# is the Carribean coastal sailing or offshore?



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

I have been looking at boats to sail the carribean and across the gulf from the keys to mexico .....would I be happier in the roominess of a coastal cruiser or would it be unsafe to cross the gulf in a 30 year old coastal cruiser such as an O Day, Hunter, Irwin, ect... Before you reply....i cannot afford a Sabre, Tartan, Pearson from the ads i have seen, Please help me get a good perspective on this??


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

although any of the boats you mention can and have made those voyages under the right conditions, none are considered offshore boats. what price / size range are you attempting to stay within? if you can''t see land, you are offshore!


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

I think that too much is made of these terms offshore or coastal cruisers. While there can be major distictions between how a specific boat is intended to be used, when you talk about extended cruising in areas that are somewhat breezy in nature, then you are better off in a boat that has certain kinds of attributes, (such as robust construction, good deck hardware, good sails and reefing gear, seaberths, plenty of storage and tankage, small but operable portlights, and a comparatively small cockpit with large drains.) 

If you are an experienced sailor with good boat repairing skills, you can by with a boat that compromises on some of these characteristics and can upgrade the boat to over come any serious deficiencies. 

When you talk about the Carribean you are talking about a large region with a wide varieties of sailing conditions. Areas like the Vigin Islands offer a wide range of marine services within a day or so sail of anywhere. The conditions are quite breezy but rarely more than manageable and when things get dicey there are plenty of places to duck in and wait things out. Other areas of the Carribean you are several days away from safe ports of refuge and conditions can be less predictable. 

People have cruised these areas in allkinds of boats. It can be done with some skill and some luck. That said, this all comes down to risk management. How much are you willing to risk? If you end up buying an unsuitable boat, the chances are greater that something catastrophic will happen. You are clearly on a tight budget. That catastrophy may not be that you sink your boat or loose your rig. It may simply be that you loose some part of the boat that you cannot fix with spares onboard in some remote corner of the world and cannot affort to buy the part and have it shipped to where you are and are forced to leave your boat in a hurricane zone and return to the States to refresh the kitty. While this can happen on any boat, it is less like to happen on a more robustly constructed boat and one designed for the kind of proplonged exposure to the kind of conditions encountered in these breezier corners of the world. 

Given your budget, probably the best way to go may be to buy an older, tougher boat from the 1960''s or early 1970''s that someone has spent time restoring, and then spend some more time going over the boat and carefully upgrading those few items that might have been missed by the previous owner. 

Jeff


----------



## thomas s (Oct 11, 2001)

Jeff, are you feeling alright. Your not supposed to recommend older boats! 
thomas


----------



## BigRed56 (May 27, 2001)

Ahoy Jeff , hey I ain''t no doctor but you better take a shot of anti- humility and lie down. Call me in the morning if your visions of money plums and "J''s"aren''t back in yer head. Just kidding,now your right snd ye be deserving of your own command by me thinking. Big Red the Pirate of Pine Island.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Jeff, I appreciate your sincerity and wealth of knowledge. I will be sailing sw Florida and the Keys with trips to the Bahamas and also my local area is very shallow.... I was wondering if you could recommend some shoal draft or center board or swing keel boats that you''d consider well enough built to handle that trip around the Carribean. I do have a budget of under 20-25,000 so I had been looking at production boats such as the O day''s and such. What models in the 29-31 foot range can you recommend? I know older boats were built heavier but does that also mean that its still stronger considering age and the pounding that its taken? I hear some folks here talk about how a production boat made in the 80''s doesn''t need to be as heavy as it is better enginered. I am unsure of which direction to head toward.??????


----------



## manateee_gene (Dec 7, 2001)

Try looking at the Lats and Atts.b.b.There is
a fully equipped 28''er that just came back from a few months out in islands for under 10K


----------



## rbh1515 (Jul 7, 2000)

On your budget I would recommend a Morgan Out Island 33 that has been well mentained. It has a shoal draft, and has alot of room. It is very heavy (14,000#) and IMHO was pretty well made. You can get one between $20 and $30k. I know Jeff will scoff at this suggestion, but oh well! I would recommend one made after 1975. Rob


----------



## manateee_gene (Dec 7, 2001)

O.K. I just checked the Lats.and Atts. B.B.
A fellow by the name of Robbie has a Irwin 28 for sail fully equipped,located in NoName Harbor in the Keys.Claims its in perfect cruise ready condition claims to have just returned from the Islands.$3k stripped,$5k fully loaded!He is not on the weg.ph# 571-236-7912.
GOOD LUCK!!!


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

I think there are a lot of good boats in the 20 to 25K range. I agree that many of the early fiberglass boats were quite heavy without being especially sturdy. The 1970''s was in some ways the sorst period because boats were getting lighter but engineering had not improved. By the 1980''s there was a better materials and methods as well as a better understanding of designing fiberglass structures.


Probably my favorite is the Tartan 30 from the 1970''s. These are nicely designed and reasonably constructed boats. I have posted this list before but here is my list of favorites under 25 K. 

-Albin Ballad (30 feet (1973-1978) $12-20K) 
These are reasonably fast and very well built and finished boats. They are not especially roomy but are good boats for short handing. They are beautiful looking boats. Most have a Volvo 10 hp diesel.

Albin Cumulus (28 feet-(early 1980''s) $15-18K) 
These fractional rigged sloops would be a ideal first boat. They are reasonably fast and easy to handle. They are nicely finished and typically have diesels. The interiors on these boats are not exactly plush but is reasonable. 

Alberg 30: slow, wet but rugged and cheap to buy. 
Beneteau First 30 or 30E (30 feet (early 1980''s) $18-22K) 
Fairly modern design that should sail reasonably well. Not the most solid boats but fine for Florida and the Bahamas. They had diesels and pretty good hardware. The 30E might be a fractional rig, I don''t recall. 

-C&C Corvette (31 feet (1967- 1970) $15-22K) and -C&C Redwing (30 footer ( 1965-1970) $12K- 20K)
Attractive and reasonably venerable designs; they are not especially fast but OK for the era. The Corvettes are moderately long keel/ centerboard boats and so are great for poking around the shallower areas of the Bay. The Redwings are fin keel/spade rudder boats and in many ways are less suitable for what you want to so than the Corvette. 

Cal 2-30 and Cal 2-29''s (just under 30 feet (mid 1960-early 1970''s) $10-18K)
These are reasonably built racer cruisers that have reasonable accommodations and pretty fair sailing ability. Like the Cal 25, the design is a dated and if the gear has not been updated will be less convenient than a more modern design But these boats have gone a lot of places.


Dehler 31 (31 feet (Mid to late 1980''s) under $20K to mid-20K range) 
These are really neat little boats. They are reasonably fast and look easy to sail and single-hand. They are fractional rigged and have a very nice interior plan. They would one of my favorites on this list.

Dufour 2800 (28 feet (mid 1980''s) mid $20K)
These are OK boats with a big following. They are not my favorite but they would not be a bad boat if the price were right.

Irwin Competition 30 (30 feet(mid 1970''s) $12-16K) 
These were well rounded little boats that sailed well and had reasonably nice interiors. There was one that dominated its class in PHRF for years. Irwin''s were not the most solidly built boats and so you are looking for a well maintained example in reasonably good shape. You may have some serious beefing up to do if you plan to do the Carribean.

MG27 (27 foot (Mid 1980''s) under $20K)
Nice little fractional rigged English boats. They seem to be well mannered and have an interior layout similar to my now sold Laser 28. They have a diesel aux. But tiny tanks that will need to get upgraded. 

1970''s vintage Tartan 30''s, (30 feet( 1970''s) under $20K)
These are my favorite masthead sloops of that era. They are good all around boats. Most still atomic 4''s but you can find them with diesels. 

Late 70''s/ early 80''s Hunter 30''s, (30feet (15-20K)
These are very under appreciated boats. We have had two in my family and again it is a matter of finding one that has been upgraded and is in good clean shape. My Dad raced his in PHRF and went for a couple years without finishing lower than a first or second. They are roomy and surprisingly fast. 

70''s vintage Pearson 30''s (Not Flyers)
These are very venerable racer/cruisers. Of course they come in all kinds of condition from really well maintained and up graded with good racing hardware and a diesel engine to stripped and trashed. You can buy them from under $10K (but you would not want any in that price range) to something approaching $20K. You should find good boats in the high teens.

Pearson Vanguard, Triton, Wanderer and Coaster: Pretty classic old boats from the 1960''s. They were simple, heavily built and pretty cheap to buy. They are a mixed bag in that their original hardware is bound to be dated and pretty worn out. They are slow, wet and don''t have the most comfortable motions in a chop, but lots of these boats have gone to far away places. Again you really want one that has been maintained and upgraded.
Ranger 29 (29 (early 1970''s) 10-18K) 
These are good sailing and nice cruising little boats. They were not the best built boats and so you should be looking for a clean and updated version. Still they offer a lot of bang for the buck. 

Wylie 28 and Wylie 30 (28 and 30 respectively(late 1970''s to early 1980''s) 10-15K) These are neat little boats that sail well and are really pretty interesting. The few that I have seen have good hardware and have had simple but workable interiors. They came in fractional and masthead rig versions. There was a masthead version that did quite well on the Bay. 

Jeff


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

HELP????????

I''d like to thank you for your thorough reply. Its a big help. I have a hard time understanding how a 70''s boat that has thick fiberglass wouldn''t be stronger..Isn''t heavier and thicker always better ? Were those boats not made of the same polyester resin of today''s boats? What things do I look for (besides the need for a shallow draft or centerboard in my case) as far as strength? I have asked the question :what defines a coastal cruiser but I don''t understand how all these companies would sell these expensive things that would fall apart in a few storms. I can understand that these boats could were not designed to handle ocean crossings or years of pounding but on the same hand the Bahamas are so close to Florida that I wonder is that going beyond the design limits of a coastal cruiser to do this? the same is true for most of the Carribean... its only a hundred miles here and there and little hops among the islands.. Would not a regular Catalina 27 or 30, and Oday or Irwin stand up to this??????? what happens? Would an Irwin or other lightly built boat break up in a storm. Certainly the designers of a 30-35 foot boat would not expect one to day sail.. I wonder if I should look at buying the most weight i can for the money or is that not a good way to look at it?????? 

I had a Magregor 25 and the hull was way to light and I agree its a cheap boat. But for years it took a lot of pounding on the steep waves of the great lakes and its still in one piece... MacGregor factory reps swear that even though the hulls flex, meaning you can make the freeboard indent with a good push, that they are engineered to handle coastal waters and trips to Catalina in CA. What does that mean? Wouldn''t stiffer be better.I feel this boat had been a great starter but I am not sure I''d cross to Bahama on it... However, to make my point... wouldn''t almost any production boat 30-34 feet long be safe enough to make those trips? 

I am trying to get the handle on what I should look for, model, weight, price, year, or what? Can anyone shine a light on my questions? You mentioned that in the 80''s the boats were better made but lighter... can you explain that?


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

This is a very long one.

1) "Isn''t heavier and thicker always better?"

Yes and no....There are a lot of factors that add to the weight of a boat beyond its hull. Earlier boats were heavier for a lot of reasons beyond simply having thick hulls. Simply focusing on the hull for a moment. There are really several things that determine the strength of the hull itself. In simple terms it is the strength of the unsupported hull panel (by ''panel'' I mean the area of the hull or deck between supporting structures) itself, the size of the unsupported panel, the connections to supporting structures and the strength of the supporting structures. 

On its own, Fiberglass laminate does not develop much stiffness and it is very dense. If you simply try to create stiffness in fiberglass it takes a lot of thickness. Early fiberglass boat designers tried to simply use the skin for stiffness with wide spread supports from bulkheads and bunk flats. This lead to incredibly heavy boats and boats that were comparably flexible. (In early designs that were built in both wood and fiberglass, the wooden boats typically weighed the same but were stiffer, stronger, and had higher ballast ratios) 

Fiberglass hates to be flexed. Fiberglass is a highly fatigue prone material and over time it looses strength through flexing cycles. A flexible boat may have plenty of reserve strength when new but over time through flexure fiberglass loses this reserve. 

So back to your original question, all other things being equal a thicker panel should have more stiffness but typically these early thickened panels were just not that stiff and as a result they are prone to losing more strength over time.


2) Were those boats not made of the same polyester resin (and fiberglass) used in today''s boats?

Not Really. While the basic chemistry is the same, there is a lot that makes up polyester resin. Prior to the fuel crisis in the 1970''s polyester formulations were different and were comparatively brittle (but resistant to blisters). As a result of the fuel crisis, the resin formulations used in marine applications were altered, and they were altered again in the early 1980''s as a result of the acute blister problems caused by the 1970''s reformulation. 

Beyond that, there is the way that resins were handled. In the 1960''s mixing proportioning, temperature control and even apply resins was pretty haphazard. Various additives were pretty casually added to the resins, such as extenders, bulking agents and accelerators. Each of these offered some cost advantage, but did nothing for strength. 

Probably the worst offenders were accelerators, which increases the brittleness of the resin and weakens it over time. The idea behind accelerators is that tooling for boats (moulds) are expensive. The quicker you can pop out a hull the more frequently you can use a mold. In the 1960''s fiberglass normally took a period weeks to reach a state of cure (i.e. reach something approaching full strength) that it was acceptable to remove the hull and not risk distortion. If you simply over catalyze the resin it will cure more quickly but it will also go off too quickly to have a useful pot life. So in the 1960s accelerators were used to allow a reasonable pot life but speed up the cure time. 

The other component in the laminate is the actual reinforcing fabrics. In its infancy, fiberglass fibers were quite short, brittle and needed to be handled very carefully to avoid damage to the individual fibers. In production facilities in the 1960''s this was simply not well known and so fabrics were cut and folded into tight little bundles. In a plant you would see small stacks of these tightly folded and carefully labeled fiberglass fabric bundles around the perimeter of a boat being laminated. 

Then there was the cloths themselves. Woven fiberglass is comparatively stretchy and weak because in the weaving process the geometry results in fibers that are folded over each other and need to elongate in order to really absorb a big load. Fiberglass fabrics also take the greatest stress in the direction that the fibers are oriented. In the 1960''s there was no effort to minimize the use of materials that reduced the strength of the fiberglass fibers because of the way that the fabric was woven and there was little or no effort to orient the fibers to the direction of maximum stress. 

Then there is the ratio of fiberglass and resin. Except in compression, resin is a very weak material. Resin is very poor in tension, can''t stand elongation and is not too good in sheer. Resin is only there to glue the fibers together and to keep the fibers in column so that the laminate does not fail. The ideal fiberglass resin has no more resin than is absolutely necessary to hold the fibers together and not a tiny bit more. 

This was known in the early days of fiberglass boats but resin and labor was cheap so it was easier to just pour a little more in and avoid dry spots. When I have cored older boats I have generally been amazed how much resin compared to cloth I have found, certainly compared to later boats.

Lastly, comes the controversial issue of coring. Solid glass is heavy. No two ways about it. So it is hard to achieve much bending strength or stiffness without incurring a major weight problem in a comparably small boat. (It is the same problem with steel construction.) If you try to keep weight down you end up with a boat that flexes a lot and flexing causes fatigue that greatly weakens the laminate. 

And before you say, "So just build it heavier". (As I am sure a lot of people are tired of hearing me say) Weight does nothing good for a boat. In and of itself it does not add strength or room, or comfortable motion, but it sure adds additional stresses to every working part of the boat, and it certainly slows a boat down. 

Coring allows the depth of the section to increase and significantly strengthens and stiffens the section, reducing flexing and fatigue. While the outer skin is thinner and easier to pierce than a thicker uncored hull, the combination of outer skin, and core work together where the core acts as a crush zone absorbing energy and distributing it to a wider area. Even with the outer skin breached there is a relatively high likelihood that the inner skin will be intact and after the thicker laminate of the same weight has been broached. Where coring does not do as well in is situations where the boat is subject to long term abrasion and in situations where a boat spends a lot of time bouncing off a dock. 


3. What things do I look for as far as strength?

Up to now we have focused on the strength of the fiberglass materials themselves. But boats behave as a system. As I said early on there are a number of factors that determine the actual strength of the boat. We''ve discussed the strength of the hull panel itself but in many ways its the size of the unsupported panel, the connections to supporting structures and the strength of the supporting structures that really determine more about the strength of the boat. 

You generally just don''t hear of sail boats that are sailing along and a section of hull falls apart. What you do hear about are hardspot failures, hull/ deck joint failures and failures of the framing systems. 

Framing systems are a key part of the strength of a boat. A section of fiberglass laminate that might be extremely strong and stiff when spanning say 12 to 16 inches is really in trouble when trying to span 24 to 30 inches. One of the key elements in evaluating how strong a boat is the frequency of framing. Bulkheads, bunk and shelf flats, engine beds, athwartship frames, and longitudinal stringers all reduce panel size and, in doing so, distribute loads and help limit the size of a tear in or flexure of the skin. 

But the connection between the framing system and the skin is a really important component of the system as well. The joint between the skin and framing members (either tabbing or flanges) need to be wide enough to provide a good contact area for adhesion and to prevent a concentrated load on the skin where our old adversary ''Fatigue'' can go to town. 

Beyond that the framing members themselves need to be sturdy enough to take the loads being superimposed on them. So to answer your question, if I walked on a boat that knew nothing about, the way I would judge the strength of the boat would be to look for small panel sizes, wide tabbing and structural flanges and framing that looks appropriately sized for the job. 

I would also look at high stress areas. Hull/deck joints should have wide contact areas. Mast steps and rudderposts should have large longitudinal and athwartship, knees, frames or bulkheads. Keels should have closely spaced, well glassed-in, athwartship frames (called floor frames) that minimally start at the forward edge of the keel and stop one frame aft of the end of the keel. There should be well glassed in longitudinal (which is often formed by the face of the berths) that occurs over these athwartship frames and act to distribute loads and these should occur reasonably close to the centerline of the boat (within a few feet). 

Rigging loads should be tied into longitudinal and athwartship frames, bulkheads or knees. 

4. You mentioned that in the 80''s the boats were better made but lighter... can you explain that?

In the 1980''s, better boat builders began to use better resins and use them properly, handle fabrics better, and use fibers oriented to better stress mapping. Over resin rich laminates became rarer. Framing systems became more sophisticated. (The largest panel on my 1983 38 footer is about 14 by 22 inches. My 1960s era C&C 22 had panels 2 feet by 6 feet in size.)

5. I wonder why is it going beyond the design limits of a coastal cruiser to sail from Florida to the Bahamas? The same is true for most of the Caribbean? However, to make my point... wouldn''t almost any production boat 30-34 feet long be safe enough to make those trips? 

This is about risk management. In good weather and with a little luck you''d be amazed how minimal a boat can make the kinds of passages that you are talking about. But if your luck runs out, and you get hammered, things happen. Boats will flex bulkheads and stringers loose. At which point, rigging loads are no longer acting on a glassed in bulkhead, which pries the deck up. Perhaps a portlight cracks from being torqued and pretty soon you have something that looks like a boat, but which no longer is a boat. (I have repaired a boat that just what I described happened to and it happened off of Ft. Lauderdale.) 


6. I am trying to get the handle on what I should look for, model, weight, price, year, or what? 

There is no simple answer here. The real answer (with all due respect) comes from experience. It comes from being able to get aboard a boat and look for those subtle clues that tell you how strong a particular boat is and how hard it has been used and how well it has been maintained. It comes from really researching a boat. 

(In my own case. when I was narrowing my search for the boat that I recently bought, I talked via email to people in South Africa, the Caribbean and in New Zealand, who had sailed on sisterships in a wide range of conditions. I spoke to Bruce Farr''s office (the design firm). I spoke to people who had sailed on the boat years before. I went through the boat with a fine tooth comb and then had a surveyor do the same thing to keep me honest with myself. Only then was I ready to buy a boat in confidence that the boat would do what I needed it to.)

You have very ambitious goals and not much money. People have given you good advice but you want to understand why you were getting that advice. That''s good. But you have a long way to go (and I don''t mean that as a put down). My best recommendation is that you allow yourself the time to look at a lot of boats, talk to a lot of people, get out on the water when ever you can and you will be able sort all this out and learn as you go.

7. Can anyone shine a light on my questions? 

Yes, You can! We''re here to help but this is your puzzle. Even if we could, and even if we did, give you all the answers, you couldn''t learn enough or enjoy the ride as much, if all you had to do was dial into a bulletin board and just like turning over a magic 8 ball, the exact right answer to your question came your way.

Hang in there!
Regards
Jeff


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Jeff,
I would like to send my exstreme thanks for taking so much time to shed light on the subject... I never understood that at all before... its always been by a 70 boat -stay away from the 80''s or visa versa...
thank you... I feel like I have a place to start evaluating..., by the way, can I ask what brand of boat in Lauderdale came apart like that? Curious. 
Troy

Jeff,
Also, I would like to tell you something one on one. Let me know your your e mail address to [email protected]? I won''t spam your or nothing.. Just a friendly thought I''d like to share with you.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

jeff h,
that was an amazing explanation!
5 stars
eric


----------



## lisbet (Jan 23, 2002)

Dear Jeff,

You said that it was not a good idea to buy a Pearson 30 under 10K. Why?

We want to buy a boat for less than 10K and hope to find one that "only" need a facelift!! Is that a reasonable thought?

Thanks.

Elisabeth


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

I am not sure in what context I said that, but Pearson 30''s were originally designed as pretty light weight race boats. They have certainly turned out to be good performance cruisers and make good one design racers where a one design fleet exists. For all of thier obvious virtues (and I basically like Pearson 30''s) they are not extremely robust so that when you see one for less than $10K as you sometimes do, they are generally beat to death and need a lot of work. 

To repeat my old boat litany, you can expect to find some ''issues'' with any boat this age. Unless very well maintained and updated by a previous owner, you might expect to need to address some combination of the following items. On a less than $10K Pearson 30 you can expect that the boat was not well maintained. 
You can expect to perhaps need some combination of, 
·	Sails, standing and running rigging and perhaps chainplates that are beyond their useful lifespan, mast step and associated suporting structure in need of rebuilding 
·	an Atomic 4 engine that is in need of rebuild or replacement, 
·	worn out or out of date deck, galley, and head hardware, 
·	worn out upholstery, 
·	electronics that are non operational, or in need of updating, 
·	electrical and plumbing systems that need repairs, or upgrades to modern standards or replacement.
·	Blisters, fatigue, rudder, hull to deck joint or deck coring problems
·	Keel hull joint repairs and/or bolt replacement. 
·	And perhaps a whole range of aesthetic issues. 

Since a Pearson 30 in really good shape is not worth much more I would suggest looking for one in really good shape. 

Jeff


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

*adventure*

Forget all the self-proclaimed expert advice and buy the largest, most shallow draft boat and ........ go. You will never regret it


----------



## Johnrb (Sep 21, 2002)

I can sense Sailingdog coming any minute now.


----------



## johnshasteen (Aug 9, 2002)

Jeff, you added the vintage Pearsons, but left off the same period Bristols - same construction, same hull shape, same guys designed them (Alberg, Alden, Herreshoff , Hood). Coincidence? I think not!! The same guys built them. Clint and Everett sold Pearson to Grumman in the 60's and started Bristol Marine. 
You can find a nice "first generation" Bristol 30 or 32 in that price range as well (and built by the Pearsons, not Grumman) - I know where a very nice B30 is for sail at well under $10K.


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

Johnrb said:


> I can sense Sailingdog coming any minute now.


Yes. I am counting the seconds...(smile)

- CD


----------



## Stillraining (Jan 11, 2008)

Cam thats an excellent write up and summary from Jeff..I vote for it to be more easily accessed as in a Sticky or something ( Gosh I hate that term )

FWIW.. my boat has the big panel's and flex that is why I would not cross an ocean in it...New maybe 25 years old no thanks.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

johnshasteen said:


> Jeff, you added the vintage Pearsons, but left off the same period Bristols - same construction, same hull shape, same guys designed them (Alberg, Alden, Herreshoff , Hood). Coincidence? I think not!! The same guys built them. Clint and Everett sold Pearson to Grumman in the 60's and started Bristol Marine.
> You can find a nice "first generation" Bristol 30 or 32 in that price range as well (and built by the Pearsons, not Grumman) - I know where a very nice B30 is for sail at well under $10K.


John:
I'm not exactly sure precisely what you are referring to in your comment above. When I responded to the question back in 2002, I was answering a specific question about the Pearson 30, which I assumed was the 1970's era Pearson 30 and not the earlier 30 foot Wanderer/Coaster or later Flyer or 303. At the time that I posted my earlier list of boats, the Bristol 33 was over the arbitrary $25,000 budget that we were discussing, and I am not a fan of the smaller Bristols as distance cruisers.

Just to clarify some earlier comments, the earliest Pearsons were designed by Alberg, Tripp and Rhodes. When the Pearson cousins split up Clint used Alberg to design the first Bristol that went into production, the Bristol 27 before moving on to Alden, Hood, Herreshoff and then back to the Hood/Dieter Empacher team.

You are right that when Clint first started Bristol, he was guilty of the same sloppy build techniques employed when he was at Pearson Yachts, but I would argue that over time his build quality and the quality of the designs definitely improved.

I think that this improvement probably began during the period that he employed Halsey Herreshoff, and I think that the Herreshoff designed Bristol 23, 26, and 34/34 were some of the best designs that Bristol ever produced, while the later Hood designed 35.5, 38.8, and 41.1 were probably the best built Bristols.

Jeff


----------



## SVAuspicious (Oct 31, 2006)

Since we have dredged this thread out of the past (and an interesting topic it is), I'd like to go back to what I read as the original question: is the Caribbean offshore sailing?

I think it doesn't have to be, which immediately leads to a vocabulary discussion: what the heck is offshore sailing? In my opinion, you are "offshore" when your passage plan takes you beyond the reach of a reasonable weather forecast. I think that's about three days, so somewhere between 250 and 500 miles depending on your boat.

If you accept that, all the "offshore sailors" shuttling between Lake Worth and the Bahamas are coastal sailors. 

In my opinion, you can do a lot of neat cruising in light-weight production boats.Watch the weather. You can certainly launch off across an ocean but you are rolling the dice and taking your chances. 

The Caribbean makes that easier as you work your way down the US East Coast, across to the Bahamas, down-island as far as Grenada, the ABCs, and coast-wise (ignoring personal security issues) all the way around (if one wishes) back to Florida.

You can do that in a pretty light boat.

The longer a hop is the less confidence you can have in weather forecasting, and the more prepared you must be to be whomped.

sail fast, dave
S/V Auspicious


----------



## Robby Barlow (Apr 23, 2006)

Is this just my PC or is this thread really 6 yrs. old?


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

I don't care how old the thread is it's still a great read lots of useful stuuf there, as always thanks Jeff!!!


----------



## JimsCAL (May 23, 2007)

deepblueme said:


> I don't care how old the thread is it's still a great read lots of useful stuuf there, as always thanks Jeff!!!


I second that. Great info Jeff!!


----------



## chucklesR (Sep 17, 2007)

Thanks Jeff,
I'm aware you have the background and experience to have written this up based on real world considerations.
One of the things I like about sailnet is the honesty that comes with experts aren't held to a sponsor's wallet.

Seriously, thanks.

Now, everyone go out and buy catamarans.


----------



## AlanBrown (Dec 20, 2007)

Wow! And the suggestions just keep on coming!

Nobody has responded yet all of your original question "...would I be happier in the roominess of a coastal cruiser or would it be unsafe to cross the gulf in a 30 year old coastal cruiser such as an O Day, Hunter, Irwin, ect... "

You have actually posed a 2-part question. The answer to the second part, as others have already addressed, is easy. Any 30-year old boat that has been properly maintained, should be more than adequate for what you have planned. My 27-year old Hunter 30 works fine for my trips through the Keys and trips to the Bahamas.

As a rule a coastal cruiser (ie light displacement) is designed to island hop, not cross big oceans. The trips you have planned (Keys & Bahamas) do not involve any long offshore passages. If my recollection is correct, the longest offshore passage between FL and the lower Caribbean you could possibly have is about 100 miles, from the Bahamas to Luperon in the DR. This is certainly doable in the right weather and in any sound vessel. So, a coastal cruiser will work just fine for you.

You also raise the roominess (comfort-level?) question. This is the tough part to answer as only you can answer it. 

For example, when I was single handing my Hunter, I was very happy with its size. I had lots of storage room and could handle it easily. Now with a partner aboard, we've got twice as much gear, carry twice as much food, etc. Space is now cramped. Forget about inviting guests to cruise with us! 

You haven't mentioned crew size or what amenities you'd like to see aboard. Is refrigeration important? How about a windlass? How about an extra stateroom for guests? All of these are what I'll be looking for in my next boat. Only you can determine what you want.

Finally, my advice to you is to buy the largest boat you can afford that contains whatever creature comforts you feel are necessary. Walk the docks, hit the shows, and make up your own mind as to what is important. Try not to focus on specific boat manufacturers. If you fall in love with a particular vessel, then start asking questions and doing your homework. When you think you've finally got it nailed down and are about to make a purchase decision, get the boat professionally surveyed.

Good luck and take your time!


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

AlanBrown said:


> Wow! And the suggestions just keep on coming!
> 
> Nobody has responded yet all of your original question "...would I be happier in the roominess of a coastal cruiser or would it be unsafe to cross the gulf in a 30 year old coastal cruiser such as an O Day, Hunter, Irwin, ect... "


*The original question is a bit moot at this point, as it is over SIX YEARS OLD, and if the OP hasn't figured it out by now, they're never gonna. *_They've probably bought a boat, and gone to the Caribbean and are now sitting anchored out someplace drinking fruity drinks with a little umbrella in the cockpit. _


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

To the original poster...

You can do it if you don't take a Telstar. They have too many anchors, all the wires are soldered, and are weighed down by solar sticks making them unsafe.

Other than that, original poster, what do you think? 

- CD


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

CD-

Hate to break it to you, only my Telstar has too many anchors...  and extremely oversized ground tackle handling gear to go with it.


----------



## tommyt (Sep 21, 2002)

SD,

You really have to stop using all the color and large print. Quit yelling! We hear you.


----------



## johnshasteen (Aug 9, 2002)

Jeff_H said:


> John:
> I'm not exactly sure precisely what you are referring to in your comment above. When I responded to the question back in 2002, I was answering a specific question about the Pearson 30, which I assumed was the 1970's era Pearson 30 and not the earlier 30 foot Wanderer/Coaster or later Flyer or 303. Alden, Hood, Herreshoff and then back to the Hood/Dieter Empacher team.
> I think that this improvement probably began during the period that he employed Halsey Herreshoff, ....
> Jeff


Sorry Jeff, I didn't realize that your thread was 2002 - that's when I first joined SailNet and my memory isn't that good. I agree that the second-generation boats are better designs - Herreshoff designed my boat and we love it and as you know, we've taken it to the gates of hell and come back from it, somewhat worse for the wear.
With that said, my comment was that the first-generation Bristol 30 is as tough as the 70's era Pearson 30.


----------



## teddier1 (Apr 8, 2008)

I sailed a 1980 Morgan 32 on Lake Erie for about 8 years (boat was purchased in 1998. This boat served me well in some very bad weather. Previous owner had sailed it on Long Island Sound and all of the Great Lakes and according to ships log experienced extreme weather. I would recommend this boat to anyone. The only downside is that she was not very fast and had to be reefed early.


----------



## AlanBrown (Dec 20, 2007)

SD,

Didn't notice the date of the original post when I replied. Thanks for pointing that out to me.

Regardless, I hope that my response provided to some useful information to other readers who may also be dealing with the original questions about boat age and comfort levels.


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

Alan...I agree with you about any boat for the Bahamas....but a LOT of standard production boats would be quite dangerous once you get past the Turks and Caicos and protected waters and need to bash into the full trade winds and seas for 700 miles or so. The passage to Luperon can be hairy but it is after Luperon that you must head into the trades along the north DR coast and through the Mona passge. I am not saying it hasn't been done, but I would not do it in anything in the 30' range that was not purpose built for sea duty. (i.e. a Southern Cross but not an O'day).


----------



## sailhagg (Feb 19, 2007)

Great old post guys...glad someone revived it! I've enjoyed reading through it. I'm in the Pacific Northwest and getting ready for too soon rain that seems never to end so I'm dreaming of some of those pink sand beaches and fruity drinks...plus the next great boat to buy!


----------



## xort (Aug 4, 2006)

Oh NO!! An old post revived! The horror, the horror.

Naughty boy didn't read SD's directive. They should be banned.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

I have a Bristol 35 from 1967 and I don't think it would be considered a heavily built boat, it weighs in at around 12,000 lbs which is quite comparable to today's boats. However, with its full keel I do feel at home on the open water with this boat and she has sailed more than once to Bermuda and back to Boston in good weather and bad. Jim


----------



## chall03 (Oct 14, 2002)

Strangely enough, At the moment it seems to me to be these revived old posts that actually hold real interesting information and discussion.


----------



## WheresTheBrakes (Sep 29, 2008)

I agree chall03.. as Andy Warhol said "there are no new ideas" - at some point when we hit 3,234,082,348,023,482,034,802 threads, eventually someone may ask "which boat to get to go to the Bahamas ?"

-- Awesome thread by the way, great responses


----------

