# bluewater on the cheap



## wumhenry (Mar 29, 2006)

I plan to retire soon, and I'd like to do some bluewater voyaging thereafter. I have a Bristol 29.9, but for various reasons, including things I've read or heard from Jeff H, I don't think that's the right kind of vehicle for what I have in mind. Futhermore, it lacks stuff that you'd find in any well-fitted-out bluewater cruiser -- windvane steering, radar, epirb, gimballed stove, drogue, storm sails, SSB -- and methinks it would be cheaper to sell the Bristol and buy an already-fitted-out bluewater cruiser than upgrade. My question is, which boats that can be bought well-equipped for less than $45,000 are best suited for bluewater voyaging?

P.S. Aesthetics is a consideration. I'd rather stay home than set forth in an ugly boat. Don't bother extolling the virtues of the Gulf 32, for instance.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Southern Cross 31, Hallberg-Rassy Monsun or Rasmus, Contessa 32, etc.


----------



## johnshasteen (Aug 9, 2002)

Hi Wumhenry, we haven't visited in a while. I'm not sure who Jeff H is or what he told you about the B29.9, but for bluewater cruising, they are as tough as anything you'll find for $45K. Paloma has been on numerous of bluewater voyages, and has over the years, weathered two Force 10 storms, one for 48 continous hours with no let up and the most recent, in March of this year, for 36 excruciating non-stop hours. According to Coast Guard Corpus Christi, the winds were gusting above 60 and 28-30 foot seas. We never worried about Paloma - she's my bluewater warrior princess - we only wondered how far South we would be blown before the storm abated - in the March storm we ended up 180 miles South of our rumb line.


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

How about the Cape Dory's...several models in your price range 30-36'...full keel, solid bluewater boats from the late 70's to mid 80's.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Alberg-designed Cape Dory models, or the Alberg 35, Westsail 32.

One problem you'll probably have with many of these older "bluewater" designs is that they really weren't designed with making bluewater passages in mind, much like your Bristol 29.9. So they will tend to have less tankage than you would probably want. 

Personally, I don't see why you would sell the Bristol 29.9 and buy a different boat. You know the 29.9 well and it would probably make at least as good a bluewater boat, with some small upgrades as anything you're going to buy for your budget.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Don't sell a boat that you are familiar with. Your knowledge and familiarity can not be bought at any price. Unless you are planning on cruising high latitudes I can't think of any good reason to sell and get another boat of similar size, provided your current craft is structurally sound. Even if she needs a total refit. 
BTW your chances of finding a 'blue water' boat ready to go for a good price isn't too good. Reason being those who have fitted out their boats are, except for some extraordinary circumstance, ACTUALLY OUT THERE. The boats you see for sale are either boats that have sailed 1000's of miles and are in need of another refit, or, much more likely the product of someone's failed or partially fulfilled dream which needs careful inspection, probably most of the work redone anyway, and still in need of extensive upgrades (i.e. possibly some of the reasons the last owner didn't go anywhere). I've seen it a dozen times... people buying 'turn key' 'ready to sail around the world' boats that end up on the hard for 6 months getting a total refit, or getting dis-masted 10 miles offshore, even one that was dismasted at the dock. I almost got sucked into a Westerly 32 that was advertised as 'ready to go.' Good thing I didn't buy it. Tuned out the rudder was completely delaminated, the hull had suffered severe osmosis, the mast was rotten etc etc.... Ready to go indeed...


----------



## chucklesR (Sep 17, 2007)

Take the 45k you have to spend and upgrade what you have.


----------



## JohnRPollard (Mar 26, 2007)

Here's one more vote for re-fitting the able boat you already have. Unless you are aware of a fundamental flaw or shortcoming of your Bristol -- such as it's simply not as large as you'd like for your intended itinerary and crew contingent.


----------



## Freesail99 (Feb 13, 2006)

As no one has asked, where are you planning on going with your bluewater boat ?


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

Do you have the keel or centerboar version of the 29.9? The keel version might be OK... and it is a solid boat...but more waterline...more displacement...and more stuff carrying capacity makes for a more comfortable passage and safety if you can handle the bills. Just my 2cents.


----------



## chucklesR (Sep 17, 2007)

With 45k you can convert a centerboard to a keel version, I would think


----------



## Stillraining (Jan 11, 2008)

Just dont use the same yard as TA&M used...


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

chucklesR said:


> With 45k you can convert a centerboard to a keel version, I would think


Yep - just get a coupla grand in pennies and some epoxy...


----------



## wumhenry (Mar 29, 2006)

chucklesR said:


> With 45k you can convert a centerboard to a keel version, I would think


The less-than-45K would include the proceeds from selling the Bristol. If I don't sell it, I won't have anywhere near that much for upgrading. BTW, it's the keel version.

*John Shasteen*, it's hard to argue with (your) experience, but I'd like to hear *Jeff H'*s take on it. (YO, JEFF!) Meanwhile, how did you cope with the heavy weather? What sails did you use, and what were you doing when it was blowing 60 kts? And what re-fitting have you done to prepare your boat for long-distance Gulf excursions?

To those who suggested Cape Dories and Albergs: Jeff said in a thread that ran in the boat-design forum this spring that, contrary to conventional wisdom, those are NDG for bluewater work. (JEFF, YO!)


----------



## wumhenry (Mar 29, 2006)

sailboy21 said:


> your chances of finding a 'blue water' boat ready to go for a good price isn't too good. Reason being those who have fitted out their boats are, except for some extraordinary circumstance, ACTUALLY OUT THERE. The boats you see for sale are either boats that have sailed 1000's of miles and are in need of another refit, or, much more likely the product of someone's failed or partially fulfilled dream which needs careful inspection, probably most of the work redone anyway, and still in need of extensive upgrades (i.e. possibly some of the reasons the last owner didn't go anywhere). I've seen it a dozen times... people buying 'turn key' 'ready to sail around the world' boats that end up on the hard for 6 months getting a total refit, or getting dis-masted 10 miles offshore


Could this be an exception that proves the rule? 
1975 Southern Cross Cutter Boat For Sale


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Not bad... some SC31 have circumnavigated....


----------



## johnshasteen (Aug 9, 2002)

wumhenry said:


> *John Shasteen*, it's hard to argue with (your) experience, but I'd like to hear *Jeff H'*s take on it. (YO, JEFF!) Meanwhile, how did you cope with the heavy weather? What sails did you use, and what were you doing when it was blowing 60 kts? And what re-fitting have you done to prepare your boat for long-distance Gulf excursions?
> To those who suggested Cape Dories and Albergs: Jeff said in a thread that ran in the boat-design forum this spring that, contrary to conventional wisdom, those are NDG for bluewater work. (JEFF, YO!)


wumhenry - first, I'm not sure who JEFF is and he may be some sort of expert, but if you look at the updated list of bluewater boats at the begining of this list, you'll find Albergs, Cape Dorys and Bristols.
Now, as to how we handled the heavy weather. First, Paloma probably isn't any more heavily rigged than your Bristol, but has the following equipment and outfitting: top of the line Hood heavy-duty sails with a three-reef main, EPRIB, life raft, parachute drogue, Type A life preservers and an abandon ship bag, etc. 
In the first storm, we ran before the storm for 48 hours under a third-reef in the main and headsail furled down to hankerchief size and kept the engine idling so if we needed it, we didn't have to worry about it starting. No drogues, no heaving to, etc. The second storm was in early March of this year and for your reading pleasure, I've posted the same info I posted on another thread:

Three of us, all seasoned sailors, sailed out around the bottom of South Padre Island (just North of the Rio Grande and the Mexican border) headed for Freeport, Thursday in the perfect sailing weather - we were in shorts and polos shirts, on a broad reach in 15 knot SSE winds, beautiful 5-7 foot seas and 70 degree weather - the only thing missing were the Jimmy Buffett tapes.
Later in the day we got a weather report, small craft immediately make for port, there was a Northerly cold front (the one that dumped all the snow in mid-west mid-week) moving our way at 35 miles per hour packing internal winds of 50-60, gusting higher, seas quickly building to over 20 feet. Paloma is a not a small craft, but a second-generation Bristol built and equiped to go anywhere in any weather, and since the weather report was coming from Coast Guard South Padre Island, we thought we could head more Easterly and possibly get on the other side of the brunt of the storm. No such luck, around 6:30pm we got hit full force by the front, coming like a freight train. It slammed us from about a 30 degree heel to port all the way over to down to the starboard port lights in the water before we rounded up into the wind and could start the engine and start dropping sail. On the initial hit, the main got caught in the spreaders and got a nasty tear and we lost a cotterpin on the port upper stay. We couldn't haul the main more than about 3/4 of the way down and as bad luck would have it, a jib sheet got of control and went under the boat, tangling in the prop, stopping the engine. Now comes the decisions, not in the "game plan".
We made the only possible decision, to turn South and run bare poles before the storm. From the point we turned, about 35-40 miles NE of the Rio Grande, we screamed down wind in what we thought were 18- 20 foot following seas (later the Coast Guard told us they were 28 to 30 feet) and winds 50-60 and gusting over 60 (Force 10 storm, precisely as predicted by the Coast Guard) for 36 hours. The stern and bimini were plenty of sail and it was a wild ride being pushed along by the seas, hitting over 10mph (from the GPS) when sliding down the face of the seas. It was a strain to keep Paloma tracking so we couldn't stay on the helm more than an hour at a time and we knew if we turned beam to the wind, we would broach. When you went below for one-hour rest, you could only nap on the cabin sole - even that was comfortable after two hours in the cockpit. The winds were cold, but on the occasions that a wave broke into the cockpit, the water was warm - we couldn't figure why the warm Gulf waters didn't abate the cold front-driven storm sooner - actually we just kept wondering if we were going to end up in Vera Cruz.
When the winds finally abated and shifted back to SE, we were about 135 miles down and 70 miles off the Mexican coastline - we had been blown 180 miles off our original rhumb line, no engine and only a 110 working jib. During the short calm of the wind shift, we untangled the line around the prop, by starting the engine in neutral then putting the engine in reverse and pulling like crazy on the line trying to unwind it - after two tries, thank goodness it worked, so we now had a working jib and an engine (if we needed it) - not a bad combination to turn and run north in what ended up being a more comfortable 15-20 knot SE winds and 8-10 foot seas - still a chore to keep her on track with only a small jib and making hull speed and better when shoved by the following seas, easily manageable.
The closest US landfall was South Padre Island about 135 miles NNW and by mid-day Sunday we were in sight of the buildings on the island.

hasEML = false;


----------



## southerncross31 (Sep 16, 2006)

My SC31 has circumnavigated........ it went from the lower front part of the yard all the way around to the back by the old abandoned boats! Man wouldn't it be nice to sail


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

SC31's are certainly blue water boats but be careful of the cored hulls if you look for one. Get a solid one and it will go anywhere. I am not a big fan of big sprits and bob stays for sea duty but they do make a good looking boat.

John...Jeff_H is another moderator and a most knowledgeable and experienced racing sailor and "expert" on many different types of boats from his time in the industry. There is in my opinion, no one here that has more knowledge about more types of boats than Jeff. 
This does not make him the "boat god" but it does mean his opinions are worth listening to. I disagree with him all the time on specific boats that I think are well suited to bluewater and he does not. On the other hand, he has made me aware of other considerations in boat design AND other brands and models that would be suitable. I'm sure he will hop on here to discuss the 29.9 further...*but my guess is that he did NOT say that the 29.9 is not built well and ocean capable*. My guess is that he feels the *design *is not as well suited for sea duty as some others due to the hull form or sail plan, tankage etc. . Suggest you wait and see what he has to say before dismissing it.

As to the Cape Dory's ....Jeff doesn't like them for sea duty but the CD36 would be my own "ideal single hander" ...especially the new ones being built by robin hood in Maine....I'm a sucker for a bowsprit!


----------



## wumhenry (Mar 29, 2006)

johnshasteen said:


> wumhenry - first, I'm not sure who JEFF is and he may be some sort of expert, but if you look at the updated list of bluewater boats at the begining of this list, you'll find Albergs, Cape Dorys and Bristols.


*Jeff H* is the _eminence grise_ of the Boat Design and Construction forum. He sails a Farr 38 out of Annapolis and makes his living designing buildings, but I think he has had formal training in naval architecture. He states his reasons for his low opinion of Alberg 30s and Alberg-designed Cape Dorys as sea boats in the thread entitled "Long versus short overhangs."



> First, Paloma probably isn't any more heavily rigged than your Bristol, but has the following equipment and outfitting: top of the line Hood heavy-duty sails with a three-reef main, EPRIB, life raft, parachute drogue, Type A life preservers and an abandon ship bag, etc.


Where do you stow the raft?

One strike against the B29.9 for bluewater cruising is the absence of a bridge deck and the low-cut companionway sill. A guy who did an Atlantic circuit in a Bristol 32 a couple years ago had a bridge deck put in before he took off. That can't be cheap. In a luncheon talk to the Chesapeake Bristol Club, with yrs truly in attendance, he said he spent $50K on bluewater upgrades. Or maybe he said $75K. It was a lot, anyway.


----------



## johnshasteen (Aug 9, 2002)

camaraderie said:


> SC31's are certainly blue water boats but be careful of the cored hulls if you look for one. Get a solid one and it will go anywhere. I am not a big fan of big sprits and bob stays for sea duty but they do make a good looking boat.
> 
> John...Jeff_H is another moderator and a most knowledgeable and experienced racing sailor and "expert" on many different types of boats from his time in the industry. There is in my opinion, no one here that has more knowledge about more types of boats than Jeff.
> This does not make him the "boat god" but it does mean his opinions are worth listening to. I disagree with him all the time on specific boats that I think are well suited to bluewater and he does not. On the other hand, he has made me aware of other considerations in boat design AND other brands and models that would be suitable. I'm sure he will hop on here to discuss the 29.9 further...*but my guess is that he did NOT say that the 29.9 is not built well and ocean capable*. My guess is that he feels the *design *is not as well suited for sea duty as some others due to the hull form or sail plan, tankage etc. . Suggest you wait and see what he has to say before dismissing it.
> ...


As I said, I have not doubt Jeff H is very well versed and I would take nothing away from that. But I have been sailing for 50 years and almost all in blue water and have many miles of ocean racing (Marion to Hamilton, Galveston to Vera Cruz, Galveston to Isla Mujeres, etc) as well as mostly cruising. My dad had a Hinckley B40 on which I made four Bermuda races as far back as the '60's, and I've owned a Columbia 28, Easward Ho 24, Bayfield 29 and my current boat of many years the Bristol. Tankage on boats you take to sea are certainly a consideration, but they can be supplemented. On the other hand, I would not go to sea in 75% of the racing boats on the circuit today or any other boat with a fin keel/spade rudder underbody - look at the recent Cape Fear 38 disaster, couldn't happen with a full keel boat, or a cutaway forefoot/skeg rudder configuration.


----------



## wumhenry (Mar 29, 2006)

camaraderie said:


> SC31's are certainly blue water boats but be careful of the cored hulls if you look for one. Get a solid one and it will go anywhere. I am not a big fan of big sprits and bob stays for sea duty but they do make a good looking boat.


They're solid glass from the keel to the turn of the bilge and airex cored above that. Airex doesn't rot or get mushy when wet and provides insulation from sound, heat, and cold.



> I disagree with him [Jeff H] all the time on specific boats that I think are well suited to bluewater and he does not. On the other hand, he has made me aware of other considerations in boat design AND other brands and models that would be suitable. I'm sure he will hop on here to discuss the 29.9 further...*but my guess is that he did NOT say that the 29.9 is not built well and ocean capable*. My guess is that he feels the *design *is not as well suited for sea duty as some others due to the hull form or sail plan, tankage etc. . Suggest you wait and see what he has to say before dismissing it.


I PMed him and hope he'll chime in soon.

I have discussed the B29.9 with him in PMs, and he sailed in mine one afternoon last September, after which he said it's "a good boat," but I think he said later in a Sailnet message that the 29.9 is one of a number of boats in Tahaina's list that aren't really well-suited for bluewater cruising. I'm still not sure exactly what his rap is against the 29.9. He has a high opinion of the Bristol 34, on the other hand, which doesn't seem all that different in design from the 29.9 -- including low-cut companionway sill and absence of a bridge deck. (FWIW, both were designed by Halsey Herreshof.)


----------



## seabreeze_97 (Apr 30, 2006)

You want the truth? Get yourself a copy of "Desirable and Undesirable Characteristics of Offshore Yachts" and read it. Then make your decision. It is a compilation by names such as Stephens, Ewing, Griffith, Kirkman, Lapworth, and others equally esteemed and qualified. They do have, after all, thousands of bluewater miles beneath their collective keels (dozens of transatlantic crossings, etc.), and hundreds of well-known designs to their credit. That's important......hundreds of well-known designs. The proof, as they say, is in the pudding, and the men who wrote this book have it by the, ahem, boatload. Never ever let your decision be based on the opinions of one source. Times may change, but standards, and the realities of sailing, remain.

As far as the bridge deck on the Bristol 32, while the addition of a bridge deck can improve structural strength on some lightly constructed boats, the Bristol 32 is already so heavily built, the deck's contribution would be minimal to that point. As for limiting seawater entry, securing the lower board in the companionway will accomplish the same thing.


----------



## chris_gee (May 31, 2006)

It is one thing putting out a theoretical view but Jeff allows exceptions.
One being if you are sailing the Chesapeake and may go to the Bahamas at some point in the future your needs may be different from say mine.
Two if you were fit young and well crewed you may be less conservative than others.
As a contrary example many have found Westsails a secure blue water vessel, albeit that certain criticismas can be made as part of a balanced overall appraisal.
In your case I would make the point that a cheap blue water boat is unlikely at least as it stands, but sure small size helps.
I have a limited budget and have looked at this closely.
The problem is many boats may be suitable more or less. I would not want to sail long on a less than 30 or even 35' but it depends how many wifes you have etc.
However the costs of bringing it up to bluewater (and few are in this state) are high. Think SSB, Liferaft Epirb, and selfsteering, plus almost certainly re-rigging, and storm sails probably 20K US regardless of boat size and price, never mind the other bits that need to be done on an old boat. These costs are more or less fixed regardless of size and age but as a % of a cheaper boat are higher.
However some of these costs can be reduced substantially by buying used. But not all. I gather a new liferaft may be say 2600 US + but the service costs here are about 800 US. I have seen liferafts with service overdue 10 years and the owner on a passage taking the risk. Your choice. 
Depending where you are and how many young women you want to entice to share cramped quarters you may be better if your finances are tight by using your boat on limited passages, and crewing on longer ones. One tropical island isn't that different from another.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Adding a bridge deck to most boats isn't all that difficult. I recently did this to my boat, at the beginning of last season. I would have to say that adding the bridge deck was a very good thing as the cabin is much drier when we're out sailing in heavier conditions. It also reduced the volume of the cockpit by about five cubic feet or 300 lbs of seawater, if theb boat were ever pooped. The cost in materials was probably about $250 to do the project for the plywood, fiberglass, epoxy and paint.



wumhenry said:


> One strike against the B29.9 for bluewater cruising is the absence of a bridge deck and the low-cut companionway sill. A guy who did an Atlantic circuit in a Bristol 32 a couple years ago had a bridge deck put in before he took off. That can't be cheap. In a luncheon talk to the Chesapeake Bristol Club, with yrs truly in attendance, he said he spent $50K on bluewater upgrades. Or maybe he said $75K. It was a lot, anyway.


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

Very true, but I'm not planning on selling my boat. The cockpit drains were further aft, which was a bit simpler, and they drain directly overboard-no hoses. Originally, I tried securing the lower dropboard, but my crew kept removing it....and when you're out in 30 knots with 7-9' seas, water does get in the cockpit, and then down below, on a 28' boat. Now, they can't remove the bridge deck, it provides some more cockpit seating, and the cabin stays almost completely bone dry. 



otaga05 said:


> The one thing which would be a PITA about adding a bridge deck to the Bristol is that the cockpit drains are right in front of the companionway. I thought about doing on Chicory (Bristol 35.5), but with virtually no fiberglass experience I am not confident in my ability to make the drain nipples strong enough. Another consideration of a significant modification like this that the surveyor when I bought her warned me about is when you go to resell, changing the "style" of the boat like this can turn off some buyers. I decided to stick with securing the lower companionway board.


----------



## johnshasteen (Aug 9, 2002)

Originally Posted by *wumhenry*  
_One strike against the B29.9 for bluewater cruising is the absence of a bridge deck and the low-cut companionway sill. A guy who did an Atlantic circuit in a Bristol 32 a couple years ago had a bridge deck put in before he took off. That can't be cheap :QUOTE_

_If you think you want a permanent bridge deck, put in the lower hatch board, then caulk around it. Cheap and later, when you realize that the 29.9 doesn't need a bridge deck, you can take it out._


----------



## wumhenry (Mar 29, 2006)

johnshasteen said:


> Paloma probably isn't any more heavily rigged than your Bristol, but has the following equipment and outfitting: top of the line Hood heavy-duty sails with a three-reef main, EPRIB, life raft, parachute drogue, Type A life preservers and an abandon ship bag, etc.


Still wondering where you stow the raft. 

How old is your standing rigging? Mine passed annual inspection by a boatyard rigger this year, but I don't know how old it is. My guess is that it's as old as the boat.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

wumhenry said:


> Could this be an exception that proves the rule?
> 1975 Southern Cross Cutter Boat For Sale


Hey, I think I've been on that boat! About 7 years ago if memory serves....

Rules? With used boats there are no rules! However $40K for a 33 year old 30 footer doesn't sound like much an exception. But hey, it comes with fishing poles. How cool is that?


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

wumhenry said:


> They're solid glass from the keel to the turn of the bilge and airex cored above that. Airex doesn't rot or get mushy when wet and provides insulation from sound, heat, and cold.


Wum... that's possible I guess on some boats since there seems to be a good deal of variation...but the brochure talks about an airex cored hull...not just above the waterline and my buddy on the docks here has coring below his waterline. Airex is indeed a good way to core...but you can get delam and water migration and cracking due to freezing etc.. and repairs above or below the watrerline are more difficult...so I prefer NO coring of any kind....and if you're going to have it...take care of the through hulls as that is where intrusion generally starts. My buddy's boat has never had any problems with the core...but it is something a new buyer should worry about and be very thorough as something as simple as adding a depth sounder without sealing the core can lead to a VERY expensive situation. Here's the link to the brochure FYI...
http://www.southerncross-boats.org/images/sc31-text.jpg


----------



## johnshasteen (Aug 9, 2002)

wumhenry said:


> Still wondering where you stow the raft.
> 
> How old is your standing rigging? Mine passed annual inspection by a boatyard rigger this year, but I don't know how old it is. My guess is that it's as old as the boat.


When we are going offshore, we lash the raft container on the foredeck directly forward of the cabin trunk and it clears the anchor well quite nicely.
I replaced all the standing rigging on Paloma about two years ago - although yours may be just fine. I was getting ready to sail Paloma the 250 miles from Galveston to Puerto Isabella and had the rigging checked before the trip. There were some swages that had signs of bleeding rust and my spreader tips were badly worn, so I decided if some of the rigging was suspect, why piecemeal it - just do it all at once and replace the spreader tips at the same time.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

William, 

Sorry to have taken a little while to get back to you. I've had a lot on my plate, and wanted to frame my answer in order to avoid a food fight if possible. To begin with, I want to touch on the past history that you refer to. Before you bought your current boat, you looked a variety of specific boats. Of the specific bunch in question, for the dollar I thought that there was a Tartan 30, Tartan 34 and a Bristol 34 that were better for your needs than the Bristol 29.9 for a variety of reasons. Much of it had to do with equipage and condition rather than design issues, although design certainly figured in. In particular the Tartan 34, had been extensively upgraded for offshore use with all of the best gear, and sails by an extremely knowledgeable sailor, who unfortunately was taken by cancer. It was the boat that I thought was best suited to your needs as you expressed them. 

I recommended the Bristol 34 to you for similar reasons, it had upgraded winches and gear, a reorganized deck layout, and a good sail inventory. But beyond that, as I have tried to explain to you in detail, I consider the Bristol 34 a better design for your purposes than the 29.9 in all ways. 

I certainly respect what John Shasteen has done with his 29.9. It is truly impressive, but as we discussed an experienced, talented and moderately athletic sailor with a bit of luck can take almost any boat almost anywhere. Bligh crossed a 1000 some odd miles of tough ocean in an overloaded, open, leaking wooden boat. Webb Chiles crossed most of the Pacific in an open coastal daysailer. The Bristol 29.9 is certainly a far superior boat to either of those and to many other choices that you might consider. 

When you came to me a couple years ago with a blank slate, we discussed perhaps a dozen designs and I gave you my opinion on those designs based on my experience with these individual boats or in a few cases on designs that were very close in concept. In most cases it was a relative discussion, one boat to the other, meaning which of the choices were more likely to suit your goals than the other choices that you were considering, rather than some absolute discussion, that this design was totally unsuited for anyone vs this is the best design that ever was. 

In the case of the Bristol 29.9, and more specifically the 29.9 that you actually bought, the boat in question had the least amount of critical upgrades, the sail inventory was old, tired and limited, the stock winches were undersized for the sails in question, the deck layout was inconvenient for single-handing. As we had discussed, as much as you love sailing and have reasonable ambitions for what you'd like to do with the boat, and as you have described yourself to me, you are not exactly a talented sailor and are not especially athletic. In that regard, if you were going to be voyaging offshore it would seem like you would want a boat that looks after you and which was set up to be easy to handle. The boat you bought was not. 

But the 29.9 is not a design that I am particularly fond of, especially relative to the other choices. As we discussed, the Bristol 29.9 was an early IOR design vs. the Tartan 34 and the Bristol 34, which in my opinion were two of the better designs from the CCA era. The impact of the IOR era on the 29.9 resulted in a deeper than ideal canoe body, pinched ends, and a rig proportion that is less suitable to single-handing than the other two designs. As we discussed and as we experienced during our sail, the motion is not as gentle as it might be, the stability is not as good as it might be, and the boat tends to build weather helm rather quickly with heel angle, which again, can be dealt with but which resulted in roll steering, which is not an ideal characteristic for an offshore cruiser.

As I said during our sail, the 29.9 is a pretty good boat for daysailing and cruising on the Chesapeake Bay. It would not be my first choice either for that purpose or as a single-handed offshore cruiser. Does that mean that I think that it is totally unsuited for offshore work? No. What that does mean is that there are better choices out there. And if you are going to take your current 29.9 offshore, there is a whole bunch of work that I would consider as absolutely necessary before I personally would consider taking her offshore. 

Respectfully,
Jeff


----------



## wumhenry (Mar 29, 2006)

Jeff_H said:


> William,
> 
> Of the specific bunch in question, for the dollar I thought that there was a Tartan 30, Tartan 34 and a Bristol 34 that were better for your needs than the Bristol 29.9 for a variety of reasons. Much of it had to do with equipage and condition rather than design issues, although design certainly figured in. In particular the Tartan 34, had been extensively upgraded for offshore use with all of the best gear, and sails by an extremely knowledgeable sailor
> 
> ...


There you have it, *John Shasteen*: the bad news is your boat isn't all that suitable for offshore cruising, and the good news is you're either a Hell of an athlete, a Hell of a sailor, or both. 

As you may remember me telling you last year, *Jeff*, the reason why I bought the 29.9 instead of the Tartan 34 or the B34 is that I lacked confidence in my ability to handle the bigger boats, never having previously skippered anything larger than an 18-foot catboat.

A guy has a Norsea 27 for sale at the same boatyard where I keep my Bristol. Would you say that's suitable for singlehanding offshore? FWIW, the Norsea displaces about the same as the 29.9 and has a foot more LWL. I don't know whether there's a berth in it big enough for the likes of me, but I can find out easy enough.


----------



## Jeff_H (Feb 26, 2000)

Ah so Grasshopper, but as I explained, the Bristol 34 and the Tartan 34 in question were set up much better than you current boat and so would actually be easier to handle. All you had to fear was fear itself. 

Jeff


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

Wum...BTW...just talked to the guy with the SC31 here this AM and he re-confirmed hull is cored below the waterline. He actually had to repair a void found in the keel at survey so has seen the core in the keel and says it ends about 1 ft. above the very bottom of the keel. (Again...not to say that an individual SC31 may have been custom built with core only above the waterline...but the airex coring was standard.)


----------



## johnshasteen (Aug 9, 2002)

wumhenry said:


> There you have it, *John Shasteen*: the bad news is your boat isn't all that suitable for offshore cruising, and the good news is you're either a Hell of an athlete, a Hell of a sailor, or both.


Gee Wuh and Jeff, It's going to very hard to break the news to my little blue water warrior princess that she's she has to have her name stricken from John Adams' (owner of Mahina Consulting,) Offshore Crusing Boat List ("*Bristol* 27 45 ** USA *Good boats. Later models were better quality"), that she can't go on any more Galveston to Vera Cruz or Galveston to Isla Mujeres regattas because they are each 1300 mile offshore roundtrips, and the two Force 10 storms (storms in which others had to be plucked off of floundering boats by the CG) that she weathered over the years were a fluke and that she can't go out in 30 foot seas or winds above 60 ever again - because she's not suited for offshore sailing. Paloma will be heart broken







she thinks she's I'm a poor sailor and that she has to constantly get me out of harms way.


----------



## wumhenry (Mar 29, 2006)

johnshasteen said:


> Gee Wuh and Jeff, It's going to very hard to break the news to my little blue water warrior princess that she's she has to have her name stricken from John Adams' (owner of Mahina Consulting,) Offshore Crusing Boat List ("*Bristol* 27 45 ** USA *Good boats. Later models were better quality"), that she can't go on any more Galveston to Vera Cruz or Galveston to Isla Mujeres regattas because they are each 1300 mile offshore roundtrips, and the two Force 10 storms (storms in which others had to be plucked off of floundering boats by the CG) that she weathered over the years were a fluke and that she can't go out in 30 foot seas or winds above 60 ever again - because she's not suited for offshore sailing. Paloma will be heart broken
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Maybe "offshore" means "more than 1300 miles"?


----------



## Allanbc (Apr 19, 2007)

johnshasteen said:


> Gee Wuh and Jeff, It's going to very hard to break the news to my little blue water warrior princess that she's she has to have her name stricken from John Adams' (owner of Mahina Consulting,) Offshore Crusing Boat List ("*Bristol* 27 45 ** USA *Good boats. Later models were better quality"), that she can't go on any more Galveston to Vera Cruz or Galveston to Isla Mujeres regattas because they are each 1300 mile offshore roundtrips, and the two Force 10 storms (storms in which others had to be plucked off of floundering boats by the CG) that she weathered over the years were a fluke and that she can't go out in 30 foot seas or winds above 60 ever again - because she's not suited for offshore sailing. Paloma will be heart broken
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Actually, if go to the list on the Mahina website, you will see that for the actual listing says "Bristol 27*-*45 ** USA *Good boats. Later models were better quality". This actually include all sizes from 27 *to* 45 feet. Methinks that includes the Bristol 29.9.


----------



## gjreed (May 21, 2008)

Well another option is a Cascade 29, not the most common vessel but will do the trick Ed Hart from san Diego solo circumnavigated one a few years back, and I have one and know they are hard as nails and can be picked up on the cheap. Below is the link to the circumnavigation site solantamity.com/Extraneous/MuggingsPlus.htm Ed Hart's Circumnaviation


----------



## johnshasteen (Aug 9, 2002)

wumhenry said:


> Maybe "offshore" means "more than 1300 miles"?


Hi again Wum - back on a more serious note: Why don't you keep your Bristol for a while longer, but buy a raft, EPIRB, drogue, self-steering, SeaSwing cooker, etc. because you can always move those items to your next boat. That way, when it's time for your next boat, you will be looking for a well-kept, more lightly used vessel, that' has only been sailed around a bay somewhere and never needed the offshore whistles and buzzers - and is probably cheaper because it doesn't have them. Rather than looking at a bunch of tired old cruisers that are more expensive than they should be because they have this stuff on them. 
If I were ever to sell Paloma, and that is highly unlikely, I would move all my offshore toys to the next boat. If I were to sell Paloma with all that stuff on her, I'd want more for the boat.


----------



## wumhenry (Mar 29, 2006)

johnshasteen said:


> Hi again Wum - back on a more serious note: Why don't you keep your Bristol for a while longer, but buy a raft, EPIRB, drogue, self-steering, SeaSwing cooker, etc. because you can always move those items to your next boat. That way, when it's time for your next boat, you will be looking for a well-kept, more lightly used vessel, that' has only been sailed around a bay somewhere and never needed the offshore whistles and buzzers - and is probably cheaper because it doesn't have them. Rather than looking at a bunch of tired old cruisers that are more expensive than they should be because they have this stuff on them.


What if I put to sea in an upgraded 29.9 and wound up in Davy Jones's locker? Can you imagine what *Jeff H* would say? "I warned him repeatedly against going offshore in a boat like that, but the damn fool ignored my advice, and now look what happened!" 

Sometimes boats come on the market that have been extensively refurbished and lightly used since the rehab. For instance, the Tartan 34 that I passed up a few years ago, which was all ready for the BOR when the owner suddenly died of a heart attack -- and his widow wasn't asking all that much ($35K). The Norsea for sale in my boatyard, whose current owner has never taken her offshore, has a newish Monitor windvane and extensive rehab was completed recently. Unfortunately, he wants an arm and a leg for it.


----------



## johnshasteen (Aug 9, 2002)

wumhenry said:


> What if I put to sea in an upgraded 29.9 and wound up in Davy Jones's locker? Can you imagine what *Jeff H* would say? "I warned him repeatedly against going offshore in a boat like that, but the damn fool ignored my advice, and now look what happened!"  it.


First, don't put to sea until you are a fully capable sailor, because you can get in trouble in any boat if the weather gets really bad. Second, if you go to sea and don't make it back, it doesn't matter what Jeff H says, because you won't be there to hear it anyway!







Back to first, when you are fully capable of handling a boat in any weather, then you can go anywhere in a B29.9 - just like I do. You may remember from the Bristol net group, several of the Bristoleeros have made circumnavigations - others have ventured far and wide - one captained by a woman is currently somewhere down in Mexico. Paloma, and Bravo (a 29.9 owned by Gene Penebacker down in Corpus Christi) were sailed from the factory in RI, all the way around to TX - all offshore. There are a lot of Bristol sailors out there that think they can go anywhere in a Bristol - and a number of them do.


----------



## wumhenry (Mar 29, 2006)

*Ojt*



johnshasteen said:


> if you go to sea and don't make it back, it doesn't matter what Jeff H says, because you won't be there to hear it anyway!


But I'd go to my death with the horrid certainty that he _will_ say it. 



> when you are fully capable of handling a boat in any weather, then you can go anywhere in a B29.9 - just like I do.


Hmm. If you've got an open berth for your next bluewater excursion in Paloma please give me a shout!


----------



## johnshasteen (Aug 9, 2002)

wumhenry said:


> But I'd go to my death with the horrid certainty that he _will_ say it.
> Hmm. If you've got an open berth for your next bluewater excursion in Paloma please give me a shout!


I know, itsn't life cruel???? I'll PM you with my cell phone number and yes, you'll be welcome on the next trip.


----------



## seabreeze_97 (Apr 30, 2006)

Allanbc said:


> Actually, if go to the list on the Mahina website, you will see that for the actual listing says "Bristol 27*-*45 ** USA *Good boats. Later models were better quality". This actually include all sizes from 27 *to* 45 feet. Methinks that includes the Bristol 29.9.


Oh look! That includes the 32 also. Imagine that.


----------



## johnshasteen (Aug 9, 2002)

seabreeze_97 said:


> Oh look! That includes the 32 also. Imagine that.


Not only that, but the Bristol 32 is one of the most beautiful boats on the water. There is a black hulled 32 with maroon canvas and interior down in Freeport and it's one beautiful boat.


----------



## wumhenry (Mar 29, 2006)

seabreeze_97 said:


> Oh look! That includes the 32 also. Imagine that.


I know a guy who did an Atlantic circuit recently in a B.32, mostly singlehanded. There's probably a link to his website in the Bristol Chesapeake webpage.


----------



## seabreeze_97 (Apr 30, 2006)

You're talking about John Atkisson and S/V Kestrel. A salty cuss you can't help but like. S/V Kestrel
Here's something you don't see often....a 32 with a fin keel. #3 is the only one.
Home


----------



## johnshasteen (Aug 9, 2002)

seabreeze_97 said:


> You're talking about John Atkisson and S/V Kestrel. A salty cuss you can't help but like. S/V Kestrel


Nice boat - do you have a 32 and are you also on the Bristol Yahoo net? The black hulled 32 is featured on the Bristol Owners Association site - at the time of that photo it was for sale, so it still had black canvas, was the one I was talking about in a prior post. Bristol32 and the well-traveled 32 that's down in Mexico is: Con Te Partiro


----------



## Cruisingdreamspress (Apr 8, 2008)

I've sailed my Hans Christian 38 for 30 years.Two voyages to Mexico and one 7 year solo circumnavigation doesn't make me any wiser than my fellow sailors, but if I were interested in purchasing a blue water cruising boat I would choose a Westsail 32. And for these reasons:I've sailed on one including a voyage down the west coast of Vancouver Island. I believe a cutter rig offers extra strength to the mast and divides the sail plan into a manageable arrangement. The tiller is less prone to failure than wheel steering. The boat can carry a 100 gallons of fuel and 100 gallons of water plus enough food and supplies to cruise for months on end. The Westsail is comfortable in a sea way, she has a bullet proof hull, she heaves-to well, has a full keel which will ride up and over many hazzards at sea including nets. And finally, any clean Westsail, loaded with equiptment and under 45K is a great buy. 7 years from now she will still be worth 45K (or probably more.)


----------



## seabreeze_97 (Apr 30, 2006)

Yeah, I have a 32. I do, on rare occasion visit the Bristol Yahoo site. Kinda thought you might be talking about the same black-hulled boat as on the site, but the maroon had me wondering. If you've seen it on the Bristol page, you've probably seen Intrepid as well. Didn't mean to turn this into an expo on the 32, but I couldn't resist my initial remark, facetious as it may have been.


----------



## johnshasteen (Aug 9, 2002)

Cruisingdreamspress said:


> I've sailed my Hans Christian 38 for 30 years.Two voyages to Mexico and one 7 year solo circumnavigation doesn't make me any wiser than my fellow sailors, but if I were interested in purchasing a blue water cruising boat I would choose a Westsail 32. And for these reasons:I've sailed on one including a voyage down the west coast of Vancouver Island. I believe a cutter rig offers extra strength to the mast and divides the sail plan into a manageable arrangement. The tiller is less prone to failure than wheel steering. The boat can carry a 100 gallons of fuel and 100 gallons of water plus enough food and supplies to cruise for months on end. The Westsail is comfortable in a sea way, she has a bullet proof hull, she heaves-to well, has a full keel which will ride up and over many hazzards at sea including nets. And finally, any clean Westsail, loaded with equiptment and under 45K is a great buy. 7 years from now she will still be worth 45K (or probably more.)


I agree with you that the Westsail 32 is an outstanding bluewater boat - I sailed extensively on a friends Westsail. The only thing about them is that you must be an accomplished sailor of heavier displacement boats (a Westsail 32 displaces around 20,000 pounds compared to a Bristol 32 that displaces around 11,300) to sail one in light air - I've heard people say they are very slow boats - which isn't true - but for a fairly new sailor, they can be a challenge to sail them well.


----------



## seabreeze_97 (Apr 30, 2006)

The only thing I don't like about the Westsail 32 is the thought of filling that 100 gallon fuel tank.


----------



## dnice (Apr 15, 2008)

I wouldn't concern myself so much with JeffH's personal opinions. Yes his points are valid, and to be respected. but you have to understand, he is a perfectionist and is only concerned about the 'perfect' or 'ideal' options. The B29.9 is the only boat in its price range (~$15,000) that I would consider for ocean-going, without significant upgrades. JeffH takes issue with IOR era boats, thats fine, its understandable, but that is only one opinion and if you know anybody who is actually out there cruising, ask them, there are plenty of those boats "out there". people like to mention that Webb Chiles went around in an 18' open boat, but rarely does anyone mention the 2 times around in a Stock Ericson 37 and the other time around in an IOR era S&S designed 36 footer. all three of those circumnavs never resulted in any significant design failure. Yes I know Egregious had a cracked hull, but that started before he began his circuit and it held up through the southern ocean and several knockdowns without any further damage. 

For you personally, outfitting the boat should not be anywhere near the cost of selling it, buying a new one, then outfitting the new one. Keep your money for the kitty, take the boat you have. period.


----------

