios over 15 or so? I would venture "not many" and that short sail is the real cause of their rep for being slow in light air, or at least as much to blame as the wetted surface.

I met a guy once who had a hot rodded '65 Chevy Impala that would run the 1/4 mile in the 10 second range. That aircraft carrier was the automotive equivalent of a full keel but it had the "sail area" to make up for it.


----------



## GBurton (Jun 26, 2007)

SloopJonB said:


> Somehow I think that is a critical statement re: full keelers performance.
> 
> How many of them have Sa/D ratios over 15 or so? I would venture "not many" and that short sail is the real cause of their rep for being slow in light air, or at least as much to blame as the wetted surface.
> 
> I met a guy once who had a hot rodded '65 Chevy Impala that would run the 1/4 mile in the 10 second range. That aircraft carrier was the automotive equivalent of a full keel but it had the "sail area" to make up for it.


Yes, and many people who sail these boats don't have the sails to make the boat move like it can. I prefer the heavier boat even if it means greater sail area than a lighter boat of similar length, because I like the way the heavier boat sails. Its a personal preference as others have stated in this thread.

Some make the assumption that, because they once sailed past a heavy full keeled boat "with all working sails flying" etc ad nauseum, that these boats are pigs.
Not true.


----------



## b40Ibis (Apr 27, 2011)

Dave 6330- We have had a bermuda40 three years now. She has a long flat keel w/centerboard. The most annoying thing about this boat is she don't back! I mean back strait. You kind of have to swurl her around while backing using prop walk. I am not sure how other full keelers back. I assume not well.


----------



## ctl411 (Feb 15, 2009)

Bob I'm sure you had nothing to do with the race results . You are correct in that a "slow" boat sailed well makes others take notice. Everyone expects a J boat to be fast.


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

I think for many of us our boat choice reflects the painting we want to paint out on the water. It's a very subjective thing, very personal. Not sure, if you fall into this category and I suspect a lot of you do, that differences in performance really matter at all. You learn to compensate and plan trips around your boat's performace capabilities.


----------



## mad_machine (Dec 16, 2012)

GBurton said:


> Yes, and many people who sail these boats don't have the sails to make the boat move like it can. I prefer the heavier boat even if it means greater sail area than a lighter boat of similar length, because I like the way the heavier boat sails. Its a personal preference as others have stated in this thread.
> 
> Some make the assumption that, because they once sailed past a heavy full keeled boat "with all working sails flying" etc ad nauseum, that these boats are pigs.
> Not true.


exactly. My little 23 foot Sea Sprite has a 30 foot tall rig. Not exactly small for a boat it's size. It's PHRF rating is not that great (in the 200s) but on a day the winds are blowing, she will bury the rail and keep right on going.

Bob is also right. Looks are the main reason any of us buy what we go. I will admit I am a traditionalist. I love traditional looking boats. If I wanted a speed demon, I would own a multihull


----------



## dave6330 (Aug 16, 2006)

bobperry said:


> I think for many of us our boat choice reflects the painting we want to paint out on the water. It's a very subjective thing, very personal. Not sure, if you fall into this category and I suspect a lot of you do, that differences in performance really matter at all. You learn to compensate and plan trips around your boat's performace capabilities.


Very perceptive, Sir. I guess it's just like the houses we live in (or lived in) and the cars we drive - our choices is going to be driven by a mixture of what we can afford, what serves our needs best, what looks best and what we feel best reflects the image we want to project. No "right" answer here and one size absolutely does not fit all.

As one who is about to re-enter the market, I value all opinions.

Thanks all.

V/R

Dave


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

"what we feel best reflects the image we want to project."

I'll think about that the next time I drive my Subaru Outback to town.
How the hell did I go from being a Mercedes guy to being an Outback guy?


----------



## SloopJonB (Jun 6, 2011)

I've never been too concerned about the image I project with my choice of cars. I drive cars that I like and that are nice to drive - period.

If you need a certain type of car to bolster your sense of self by projecting a certain image, well.... Time you grew up or grew a pair.


----------



## Eder (Sep 21, 2009)

Its pretty easy to back up my IP 460 I use the bow thruster to steer.
I enjoyed crossing Georgia Strait today from Pender Harbour to Nanaimo...waves and wind were hard on the beam once we cleared Texada...we baked bread,drank coffee, took pictures but saw no other sailboats crossing...maybe they were waiting for better forecast on Wednesday(no wind).


----------



## manatee (Feb 27, 2013)

"...I finally understood that the whole point of boats, is, FUN!. That means that whatever you want to do is OK! The problem appears when people start thinking that there is one type of boat that will do all things. There isn't, you see."

George Buehler
George Buehler Yacht Design Home Page


----------



## TomMaine (Dec 21, 2010)

Boat popularity has something to do with location too. We like them all here on the coast of Maine, but the classics, some of which are rare in other parts of the world, are like the old houses that will never go out of style on the coast of New England. Rockport Harbor Maine last evening.










Like the old Hinckley B40. It'll always be at the top of any "favorite sailboat" poll. When you get ready to sell it, sail it to Maine overnight(like this one just did), anchor it in Cabot Cove in 4'3" of water, take a picture, and add 10% to the asking price.


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

Holy cow Tom!
Whats that double ender to the left in the upper photo.
It makes my heart beat fast.


----------



## TomMaine (Dec 21, 2010)

bobperry said:


> Holy cow Tom!
> Whats that double ender to the left in the upper photo.
> It makes my heart beat fast.


I think CAPUCELLO is a Rosinante', Bob. There are a few of them around but no two seem to be alike. It looks like a fun sail.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

Rozinante's have always made me swoon. In the right conditions and with the right crew they can be surprisingly fast, especially the wooden ones, which tend to be mix of a little lighter and with more ballast and sail area than the glass ones. 

Jeff


----------



## SloopJonB (Jun 6, 2011)

TomMaine said:


> Boat popularity has something to do with location too. We like them all here on the coast of Maine, but the classics, some of which are rare in other parts of the world, are like the old houses that will never go out of style on the coast of New England. Rockport Harbor Maine last evening.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Paint it dark blue first and add 20% to the price.


----------



## barefootnavigator (Mar 12, 2012)

Full keel, fin keel blah, blah, blah. It doesn't matter what you choose because 90% of people her in the San Juan's motor everywhere. I sail a full keel boat because I love the way she sails in all weather and yes she can back down under power. I think one of the largest benefits of my full keel cutter is that she can and does sail perfectly going backwards, I have sailed backwards all the way around every one of these islands. 
To the OP I live aboard in the PNW year round and have for 5 years, I think you are crazy for wanting this lifestyle but aren't most sailors crazy?

If you want a better performing traditional boat lose the furling sails, they cost you far more than the hull design in speed performance and have absolutely ruined performance under sail for all boats.

Get a boat with an excellent heating system, diesel is best for drying out the massive condensation you will experience for over half the year.

I'm not a fan of engines on sailboats but get a good one, you can only go 6 hours in any direction before the tide starts to pull you home.

When you arrive come by for a glass of wine, I'm always eager to meets people who are as insane as i am


----------



## Kenn43 (Feb 3, 2012)

deniseO30 said:


> Then everyone knows full keeled boats can't go in reverse under power. ( I don't know this)


I do know this.


----------



## TomMaine (Dec 21, 2010)

SloopJonB said:


> Paint it dark blue first and add 20% to the price.


That's right(Flag Blue they call it around here)! In fact, there may be a 3% deduction for Avocado, I'll check.


----------



## dave6330 (Aug 16, 2006)

barefootnavigator said:


> Full keel, fin keel blah, blah, blah. It doesn't matter what you choose because 90% of people her in the San Juan's motor everywhere. I sail a full keel boat because I love the way she sails in all weather and yes she can back down under power. I think one of the largest benefits of my full keel cutter is that she can and does sail perfectly going backwards, I have sailed backwards all the way around every one of these islands.
> To the OP I live aboard in the PNW year round and have for 5 years, I think you are crazy for wanting this lifestyle but aren't most sailors crazy?
> 
> If you want a better performing traditional boat lose the furling sails, they cost you far more than the hull design in speed performance and have absolutely ruined performance under sail for all boats.
> ...


God willing we'll meet up sometime down there and I'll have that glass of wine with you.


----------



## Advocate777 (Sep 28, 2010)

shanedennis said:


> Yes, for sure. IPs are built for a market that exists for "classic" cruising boats built like brick sh!thouses. They conjure dreams of low pressure cruising in reliable latitudes.
> 
> The long keelers are dream makers. They may not win any races around the buoys but they will give you the confidence to get out there.


Shanedennis-- very true....and that is a good thing as whatever gets you 'out there' or as John Lennon sang 'whatever gets you through the night..is alright, is alrright'

I guess race sailors, and sailing as a true sport- speed and performance - that is a level of purity which must be wonderful to experience - so, it is no wonder that real day sailors and race sailors would not be impressed with an IP. No problem there. But for those looking to sail in mid-latitudes the IP is a great boat. I am chartering an IP27 next week for 3 days and I have sailed on a IP31/32 previously so I will tell you all about it. Obviously, for sheer sailing thrill and pleasure and performance....the IP is a dog. But, for those of us who like to feel the heavy non-tender platform as a basis--even though we are obviously outsailed in light air, will enjoy the IP for other reasons.
Still, as a eager boat buyer.....the IP's do seem to be overpriced. But, in a market economy of supply and demand...that's just the way it is.
Now, I speak only as a beginner --Certainly not someone who has been sailing on many different boats for 30 years. 
In fact, I have never sailed on a fast sailboat...maybe that is a good thing as it would make me extra picky!
My only sailboats that I have sailed have been a 15-foot lake sailor/dinghy, a West Whight Potter 15 I owned in S. Florida, a 50 foot Pearson in Florida, a Island packet 32 and a Dufour Gib'Sea 50. That is the extent of my sailboats.
So....I'm sure I would be spoiled for speed and performance if I had been exposed to the sailboats that 'IP bashers' have sailed in. Maybe then I would be an 'IP basher'.
But....I am a middle aged guy looking for a relatively comfortable cruiser to sail the coastal atlantic, the keys, and the bahamas.. so, I'm sure there are many suitable boats for me...and I understand the IP bashers but I am not so knowledgeable to bash it as the boats I have sailed is negligible.
I might wind up buying an IP 29 or 31 and if I did.....I would consider myself fortunate to own such a boat!
But....I am always willing to learn which is the best affordable boat for my needs... and I respect all opinions, of course.


----------



## Classic30 (Aug 29, 2007)

Kenn43 said:


> deniseO30 said:
> 
> 
> > Then everyone knows full keeled boats can't go in reverse under power. ( I don't know this)
> ...


Well, FWIW, my old full-keeler goes in reverse under power just fine.. In fact, given the old girl's tendency to be blown sideways whilst coming into the marina at crawling speed, I find reverse allows me far more control than going forward.

Maybe you're doing something wrong?


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

777:
Well said. There are many different ways to enjoy sailing . There are no wrong ways.

Tom: I see now that it is a Rosinante. But in that first photo it looks twice as long and half as beamy. Must be the lens.


----------



## TomMaine (Dec 21, 2010)

bobperry said:


> 777:
> Well said. There are many different ways to enjoy sailing . There are no wrong ways.
> 
> Tom: I see now that it is a Rosinante. But in that first photo it looks twice as long and half as beamy. Must be the lens.


Good eye. Wide angle 10mm. It's a handy lens at the docks, especially for boats like this 22Square meter. For those that hate long overhangs, here's a teeth grinder.


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

Tom:
How could anyone hate those overhangs? That is beautiful and simply a product of it's rule. That rule produced some stunning boats.


----------



## SloopJonB (Jun 6, 2011)

Exactly! There is little that will make a boat as beautiful as long overhangs - performance be damned.


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

That cabin trunk is exquisite.


----------



## dave6330 (Aug 16, 2006)

I know it comes dangerously close to highjacking my own thread, but does anyone have any real-world (as opposed to anacdotal) experience they would be willing to share regarding the durability (over time as well as under stress) of the various rudder designs? 

What I want to hear are comments like, "we crossed the Atlantic with a spade rudder and never had a lick of trouble" or "ours broke off the stern in a mild five foot following swell".


----------



## SloopJonB (Jun 6, 2011)

Every boat I've owned has had a spade, on shafts or on pintles & gudgeons - I've never had a lick of trouble with any of them. 

The boats I've sailed with attached rudders were all much harder to steer than the spades. I've never sailed a boat with a skeg hung rudder.

I do know that I prefer a tiller and I absolutely HATE hydraulic steering - lifeless & insensitive as well as prone to leaks. I can't imagine why anyone would install it if they had ANY other option.

A spade with a tiller is stone axe technology - just what you want for steering a boat IMHO.


----------



## tidewaterv (Jul 18, 2013)

any cruising boat that has hull that is laid up glass WITHOUT a core material like balsa core or similar is a real safe start in a search .many early hulls before 1973 were made of different glass than those later.early were polyester &much harder & stronger ....also most polyester hulls do not get the pox...better known as blisters...almost any hull by c&c,hughes_canada..hinterholler,belleville marine made before 1973 should be considered.manufacturers changed because of cost but mostly because of molds catching fire..very flamable materiels before they harden...most people are not aware of these changes...but smart buyer s in the know will take this into consideration..


----------



## JomsViking (Apr 28, 2007)

Boats, Yachts: The Wonderful World of Hull Blistering

Read this for a more accurate description of blisters and how they happen.



tidewaterv said:


> any cruising boat that has hull that is laid up glass WITHOUT a core material like balsa core or similar is a real safe start in a search .many early hulls before 1973 were made of different glass than those later.early were polyester &much harder & stronger ....also most polyester hulls do not get the pox...better known as blisters...almost any hull by c&c,hughes_canada..hinterholler,belleville marine made before 1973 should be considered.manufacturers changed because of cost but mostly because of molds catching fire..very flamable materiels before they harden...most people are not aware of these changes...but smart buyer s in the know will take this into consideration..


----------



## JomsViking (Apr 28, 2007)

Trekka in which John Guzwell circumnavigated in the 1950's (at the time the smallest boat to circumnavigate) was a fin keel spade rudder design by Jack Laurent Giles. Both before, and not least, since thousands of spade rudders have circumnavigated, and I honestly believe Colin Archer and other naval architects of yore would have used spade rudders had the technology at the time permitted it.

I love old boats, but the bad copies of Colin Archer boats in GRP, Steel etc make me cringe especially when they're heavier than the originals.

/Joms



SloopJonB said:


> Every boat I've owned has had a spade, on shafts or on pintles & gudgeons - I've never had a lick of trouble with any of them.
> 
> The boats I've sailed with attached rudders were all much harder to steer than the spades. I've never sailed a boat with a skeg hung rudder.
> 
> ...


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

"also most polyester hulls do not get the pox...better known as blisters."

That's not the way I see it. Vinylester replaced polyester resin to avoid getting the blisters. Polyester resin was the problem. Today some builders will use polyester resin above the DWL and Vinylester resin below to avoid blisters. But a well built boat today will be all vinylester resin. It's more expensive than polyester resin and stronger. There are also today "modified polyester" resins that are far better than the old straight polyester resins. They are also cheaper than viylester resins. You can do a skin coat on a hull with vinylester resin then switch to modified polyester resin to save money but there is some labor involved bwteen the two coats. Vinylester resin is the first choice if you want to avoid the cost of epoxy resin.

I didn't want to get this response wrong. I felt the original post was quite misleading. I called Wtsrely Marine in Costa Mesa, one of if not the very best yard on the west coast and I talked to Steve, one of the owners. Westerly has built several of my boats. If this is not good enough for you I suggest calling a true expert on resins, Dennis at REVCHEM.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

The other nice thing about vinylester/glass matrix is that is more impact resistent and does not get a brittle or prone to fatigue as polyester. 

Based on research that I have read, blister problems were at their worst starting in the early 1970s and dropping off considerably by the end of the 1980's. My understanding of the problem was a manufacturing process change and reformulation that occurred due to the oil embargos of the 1970's. The earlier resins were less prone to blistering, but they were far more brittle and prone to fatigue, so pick your poison. 

Jeff


----------



## SloopJonB (Jun 6, 2011)

tidewaterv said:


> any cruising boat that has hull that is laid up glass WITHOUT a core material like balsa core or similar is a real safe start in a search .many early hulls before 1973 were made of different glass than those later.early were polyester &much harder & stronger ....also most polyester hulls do not get the pox...better known as blisters...almost any hull by c&c,hughes_canada..hinterholler,belleville marine made before 1973 should be considered.manufacturers changed because of cost but mostly because of molds catching fire..very flamable materiels before they harden...most people are not aware of these changes...but smart buyer s in the know will take this into consideration..


Lots of incorrect and/or bad info in that post. C&C's have had balsa hulls on many models practically back to their inception - they were a leader in that kind of build.

The glass didn't change much until the 80's - old boats are all mat and roving. Lyasil (unidirectional) glass was pretty high tech in the mid 70's. IIRC it was the 80's before uncrimped (bi-axial) fabric was developed.

The boats with pox are almost universally polyester resin. Vinylester was a response to pox which is pretty well understood to have been caused by resin reformulations after the oil embargoes (along with some questionable laminating practices)

You actually don't want an overly hard resin - it's brittle. That's one of the big advantages to epoxy - it remains quite flexible after it's cured. Polyester resin is like rock candy when it's cured which means no "toughness". Let some pure poly resin cure and drop it on cement - you'll see (wear glasses)


----------



## Classic30 (Aug 29, 2007)

SloopJonB said:


> The boats with pox are almost universally polyester resin. Vinylester was a response to pox which is pretty well understood to have been caused by resin reformulations after the oil embargoes (along with some questionable laminating practices)


Beware... the dreaded Polyestermite!!


----------



## Blusailn (Aug 11, 2013)

bobperry said:


> "Overweight tanks"?
> 
> I agree with you and I chuckle when I think back to 1974 when a noted yacht designer writing an article in YACHTING wrote that the Valiant was "too light to be considered a serious offshore boat".
> 
> ...


Bob,
Interesting that I ran across this post. I have owned IPs for 25 years but sold my IP420 last year. I have always been drawn to your brilliant designs and decided to 'jump ship' and appease my longing for the double ender 'traditional' full of teak beauties. I have narrowed that search down to a Baba PH 35 and a Tashiba 36. I've sailed neither. My sailing latitudes will be southerly, so I'm not sure of the utility of the PH versus just a full canvas enclosure. I love the layout of the Baba PH 35, albeit I do worry about a window 'blowout' in heavy weather. A friend of mine owns a Tashiba 36. Gorgeous! Bluewaterboats.org touts the Tashiba 36 as stiff, fast, and close-winded. Are they more so than the Baba's? I can imagine you are more than tired of answering these types of comparison questions, but I plan for this to be my last sailboat purchase and I would value whatever you would like to share. Your work is amazing, Bob....THANK YOU for the countless hours I've enjoyed simply admiring your sailboats.

Most sincerely,
Paula


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

Paula:
Many thanks for the kind words.
Without a doubt the Tashiba 36 is the better boat. They may look like the Baba 35 and the Baba 30 but they are far more like the Baba 40 in hull form. They are better designs (I learned as I went along) and they have superior performance. While the Baba 35 sails well, the Tashiba 36 sails great. It's a sleeper. If you were here in the office with me I could easily point out the hull shape differences. Kind of hard on a web site.

I think you should be patient and find a Tashiba 36.

Bob P.


----------



## Blusailn (Aug 11, 2013)

I was thrilled to get your reply, Bob. Thank you so very much. The Tashiba it is! Have a wonderful week!

Grateful,
Paula


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

Blu:
Not sure where you are but if you in the PNW we have the Perry Rendezvous at Port Ludlow this weekend. We usually get around 50 boats and it's a good time for someone to compare boats. I'll be there but I'll be relaxing and trying not to work.

You can Google Perry Rendezvous 2013 and find out all about it.


----------



## Blusailn (Aug 11, 2013)

Hey, Bob. I had read about the rendezvous in the thread and sure wish that was a possibility for me. I really would enjoy that! But Georgia is a bit far. I'm sure there will be many beautiful boats present, I'm jealous. Have a wonderful time and thank you!

Paula


----------



## GBurton (Jun 26, 2007)

Tashiba 31 PHRF 234


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

Right but we are talking about the Tashiba 36 not the 31.


----------



## GBurton (Jun 26, 2007)

bobperry said:


> "Overweight tanks"?
> 
> I agree with you and I chuckle when I think back to 1974 when a noted yacht designer writing an article in YACHTING wrote that the Valiant was "too light to be considered a serious offshore boat".
> 
> ...


Sorry, my bad.


----------



## GBurton (Jun 26, 2007)

Perhaps the boat sails a bit better than that 234 rating? I know my Westsail 32 sails better than her 216 rating....


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

Burton:
Do you race your Westsail? If so where?

There is a W-32 that has been very succesfully raced in California. But this is a very well equipped boat with very good sails and some good sailors sailing it. It's not your Mom and Pop Westsail so I would consider it indicative of the design as a prodction boat with the current rating. Still very impressive though on the right race course. I always watch their racing efforts with interest.


----------



## GBurton (Jun 26, 2007)

I do race my boat but she is not the boat you are thinking of, that would be Oregonians boat, SARABAND. You know, the one you just called BS on.

His sails are actually at least 20 years old and his rig is standard... and the interior is definitely not stripped out. So old dacron sails (except for the old nylon spinnaker and reacher/drifter)


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

Yes, SARABAND was the boat I was thinking of and I most certainly did not call BS on the boat in any way. I have watched him race that boat for several years and admired the results. I do not know the man. He does very well racing that boat. I thought there was a fairly recent interview with him where he talked about a Kevlar genoa. I must be mistaken. By "turbo" I was not inferring a taller rig, just a well set up sail plan considering the boat is a Westsail. Nor did I say anything about the interior at all. Now you must be confused. I have no idea what his interior is.


----------



## jraymer (Feb 23, 2012)

I started reading this thread hoping to get some info about bulb and wing keels. I like deep fin keels and was wondering how bulb and wing keels compare. Thanks, Jim.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

jraymer said:


> I started reading this thread hoping to get some info about bulb and wing keels. I like deep fin keels and was wondering how bulb and wing keels compare. Thanks, Jim.


Bulbed keels are used on "normal" draft boats, wing keels are used in swallow draft boat as a way to partially compensate the difference in draft. The compensation is some but not much. The draft is very important to a sailboat, not only to make it lighter ( a wing keel has to be heavier to compensate the RM) but to better the upwind performance.

If you want to have an idea of the difference in performance you can go to a PHRF list and compare the same boat with wing keel and deep draft and you will see that there are a very considerable difference.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## jraymer (Feb 23, 2012)

Hi Paulo.
So I take it leeway would be worse with bulb/wing keels?

Jim.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

jraymer said:


> Hi Paulo.
> So I take it leeway would be worse with bulb/wing keels?
> 
> Jim.


Some confusion here. I was talking about deep draft bulbed keels versus wing keels.

Yes on a wing keel assuming it is a shallow draft wing keel you will have more leeway and also less pointing ability.

Some American boat builders like Hunter or Catalina only started to use bulbed deep draft keels recently but they are the standard on cruising boats for almost two decades.

Previous to that the standard was a fin not bulbed keel (iron or lead). In what regards leeway and pointing ability it is the same: Way better than in a shallow draft wing keel.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

I have some interesting first hand experience in this area. I designed the Islander 34 about 25 years ago. We did two keels for the boat. One keel drew 5’ and had wings. The other keel ,sharing the same root fin, drew 7’ and was a clean tip fin keel. One keel was on hull number one. The other keel was on hull number two. Both boats were launched the same day. Both boats had identical new sets of sails. I flew to California with my right hand man, Paul, and we spent two days racing the two boats against each other, upwind, downwind, reaching, tight windward course, and long downwind course. For two days we did this while switching crews. Paul and I never sailed on the same boat. I wanted to be certain that the boat I was racing against had a skipper I trusted, one with far better than average sailing skills. Paul was a skilled racer.

After two days of constant sailing it was clear. Neither boat had a boat speed edge on the other. This was not what we expected but it is what we found to be true. Upwind and down either boat could beat the other depending on wind shifts and tactics but not boat speed. Much of the time we sailed very close to each other to access the speed differences. We sort of thought the wing keel might be faster accelerating out of a tack. We sort of felt the wing keel did not track downwind as well as the deep draft keel. But there was no definitive performance difference. For sure, we looked for one.

This is not theory. This is not conjecture. This I first hand experience with real boats and real sailors. It was the chance to do an experiment with two identical boats and that is a rare opportunity.

So what I would like you to take away from this report is that all wing keels are not created equal. All deep draft keels are not created equal. All bulb keels etc. You can theorize and generalize but leave room for exceptions to the generalities. You can have a very well designed wing keel or a very poorly designed wing keel. The only thing they will share in common is that they both have wings. The geometry of the wings could be totally different. The geometry of the fins could be totally different, Lots of variable availables here. Good bulb shape vs bad bulb shape. Good bulb on a bad fin? Bad bulb ona good fin? Lots of variables.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

Sure, there is nothing like reality and I don't know the fin keel you are talking about (or the wing keel) but that is an exception in what regards the typical deep fin keels and typical swallow wing keel, the ones that are used by most designers. Why?

Because otherwise all will be racing with low draft wing keels. I don't know of any boat with a version of low draft wing keel that has not a significantly higher rating (PHRF) so if the boats had the same performance it would be a lot easier to sail the wing keel to the higher rating, even sail easily over it and win all the races. 

Boats with fin keel and big draft would not stand a chance: Their performance would be similar and the rating a lot lower, I mean the PHRF number would be lower. They would win all races on compensated time and would be as fast on the water.

That is not what happens.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

Paulo has laid out the components and the variable pretty thoroughly here. And I totally agree, if in doubt, check the PHRF rating differences. They are not theory.

A couple things I should add;

I owe the success of the Islander 34 wing keel to Dave Vacanti. I hired Dave because he is an expert in foil performance and a buddy of mine. Dave did the geometry and foil choice for the 34’s wings. I’ll take the credit for the design, it’s a great one but Dave gets the credit for that wing keel. Google Dave Vacanti.

You can’t put fat, stubby wings on a fat, stubby fin and get good results. You’ll get fat, stubby results. You can’t put a fat, stubby bulb on a fat, stubby fin and get good results. As Paulo points out the ratings will verify this. For fins and wings to be effective they need aspect ratio. The problem is that Mom and Pop can’t live with long, thin, bladelike wings sticking off their keel. They are just not durable enough. So the designer or builder has to compromise. A highly compromised set of wings may help you lower the VCG of the boat and reward you with decent stability in a shoal draft situation but it will not give you the lift you need for speed to weather. There are no magic bullets in keel design.

Now, go to the blackboard and write 1,000 times, "There is no substitute for draft."


----------



## jraymer (Feb 23, 2012)

There is no substitute for draft, there is no substitute for draft, there is...

Thanks for adding your knowledge Bob. I really appreciate it. I am shopping for a boat and the ones I like are coming with wing keels but I really prefer deep fin. Thanks for your input Paulo. You guys cleared up a big question of mine.

Jim.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

bobperry said:


> ...
> 
> A couple things I should add;
> 
> ...


Bob, It seems we are talking about a very special keel with foils as wings, not the typical mass production keel. It seems very interesting. I would like very much to have a look. Can you post a drawing?

Yes, I found out very interesting "stuff" by Dave Vacanti. Interesting read. Thanks!

Regards

Paulo


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

Paulo:
Those drawings are hand drawn. I will have to get them digitized but I'd be happy to do that next week and post them.

The other thing I should have added was that we were in agreement that the deep draft boat was the more pleasant boat to sail. We preferred the feel of the deep keel boat. Dave Vacanti also flew to Calfornia for the test sail. Somewhere in my archives I have a report Dave wrote on the test. I'll see if I can find it. It was fun. My friend lent me his Mercedes 6.3 litre SEL while we were there.


----------



## ctl411 (Feb 15, 2009)

Compromise is a good thing in keels. A new Jen 379 at the yard I'm at has the "Catalina" smile. The dealer says yard blocked wrong. Not sure who is going to pay for the fix. I think a lot of finger pointing is going to happen. Long narrow fins are good for ultimate performance up to the point where you ground out or a little bump breaks the boat.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

ctl411;1113695... said:


> ong narrow fins are good for ultimate performance up to the point where you ground out or a little bump breaks the boat.


If the boat is well built, as most are, a little bump is not going to break the boat. Some way back on this thread there is a movie with a racing boat with very narrow and deep torpedo keel being dragged (after having grounding with waves) on the beach to the sea (with waves again) and being put afloat again. Lots of hard bumps and the keel remained solid and on its place.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## ctl411 (Feb 15, 2009)

Being put afloat and being OK are not the same. Was the boat floated then pulled for repair? I'm not saying it can't be made strong just takes better design and build to do it. I've hit bottom with my Cherubini hunters moderate fin keels no damage. But the Jen 379 was just blocked a little wrong and damage occurred.


----------



## jraymer (Feb 23, 2012)

Another question I've always had concerning keels is how important is b/d ratio to performance,comfort ect.

Jim.

Especially concerning fin keels. Jim.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

ctl411 said:


> A new Jen 379 at the yard I'm at has the "Catalina" smile. The dealer says yard blocked wrong. ... But the Jen 379 was just blocked a little wrong and damage occurred.


What is a Catalina smile? what is blocked wrong? The Jeanneau 379 can have three different keels. What is the one you are talking about?

Regards

Paulo


----------



## ctl411 (Feb 15, 2009)

Crack at the hull keel joint it makes a smile shape. Keel is a L shape bulb.


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

raymer:
B/D has everything/zero to do with the keel design.

The ballast could all be internal, up in the hull the way some of Ted Hood's big boats are. Or, like some of the old IOR boats were. The fin could be a non buoyant material with nom actual ballast. Or go further back to a time when all the ballast was internal. Hard to imagine but there was a time when outside lead ballast was considered only fit for radical racing yachts.

Your question is very broad.

In the audiophile world we have asaying, "Everything effects everything."


----------



## jraymer (Feb 23, 2012)

Thanks Bob. I understand a little better now.

Jim.


----------



## jraymer (Feb 23, 2012)

Just read "keel design according to perry". It answered a lot of questions for me. Helps my boat search a bunch. Thanks grumpy.

Jim.


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

Shaddup kid.


----------



## blt2ski (May 5, 2005)

jraymer said:


> Just read "keel design according to perry". It answered a lot of questions for me. Helps my boat search a bunch. Thanks grumpy.
> 
> Jim.


Whom is this "perry" person you speak of!?!?!?!?!?!!!!:laugher:laugher


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

huh?


----------



## AlaskaMC (Aug 19, 2010)

bobperry said:


> huh?


How do I sign up for that class? That crowd looks a bit younger than my last ASA outing for sure though. Good to get 'em into the sport young Bob!


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

I volunteer at a 5th grade class. The teacher uses an integrated aproach to all the subjects based on sailing the world on a square rigger. I go down and teach the kids about sailing ships. I have them all draw sailing ships. I also do music with them. I enjoy it and I have done it for at least 25 years.


----------



## AlaskaMC (Aug 19, 2010)

Those are lucky kids!


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

This year ARC will be interesting to measure the performance of old bluewater designs with modern ones.

No, there is not any true full keel boat among the 200 boats but there are some boats from the next generation, fin modified keel, I mean that keel that is in between a true narrow fin and a full keel.

Well, it is better than nothing for comparative purposes in what regards performance and those boats have already a better performance than full keel boats.

Of course, the way the boats are sailed also counts but in so many boats we can easily discover a pattern and see if the claim that modern performance cruisers when loaded are as slow or not much faster than those boats. Almost all boats that are making the ARC, are in fact going to the Caribbean to pass the European winter there and are loaded accordingly.

We have there some that are great boats of an older design, like the Shanon 37, a Nauticat 42, a Gozzard 41, a Trintella 45, two Island Packet 380, a Island Packet 45, a Pacific Seacraft 40, a Rustler 36.

In what regards performance cruisers of the same size on we have on the cruising division:

A Sabre 386, a Grand Soleil 43 OT, 2 Beneteau First 47.7, a Pogo 40. There are more performance cruisers but they are on the racing division taking the opportunity to have some fun. It would not be fair to compare boats cruising with boats racing even if nobody likes to be left behind so we will only compare boats cruising, not racing.

We can also compare the performance of those old designs with the performance of modern cruisers, I mean modern but not performance boats:

We have a 2 XC45, a Jeanneau Sun Odyssey 43, a Hanse 445, a Jeanneau Sun Odyssey 49, a Dehler 32, a Delphia 33, a Beneteau Oceanis473, a Allures 39.9, a Hallberg Rassy 372 and a Southerly 42.

I kept only on the list of modern boats recent designs and excluded older boats even if with a fin keel.The subject here is the comparison of old designs with contemporary designs, fully loaded an on an Atlantic crossing.

It will be fun The ARC will start in some days.

ARC


----------



## SloopJonB (Jun 6, 2011)

That should provide some interesting info and comparisons.

Please keep us posted.


----------



## GBurton (Jun 26, 2007)

Actually there is a full keel boat in the fleet, a Laurin 32










According to the "leaderboard" the boat is in 18th place of 36.....and the 4th smallest boat in the fleet.

Can this be real Paulo?


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

GBurton said:


> Actually there is a full keel boat in the fleet, a Laurin 32
> 
> 
> 
> ...


First I thought you were kidding me, you know the ARC has not yet begun but then I understood that you were talking about the ARC+ a side event with a much smaller number of boats, boats that could not find place on the ARC.

A single example will not prove much, you need several cases to have a pattern in what regards statistics. That boat can be sailed much better than others, flying a spinnaker while others are not using it. You need several cases to be statistically relevant and that's why I had on a previous post considered several old boats and several modern boats.

Even so, even if that boat is well sailed I don't understand your enthusiasm.

You as usual confound *corrected* time with *real time*. The boat that is called Corona has a time of 6d 12h 32m 31s and his in corrected time in 18th place out of 36 but the one that is 33th has real time of 5d 23h 44m 49s and it is incomparably faster

That means that the boat that is in 33th place has already an advantage of about 12 hours over the one that is in 18th.

So please, look at the map were the boats are in real time and there you will see that the boat is on the back of the pack.

The last one is an Oyster 35 mariner, one of those heavy boats with a modified fin keel, or kind of a short long keel. Very close goes another of those, a Passport 40.

Anyway there are few boats on this rally and we cannot compare performances namely what regards the main question: the performance modern performance cruisers loaded with the performance of old designed heavy boats, preferably with full or modified fin keel. There are not a single modern performance cruiser of that size racing, I mean regarding your full keel boat.

Yes, we can compare the performance of other old designed heavy boats like the Passport 40 that goes before the last (6d 20h 11m 7s) with the only performance cruiser with about the same size even if a little bigger, a Bavaria Match 42 (5d 1h 30m 16s), almost two days less but the Bavaria Match is not a contemporary model. We can also compare it with a smaller modern light cruiser (not a performance cruiser), an Hanse 370 that has a real time of 6d 0h 16m 8s, almost a day less.

Anyway there is not many boats to compare here, I mean old heavy designs with modern performance cruisers. On the big one with more than 200 boats we would have a lot more to compare and we can get meaningful results, I mean statistically. Starts in some days.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

Paulo:
Don't confuse poor GB with reality. He sees what he wants to see.


----------



## GBurton (Jun 26, 2007)

Enthusiastic? haha  No Paulo, I'm just pointing out that once again facts prove you wrong. Besides, if the boat was well sailed it wouldn't be midpack, it would be first (on corrected time)
The fact is that this very old design full keel boat (is it built from wood?) is sailing boat for boat better than bigger more modern "faster" boats.


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

GB:
Yes you are correct and soon the world will see your wisdom and all the best boats will have full keels once again.

The full keel shall rise again!

" if the boat was well sailed it wouldn't be midpack, it would be first (on corrected time)"
Well, that would all depend on the rating wouldn't it. The rating could be so fast that Dennis Connor couldn't win with it. But there again, reality has no place in this argument. Youy see what you want to see.

And if you have trouble reading drawings GB let me help you. The drawing posted clearly shows a GRP boat. There is no evidence of wooden structure. But don't let reality bother you.

Full keels forever!


----------



## Classic30 (Aug 29, 2007)

GBurton said:


> Enthusiastic? haha  No Paulo, I'm just pointing out that once again facts prove you wrong. Besides, if the boat was well sailed it wouldn't be midpack, it would be first (on corrected time)


If the owner was best friends with the handicapper, the boat could be *badly* sailed and still be first (on corrected time). That's just how the system works. 



GBurton said:


> The fact is that this very old design full keel boat (is it built from wood?) is sailing boat for boat better than bigger more modern "faster" boats.


It would be nice if that were true.. but it isn't. Never mind...


----------



## GBurton (Jun 26, 2007)

bobperry said:


> GB:
> Yes you are correct and soon the world will see your wisdom and all the best boats will have full keels once again.
> 
> The full keel shall rise again!
> ...


Bob, let me help you out, the design was built in wood and fg. Forgive me for pointing out that the boat in the picture is not the boat in the Rally. Unless you have personal knowledge of the boat in the rally you don't know if it is built from wood or fg. The design was first produced in 1964 apparently.

Concerning the rating, are you saying that the numbers could be wrong? hahahaha .... you who flourish PHRF like a trump card? 

LAURIN 32 sailboat specifications and details on sailboatdata.com


----------



## Classic30 (Aug 29, 2007)

bobperry said:


> The full keel shall rise again!


I do hope not. That would mean he's turtled.. and in mid ocean, too!


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

GB:
Speak English please.

Come out of your cave. It is 2013 not 1948. If you like your heavy, full keel boat that's just great. Enjoy. Many of us prefer more modern designs. They have proven over and over to be better boats. If full keels boats were better boats we would be sailing them today.

But they are not. I like all kinds of boats but I appreciate them for what they are and not what they are not. I don't try to pretend they are something else. I can understand that you have have a problem with this. I just can't understand why. Look around. The time of the full keel boat as a presentative of a performance craft has come and gone.

Gb I'm not sure what you are trying to say. Could you please sum it up in one cogent and succinct statement? What is your point?

Unfortunately I'll have to miss it. I have to drive in to Seattle tonight to play some music with some old buddies, Red Crane, 175th Aurora N.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

GBurton said:


> Enthusiastic? haha  ...
> The fact is that this very old design full keel boat (is it built from wood?) is sailing boat for boat better than bigger more modern "faster" boats.


Yes you are right but that does not prove nothing except the boat is much better sailed than those bigger ones. None of those bigger boats that are behind is a performance cruiser or even a contemporary cruiser.

Anyway I did not say more modern, I said modern meaning contemporary and not any modern boat but a performance cruiser.

You (and others) said that a modern performance cruiser loaded would not be faster than an old design with full keel loaded. Here you just don't have any performance cruiser with the size of that old keeler and you just don't have the number of boats to take any relevant conclusion.

Let's wait for the big ARC where there are several old designs and also several performance cruisers with roughly the same size. That should take away any doubts.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

You ask for a simple explanation of what someone is laboring at trying to say and 
"poof" they are gone.


----------



## GBurton (Jun 26, 2007)

bobperry said:


> You ask for a simple explanation of what someone is laboring at trying to say and
> "poof" they are gone.


The topic is "full keel". Am I the only one who is on topic lately? All it takes to raise the ire of some posters is a simple post pointing out that the only full keel boat in the rally is sailing quite well thank you.

Please try not to be so emotional about this.


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

No thanks Gb. Keep your advice.
I've made a nice living being "emotional" about boats. I call it being "passionate". It has served and still serves me very well. I see no reason at all to change my approach.

Here is another "emotional" expression of my work.


----------



## mitiempo (Sep 19, 2008)

Which design is that Bob? I like it. Don't recognize it though.


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

Miti:
That's my latest design for an East Coast client.


----------



## jameswilson29 (Aug 15, 2009)

That is a beauty!

Interesting you list specs we usually don't see: righting moment, wetted surface area, lbs. per sq. in., etc.


----------



## AlaskaMC (Aug 19, 2010)

bobperry said:


> Miti:
> That's my latest design for an East Coast client.


Bob,

Is the plan to finish it bright? I love it.


----------



## puddinlegs (Jul 5, 2006)

Did a B-40 and a Passport mate? 

Now if it has a Westsail keel, you'd have something there, Bob.


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

Thanks guys.
No it will be a dark blue hull with a teak overlay on the transom as per the client's current Hinckley.

James:
Can't very well expect you guys to get a feel for the design if I don't post those numbers.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

bobperry said:


> Thanks guys.
> No it will be a dark blue hull with a teak overlay on the transom as per the client's current Hinckley.
> 
> James:
> Can't very well expect you guys to get a feel for the design if I don't post those numbers.


I assume you are going to make a full keel version and that's why you are posting this gorgeous boat on a full keel thread. When can we see it?

Regards

Paulo


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

Paulo:
Just for you I will do a special full keel version.

No,,,wait,,,,I'll give you two, tandem full keels.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

bobperry said:


> Paulo:
> Just for you I will do a special full keel version.
> 
> ...]


I prefer the full keel. Twin keels don't make sense on a narrow boat

Regards

Paulo


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

When I get a free moment I'll draw the Paulo's full keel version. That will be fun.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

GBurton said:


> The topic is "full keel". Am I the only one who is on topic lately? All it takes to raise the ire of some posters is a simple post pointing out that the only full keel boat in the rally is sailing quite well thank you.
> 
> ...


Yes you are right. The boat has even went up on the classification and is now in 13th on compensated. To be on that position regarding bigger boats and to be only in 13th on compensated that means also that it is a relatively fast boat (with a high rating), certainly a very fast boat for a full keel and one very well sailed (they are cruising not racing).

I was curious about the boat that I did not knew and found out that the boat was built for a long time and only the first versions were made of wood. The designer Arvid Laurin designed a new boat in fiberglass in 1960:

*"In their search for a suitable plug, they chose "Casella II" an Arvid Laurin design - which had participated in the Transatlantic Race from Bermuda to Gothenburg n 1960, arranged to celebrate the centenary of the foundation of GKSS (Gothenburg's Royal Yacht Club). Her owner - Yngve Cassel - was approached and for a fee he agreed to have his boat used as a full-scale mould

Somehow Arvid Laurin got wind of this plan and pointed out to MFI, that it was not recommendable to build a glass fibre version of an old design, when he could draw them a better and faster one, especially designed to take advantage of the flexibility of glass fiber construction. MFI agreed and Arvid Laurin set out to do something quite new to him, drawing a 32' boat that would not be built of wood but in a much more flexible material allowing curvatures that previously had been impossible."*

Laurin 32

The last versions used cored hulls for superior stiffness and less weight. A very interesting boat that should have been very fast in its days and that today if well sailed can still have a relatively good performance. A nice one too:





I saw also that the boat has been used extensively for offshore sailing and have circumnavigated several times:

Blue Water

Regarding the Corona, the one that is doing the ARC. here you have the boat blog:

They are not young, but great sailors no doubt:

Corona Aq seglingsblogg

Regards

Paulo


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

bobperry said:


> When I get a free moment I'll draw the Paulo's full keel version. That will be fun.


Do me also one with a lifting keel with 1,80/3.00m draft, a keel with very narrow fin with a torpedo, with an epoxy cored hull and vacuum infusion, with a light interior and carbon mast and boom. Give me a hugely stiff boat. I am undecided between that one and the one with the full keel.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## Faster (Sep 13, 2005)

I think you need to get a 'good faith' deposit from Paulo, Bob.. that's a 'picky client'

.. and he'll probably want both built before he chooses!


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

It's lunchtime and I couldn't resist having some fun.
I love that full keel double ender. My kind of boat.


----------



## mitiempo (Sep 19, 2008)

PCP said:


> Yes you are right. The boat has even went up on the classification and is now in 13th on compensated. To be on that position regarding bigger boats and to be only in 13th on compensated that means also that it is a relatively fast boat (with a high rating), certainly a very fast boat for a full keel and one very well sailed (they are cruising not racing).
> 
> I was curious about the boat that I did not knew and found out that the boat was built for a long time and only the first versions were made of wood. The designer Arvid Laurin designed a new boat in fiberglass in 1960:
> 
> ...


Pretty boat, reminds me of a Tumlaren like Adlard Coles Cohoe, but not quite as lean.


----------



## mitiempo (Sep 19, 2008)

bobperry said:


> Thanks guys.
> No it will be a dark blue hull with a teak overlay on the transom as per the client's current Hinckley.
> 
> James:
> Can't very well expect you guys to get a feel for the design if I don't post those numbers.


Beautiful Bob, just beautiful. The layout is great as well, good galley as yours always are and not cramming 2 heads in makes it very spacious. The only layout change I would make is for a pullman instead of the V berth. It would lose the direct access from the forward cabin to the head though. That's the advantage of a custom boat though, you get exactly what you desire.


----------



## DJR351 (Mar 3, 2010)

bobperry said:


> It's lunchtime and I couldn't resist having some fun.
> I love that full keel double ender. My kind of boat.


If it's available with a Cutter Ketch rig I may be interested.....


----------



## mitiempo (Sep 19, 2008)

bobperry said:


> It's lunchtime and I couldn't resist having some fun.
> I love that full keel double ender. My kind of boat.


G Burton might even like it!


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

Miti:
The V berths were designed so that two men could sleep there without feeling too,,,,,,chummy?


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

Bob,

The real version is a really lovely boat. You can sort of tell the client is a former Hinckley guy from the portlights and forward trim on the house which carry a faint sent of an H.H past. Really nice piece of work-thank you for sharing that. 

Jeff


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

Jeff:
The other keel versions were just me having fun with Paulo while am amusing myself as I ate my lunch. Think of those as Reuben sandwich keels. Unfortunately I was more emotional about my Reuben than I was about the keels. But I'll try harder to immerse myself emotionally the next time.


----------



## jraymer (Feb 23, 2012)

Hi Bob.

What a nice looking boat. If it's not too late, I'd like to get on the wanna-be crew list for the first sail. Hope you get good wind.

Good luck, Jim.


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

You are on Jim.
But you have to bring the beer.


----------



## jraymer (Feb 23, 2012)

bobperry said:


> You are on Jim.
> But you have to bring the beer.


You got it!


----------



## Classic30 (Aug 29, 2007)

Jeff_H said:


> Bob,
> 
> The real version is a really lovely boat. You can sort of tell the client is a former Hinckley guy from the portlights and forward trim on the house which carry a faint sent of an H.H past. Really nice piece of work-thank you for sharing that.
> 
> Jeff


I agree with Jeff 100%.

Truthfully, I've never been as massive a fan of Bob's designs as others here are (just not into 'modern' - sorry)... but that there is *a real work of art*!

So much for retirement - methinks you've outdone yourself, Bob.


----------



## Classic30 (Aug 29, 2007)

mitiempo said:


> Pretty boat, reminds me of a Tumlaren like Adlard Coles Cohoe, but not quite as lean.


Brian, _Cohoe_ was a Stor-tumlaren - not a "real" one.

Here's what a Tumlaren looks like (this is _Galatea_ - one of a few in our fleet):









But, yes, a pretty boat in PCP's post... and a lot more "Koster" than "Tumlaren".


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

bobperry said:


> Miti:
> The V berths were designed so that two men could sleep there without feeling too,,,,,,chummy?


Sorry Bob, I went to have dinner with friends.

It is amazing how a keel can change the looks of a boat. That draft is what? 2.30/2.40m?

I really like the look of the boat and yes if I had the money for that kind of boat and the costs associated with I am sure you could design me, taking as base that design a boat I could live with

It makes no sense to have a custom boat if the boat is like the others so imagining that I went through with it the first thing I would ask regarding your boat was a top building with epoxy vacuum infused technology with carbon reinforcements. That and an even deeper keel (lifting keel) and a modern interior would allow a much lighter boat with less wet surface and less rocker. A top builder could make a boat like that with about, let's say 5000/6000kg for the hull and something like 3000/3500kg of ballast.

That and a much more elongated torpedo on the keel would be a good start.

That boat with a big stiffness a great grip on the water about 8000kg of displacement and the possibility to reduce draft to 1.80m could really convince me to have a classical looking boat. Yes I know the keel would create problems in the interior but with 46ft I am sure that I could handle that in what regards design. Well if not with 46, with 48ft, but who cares if I would have money for that I would not be much concerned about the extra cost. Dreams don't have price

Thanks for the drawing.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

Paulo:

I like it too but I'd go fixed keel.
That is 2.89m draft as drawn. I did that sketch in 10 minutes while I ate my lunch. See that mustard next to the rudder.

Right, a lifting keel drives the interior design But that can be dealt with.

I think you should get a night job and save your money.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

bobperry said:


> Paulo:
> 
> I like it too but I'd go fixed keel.
> That is 2.89m draft as drawn. I did that sketch in 10 minutes while I ate my lunch. See that mustard next to the rudder.
> ...


 Nah, on that I am with with Brent: I prefer to keep my boat and go cruising in it 4 months a year instead of getting that night job for having a boat when I will only to be able to sail it from a wheel chair

Regards

Paulo


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

Well, I should talk. I don't even have a day job. I just design boats all day long. It's a hard life.


----------



## mitiempo (Sep 19, 2008)

Classic30 said:


> Brian, _Cohoe_ was a Stor-tumlaren - not a "real" one.
> 
> Here's what a Tumlaren looks like (this is _Galatea_ - one of a few in our fleet):
> 
> ...


As I understand it both of Coles' Tumlare were designed by Knud Reimers. Zara was less than 22' on the waterline. Cohoe won the TransAtlantic race of 1950. Both Zara and Cohoe were raced extensively in open ocean, and Coles loved the light feel of the tiller. I remember a picture in the early edition of Heavy Weather Sailing showing his hand on the tiller in a gale. He was also quoted as saying they were as wet as a half tide rock.

The Koster is definitely a fuller heavier boat but the reminder is still there, despite the differences.

I haven't read Heavy Weather Sailing for decades. I should pull it out for a re-read. Even though it has been updated multiple times I always liked Coles writing style and have not bought any of the newer editions.

What is the difference between a Stor-Tumlare and a Tumlare?


----------



## mitiempo (Sep 19, 2008)

Classic

I think I found the answer. Stor means large in Swedish. Tumlaren means Dolphin. Apparently Knud Reimers (a Dane) designed the Tumlaren class in 1933 to marry the Koster boat, long and narrow, with the speed potential of a Scandinavian Skerry cruiser.

Adlard Coles gave the name Cohoe to all his boats - after the fastest of the salmon.

Back to researching Tumlare.


----------



## Classic30 (Aug 29, 2007)

mitiempo said:


> Classic
> 
> I think I found the answer. Stor means large in Swedish. Tumlaren means Dolphin. Apparently Knud Reimers (a Dane) designed the Tumlaren class in 1933 to marry the Koster boat, long and narrow, with the speed potential of a Scandinavian Skerry cruiser.
> 
> ...


Yep, you got it. 

There are subtle design differences between a Stor-Tum and a regular Tum - mainly to do with the Tum being originally intended to be a 20m2 class racing yacht whilst the Stor was more... "comfortable".

Koster's are quite something (particularly the Norwegian wooden ones) and there are a couple of (very quiet) people I know on this forum who are lucky enough to own them.

To sail a Tum is an experience in itself.. ask anyone who has owned one. A little like driving a sports coupe along a winding ocean road, it's a whole new enjoyment of wind and water. I'd love to have one - and there are a fair few around to choose from - and they are certainly a lot quicker than my old bus, but one Classic at a time is enough for me.

Happy researching!!

EDIT:


mitiempo said:


> As I understand it both of Coles' Tumlare were designed by Knud Reimers. Zara was less than 22' on the waterline. Cohoe won the TransAtlantic race of 1950. Both Zara and Cohoe were raced extensively in open ocean, and Coles loved the light feel of the tiller. I remember a picture in the early edition of Heavy Weather Sailing showing his hand on the tiller in a gale. He was also quoted as saying they were as wet as a half tide rock.


Well, a half-tide rock isn't always wet all of the time..  There's been a bit of unpleasantness around our clubs recently over the fact that the Tums don't have self-draining cockpits and are thus deemed by some to be "unsafe" in the rough stuff. Interestingly though, over the course of their +80 year history in this country not one has ever been sunk in a storm. IIRC, three Tums competed in a long-distance race on our Port Phillip back in the late thirties in which one other yacht sank and half the remaining fleet turned back, yet all 3 Tums finished the race just fine... and, as you point out, Adlard Coles took his safely across the Atlantic.

Mr Reimers certainly knew how to design a racing yacht.


----------



## mitiempo (Sep 19, 2008)

When I was young I saw some smaller boats, mostly under 25' long, that did not have self draining cockpits. They had a vinyl or rubber coated cloth liner for the cockpit well and if you shipped water you just lifted it up by a handle to drain the water over the side.


----------



## Classic30 (Aug 29, 2007)

There's nothing like that on the Tums - just an open bilge with a bucket and bilge pump.. but the same goes for the old 6-metres, 22-square metres, Dragons, YW Diamonds, Couta boats, Mullet-boats, Cornish Shrimpers, etc., etc.., etc...

Like somebody famous once said: "The best bilge pump in the world is a frightened crew with a bucket"


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

Classic:
I have been that 16 year old kid with the bucket. Raven, 24' open planing dinghy, 30 knots, lightning storm, you should have seen me bail while the boat was on it's ear.

I love those old Tums. I'm a sucker for any of those old Scandinavian double enders. A huge part of the inspiration for FRANCIS LEE came from those boats.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

We all take self bailing cockpits for granted these days, but when I started sailing, the jury was still out on self bailing cockpits. The argument was that self bailing cockpit were much shallower than non self bailers and that the deeper cockpits were safer. Race boats like the Dragons, Luder 16, Folkboat, and many small cruisers were built with these deep cockpit. 

A friend of mine sailed his Folkboat derivative with its non-bailing cockpit from England to France. When it came time for him to sail home the French authorities forbid him to leave and chained the boat to the dock as unsafe for the passage. His response occured after dark when he decided that he carried the big bolt cutters for reasons other than cutting away the rig after a demasting. 

Jeff


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

"French authorities"

Well, they were authorities.


----------



## SloopJonB (Jun 6, 2011)

Jeff_H said:


> We all take self bailing cockpits for granted these days, but when I started sailing, the jury was still out on self bailing cockpits.
> 
> Jeff


Has there EVER been an advancement of any kind where there weren't a bunch of Luddites complaining about how it was going to ruin civilization?

The mere fact of the title of this thread says they are alive & well in the new millennium.

Bring back the Astrolabe and the hourglass! You might lose power to one of those newfangled GPS units.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

bobperry said:


> "French authorities"
> 
> Well, they were authorities.


Very true and very funny. I suspect that these French Authorities must have the same intimate knowledge of sailboats as some of the Internet Authorities that I have collided with over the years......


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

SloopJonB said:


> Has there EVER been an advancement of any kind where there weren't a bunch of Luddites complaining about how it was going to ruin civilization?
> ....


Well, bucking bailing cockpits are certainly not an advancement on boat design but open cockpits (or semi-open) probably are, not to mention self bailing cockpits.

The complaints here respect not an improvement but the lack of it. They may been exaggerated regarding that particular boat but when I modified my traditional old 80 years sailboat to be more seaworthy one of the things I have done was providing it with a self bailing cockpit.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

I was coming back from Canada, crossing the border and the US border agent asked me why I had been in Canada. I said what I always say, "I went to look at a boat."
He said, " What kind of construction.?
I said, "Composite, wood veneer over foam."
"He said, "That's not composite."

Then, pointing to my Scottish Glengarry he said, "What does that hat have to do with the boat?
I said, "Nothing. It's just my hat."

I'm not keen on the authorities.


----------



## djodenda (Mar 4, 2006)

During the purchase process for my boat, I crossed the border a couple of times. "Looking at boats" was what I said, and that seemed to annoy them as well..

Anyhow..

My father had a Downeaster 38 (full keel) that he circumnavigated on. He never could get that boat to back up straight. He always wound up having to warp off the dock.

So my question is:

Do people ever get good at backing up full keel boats? Can a truly skilled sailor do it? Or is it just something that they live with?


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

bobperry said:


> ...
> I said, "Nothing. It's just my hat."
> 
> I'm not keen on the authorities.


Bob, nothing to do with boats but with authorities and I have a feeling you will like this one:

Long before Portugal and Spain entering the EC, two friends of my father were returning from Spain. The authorities inspected the car and found a big box full of Spanish beer, San Miguel to be exact.

The authorities said that they could not pass and that the beers would be confiscated.

They said no, you will not have our beers and returned to Spain again.

Two hours later they were back and the authorities went to search the car thoroughly trying to find out the beers. Has they did not found anything they asked with bad manners where they had put the beers.

On of then said politely to the officer: Where do you want me to piss

Regards

Paulo


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

djodenda said:


> So my question is:
> 
> Do people ever get good at backing up full keel boats? Can a truly skilled sailor do it? Or is it just something that they live with?


When I owned 'Indian' I was somewhat able to back her. My trick was to get her moving pretty quickly in reverse then put her in neutral. It mostly worked. The trick was to start at an angle to where you wanted to go so that the initial prop walk straightened you out. You can imagine she mostly wanted to back dead straight if the prop wasn't spinning so precision backing was never a sure thing.



The other oddity on 'Indian' was the gear shift which was a 2" x 1/4" by 2 foot long piece of bronze with wooden handles. It dropped into a hinged collar in the cockpit sole. There was a piece of iron water pipe that connected the bottom of the collar to the shift lever on the side of the Universal Bluejacket Twin (half of an Atomic 4). The problem was that when you put pushed the lever forward, that put the engine in reverse and so you always had this moment when you had to stop and check that you had pushed the lever the right way. It meant a bunch of concentrating when backing and filling.....

Jeff


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

I think you just learn patience backing a full keel boat.

Circumnavigating in a Downbeaster? Now there is some patience.

Nobody but nobody messes with my Glengarry.


----------



## djodenda (Mar 4, 2006)

bobperry said:


> I think you just learn patience backing a full keel boat.
> 
> Circumnavigating in a Downbeaster? Now there is some patience.


Took him 12 years......


----------



## AlaskaMC (Aug 19, 2010)

SloopJonB said:


> Has there EVER been an advancement of any kind where there weren't a bunch of Luddites complaining about how it was going to ruin civilization?
> 
> The mere fact of the title of this thread says they are alive & well in the new millennium.
> 
> Bring back the Astrolabe and the hourglass! You might lose power to one of those newfangled GPS units.


You are so right. In fact it has been going on since the middle ages....


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

Now you guys are getting personal.

I got the damn photobucket!


----------



## djodenda (Mar 4, 2006)

bobperry said:


> Now you guys are getting personal.
> 
> I got the damn photobucket!


Thanks for that. I was getting tired of squinting


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

Me too.


----------



## Oregonian (Oct 4, 2011)

The Laurin 32, Corona Ag, the only full keel boat, and the shortest boat, continues to do well in the ARC+. The Passport 40 continues to be last, boat for boat.


----------



## Classic30 (Aug 29, 2007)

bobperry said:


> I think you just learn patience backing a full keel boat.


I must admit I'm a bit confused as to what all the fuss is about. 

My full-keeler backs just fine.. although it might not steer brilliantly in reverse, in strong winds it's often the only way I can get out of the slip, since without a good grip on the water the bow just gets pushed sideways if I try to go ahead. I took that as being pretty typical of full-keelers.


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

Classic:
I think you may be a good boat handler. There is almost always a way. It just takes some sensitivity to what the boat needs.


----------



## Oregonian (Oct 4, 2011)

The Laurin 32, Corona Ag, continues to do quite well in the ARC +. The Passport 40 continues to be last, as they close in on their destination. Why is it that the only full keeled boat, a double ender, and the shortest boat in the fleet is doing so well against the other smallish fin keeled boats? The Laurin does not have a “point” or two against it, it has every single point against it - according to the experts on this forum. Why is the modern fin keel, and all the superior formulas, not allowing those smaller boats to keep up with such an ancient design? Is this just another case (that happens most of the time) where only the ancient boat has a good sailor and all the other boats have Bozo sailors or simply weren’t “well sailed”? I am curious as to how the experts explain it this time? Honestly


----------



## SloopJonB (Jun 6, 2011)

Simple - ancient full keel designs are simply faster than modern boats. The last 100 years of design change has only served to make boats slower.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

Or, obviously the Laurin 32 is a faster sailing boat than the Passport 40...and by a wide margin

or maybe:



PCP said:


> .. that does not prove nothing except the boat is much better sailed than those bigger ones. ...
> 
> You (and others) said that a modern performance cruiser loaded would not be faster than an old design with full keel loaded. Here you just don't have any performance cruiser with the size of that old keeler and you just don't have the number of boats to take any relevant conclusion.
> ..


----------



## jraymer (Feb 23, 2012)

SloopJonB said:


> Simple - ancient full keel designs are simply faster than modern boats. The last 100 years of design change has only served to make boats slower.


Racing boats with their fin keel designs are choosing slower speeds? That doesn't sound right to me.

Jim.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

jraymer said:


> Racing boats with their fin keel designs are choosing slower speeds? That doesn't sound right to me.
> 
> Jim.


Racing boats? There are no racing boats on this transat, not even modern performance boats of a similar size. What do you mean be choosing slower speeds? you mean that some boats are better sailed than others or made a better routing? you can bet on that.

You can see that a Malo 43, is way ahead of a Bavaria match 42 that means that the Malo 43 is way faster than the Bavaria Match 42...right?

Regards

Paulo


----------



## GBurton (Jun 26, 2007)

PCP said:


> Racing boats? There are no racing boats on this transat, not even modern performance boats of a similar size. What do you mean be choosing slower speeds? you mean that some boats are better sailed than others or made a better routing? you can bet on that.
> 
> You can see that a Malo 43, is way ahead of a Bavaria match 42 that means that the Malo 43 is way faster than the Bavaria Match 42...right?
> 
> ...


Paulo, is your only explanation that because the results don't fit with your theory the sailors are the difference? Its pretty funny that you left the caveat in your old post.

"Let me prove my point, but if things dont work out like I said they would, its because of the sailors" hahahaha


----------



## GBurton (Jun 26, 2007)

SloopJonB said:


> Simple - ancient full keel designs are simply faster than modern boats. The last 100 years of design change has only served to make boats slower.


It would seem so in this instance.


----------



## GBurton (Jun 26, 2007)

Who designed the Passport 40 anyway?


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

GBurton said:


> Paulo, is your only explanation that because the results don't fit with your theory the sailors are the difference? Its pretty funny that you left the caveat in your old post.
> 
> "Let me prove my point, but if things dont work out like I said they would, its because of the sailors" hahahaha


No, of course not, it has nothing to do with sailing ability, crews and routing: everybody knows that a Laurin 32 is way faster than a Passport 40 and that a Malo 43 is way faster than a Bavaria Match 42, as the results of that Transat race....hum... transat cruise prove that without any doubt

Regards

Paulo


----------



## Classic30 (Aug 29, 2007)

PCP said:


> No, of course not, it has nothing to do with sailing ability, crews and routing: everybody knows that a Laurin 32 is way faster than a Passport 40 and that a Malo 43 is way faster than a Bavaria Match 42, as the results of that Transat race....hum... transat cruise prove that without any doubt


Without needing to wait for the results of the ARC (as if that would provide any new information on a subject proven on a weekly basis in combined fleet passage races all over the world ) the obvious conclusion is this: *An old, traditional, yacht sailed well can, on average, given ideal conditions of wind and sea, travel just as far just as quickly as a new, modern, yacht sailed badly.*

This is because, as pointed out by Uffa Fox, Francis Chichester and a host of others who-should-know over many decades - you can't change physics.

I'm regularly reminded of this in our passage races here by continually getting my a$$ whipped by yachts at least 50 years older than my own Classic.. which, again under ideal conditions of wind and sea, is quite capable of beating yachts 30-40 years newer in both design and build. (There's an S&S30 I get particular enjoyment beating - but that's another story for another time!)


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

Classic30 said:


> W... the obvious conclusion is this: *An old, traditional, yacht sailed well can, on average, given ideal conditions of wind and sea, travel just as far just as quickly as a new, modern, yacht sailed badly.*
> ...


Well, it has to be a very well designed yacht, it has to be very well sailed and the modern boat has to be very poorly sailed, but yes you can say that.

That is about the same as saying that a very good driver can go faster on a twisting road with an old VW (you know the one from the 60's) than a poor driver with a brand new Porsche.

That is no proof that the 60's VW is faster then the Porsche, only that it is not enough to have a fast car, it is also needed to know how to drive it. The same with the boats.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## Classic30 (Aug 29, 2007)

PCP said:


> That is no proof that the 60's VW is faster then the Porsche, only that it is not enough to have a fast car, it is also needed to know how to drive it. The same with the boats.


Agreed. 100%.

..and there are an awful lot of cruising folk out there who simply aren't all that interested in driving their boats fast - even in something like the ARC, since comfort is important too.

If you're only interested in driving fast - buy a powerboat.


----------



## mitiempo (Sep 19, 2008)

Classic30 said:


> Agreed. 100%.
> 
> ..and there are an awful lot of cruising folk out there who simply aren't all that interested in driving their boats fast - even in something like the ARC, since comfort is important too.
> 
> If you're only interested in driving fast - buy a powerboat.


Powerboat? What about a Pogo.


----------



## Classic30 (Aug 29, 2007)

mitiempo said:


> Powerboat? What about a Pogo.


Nah... (a) Too slow; (b) won't go directly into the wind.

To satisfy PCP's desire for a POW (that's Porsche-On-Water) I was thinking more of something like this:










It's even got a full keel.


----------



## aeventyr60 (Jun 29, 2011)

mitiempo said:


> Powerboat? What about a Pogo.


So much for the POGO in the ARC:

Five boats that departed Las Palmas with the ARC have taken the decision to retire from the rally. Pogo 40Green has returned to the Canary Islands with electrical problems, whilst Liberte experienced a broken boom and will remain in Mindelo, Cape Verdes. Steering problems on Zenarra has meant they too have decided to divert to Mindelo for assistance.

Above from Noonsite


----------



## GBurton (Jun 26, 2007)

PCP said:


> Well, it has to be a very well designed yacht, it has to be very well sailed and the modern boat has to be very poorly sailed, but yes you can say that.
> 
> That is about the same as saying that a very good driver can go faster on a twisting road with an old VW (you know the one from the 60's) than a poor driver with a brand new Porsche.
> 
> ...


Or, the new porsche is very difficult to drive fast as it is very demanding and uncomfortable (and breaks down a lot) and the old vw that is comfortable and reliable is easy to drive faster.


----------



## Classic30 (Aug 29, 2007)

GBurton said:


> Or, the new porsche is very difficult to drive fast as it is very demanding and uncomfortable (and breaks down a lot) and the old vw that is comfortable and reliable is easy to drive faster.


Personally, I'd still prefer cruising along slowly in a nice, flashy, modern Porsche to driving fast in a beat-up old VW..


----------



## GBurton (Jun 26, 2007)

Classic30 said:


> Personally, I'd still prefer cruising along slowly in a nice, flashy, modern Porsche to driving fast in a beat-up old VW..


Comfort is more important to me than image  Not to mention reliability, simplicity and cost.
But, I get a lot of compliments on my boat as well..


----------



## Oregonian (Oct 4, 2011)

I am once again referencing the ARC+ and the very fine performance of the Laurin 32, Corona Ag. The overweight, full keeled, short, ancient, double ender that is currently sailing faster than many of the much more modern, fin keeled boats. As I have participated in a number of similar events, I must disagree with the assessment of PCP and Classic30 and certainly many dozens of others.
It shows no respect what-so-ever for all the fine sailors in the boats behind the Laurin 32, to imply they are all poor sailors and only the sailors on Corona Ag are good sailors. That is Absurd. The reason that all of those boats are behind the Laurin is because they are slower. Under the circumstances that all of the boats are sailing under, all of the boats behind the Laurin are SLOWER. In almost all cases, if not all, the small boats participating are over loaded, have small crews, and doing the best they can, knowing it is a long haul. The lighter, fin keeled boat, is moving around more than the Laurin. The crew is probably a bit more fatigued. The boat is setting below its (original) lines and simply cannot carry the extra weight compared to the boat that was designed heavier in the first place and able to carry that weight. Remember that if the shape of the hull was correct at a given displacement, it is no longer correct at the displacement + 30%. Remember also that all of these boats are now in displacement mode but literally none of them have hull shapes optimizing a displacement speed.
The boats behind the Laurin are slower boats when cruising. What is being observed in this event is the norm. Are all of those boats always slower than the Laurin? No, of course not. They have the potential to be faster, when they are more empty, sailing in smoother water, and sailing within a weather window, as in a typical race.
PCP implied that the Bavaria Match 42 was a much faster boat than the Malo 43’s ahead of it. Well - NO. When the Bavaria 42 is more empty, has a racing crew and going the short distance, then yes. But, obviously, as shown, when that boat is loaded (or over loaded), has a small crew, has to run the long haul, etc, it is NOT the fast boat PCP says it is. It is slower than the heavier designed Malo.
The following quote is from Mikejohns of a different thread: “The best advice for anyone and especially designers is to sail offshore on different types of boats and see the difference”. Fewer things are more true. It is my own opinion that if the designers and theorist on this forum spent a little more time on the different boats, IN THE OCEAN, they may, in fact, design us better sea going boats, if they had enough integrity to do so.


----------



## Classic30 (Aug 29, 2007)

Oregonian said:


> I am once again referencing the ARC+ and the very fine performance of the Laurin 32, Corona Ag. The overweight, full keeled, short, ancient, double ender that is currently sailing faster than many of the much more modern, fin keeled boats. As I have participated in a number of similar events, I must disagree with the assessment of PCP and Classic30 and certainly many dozens of others.
> It shows no respect what-so-ever for all the fine sailors in the boats behind the Laurin 32, to imply they are all poor sailors and only the sailors on Corona Ag are good sailors. That is Absurd. The reason that all of those boats are behind the Laurin is because they are slower.
> .....


Oregonian, with all due respect, I do think you've missed the point. The ARC is NOT a race and I, for one, am NOT implying they are poor sailors since there are many, many reasons one yacht might travel slower than another over a 2,700 nautical mile course regardless of it's hull design. The textbook treatise on that subject would be, I suppose, _"A Voyage for Madmen"_ by Peter Nichols.

From the ARC FAQs:

"_What is a Rally? Our definition of a rally is safe and social cruising. We offer an element of fun competition, but it isn't a race!" _ and:

"_Can I use my engine? This is a cruising rally, so use of engines is OK! Boats in the fun competition Cruising Division must declare their engine hours for their results to be calculated. Boats in the RORC Racing Division are NOT allowed to use their engines for propulsion._"


----------



## Oregonian (Oct 4, 2011)

Classic30, Thanks for the response and the chance to, once again, state my position. You are very right. I should have been more clear. The ARC+ is not a race. The boats are simply doing the best they can to get across the ocean under the circumstances that they are in. It is important to take the sailors out of this equation IMO, and examine the boat types only. A very common, I’ll say normal, phenomenon is that one boat type consistently out performs another when simply cruising across the ocean. All of the boats in this rally are in the same position, but the heavy displacement, full keeled, double ender is ahead of the much more modern, fin keeled lighter boats. I am pretty certain that none of the boats behind the Laurin 32 are purposely going slower than they want to. The truth is that those more modern boats, when playing this “cruising” kind of game are slower boats.

You said “ An old traditional, yacht sailed well can, on average, given ideal conditions of wind and sea, travel just as far just as quickly as a modern yacht sailed badly”.
PCP added “Well it has to be a very well designed yacht, it has to be very well sailed and the modern boat has to be very poorly sailed, but yes you can say that”.

Those are your words and PCP’s. That seems to imply that the sailors are the most responsible for the results and that the conditions must be just so.
I am saying “The reason that the boats are behind the Laurin 32 are because those boats are sailing slower. But they are doing the best they can.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

Oregonian said:


> ... It is important to take the sailors out of this equation IMO, and examine the boat types only. A very common, I'll say normal, phenomenon is that one boat type consistently out performs another when simply cruising across the ocean. All of the boats in this rally are in the same position, but the heavy displacement, full keeled, double ender is ahead of the much more modern, fin keeled lighter boats. ... *The truth is that those more modern boats, when playing this "cruising" kind of game are slower boats.*
> 
> ....


You are really hopeless and your knowledge about boats is a very narrow one.

Believing that a 32ft Laurin is faster than a Passport 40 and that a Malo 43 is faster than a Bavaria Match 42 while cruising on a transat, giving equal conditions in what regards routing and sailing crew competence shows a great ignorance about those boats and their possible performance.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## GBurton (Jun 26, 2007)

That response is par for the course on this thread pcp. Things dont prove out what you stated earlier, that is: roughly paraphrased "this rally will show us that modern boats when loaded are faster than old boats when loaded" so you resort to insults. This was your idea to watch these boats ...."it will be fun" was your ending comment. 

Yes, it has been fun! hahahahahaha 

Do try to keep up.


----------



## Argyle38 (Oct 28, 2010)

Interesting discussion, but it's a little hard to follow what exactly is going in the ARC based on this thread. 

What are the results so far? Is the ARC over? Are (were) there a significant number of full keel boats that are sailing faster than various "modern" hull designs, or are they just ahead on corrected time? I think following the progress of the ARC adds a pretty interesting data point of how classic designs actually perform at sea, at least in the trades.


----------



## mitiempo (Sep 19, 2008)

Oregonian said:


> But they are doing the best they can.


How the hell do you know that? For all anyone knows they may be heaving to for meals even. If one is not there it is pretty hard to say really.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

GBurton said:


> That response is par for the course on this thread pcp. Things dont prove out what you stated earlier, that is: roughly paraphrased "this rally will show us that modern boats when loaded are faster than old boats when loaded" so you resort to insults. This was your idea to watch these boats ...."it will be fun" was your ending comment.
> 
> Yes, it has been fun! hahahahahaha
> 
> Do try to keep up.


I did not insult anybody. You are quoting me wrongly and you should be more careful, that is not right. I said:


----------



## GBurton (Jun 26, 2007)

PCP said:


> I did not insult anybody. You are quoting me wrongly and you should be more careful, that is not right. I said:


Calling someone hopeless is not an insult?

What, are you going to send the modern boat police after me? Pathetic.


----------



## GBurton (Jun 26, 2007)

mitiempo said:


> How the hell do you know that? For all anyone knows they may be heaving to for meals even. If one is not there it is pretty hard to say really.


Right, all those boats are heaving to for meals.


----------



## SloopJonB (Jun 6, 2011)

It's getting to be about time for Hitler to make an appearance in this thread.

Old, full keel boats are faster than modern performance boats? 

Puhleeeze.


----------



## mitiempo (Sep 19, 2008)

GBurton said:


> Right, all those boats are heaving to for meals.


Point being that for anyone that is not there like Paulo, you or me, we really don't know.


----------



## mitiempo (Sep 19, 2008)

Too bad there are not any Westsail 32's in the ARC - an obvious winner.


----------



## GBurton (Jun 26, 2007)

mitiempo said:


> Point being that for anyone that is not there like Paulo, you or me, we really don't know.


Exactly. What we do know is that the older design full keel is sailing faster than the more modern design. Do you agree?


----------



## GBurton (Jun 26, 2007)

poof, he is gone.


----------



## mitiempo (Sep 19, 2008)

GBurton said:


> poof, he is gone.


Not gone, just had to walk my dog in a snowstorm.

It is getting there faster, why we don't know. We can only guess.


----------



## GBurton (Jun 26, 2007)

I'm going to guess that it is moving through the water faster....  You guess that all the more modern boats are heaving to for meals.


----------



## mitiempo (Sep 19, 2008)

I'm guessing that the Laurin is being sailed better - beyond that who knows?


----------



## GBurton (Jun 26, 2007)

Well, shouldn't the Modern boats be faster than the Laurin even if sailed "worse"? After all, according to the go fast gurus there is absolutely no comparison in speed between the old boat and the modern boat.....right?

Perhaps the modern boats are all towing drogues? Who knows ..it might be possible....


----------



## GBurton (Jun 26, 2007)

Well, enough fun for me for one day. Enjoy the beautiful area you live in Brian, we were there about 2 months ago and loved it


----------



## Oregonian (Oct 4, 2011)

PCP, this is for you, But I dislike getting off topic and I apologize. 
I agree that a Bavaria Match 42 is probably faster than a Malo 43 on a short race course. (please dig up the PHRF numbers and help me out) It is a nice looking boat and has all the “fast” features. (pull up a picture and help me out again) Now put a 12’ RIB on the foredeck. The 20hp, 4stroke, outboard can go on the stern rail. The gasoline jerry jugs should be kept close by too. Are the bicycles on the stern rail also or are they in bags in the forepeak. This cruising boat will need extra water. Are the jerry jugs properly tied down along the deck or are you using a water maker? Don’t forget the extra diesel to run the charging system to make that water. You will be arriving at an anchorage. Don’t forget the stern anchor, and you’d better be prepared with a third anchor because s### happens. All the other stuff, the other 2000#s can be put away - somewhere. All in all you should just about be ready. Too bad all of that stuff is all above the waterline. Like anti-ballast. If you think you are ready, then go. It’s too bad though that you have had to add 60 seconds per mile to your trip. What’s the PHRF again?
PCP, I know this was all very childish but please be honest with me. Is the Bavaria Match 42 that is in the ARC+, however it may be configured, really as fast as the empty, crewed, Bavaria that is frequently raced?
Another exercise would be to visualize the very same kind of outfitting but on the smaller , modern, boats. If you do, you will visualize a slow boat. And Yes, it will be slower than a Laurin, or Westsail 32.

Arglye38: All of the references to the ARC+ are “boat for boat” references. The ARC+ was run before the ARC and had only a single full keeled boat in it. A Laurin 32. It is a bit late but check this out: 
worldcruising.com/arc/eventfleetviewer.asp


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

Oregonian said:


> PCP, this is for you, But I dislike getting off topic and I apologize.
> I agree that a Bavaria Match 42 is probably faster than a Malo 43 on a short race course. (please dig up the PHRF numbers and help me out) It is a nice looking boat and has all the "fast" features. (pull up a picture and help me out again) Now put a 12' RIB on the foredeck. The 20hp, 4stroke, outboard can go on the stern rail. The gasoline jerry jugs should be kept close by too. Are the bicycles on the stern rail also or are they in bags in the forepeak. This cruising boat will need extra water. Are the jerry jugs properly tied down along the deck or are you using a water maker? Don't forget the extra diesel to run the charging system to make that water. You will be arriving at an anchorage. Don't forget the stern anchor, and you'd better be prepared with a third anchor because s### happens. All the other stuff, the other 2000#s can be put away - somewhere. All in all you should just about be ready. Too bad all of that stuff is all above the waterline. Like anti-ballast. If you think you are ready, then go. It's too bad though that you have had to add 60 seconds per mile to your trip. What's the PHRF again?
> PCP, I know this was all very childish but please be honest with me. Is the Bavaria Match 42 that is in the ARC+, however it may be configured, really as fast as the empty, crewed, Bavaria that is frequently raced?
> Another exercise would be to visualize the very same kind of outfitting but on the smaller , modern, boats. If you do, you will visualize a slow boat. And Yes, it will be slower than a Laurin, or Westsail 32.


I don't know if you guys believe in all the crap you have being posting but the truth is that a Bavaria Mach 42 is much faster than a Malo 43, so much faster that any comparison in what regard speed is ridiculous even on a cruising configuration. The difference in rating (PHRF) would be like 50 points or so.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

[


GBurton said:


> That response is par for the course on this thread pcp. Things dont prove out what you stated earlier, that is: roughly paraphrased "this rally will show us that *modern boats* when loaded are faster than old boats when loaded" so you resort to insults. This was your idea to watch these boats ...."it will be fun" was your ending comment.
> Yes, it has been fun! hahahahahaha
> 
> Do try to keep up.


Well, that is not nice. When you quote someone you should quote it correctly and that is not the case:



PCP said:


> This year *ARC* will be interesting to measure the performance of old bluewater designs with modern ones.
> 
> ... *200 boats*..Of course, *the way the boats are sailed also counts but in so many boats we can easily discover a pattern and see if the claim that modern performance cruisers when loaded are as slow or not much faster than those boats.* ...
> 
> ...


I did not said modern boats but modern *performance* cruisers regarding old boats and that's because it was what you or someone claimed here, that a modern performance cruiser fully loaded was not faster than an old heavy design.

I said that the 200 boats of the ARC would be enough to determine a pattern statistically meaningful and instead you talk about the ARC+ a rally with about 30 boats that didn't fit on the big one and worse, among them there is only a performance cruiser (the Bavaria Match 42).

And then you talk about the performance of *one* old designed heavy boat as if it was statistically meaningful. Or you are just kidding or you don't understand nothing about statistics.

On that rally you have 5 old designed heavy sailboats: a Passport 40, a Moody 41 (old model), a Rival 38, a oyster 35 and a Laurin 32. All except the Laurin are on the tail, I mean, are the last of the rally, far away from almost all other boats and you take one single boat as statistically significant, regarding the performance of old designed heavy boats versus the performance of modern designed ones, forgetting the performance of the other 4 heavy boats:



GBurton said:


> Paulo, is your only explanation that because the results don't fit with your theory the sailors are the difference? Its pretty funny that you left the caveat in your old post.
> "Let me prove my point, but if things dont work out like I said they would, its because of the sailors" hahahaha


As you can see things prove my theory. Statistically old designed heavier boats are much slower and by far.

As I have pointed out there was no performance cruisers on this rally except for the Bavaria Match 42 that even if very badly sailed (26th in compensated time) it is a day ahead of the Laurin 32 that is very well sailed (7th in compensated) and it is an exception, not the rule in what are the overall comparative results of heavy old designed boats versus modern cruisers.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## Classic30 (Aug 29, 2007)

GBurton said:


> Well, shouldn't the Modern boats be faster than the Laurin even if sailed "worse"? After all, according to the go fast gurus there is absolutely no comparison in speed between the old boat and the modern boat.....right?


Ignoring the ARC for a sec and getting back to generalities, it is my experience, sailing both classic and modern displacement racing yachts, that there very little comparison in speed between the old boat and the modern boat of similar size - because *the physics doesn't change*. There's perhaps 1kt in it, but not much more. In fact, taking it to the extreme, in some conditions (eg. very light winds) some old designs can be significantly faster than a modern design due to greater SA/D and greater momentum.

Design rules have changed several times since the 1880's (roughly when gentlemen's yacht racing became a popular sport) and, each time the rules were tweaked to improve one aspect or another (eg. safety!) that did not always mean that the newer displacement yacht design was faster through the water than the old.

..more manoeuvrable, yes, more comfortable, perhaps, but always faster? No.


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

*Arc*



Classic30 said:


> .., sailing both classic and modern displacement racing yachts, that there very little comparison in speed between the old boat and the modern boat of similar size - because *the physics doesn't change*. There's perhaps 1kt in it, but not much more. In fact, taking it to the extreme, in some conditions (eg. very light winds) some old designs can be significantly faster than a modern design due to greater SA/D and greater momentum.
> 
> ...that did not always mean that the newer displacement yacht design was faster through the water than the old.
> 
> ..more manoeuvrable, yes, more comfortable, perhaps, but always faster? No.


Finally, when the first have already arrived, I had time to look at the ARC and its 200 boats cruising the Atlantic

World Cruising Club - Fleet Viewer

Regarding the performance cruisers and cruising boats, these are the ones that impressed me by their performance:

The Mills designed Marten 49 performance cruiser is doing a great transat sailing among the big yachts, going side by side with a Baltic 78.

The first 40ft boat is as usual a racing Class 40 pursued by a X 50 performance cruiser, both doing a great race but no better than a wauquiez (45 performance cruiser) that follows both. The first 40ft performance cruiser is a Pogo 12,50. That cruising Pogo 40ft is battling with ...a racing TP52. Besides the Pogo, the fastest 40ft performance cruisers are several First 40 (and 40.7), but at a very considerable distance.

On the real small performance cruisers going very fast and surrounded by much bigger boats, a Sunfast 3200, a Pogo30, an older and smaller Pogo 8.50 and a first 36.7.

Also doing a great and fast transat A Dufour 45e, a Grand soleil 43, a Dufour 40 (all performance cruisers).

Some other cruisers (not performance cruisers) going fast (and this one will put a smile on my friend Smack) a Belgian Hunter 36 (that have the balls to head North for wind), an American Southerly 42RS, a Van de Stadt Moorea 45, a Jeanneau Sun Odyssey 42, a Dufour 385, a Dufour 375 , two XC 45, a Bavaria 40 and a 42, an Amel super Maramu, a Southerly 110, a Dufour 425, a Bavaria 36, a Benetau Oceanis 411, a Bowman 42 and a Dufour 34.

All modern designed sail boats.

Maybe you can take a look where the more fast group of old designed heavy cruisers are: I give you a hint, look at the tail of the transat, several days behind some of those boats I mentioned

I guess that we can call that a difference of speed.

Surely, like we have seen with the Laurin, the way the boat is sailed has a lot of importance regarding speed and that's why I have looked at the best group of boats among the performance cruisers and modern cruisers and I am asking you to look at the best group among the old designed heavy boats.

The best on the two groups will be certainly well sailed but the same cannot be said for the worse cases on both groups.

Regards

Paulo


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

*Arc*

I posted this on another thread and I think it is relevant here too:

ARC- Performance cruisers and comparative difference to other types of cruisers:

So, how compare performance cruisers in a transat with medium height modern cruisers? A lot of talk about the performance of a performance cruiser loaded for a Transat to be prejudiced to the point of being so slow as medium heavy boats, and some would even believe, than heavy boats. A lot of crap. They are way faster than even bigger medium weight sailboats, as we would see.

First let me tell you that modern boats are only considered medium weight if compared with typical modern mass production boats and the difference is not that big. It is certainly much bigger if compared with what used to be medium weight boats or what used to be the weight of this type of boasts 20 or 30 years ago. An average 30 year old performance cruiser (for instance a Swan) has about the weight of a comparably sized medium weight cruiser today.

Secondly that this year the conditions, except for the ones that chose the North route, did not suit performance cruisers. The bigger difference in speed regards the difference of speed downwind with strong winds where these boats can go to semi-planing or even planing speeds and be way faster than much bigger boats. They sail also better with very light winds and even if this year the conditions were strange, with upwind sailing and not strong winds, really light winds were not so frequent (less than 8k).

And finally that the way a boat is sailed is fundamental to the performance. I assumed that among so many boats (+200) the ones of each type that have the better performance are the ones well sailed. In so many boats we should find some well sailed boats in each type and I will consider irrelevant the performance of the others. Any boat can be very slow if sailed badly or very far away from his potential.

A warning also, the boats that are not racing can use their engine and are using the engine on situations without wind or with head wind. In the end sometimes they give the number of hours each boat used the engine but that's obvious that a boat with a large tankage like the IP 485 that carries 1100L of fuel will be motoring a lot more than boats with a 150L tankage. That will be reflected in their "performance" and on the position they occupy on the map.

Regarding those that went North, they sailed faster and made a big difference to the others that choose a central course. That is the case for instance of the Marten 49 that is ahead of the first medium weight cruiser, a boat twice as big, the Oyster 865 by 30Nm and the oyster is making a very fast transat.

If we went looking for the first medium weight modern with the same approximated size of the Marten 49 we would be looking at the XC 45. I know it is smaller but they are faster than any other 49/50ft medium weight boat (it is just a great cruising boat). There are a difference of about 700nm between the two boats. That means they are about 4 days away.

Curiously and as I have been saying the performance of XC 45, even if not a performance cruiser is similar to top performance cruisers from 30 years ago. We can see that a Swan 51, a swan 46MKII or a Swan 53 are in the same performance range being all at more or less the same distance from the finish (+- 100nm).

The Marten 49 is an exceptional and very expensive performance cruiser. Let's see if difference to more "normal" production performance cruisers is also a big one:

There next performance cruiser is a 50ft boat, a X50. The distance for the first medium weight 50ft cruiser (again the XC 45) is of about 500nm (about 4 days). Another performance cruiser doing a good passage is a GrandSoleil 56 that has a an advance of 117 to 120nm regarding a Gunfleet 58, a Discover 55 and a Jeanneau 57.

The difference will be way bigger if we look at the 40ft cruisers. The faster performance cruiser is a Pogo 12.50. The first medium displacement boat is a Oyster 406 and is at 622nm, a Moody 425 is at 694nm, that means at about 4 days away.

Regarding the distance of the Pogo to modern mass production cruisers the distance is smaller. He have a Dufour 385 at 344Nm, another Dufour 375 at 431nm and a Bavaria 40 at about 500nm. The diference of the first 40ft light modern production boat (the Dufour 385) to the first medium weight 40ft is of about 280nm, almost 2 days.

It is true that the Pogo 12.50 is probably the faster 40ft performance cruiser in a Transat since it is a boat maximized for downwind sailing. If we look at the fastest of the more conventional 40 performance cruisers, a First 40.7, that is at about a day from the Pogo, those numbers will be diminished by 180nm. The First would be at 442nm of distance regarding the first medium weight cruiser, the Oyster 406, even so more than 3 days.

If we look at 36ft boats the first is a First 36.7. The first medium weight 36ft cruiser is a Halberg Rassy 36 at 521nm (about 4 days) and the best modern 36ft cruiser is a Hunter 36 at 267Nm (almost 2 days).

Regarding performance cruisers with around 30ft, the first is a Sun Fast 3200, the second a Pogo 30 and the third a Pogo 8.50. The difference from the first to the last is of 188Nm and the 3200 is way faster. The difference between the two Pogos is only 61nm. The distance from the Sunfast to the first medium weight cruiser, a Forgus 31 is of 729nm (about 5 days) and to the Pogo 30 599nm, about 4 days.

We can conclude that in all sizes the difference in performance on a Transat, with the boat loaded with the needed provisions and tankage, between a performance cruiser and a medium weight cruiser is a big one and increases in proportion with the size of the boat. On really big boats, with over 50ft that difference is not as big, maybe because in those sizes the big LWL is a more determinant factor.

We can also see that the performance of a mass produced modern cruiser is better than the one of an medium weight cruiser by about the same margin that separates this one from a performance cruiser.

If we considered heavy boats the diference would even be more substantial. There are some in this rally but as they are not many the best performance between just a few would not necessarily be a good one. They are on the tail of the transat anyway.

Finally we can see that the crew is an huge factor regarding the speed of a boat and if a slower boat cannot go faster than a certain limit, even with the best possible crew, a faster boat can go much slower than his potential with a bad crew. We can see similar boats separated by many days. That has nothing to do with the boat but with the crew.

Just an example: The Belgian Dufour 40 Heckogecko (same model) is at 674nm (about 6 days) from the Portuguese Dufour 40 Conquilha III.

Only two Portuguese boats but both doing well. One is this Dufour the other that First 36.7 that is by far the fastest of the 36ft boats.

http://www.worldcruising.com/arc/eventfleetviewer.aspx


----------



## Classic30 (Aug 29, 2007)

*Re: Arc*

I've had a look at the fleet viewer and see nothing unexpected. There are some boats being sailed 'racing style', shall we say, others wandering all over the ocean (trying to find the best wind? who knows!) and some being sailed rather 'comfortably'.. 

Other than those who have retired and turned back (presumably from gear failure?) I'm sure they're all out there enjoying themselves sailing their chosen yacht - full keel or fin - the way they choose to on the course they choose. In a 'rally' where everyone who reaches the finish wins, far be it for me or anyone else to judge one yacht's "performance" over another.

OTOH, if this was a race..  

Paulo, FWIW, like many Aussies I'm a keen follower of the Sydney-Hobart and have been for a few decades now. (I suppose I have to admit that it's a family tradition that every year we sit around the TV and watch the start ). I don't know if you've ever taken much notice of this race over there - but it is a race and it has a wide mix of all your favourites: TP52's, super-maxis, maxis, pocket-maxis, performance cruisers and even, sometimes, and old full-keel cruising boat in it.. but, unlike the ARC, its a *race*. One I've only been in once, didn't finish and will never do again, but one that would probably provide you with a better comparison of performance than the ARC. It starts in 3 weeks..

http://rolexsydneyhobart.com/


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

*Re: Arc*



Classic30 said:


> I've had a look at the fleet viewer and see nothing unexpected. There are some boats being sailed 'racing style', shall we say, others wandering all over the ocean (trying to find the best wind? who knows!) and some being sailed rather 'comfortably'.. ...
> 
> ..I don't know if you've ever taken much notice of this race over there - but it is a race and it has a wide mix of all your favourites: TP52's, super-maxis, maxis, pocket-maxis, performance cruisers and even, sometimes, and old full-keel cruising boat in it.. but, unlike the ARC, its a *race*. .. one that would probably provide you with a better comparison of performance than the ARC.


That's why I one took as reference the best sailed boats of each type. In +200 there should be some well sailed among each type of boat and it was only at those that I looked at.

As you say this is a very low profile race and many just race it for the fun of it even if nobody likes to be left behind.

The objective is to take the boat to the Caribbean to pass the European winter cruising and the boats contrary to the Sydney Hobart, that is a smaller race, are loaded with all it is needed for a transat and cruising equipment.

That's why this transat in what regards the typical cruiser is a much better one to evaluate boat performances not to mention that this transat has 3 more boats than the Sydney-Hobart where most boats are much more raced typed than on this low profile "race".

Sure, the Sydney Hobart because it is a top race is better to evaluate the racing performance of sailboats while racers. This one is much better to evaluate the sailing performance of the boats while fast cruising on a make believe racing. Contrary to the Sydney Hobart there are very few racing boats on this one.



Classic30 said:


> .. ...- full keel or fin - ..


Well, here you are wrong. On +200 sailboats there is not one with a full keel (as Jeff already explained the IP is not a full keel yacht). You don't find it odd that in more than 200 skipper not only one has chose a full keel boat?

By the way I love the Sydney Hobart and I have made here the coverage of the race on the last years

Regards

Paulo


----------



## Classic30 (Aug 29, 2007)

*Re: Arc*



PCP said:


> That's why I one took as reference the best sailed boats of each type. In +200 there should be some well sailed among each type of boat and it was only at those that I looked at.
> 
> As you say this is a very low profile race and many just race it for the fun of it even if nobody likes to be left behind.
> 
> ...


But.. you're assuming they're "racing". 

Sure, I guess everyone knows it's a race whenever 2 yachts are in sight of each other and going in the same direction, so, statistically, picking the boats in the lead you should be right. Looking at the routes of some of them I'm just not sure your sample size is large enough or that the results of one "race" is enough to make a definite conclusion. Are there any past results available?



PCP said:


> Well, here you are wrong. On +200 sailboats there is not one with a full keel (as Jeff already explained the IP is not a full keel yacht). You don't find it odd that in more than 200 skipper not only one has chose a full keel boat?


What about the Laurin 32? 

Anyway, in the 21st Century, no, I don't find it odd at all. People buy whatever happens to be on the market that fits (a) their budget and (b) the kind of sailing they generally want to do - unlike the Sydney Hobart, they don't rush out and buy a new yacht specifically for this event. As you know, Benehuntalina and the rest of the mass-produced plastic fraternity have done a great sales job over the past decade or so and AFAIK almost everything they have ever offered is fin keeled, because speed, cost and manoeuvrability are more important to most people than "classic lines" and storage space in the bilge. For this reason I would also not expect that very many people interested in the ARC would also be the home-built oxidised-aluminium full-keeled low-budget world-traveller types that you see in most ports of the world because I imagine they would be left far, far behind...

It might be interesting to also look at what caused the retirements.


----------



## aeventyr60 (Jun 29, 2011)

from the little info I could gather about retirements is the ARC:

40Green Pogo Electrical Problems
Liberte Jeanue 57 Broken boom
Zenaarara Clark 72 Steering Problems

A little bit of everything...


----------



## bobperry (Apr 29, 2011)

But how can we use results from a race where you can run your engine? Not that I don't like the idea, I've wanted to run my engine in a lot of races, but it sort of throws performance comparisons out the window. Or am I wrong?


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

bobperry said:


> But how can we use results from a race where you can run your engine? Not that I don't like the idea, I've wanted to run my engine in a lot of races, but it sort of throws performance comparisons out the window. Or am I wrong?


Well, this is not a "serious" race but what they do is seeing how many hours the engine was run and give a penalty for it according with the hours the engine worked. The ones that take it more seriously don't use the engine because the penalization does not compensate. The fastest boats don't use the engine.

Last year I was absolutely perplexed with the incredible performance of a Island Packard 485 on the beginning of the Transat. The IP was "racing" in the middle of the performance cruisers and then at less than the middle of the transat they become really slow. I guess that the fuel was becoming low, even if the boat carries about 1200L

Regards

Paulo


----------



## PCP (Dec 1, 2004)

*Re: Arc*



Classic30 said:


> Sure, I guess everyone knows it's a race whenever 2 yachts are in sight of each other and going in the same direction, so, statistically, picking the boats in the lead you should be right. Looking at the routes of some of them I'm just not sure your sample size is large enough or that the results of one "race" is enough to make a definite conclusion. Are there any past results available?


Yes, here you have the results of other editions.

World Cruising Club - ARC Results

If you go back on the interesting boat thread to November last year you will find there the coverage of that edition and the one the year before.



Classic30 said:


> What about the Laurin 32?


That was on another rally one much smaller (a bit more than 30 boats ARC+). I have already explained that but it seems that the confusing.

Talking about the Laurin I love those guys and their spirit. They certainly very good sailors, even if not young...and that is even nicer. The boat photo shows them going across the finish line with style.



They have that boat for many years and cruised extensively. They made on that boat the first edition of this rally, back in 1986 with the Laurin.

*"Even after this long and arduous trip across an ocean, the taste of a cold rum punch and a warm smiley welcome is enough to turn any tiring sailor into a giddy child.

Owner of the Laurin 32' Corona AQ, Pekka Karlsson steered his boat into Rodney Bay Marina for the third time flying the ARC flag. He and his wife Barbro participated in the very first ARC back in 1986, and again in 2001.

Pekka thought his ARC days were up but when the news came that a new ARC rally had been launched taking the fleet via the Cape Verdes, he and his wife signed up and began preparing their ever trusty Corona AQ for another Atlantic crossing.

On arrival into Rodney Bay Marina Pekka Karlsson explained how 'the Marina may have changed a lot but the atmosphere and feeling on arrival is just as good as I remember'. *

Regards

Paulo


----------

