# Singlehand Multihull 'rule of thumb'?



## piscator (Sep 2, 2006)

My sailing experience is on monohull boats in the 30' - 36' range. 

As a 'rule of thumb,' I've always considered boats 35' to 40' to be 'ideal' (or at least the best compromise) for singlehanding.

Does this 'rule of thumb' apply to multihulls? Particularly catamarans?

My multihull experience is limited to 'aquacats' and 'hobies' so I don't have an appropriate feel for the subject. Also, I tend to evaluate boats based on displacement, but my understanding there, doesn't translate easily to multihulls.

I've aI'm curious to learn what aspects of multihull designs make them easier or harder to singlehand. And, whether this pushes my boat length 'rule of thumb' up or down.

My apologies if I'm asking something that already been covered, but I've tried searches and can't find anything that addresses my question directly. 

Lastly, I realize that boats of every dimension CAN be singlehanded -- I'm mainly interested in the collective wisdom regarding 'ideal cruising boat size' as it applies to catamarans.

piscator


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Piscator-

There isn't much different in terms of singlehanding a boat, whether it has one, two, or three hulls. However, what you learned on Aquacats and Hobies is going to be very different from what you'd experience on a cruising sized multihull. Beach catamarans are relatively overpowered and really won't teach you much about handling a cruising sized catamaran.

First thing I'd recommend is that you read the following books:
 Chris White's _The Cruising Multihull_
 Thomas Firth Jones's _Multihull Voyaging_
 Mike Mullen's _Multihull Seamanship_
as a basic foundation of knowledge about cruising multihulls.

One of the big problems for monohullers moving over to multihulls is that some of your reactions are going to be wrong for sailing a multihull safely. Also, the speed of a multi-hull means that things can go from safe to dangerous very quickly, unless you really understand what is going on. This is especially true on large catamarans, which tend to not give as much warning when they're at the point of getting into trouble.

That said, most of the problems I've seen on multihulls, is usually human error. The biggest problem that I see with new multihull sailors is that they get so taken by how fast a multihull can go, they don't seem to realize that you shouldn't really sail one as fast as possible once conditions start to pick up. *It is very difficult to capsize a cruising size multihull that is properly sailed-however, it is very easy to capsize one that is improperly sailed.*

Think of a multihull as a sports car.... yes, they can do 120 MPH... but that doesn't mean that it is wise or prudent to do so all the time. For example, while it is probably reasonably safe to drive 120 MPH on a closed, private sports track that is dry and well maintained-it probably isn't as wise to do so on a wet, pot-hole ridden, icy city street in rush hour traffic.

Also, in strong winds and heavier seas, dropping the speed of the boat down a bit makes the ride for the crew much more comfortable, and reduces the risks of pitchpoling and capsize drastically.

I've taken my boat out in conditions that a lot of other boats wouldn't consider going out in, but I haven't had a problem, because I know the limits of my boat, and don't push it in those conditions.

There have been a few stories recently of Corsair trimarans capsizing-most recently, what looks like a Corsair 31 off the coast of New Jersey, on its way back to New England. The Corsairs are significantly lighter than my boat, with more sail area... and also, IIRC, have smaller amas, that are higher off the water. I believe the difference in sail area, displacement, and design contribute to the reasons why the Corsairs have capsized recently.

I also believe that the attitude of the sailors aboard the boat may contribute to the risk of capsize-if the sailors have a racing mentality and are used to flying a hull and pushing the envelope... I think they're far more likely to capsize the boat than a boat with a conservative cruising mentality crew.

Catamarans will have the most living space and stowage space out of the three types of boats-mono, cat, tri. They will also often have the worst sailing performance of the three, due to the high windage, high freeboard, low bridgedeck clearance and small sail plan that seems to be fairly common on many charter-market catamarans. Non-charter catamarans seem to have some better sailing characteristics in some cases.

Some catamarans can have problems in light air, due to the wetted surface area presented by having two hulls in the water. In heavier winds, they can have problems tacking or coming about due to the windage caused by the bridgedeck and cabintop. This is due to the designers need to make the boats exceptionally spacious and roomy as desired by the charter market.

Trimarans, especially the more modern designs, that eschew the full wing deck design that was popular in the earlier designs, will have the least amount of living space and stowage space. They will also tend to be more weight sensitive than a catamaran. There are exceptions to this of course, like the big, full wingdeck trimarans that you sometimes see in the charter trade, with 8+ berths, etc.

Trimarans tend to do a bit better than catamarans, in terms of sailing ability, since they tend to pivot on the center hull, which a catamaran can't do, and have less wetted area, since the amas are much smaller than the main hull. This is especially true on the performance oriented trimarans, which are usually designed to have only one of the two amas in the water at any time.

A lot of the rules for monohulls don't really apply to multihulls. For instance, the scantlings for monohulls are often much, much heavier than what you'd find on a similar LOA catamaran or trimaran. This is due to the fact that catamarans and trimarans don't have to support the weight and mass of a heavy metal keel.


----------



## nolatom (Jun 29, 2005)

Piscator, you've asked some intelligent questions, and I will defer to the multihull sailors who know a lot more about multihulls than I do, which is slightly greater than zero, but not much.

I have the monohuller's prejudice in favor of hulls that will seek to right themselves if everything else has gone wrong. I may be sadly misinformed (as was Humphrey Bogart about "the waters") but everyone has an opinion, and that's mine.

I don't think the number of crew is a whole lot different between a mono or multi hull of similar length, but my experience in this regard is limited to monohulls. I'll agree that 35 feet is close to ideal for monohulls, but can't opine about multihulls.


----------



## Idiens (Jan 9, 2007)

When you look at the size of machines that tiny Dame Ellen navigates, it doesn't look like there is a single handed limit. However, for most cruisers, I expect it's cash rather than length that limits the choice. 

There are also practical cruising problems in marinas, not all can accommodate really big multihulls and not too many of them fit in simultaneously. 

Mooring a big multihull into a tight space could also be more stressing single handed, than mooring an equivalent length monohull. Being lighter, I would guess they are more wilful in cross winds, but a cat could have two engines to help. 

Bigger boats need bigger anchors and at some point single handed anchor laying and recovery becomes an issue. Lots of automation helps, when all is well, but when things go wrong being at both ends of the boat can prove difficult.

Big boats need big sails, and cruising sails tend to be heavier to take the chaff and have longer lives than their racing brethren. Big sails present single handed handling problems. Multihulls probably need more sail handling to sail safely and still use their speed.

Certainly, multihulls get from A to B faster, and cruisers usually want to be at A or B and the bit in between is a time consuming necessity. However, when most time is spent at A or B, the live-aboard qualities play a big role. A big cat is a bit more like a condo, than the narrow hull of a tri, or the submarine like interior of a monohull. Being a condo, the accumulation of junk is likely to be larger and those cat like high speed sailing characteristics don't like the weight.

Anyway, I still drool over pictures of the Dragonfly 1200.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

A few points re: Idiens and Nolatom

You have to remember that Dame Ellen's boat was essentially a very expensive machine tailored to her specifications and designed so that she could single-hand the boat. Most production boats won't be setup up to single hand specifically. Modifications, like having multiple headsail furling units, etc... aren't typically found on production boats.

Idiens' points about marina space and the size of boats is an excellent one...which is one reason I went with a Telstar. Most Farrier designs are not stored in the water folded, primarily due to the design of their ama folding system, which would leave the outer topsides of the amas and the hull-deck join immersed. This is why most are parked at moorings, or in the rare case an end slip, where beam is less of an issue. My boat can be stored in the water with no trouble, since the amas don't change orientation during the folding process.

As for manueverability... most big catamarans have dual engines and dual props... and as such can make turns much tighter than a monohull of the same size, once the captain and crew are used to using two engines for manuevering.

Size is generally a limitation. While powered winches and windlasses can help with raising, lowering or otherwise controlling larger sails and anchors, they do little for the rest of operating a larger boat. As Beth Leonard points out in her book, *The Voyager's Handbook*, a powered windlass or winch won't help you carry a 90 lb. anchor from the anchor locker to the bow roller or flake a 600 sq. ft. genoa. It won't help a small person coil up 50' of 5/8" dockline either. And then what do you do if the powered winch or windlass fails. On a smaller boat, you can often manually horse the sail down or haul the anchor up... with a large enough boat, that no longer becomes an option.

Windage can be a big problem for multihulls, especially since they don't have the mass and inertia that a monohull does. Without the centerboard a third of the way down, the bow of my boat blows around like a kite. This is also a major problem for them during a RTS-type storm.

The monohuller's prejudice against boats that don't self-right doesn't make much sense IMHO. Most of the boats and ships that go out to sea don't self-right-monohull sailboats are the majority of the exceptions to this. Capsizes and knockdowns are a reality. However, the incredible form stability of the multihull makes it generally a far lower probability than it is on a ballasted monohull. While a multihull can't be knocked down, it will capsize, and usually, won't right without outside assistance. A monohull can and often is knocked down or rolled, but will often right itself-but not always.

There is a monohuller's argument that the multihull has a position of ultimate stability-floating upside down, with the rig as keel. This is true, but most modern multihulls are made of positively buoyant materials and as such can't sink, since they have no ballast to pull them under. Then there is the multihuller's position that a ballasted monohull has a position of ultimate stability-upright, sitting on the bottom of the ocean._* If I have a choice of being on a floating inverted multihull or on a sunken monohull, I know which I'd choose.

*_One of the key things to taking full advantage of a well designed multihull is keeping them relatively light. Taking full advantage of all the stowage space available on a catamaran is a serious problem.


----------



## Idiens (Jan 9, 2007)

Good points SD - so what would you give as a direct answer to the size of multihull that, shall we say, is the maximum practical comfortable size to single hand on a fairly continuous basis. I'm guessing 40 ft long might be the answer, much the same as for a monohull.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

40' is probably a good basic limit for most people. A larger boat can certainly be single-handed, if the boat is rigged for it specifically, but it wouldn't be for the average sailor.


----------



## NautiG (Apr 23, 2007)

I've just come off a six month single-handed cruise from the Chesapeake to Florida and back. My boat is an old Gemini Catamaran. I don't know that there are many issues specific to single-handing a catamaran. Most of the issues are general to the performance of a catamaran compared to a mono-hull.

One thing I've found useful is that when I have crew aboard, I keep the mindset of single-handing. I always assume that I'll have to do everything myself. Regardless of the boating experience of the crew, a cat is just a lot different from what they've been on before and they're apt to make misjudgments about the performance of the boat.

In regards to size, I've appreciated that the boat is something that I can push off from grounding. I've never needed a tow (knock on teak). With my cat's tiny draft, I am often tempted into the skinny water. I'll ignore markers if they would cause a long detour from a straight line cruise. And I like to gunkhole and search out secluded anchorages. Some say that a catamaran has a natural attraction to the skinny water.

Scott
Gemini Catamaran Split Decision
Captain's Blog


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Scott's point about the ability of most multis to sneak into water that other boats would have trouble with is a good one. I've anchored in 6' of water at high tide and been able to sail off at low tide.  It also means that I can hide from storms in more choices of "hurricane" holes than a monohull. 

However, the shallow draft doesn't really affect how you sail a multihull vs. a monohull.


----------



## piscator (Sep 2, 2006)

Thanks to everyone for such thoughtful replies!

Nolatom, I agree that 35' is a 'sorta' magic monohull number, thanks for the confirmation.

Idiens, "practical crusing problems" as you phrase it, is exactly my curiosity. 'What's easier?' 'What's harder' about singlehanding a multihull and how does that influence boat length/size. You're points regarding sail area and weight, anchoring, etc. are precisely what interests me.

Sailingdog, you write wonderful stuff and I appreciate it. I've read both Chris White and Beth Leonard; and think you might consider publishing yourself! 

Sailingdog, your points regarding manueverability, windage, etc. are the kind of issues I'm trying to discover. What other multihull 'plusses' and 'minuses' do you perceive? And, when all is said and done -- where do your 'lines get drawn' when it comes to size limits and singlehanding multihulls?

A 'quasi-related' example: I once worked on charter fishing boats. My 'take' is that boats around 35' are handy and still comfortable. At 44' - 46' it gets to be a damn long trip up to the flying bridge about the 7th time you make it. 36' to 42' is my 'rule of thumb' for day charter fishing boats. 

I'm trying to cultivate a similar 'rule of thumb' for multihulls, or, at least, to understand what factors (like windage, manueverablity) contribute to the practical limits inherent to the design. 

How boat size relates to safety in multi-hulls (and where a singlehander might 'draw the line' there) is an important consideration. But, I'm not focusing on the mono vs multi controversy.

Lastly, for 'practical cruising with moderate dispatch' an undercanvassed multihull seems like it would have advantages over a monohull maximized to acheive equivalent speeds. Maybe even safety advantages. Any comments?

How design effects the compromises sailors have to make is endlessly fascinating, to me. Since I'm new to that discussion as it relates to multihulls, I do appreciate your comments.

piscator


----------



## Idiens (Jan 9, 2007)

I suppose from a cruiser's point of view, the first criterion might be price - how much boat do you get for your money - then volume - how much can you stuff into it and still move around. Then having bought and stuffed it, how well does it now sail?

My impression is that for the price of a Dragonfly 1200, I could buy a lot more volume in a monohull, or conversely, the max volume loaded in the Dragonfly would slow it down a lot. On cats, if I filled them to their volume, they might sink.


----------



## chucklesR (Sep 17, 2007)

As a multihull sailor and owner I think single handing is easier on multi's due to the more stable nature. 
I have no qualms at all going forward and doing work while letting my autohelm mind the boat.
I've only truly singled my own Gemini (33.5 feet), but I've sailed up to 42's with crew that was racked out doing nada, no problems.

It's also (due to the dual engines) much easier to dock a multi when alone.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

I'd think that a generalized rule for multihulls isn't really all that feasible, since there is such a wide range of variation on the designs...

First of all, you have two distinctly different platforms-catamaran or trimaran.

Second, you have very different design philosophies... on a trimaran, you can have a full wing deck design like an older Jim Brown Searunner, a partial wing deck like some of Dick Newick's designs, or a center hull only design, like Chris White's Hammerhead 54.

Same thing on catamarans... you can have a relatively minimalist catamaran with little or no bridgedeck ala Wharram's Tiki series, or you can have a low-bridgedeck clearance, high windage beastie with a nearly complete solid bridgedeck, like an endeavorcat, or a high-performance partial bridgedeck boat like a Gunboat 48.

For example, while a Gunboat 48 may have a fairly high cabintop, it is located fairly far aft on the boat, and doesn't affect the boat's ability to tack.

As to where to draw the line...it really depends on the boat, the way it is rigged and the sailor. Larger boats, by definition, are more capsize resistant and safer... *but a boat that is too large for you to safely handle is just as dangerous, if not more so, than one that is too small*.

*I wouldn't buy a multihull that is under-canvassed.* IMHO, this is a problem with some of the cruising catamaran designs out there... since they come with a relatively small sail plan. The problem with that is the majority of the time you're out sailing, you're generally in lighter winds, say 5-15 knots. With a deliberately under-canvassed sailplan, you'll have to motor in the lighter winds. That is probably why you see so many large charter cats motoring, rather than sailing.

*You really need to have sufficient sail area to move the boat in light winds, yet have the ability to reduce sail down enough so that you're not over-canvassed in higher winds. *In some cases this may be accomplished by rigging the boat as a cutter or ketch, rather than a sloop. It may also be accomplished by having more reefing points, say three instead of two, or deeper reefs that eat up more sail area with each reef. _In fact, I'm thinking of asking my sailmaker to add a third reefing point to my mainsail for just this very reason. _

*While a multihull can have an impressive speed advantage over a monohull, especially over short distances, the overall speed advantage over long distances and durations isn't as great as most people would think.* This is often due to the fact that you don't want to sail a multihull at the maximum speed it is capable of in most conditions, since that is a good way to end up pitchpoling or capsizing her. I've been out in 30 knots of wind, and I could have probably gotten my boat going at 17 knots or so... but generally, we'll sail at 9-11 knots instead. The ride is much more comfortable, the boat is under much less strain, and the risk of pitchpoling or capsizing is much, much lower.


----------



## NautiG (Apr 23, 2007)

Chuckles, those are good points. Maybe I've just forgotten how difficult it was to single-hand my old Pearson mono-hull. The wide, flat deck of my Gemini is easy to work on. And the boat mostly wants to go straight, even without an autopilot. (Unlike my Pearson, which wanted to do donuts in the water when I went forward.)

And docking is a lot easier. Unlike a mono-hull, my cat is just about as easy to steer in reverse as in forward.

Scott
Gemini Catamaran Split Decision
Captain's Blog


----------



## chucklesR (Sep 17, 2007)

I never backed my mono hull in well, just too uncoordinated I guess. I gave up trying after a while.
The first time (my after purchase demo sail) I brought my Gemini back in I backed her into the narrow (17 ft for a 14ft beam) like I'd been doing it all my life. 
Will H at PCI was onboard and remarked that it was the best he'd seen in a long long time - the guy in the slip next to me said he wished he could do it that well.
It drives like a car; and that with a steerable drive leg, not twin screws.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

I'd have to agree... we've been out in heavy winds and while we're sitting in the cockpit, passing the chips and soda around, we'll pass a large monohull sailboat and their crew will be hanging on for dear life, and in full foulies...getting soaked... LOL...


----------



## piscator (Sep 2, 2006)

Nautig and Chuckles, thanks for chiming in!

Sailingdog, "undercanvassed" was a poor choice of words on my part. I should have said 'reefed down', 'sailed conservatively' or something equivalent. 

The comparison I was trying to make was between a multi-hull sailing conservatively at 9-11 knots and a monohull straining all limits to reach equivalent speeds. I was imagining my sailing friends who expend enormous energy and inordinate amounts of cash to make a mono-hull 'go-fast' and thinking, "why don't they just sail a multihull". 

Your point that multihulls don't necessarily average high speeds over 'long distances or durations' is well taken. But what about 'normal cruising' where you may have flexibility to choose advantageous weather? Does the 'weekend warrior' enjoy higher average speeds over his monohull brethren?

If a 40' catamaran sailor can comfortably acheive 9-11 knots, he may be doing better than the trawler converts! Are catamarans the potential non-fuel alternative for the trawler crowd? Interesting prospect.

Thanks for pointing out the different design parameters, bridgedecks, windage, etc. Obviously, they are crucial to the discussion. 

Personally, I'm more attracted to Catamarans, but I've admired two Tri's in our area. I like Chris White's designs, but I'm not qualified to judge them. I studied a Wharram also and was impressed with the practicality. Floating condominiums don't interest me, no matter how they're packaged.

Given the parameters we're discussing, which 35' ish to 40' ish Catamarrans or Tri's should I study as 'best of the breed'? 

Thanks to everyone for your help!

Piscator


----------



## sailortjk1 (Dec 20, 2005)

> Think of a multihull as a sports car.... yes, they can do 120 MPH


Wow, that is one fast boat.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Yes, the weekend warrior or coastal cruiser does benefit from the higher speeds a multihull can sail at. A well designed 40' catamaran can probably sail at 15-17 knots fairly comfortably, given some decent wind. My example of 9-11 knots is on a 28' trimaran.  

The only problem with Chris White's designs is that most are one-offs and not production boats, and judging the build quality and production quality is a bit more difficult. 

When I was looking at boats, I was interested in getting one that had decent sailing characteristics, yet could be trailered, since some of the sailing areas I want to get to are effectively landlocked. Lake W. in NH is one example. Besides, not many boats can go to windward at 60 MPH. Most of the smaller catamarans don't sail as well as the trimarans in the <30' range.


----------



## chucklesR (Sep 17, 2007)

Gemini (105Mc and even 3400's for the older ones) are of course the best of breed when one considers price, performance (regular 10kt days, 18kts achievable) and features (queen sized bed, air conditioning, fits in a commonly found 15ft wide slip).
Charles Kanter's Cruising Multihull Communique said it best. Gemini's are the best value for the buck out there.

They do have their problems, quality control issues and shortcomings. The Yahoo group (over 1300 members with and without boats) talks extensively about the boats, improvements etc.. In fact the yahoo group is the best FREE feature of the boat.

Disclaimer: I'm somewhat biased. I've had my Gemini one year this week.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Why do you think you're biased??  I'd say much the same for the Telstar 28... best value for the buck given the features and size of the boat...


----------



## chucklesR (Sep 17, 2007)

For unbiased, experience based options (beyond Kanter's reviews).

For under 40 ft, the Maxim 38 (Voyage Yachts)
For over 40 ft, the Voyage 44

If I had the money and a 25 ft wide slip, I'd be sailing a Maxium. They have a problem with the chain locker, but a couple of epoxied slats would fix that (too steep to stand in when wet).

I've not skippered bigger so I won't opine. I have sailed on a Voyage 50 - it did not thrill me as much as the 44 and it costs a heck of a lot more.

Lagoon's suck and look like bricks with silly hats, Fountaine Pagot's, same deal, look stupid and cost has escalated them out of the market - condoCat's for the charter market. MaineCat's are silly with a open salon, if I wanted to live in a tent I'd go camping. TomCat's are Gemini wanna be's with outboards and bad berthing arrangement (same size as by 25% more than a Gem also).


I hear good things about Admirals and Seawinds, but they are out of my price range and generally not chartered.


----------



## piscator (Sep 2, 2006)

Thanks again to everyone, I'm learning a great deal!

Chuckles, I like a man that gets straight to the point! Don't hold back!  

piscator


----------



## piscator (Sep 2, 2006)

Sailingdog, 

Noting your New England location, could I ask another hypothetical question that might seem 'a little off the wall'?

What about a catamaran for fishing? Gas prices have certainly curtailed Montauk expeditions out to the 'butterfish hole' and dented the activities of inshore bass fisherman. 

I checked out photos of Chuckles Gemini and it looked like it might make a decent fishing boat. A swift sail out to the reef and then drop the sails to drift fish or troll under power. 

Crazy idea? Any thoughts?

piscator


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

LOL... one of the guys that bought a sister ship to mine nearly got killed by his wife when he ripped out the port side settee and replaced it with a storage rack for fishing tackle and tackle boxes.


----------



## piscator (Sep 2, 2006)

Sailingdog,

I'd really appreciate a brief list of multihulls that demonstrate 'good design'.

You were right to emphasize the differences in windage, bridgedeck height, etc. and I'd like to study boats you would consider 'properly designed'. 

While I'm drawn to Cats in the 30' ish to 40ish range -- to further my knowledge -- I'm equally interested in Trimarans. It's the 'desireable characteristics' of either species that I'd like to 'bone up on'. 

If you're able to give me a list of examples to track down, I'd really appreciate it! 

If Chucles or anyone else reading this can point out 'best designed' multi's that I can study -- I hope they will chime in! 

Also, Sailingdog, I'm glad you're LOL! The guy who owns your 'sistership' seems perfectly sensible -- to me! However, friends do, at times, consider me 'a little unconventional.  

fisherman


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

I would again repeat that there is no BEST DESIGN for multihulls. It really depends on what you want to do with the boat.

For instance, if you're really into going fast... a Reynolds 33 catamaran might be a very good choice. However, for about the same price, $150,000, you could get much more comfortable cruising catamaran, like the Gemini 105Mc. Both of these catamarans are relatively narrow, having a beam of only 14' and both will fit into a 40' monohull slip. A different sort of catamaran would be a Seawind 1000, which is almost 20' wide and generally requires a mooring or end slip, and has fixed berths for EIGHT...but is probably considerably more money than the other two.

The same is basically true of the trimarans. The go-fast version would be a Corsair 28. A basic cruising trailerable trimaran would be my boat, the Telstar 28. The luxury cruising model would probably be the Dragonfly 900, which is probably almost double the price of the Telstar 28.

Your budget is going to have a very serious impact on what boats are possibilities... and what ones are just pipe dreams. Going above 35' LOA starts to get really expensive, really fast. A new 40' Nautitech Catamaran goes for about $430,000.


----------



## piscator (Sep 2, 2006)

Sailingdog,

I am trying to study multihulls in terms of their intended design goal, looking at things like waterline beam to length ratios, etc. -- so I will look at the Reynolds as an example of a 'fast cat' and the Gemini as a practical cruising vessel. "Here's an example of this. Here's an example that." is the kind of direction I was seeking. 

That said, a sailing buddy and I have 'dry-docked' the fishing boat and are talking about joint ownership in a Cat. We already have a couple of moorings that could easily berth a 40'. 

We'd look for a boat suitable for a family of four to cruise Long Island Sound to Maine -- with 'dispatch'. A boat that's not a complete hassle to singlehand on a summer evening, but still large enough to feel 'a bit shippy' -- if you know what I mean.

We're both 'into' classic craft and already own a 1/2 dozen (old) small sailboats, but I'd say we're darn open-minded!  We both like the innovations that have come about in multhulls and neither one of us enjoys the long trip down the ladder into a 'leadmine' monohull. 'On the flip-side' we wouldn't appreciate a 'floating condo' either.

I don't know what the charter scene is like in New England, but we'd charter a Cat next weekend, if we new where to find one. 

Any suggestions are welcome, as always. Thanks for your help!

piscator


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

You're not generally going to find multihulls for charter this far north. The nearest place I know of that you can charter a catamaran is probably the Chesapeake.

If you're serious about buying a multihull, I'd highly recommend you go down to Annapolis in October and hit the Multihull Demo Days that is hosted by Performance Cruising, who makes the Telstar 28 Trimarans and Gemini 105Mc Catamarans. They usually have about a dozen multihulls that you can go out on test sails for. Starting in about September or so, you can register on-line to take different boats out for test sails on the MDD website.

Last year, they had the following boats on demo:

*Catamarans < 40' *
 Broadblue 385
 Gemini 105Mc
 Lagoon 380
 Seawind 1000XL
 Seawind 1160
 TomCat 9.7
* Catamarans > 40'*
 Lagoon 420
 Lagoon 440
 Lagoon 500
 Fountaine Pajot Salina 48
 Leopard 40 (basically same as the Moorings 40)
 Leopard 46 (bascially same as the Moorings 46)
 Maine Cat 41
 Manta 42
*Trimarans
*
Corsair Sprint 750
Dragonfly (probably the 920)
Telstar 28
Personally, I think that Performance Cruising gives you a lot of boat for the money. It isn't going to be finished like a Gunboat, but it isn't going to cost you like a Gunboat either. Given that they've sold over 1000 Gemini catamarans, they must be doing something right. I'd highly recommend you take a look at a Gemini. It's not a perfect boat, and has some issues, but it's not a bad compromise in terms of living space and performance.


----------



## NautiG (Apr 23, 2007)

SD, they've only manufactured around 800 Geminis. They started numbering the hulls at 100, and skipped to the next number divisible by 100 whenever they made a model change. The recent celebration of hull #1000 was a little disingenuous.

Scott
Gemini Catamaran Split Decision
Captain's Blog


----------



## piscator (Sep 2, 2006)

Sailingdog, 

Thank-you -- great suggestions, great information!

We'll put 'multihull demo days' on the list. My buddy and I will probably do a charter -- somewhere -- before then. I have to make a trip to Maine and might stop at MaineCat.

The Gemini has an awful lot going for it. While our bias is for something slightly larger, the fact that there are so many of them is a big plus. 

Rebuilding boats is what we do for fun. We've rehabbed a Wherry, a 'classic glass' Rhodes, other small boats and a 'gut and refit' of a 35' Sportfish. 

I don't think we'd want something new. A Cat in need of TLC would be more 'up our alley'. I wouldn't claim that we can match 'Gunboat's' finish level, but over the years, we've gotten pretty good with wood and 'glass. 

Nautig, thanks for your comments. If anyone wants to chime in with older Cat suggestions 35' to 42' -- I will certainly appreciate it.

piscator


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

My bad... although the number is higher than 800. From the Gemini website:



> Through over 930 boats, every aspect of the Gemini 105Mc has evolved for maximum performance. The near constant tuning and tweaking of sail plans, rig, and structure results in a cruising catamaran with unparalleled performance. Whether sailing to windward in 25 knots or ghosting at wind-speed in 5 knots of true wind, the Gemini is a cruising boat that offers exhilarating sailing every time. As Practical Sailor phrased it - she's a "spacious, stable platform for a fast-cruising couple." Take some time to explore the reasons behind her legendary performance.





NautiG said:


> SD, they've only manufactured around 800 Geminis. They started numbering the hulls at 100, and skipped to the next number divisible by 100 whenever they made a model change. The recent celebration of hull #1000 was a little disingenuous.
> 
> Scott
> Gemini Catamaran Split Decision
> Captain's Blog


----------



## chucklesR (Sep 17, 2007)

Fortunately for me, the best one is #987


----------



## NautiG (Apr 23, 2007)

SD, I think the number is closer to 800. They'd have to be on about hull #1130 in order to reach the 930 number. Chuckles, any idea what hull numbers they're presently building?

My guess is that 930 is the total number of all types of boats they've built, including Telstars and boats preceding the Gemini. If so, then what you quoted from the website is as misleading as their hull numbering system.

Scott
Gemini Catamaran Split Decision
Captain's Blog


----------



## chucklesR (Sep 17, 2007)

50 per year on average if those silly Telstar's don't get in the way too much. Now that the floor space for Telstar's is done that won't affect production.
987 was May 9th 2007, +50 = 1037 - 1040 about now.


----------



## piscator (Sep 2, 2006)

Sailingdog, Chuckles, Nautig,

Just wanted to say thanks again!

I've located several boats for charter on the Chesapeake:

Gemini 3000
Catana c381
Fountaine Pajot 40

My sailing partner and I figure a weekday charter might save us a few bucks. We plan to take a few days off during the week and give this multi-hull thing a test run. Not sure which boat to target, but it will probably depend on what dates are available. The Pajot seems like a big boat, even for two guys. 

You got us motivated, so thanks!

piscator


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Glad to help.


----------

