Floating Duck

Why would certain boat designs NOT sail to their rating?

Recommended Posts

Why do some hull/rig designs don't seem to "sail to their rating" under VPP-driven handicap systems? ex. Pogo 12.5

Or put another way, why do some hull/rig designs DO sail to their rating, ex. Sydney 38

Barring philosophical discussions of a rating system, could it be an overall systemic rating issue of designs that have a large difference (delta) between their upwind and downwind speeds - which current rating systems are incapable of rating appropriately?

I primarily ask because I am looking to have a custom boat designed (by Mr. Perry if anyone is wondering, haven't reach out to him so don't tell him yet :D). Looking to race competitively under IRC/ORC but I want something that is not a turd. Looking for serious beam, very low B/D, and a large amount of movable water ballast - all of which don't seem to work under current rating systems? And no, a J120 is not fast nor do I want that. Bieker's Riptide are fast, a SC52 is fast, Pogo 40's are fast (in heavy wind), Rodger Martin's Grey Wolf is fast, and Bob Perry's Stealth Chicken is fast.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because ratings systems can't completely characterize a boat, and those intangibles or non-characterized differences are enough to make a boat good or bad.

Of course, I'm not even going into the difference that comes into play between wind speeds and wave states versus different designs.  Nor am I going to go into what happens when you try to rate displacement boats versus planing boats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, him&her said:

Why do some hull/rig designs don't seem to "sail to their rating" under VPP-driven handicap systems? ex. Pogo 12.5

Or put another way, why do some hull/rig designs DO sail to their rating, ex. Sydney 38

Barring philosophical discussions of a rating system, could it be an overall systemic rating issue of designs that have a large difference (delta) between their upwind and downwind speeds - which current rating systems are incapable of rating appropriately?

I primarily ask because I am looking to have a custom boat designed (by Mr. Perry if anyone is wondering, haven't reach out to him so don't tell him yet :D). Looking to race competitively under IRC/ORC but I want something that is not a turd. Looking for serious beam, very low B/D, and a large amount of movable water ballast - all of which don't seem to work under current rating systems? And no, a J120 is not fast nor do I want that. Bieker's Riptide are fast, a SC52 is fast, Pogo 40's are fast (in heavy wind), Rodger Martin's Grey Wolf is fast, and Bob Perry's Stealth Chicken is fast.

 

The people sailing it suck?

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Grrr... said:

Because ratings systems can't completely characterize a boat, and those intangibles or non-characterized differences are enough to make a boat good or bad.

Of course, I'm not even going into the difference that comes into play between wind speeds and wave states versus different designs.  Nor am I going to go into what happens when you try to rate displacement boats versus planing boats.

Is having a wide beam and downwind planing ability "intangibles" anymore? Sure, when only one boat was built that way 30 years ago... But today that should be able to be completely characterized and properly rated, no?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are a few of reasons:

1. The marketplace voted with their feet against rating systems that are tailored to actual conditions in favour of 1 number ratings which means that any design that has weak points in its performance envelope (ie fat bottomed girls) get left out to dry when conditions don't suit.

2. Rating officers can't help but try to steer fleets towards their preferred style of boat RORC has always been upfront about this.

3. Sailors are idiots and tend to listen to their mates and the bloke at the bar or on the web rather than the experts.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would you expect to do any better if you bang a corner on design than you would if you bang a corner on every beat?

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, him&her said:

Why do some hull/rig designs don't seem to "sail to their rating" under VPP-driven handicap systems? ex. Pogo 12.5

Or put another way, why do some hull/rig designs DO sail to their rating, ex. Sydney 38

Barring philosophical discussions of a rating system, could it be an overall systemic rating issue of designs that have a large difference (delta) between their upwind and downwind speeds - which current rating systems are incapable of rating appropriately?

I primarily ask because I am looking to have a custom boat designed (by Mr. Perry if anyone is wondering, haven't reach out to him so don't tell him yet :D). Looking to race competitively under IRC/ORC but I want something that is not a turd. Looking for serious beam, very low B/D, and a large amount of movable water ballast - all of which don't seem to work under current rating systems? And no, a J120 is not fast nor do I want that. Bieker's Riptide are fast, a SC52 is fast, Pogo 40's are fast (in heavy wind), Rodger Martin's Grey Wolf is fast, and Bob Perry's Stealth Chicken is fast.

 

Where and how are you going to race?  Short course?  Offshore?  Salish Sea.  You are in Seattle so you have a light air, flat water venue most of the time.  With 25+ and a nasty chop a couple of times a year.   And great summer cruising.

Several of the boats you cite aren't really that fast anymore.  The SC52s and Stealth Chicken are quick cruising boats, primarily due to their length.  As raceboats, they are relatively no faster than a J120 under most handicap systems.   Grey Wolf is fast under certain conditions, but it needs much more horsepower downhill.  Madrona, the Farr 395's, etc. regularly beat it racing.  

Bieker boats are very nice and deserve a look as well.   But they are apples to grapefruits compared to the SC52s/Stealth Chicken boats.  Another Blue would be fun to have in the area though.  Typically, water ballast is treated very harshly under most handicap systems, unless your crew can push the boat.  

Sounds like what you really want is a Cookson 50.  Rocketship fast, reasonably comfortable and much cheaper than a custom build.  Plus Jim Betz is really busy these days. 

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Left Shift said:

Where and how are you going to race?  Short course?  Offshore?  Salish Sea.

Sounds like what you really want is a Cookson 50.  Rocketship fast, reasonably comfortable and much cheaper than a custom build.

You are correct, I'm looking for a Racer/Cruiser... Cookson 50 is only a race boat :/

That's part of the problem. Looking to do double handed ocean racing and cruising (i.e. Transpac, Sydney Hobart, and of course all the local races) ... while living aboard full time. I currently live aboard and race my Hunter 37.5 - great starter boat, nice inside... but slow, and not enough space now that I have been living aboard for the past 5 years and gf is wanting to move in....

So I have a lot of problems. Must be able to be shorthanded (water ballast boat helps with this), acceptable interior with good volume (40ft + and 13ft + of beam), and of course relatively fast (12-15kts downwind in good conditions).

Aerodyne 43 would be ok (interior is bland and could use some work), but only 2 made. Aerodyne 38 too small. Anything acceptable is newer and in the 250-300k range... at which point I rather have something custom built for a little more (I'll build out the interior, propulsion, and engineering systems. I.e. I only need a hull and mast made by a boatbuilder which decreases cost significantly).

Bieker boats get very very close... still the problem is Mr. Paul (and his customers) don't really design with "a budget" and "beautiful" in mind... they are much more concerned with function over form. I need something... a bit less extreme like the custom-made carbon stanchions and custom-built carbon everything else that Blue sports (and which pusehd the build cost to... $800k last time I heard?).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, him&her said:

Why do some hull/rig designs don't seem to "sail to their rating" under VPP-driven handicap systems? ex. Pogo 12.5

Or put another way, why do some hull/rig designs DO sail to their rating, ex. Sydney 38

Barring philosophical discussions of a rating system, could it be an overall systemic rating issue of designs that have a large difference (delta) between their upwind and downwind speeds - which current rating systems are incapable of rating appropriately?

I primarily ask because I am looking to have a custom boat designed (by Mr. Perry if anyone is wondering, haven't reach out to him so don't tell him yet :D). Looking to race competitively under IRC/ORC but I want something that is not a turd. Looking for serious beam, very low B/D, and a large amount of movable water ballast - all of which don't seem to work under current rating systems? And no, a J120 is not fast nor do I want that. Bieker's Riptide are fast, a SC52 is fast, Pogo 40's are fast (in heavy wind), Rodger Martin's Grey Wolf is fast, and Bob Perry's Stealth Chicken is fast.

 

Why don't you ask a designer who designs winning boats for the class you intend to race in?

By the way, Stealth Chicken is not fast.  That boat was designed as an IMS boat, and was totally uncompetitive whenever it sailed against other IMS boats.  A brutal turd.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Aerodyne 38 is really sticky in light air - lots of wetted surface and the 43 should be the same - they are South Africa boats where it blows 25.  There just are not many boats that are competitive across all conditions thus the "horses for courses" saying.  Add in sailing short handed and it's even more complicated.   AIR offers good advice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, d'ranger said:

The Aerodyne 38 is really sticky in light air - lots of wetted surface and the 43 should be the same - they are South Africa boats where it blows 25.  There just are not many boats that are competitive across all conditions thus the "horses for courses" saying.  Add in sailing short handed and it's even more complicated.   AIR offers good advice.

100% Agree. A slightly different hull profile with water ballast to help in the heavy stuff would make the A38/43 better all around. Again... just nothing for me to find out there. So... back to the original questions.

I suppose the reason why some of these boats don't rate well is because they are too specialized? Better to have a good all around boat with modern rating systems?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, him&her said:

Why do some hull/rig designs notte seem to "sail to their rating" under VPP-driven handicap systems?

<<slitte editte>>

You mite as welle aske why a tree ist goode        - Joe Dirte -

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The answer is don't build a "rating" boat. Build a proper fast easily handled one that will still sail well and look good with the changing restrictions of time as the rating rules alter. Look at the 80's boats that rated well. Some sailed like dogs but won races. Now you can't give them away. Learn the lesson

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some boats are faster than others. Period. Some designers can consistently hit the numbers while others seem to miss the mark. IOR, especially, was a connect-the-dots measurement/VPP rule and some designers just could not connect those IOR dots. All numbers being equal, one design might have more turbulent vortexes shed off the keel, or a rudder more prone to stalling. That's the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, jesposito said:

The people sailing it suck?

happy New Years John

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, dacapo said:
3 hours ago, jesposito said:

The people sailing it suck?

happy New Years John

Wingnuttes oure poore subbistutes fore saillores.                    :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, armchairadmiral said:

The answer is don't build a "rating" boat. Build a proper fast easily handled one that will still sail well and look good with the changing restrictions of time as the rating rules alter. Look at the 80's boats that rated well. Some sailed like dogs but won races. Now you can't give them away. Learn the lesson

Whoa. Deep. I like it.

That's how I feel about the often-recommended Bene 40.7 ... Seems to do well in IRC but I sure as hell don't actually want to sail one.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, him&her said:

You are correct, I'm looking for a Racer/Cruiser... Cookson 50 is only a race boat :/

That's part of the problem. Looking to do double handed ocean racing and cruising (i.e. Transpac, Sydney Hobart, and of course all the local races) ... while living aboard full time. I currently live aboard and race my Hunter 37.5 - great starter boat, nice inside... but slow, and not enough space now that I have been living aboard for the past 5 years and gf is wanting to move in....

So I have a lot of problems. Must be able to be shorthanded (water ballast boat helps with this), acceptable interior with good volume (40ft + and 13ft + of beam), and of course relatively fast (12-15kts downwind in good conditions).

Aerodyne 43 would be ok (interior is bland and could use some work), but only 2 made. Aerodyne 38 too small. Anything acceptable is newer and in the 250-300k range... at which point I rather have something custom built for a little more (I'll build out the interior, propulsion, and engineering systems. I.e. I only need a hull and mast made by a boatbuilder which decreases cost significantly).

Bieker boats get very very close... still the problem is Mr. Paul (and his customers) don't really design with "a budget" and "beautiful" in mind... they are much more concerned with function over form. I need something... a bit less extreme like the custom-made carbon stanchions and custom-built carbon everything else that Blue sports (and which pusehd the build cost to... $800k last time I heard?).

Actually Mick Cookson liked an interior in the boats he designed for himself, like the Cookson 12m and the 50.   Both great boats and well made.

925217_cookson-50_photo_6_1448175170_img.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, SailBlueH2O said:

Think of rating rules as affirmative action for boat design and skipper/crew ability

What a silly thing to say. Are you claiming that the world ORC champions need affirmative action because they can't sail, and that a Pac 52 needs affirmative action because it's a shitbox.

Fuck, you and your boat must be good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, AlR said:

Why don't you ask a designer who designs winning boats for the class you intend to race in?

By the way, Stealth Chicken is not fast.  That boat was designed as an IMS boat, and was totally uncompetitive whenever it sailed against other IMS boats.  A brutal turd.

 

So your saying that you don’t have the $300,000+ to have a great looking yacht? Keep you head in the early West Coast 70’s designs...crew

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually the 40.7 does a pretty good job at what it was intended for which coincidentally is damn near the same list as what you have suggested . Cheep to build, relatively quick (this was the early 2000's remember and Farr 40's were considered really quick boats) easy techniques to build in mass production, have enough accommodations to please the family side of things, cheep to build, have tons of interior volume and standard off the shelf hardware and spars to control cost, cheep to build, rate well in IMS (the rating rule at the time), cheep to build, be able to sail offshore, inshore, cruise, race, cheep to build so Beneteau could make money off of them.... Come to think of it the number of nearly 20 year old 40 footers that have accomplished all of these items and more in masses is actually pretty freakin rare....Cal 40 yup, J120 was probably close to double the cost so not really the same, J122 same as J120, Roger Martin boats? etc etc

Have you ever sailed on a boat with water ballast? For what you are describing you want it is a option but will have some direct drawbacks to your wants. Water tanks sweat and carry condensation when the air is warm, The water brings a certain cool/cold damp feeling to the interior climate that is hard to control (ever tried keeping warm offshore when your weather bunk is pulled up tight to a full tank of cold water....yeah not warm), the tanks take up considerable interior volume which could be a problem for a live aboard, the same goes for pumps and transfers and dump tubes if you want to transfer and or add/dump water at a reasonable rate, and of course back to your first statement/question it does carry a significant rating hit. 

So while water ballast can be a good option I would think for what you have mentioned maybe a boat with decent hull form stability coupled with a lifting keel might be a better option and achieve more of your wants much more frequently than a one trick pony. Look up at what I mentioned about the beachball 40.7 achieving what it has compared to a boat like the big pogo's at well over twice the price.    

Maybe something like a marten 49 would suit you or just say screw the results and comforts like the French do and live aboard your old class 40

fast, comfortable, cheep....Pick two

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

+1 for the first gen class 40's, some have very cozy interiors.

OP, why do you want to commission a new build, but aren't willing to shell out the cash necessary to get a comparable design? 44.7, 40.7, Cookson 50, J/130/33 all seem to check the boxes and most of them are being sold for pennies for what they cost new. Paying for Robert H's time and expertise, paying someone to build a plug, a mold, a hull, fit out the interior, a rigger to do all the rigging, somebody has to cast and mill the keel, somebody has to drill out all the hardware, etc, I'm no project manager but even with entry-level equipment you're looking at close to half a mil, when you could have gotten a very very nice 44.7 and pimped it to your heart's content for less than that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, him&her said:

Why do some hull/rig designs don't seem to "sail to their rating" under VPP-driven handicap systems? ex. Pogo 12.5

Or put another way, why do some hull/rig designs DO sail to their rating, ex. Sydney 38

Barring philosophical discussions of a rating system, could it be an overall systemic rating issue of designs that have a large difference (delta) between their upwind and downwind speeds - which current rating systems are incapable of rating appropriately?

I primarily ask because I am looking to have a custom boat designed (by Mr. Perry if anyone is wondering, haven't reach out to him so don't tell him yet :D). Looking to race competitively under IRC/ORC but I want something that is not a turd. Looking for serious beam, very low B/D, and a large amount of movable water ballast - all of which don't seem to work under current rating systems? And no, a J120 is not fast nor do I want that. Bieker's Riptide are fast, a SC52 is fast, Pogo 40's are fast (in heavy wind), Rodger Martin's Grey Wolf is fast, and Bob Perry's Stealth Chicken is fast.

 

Just to make sure you understand:

 

IRC is NOT a VPP based rating system - it will not rate the Pogo fairly as that boat does fall outside the sweet spot for a 40 footer under IRC

ORC is a VPP based rating rule but I am not sure how it treats class 40'ish style boats (fat assed water ballasted boats).  While the guys involved with the ORC VPP claims it has gotten heaps better than its origin the IMS VPP I am not definitively decided on its ability to fairly rate boats that are outside the usual bucket.  IMS certainly was not at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm, unless you're going to essentially move out of your live aboard every time you race, you ought to think about a heavier boat that will be less impacted by all your live aboard stuff. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, ericrayl said:

Hmmm, unless you're going to essentially move out of your live aboard every time you race, you ought to think about a heavier boat that will be less impacted by all your live aboard stuff. 

Hahaha that's the funny part - I already do that. I only have one pair of jeans. A couple pairs of shirts, some coats. 2 pairs of shoes.

I live pretty minimally, and actually prefer it (why I decided to live aboard in the first place).

So to me its really a non-issue. I can currently set sail in about 5 minutes (need to stow the dehumidifier, and put the dishes way... done).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, ericrayl said:

Hmmm, unless you're going to essentially move out of your live aboard every time you race, you ought to think about a heavier boat that will be less impacted by all your live aboard stuff. 

This is a good point... and even a relatively heavy boat quickly loses performance when you make it a live-aboard, even if you (think you) are relatively spartan. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just speaking from my experience.... living aboard a 40' boat (with my wife) for 2 or 3 years... you think you don't have much stuff, but it kinda sneaks up on you... and even more so if you go cruising at the same time (more anchors, chain, safety gear etc)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, him&her said:

Hahaha that's the funny part - I already do that. I only have one pair of jeans. A couple pairs of shirts, some coats. 2 pairs of shoes.

I live pretty minimally, and actually prefer it (why I decided to live aboard in the first place).

So to me its really a non-issue. I can currently set sail in about 5 minutes (need to stow the dehumidifier, and put the dishes way... done).

You race with dishes? Suppose you have coffee, beer and stuff like that on board too.

 

 

Need crew?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is your budget?  That will be the first driver of this project.  I cant imagine you getting away with a 40 foot custom racer/cruiser for less than $500k.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, him&her said:

Why do some hull/rig designs don't seem to "sail to their rating" under VPP-driven handicap systems? ex. Pogo 12.5

I know, but I'm not telling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Varan said:

You race with dishes? Suppose you have coffee, beer and stuff like that on board too.

Beer and Tito's is always in a watertight box ready to go... in the bilge to keep the COG low of course :D

 

8 hours ago, MauiPunter said:

What is your budget?  That will be the first driver of this project.  I cant imagine you getting away with a 40 foot custom racer/cruiser for less than $500k.

Of course, the cheaper the better. However, sure $500k for a house (and a hobby) is justifiable and doable (to me).

I don't think it needs to be that expensive however. I only need a bare hull and rig - I have someone who does interiors and I would love to do the propulsion systems myself. ex. You can buy a bare 42ft fiberglass hull, out of a mold, for $60k out of the east coast from a couple of builders (my only frame of reference, of course). A custom build obviously doesn't have a mold, nor does it need one. Strip plank foam core would be what... $100k? Or re-use an existing hull mold perhaps (Bieker?).

This boat would be perfect - Neo 400 - but again at $380k + 20% vat - we are again in custom built territory anyway -_-

Open to any and all suggestions! Trust me I would love to do something for $200k instead of $500k.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, him&her said:

Beer and Tito's is always in a watertight box ready to go... in the bilge to keep the COG low of course :D

 

Of course, the cheaper the better. However, sure $500k for a house (and a hobby) is justifiable and doable (to me).

I don't think it needs to be that expensive however. I only need a bare hull and rig - I have someone who does interiors and I would love to do the propulsion systems myself. ex. You can buy a bare 42ft fiberglass hull, out of a mold, for $60k out of the east coast from a couple of builders (my only frame of reference, of course). A custom build obviously doesn't have a mold, nor does it need one. Strip plank foam core would be what... $100k? Or re-use an existing hull mold perhaps (Bieker?).

This boat would be perfect - Neo 400 - but again at $380k + 20% vat - we are again in custom built territory anyway -_-

Open to any and all suggestions! Trust me I would love to do something for $200k instead of $500k.

Are you implying that the gross profit on a $500k build is $300k?  Actually, more since they will get much much better pricing than you can likely ever hope to attain.  Also, they know how and where to source parts and materials.

IF there was that much gross profit to be made, I would open a yard tomorrow and be filthy rich in a couple of years. Oddly enough, more builders are shuttering their doors than opening them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 12 metre said:

IF there was that much gross profit to be made, I would open a yard tomorrow and be filthy rich in a couple of years. Oddly enough, more builders are shuttering their doors than opening them.

If you're going to run your own business, you should become a professional accountant. May as well get paid for what you'll otherwise be staying up late at night and doing for free, running any other business.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Returning to the original question I'd like to share my own experiences with my small Pogo 8.50.

Contrary to most I actually think that the rating systems does a decent job but one must understand the limitations of the systems and the characteristics of different types of boats so....A VPP based rating system like ORC (the same goes for IRC even though it is probably not VPP based) attemt to rate the speed potential of a boat on its own without interaction with other boats and other obstacles.  A consequence of this is that there are a lot of unrated factors that affect the racing potential of a boat in different settings. The breed of light/wide offshore boats has certain characteristics that can be frustrating especially in tight racing. What I have found on my own boat is that while you can actually get it to go upwind quite well with a respectable VMG it has poor acceleration and no point mode at all. These characteristics are unrated but makes it very difficult in handling interaction with other boats and rather uninteresting to race the boat on a crowded W/L course but matters less on an offshore course where you also, sometimes, experiences the boats strong side where it is VERY fast for its rating on some reaching angles but in order to extract that performance you must have the right sails and be prepared to change sails much more often than what is needed on a conventional boat. I have also found that you need to adjust your style of sailing compared to more conventional boats as the big asset in a light/wide offshore is righting moment and in order to extract the performance you must use it and sail the boat with more sail area and more heel than you would do in a more conventional boat which is hard work. The next thing I fond is that ,not surprisingly, these boats are much more sensitive to excess weight than a more conventional C/R. When I bought my boat it was loaded down with a couple 100 kg of cruising equipment and removing that and other excess weight has had a big impact on performance. I have also found that racing double handed is in relative terms better than racing with a full crew which I think is related to the excess weight onboard.

Another factor that should be considered is that a large proportion of wide/light offshore boats I have seen have quite sadly looking sails and I have found that there are, not surprisingly, large performance gains in having good sails

So in the end I actually think that the rating systems are doing a decent job but an offshore boat will never excel on an inshore course.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Buy Dark Star. Truly awesome racer/cruiser.

As far as I know it’s not for sale, but that doesn’t mean they wouldn’t sell it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

J/112e. fast and comfy. get it in the GP spec...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/10/2019 at 6:40 AM, JMOD said:

J/112e. fast and comfy. get it in the GP spec...

 

Great fast little cruiser/racer but... Notice how I said "little" :/ Smaller than even my current boat, Hunter 37.5, looking for something with more interior volume for the gf...

Then the problem is once you get to 42ft+ all the boats start adding multiple heads wtf... Negating any volume increase and just complicating the systems and adding weight (I'm looking at you Bene 44.7).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/10/2019 at 1:31 AM, Trevor B said:

Buy Dark Star. Truly awesome racer/cruiser.

As far as I know it’s not for sale, but that doesn’t mean they wouldn’t sell it.

Exactly what I want! But not in carbon as last I checked I think the total bill for Dark Star was over a mil?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

J 121, not sure what it runs though or if they would ship you a boat with no interior and systems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, him&her said:

Exactly what I want! But not in carbon as last I checked I think the total bill for Dark Star was over a mil?

Pretty sure it’s all carbon except for the wood in the interior....

A new Dark Star might be a million, but I don’t think they spent that much. It was built a while ago when the kiwi dollar was much weaker than it is now. Anyway, how much it cost to build is irrelevant, how much they’d sell it for is the only important number... And if they’d sell it, of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, hhn92 said:

J 121, not sure what it runs though or if they would ship you a boat with no interior and systems.

Hmmm. Perhaps an email to J-boats to ask if that would be possible?

I still can't see a custom (foam) "strip planked" 40ft monohull being more than 100k... but what do I know :huh:

What does a new custom topside (deck) cost anyway? (to be mated to an existing hull). Just thoughts.

Anyway a Neo 400 would be pretty sweet...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/7/2019 at 11:58 AM, Left Shift said:

Actually Mick Cookson liked an interior in the boats he designed for himself, like the Cookson 12m and the 50.   Both great boats and well made.

Are you talking about the Cookson50 designed by Farr....?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/6/2019 at 3:37 PM, jesposito said:

The people sailing it suck?

That's why you did so great racing IRC with Hustler? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/6/2019 at 6:58 PM, Left Shift said:

Actually Mick Cookson liked an interior in the boats he designed for himself, like the Cookson 12m and the 50.   Both great boats and well made.

925217_cookson-50_photo_6_1448175170_img.jpg

i like that, clean it with a power washer.. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Mitch Bayliss said:

Are you talking about the Cookson50 designed by Farr....?

Yep.  One of the great recent race boats.  Should have made more. I’ve never heard of a canting failure, either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Grande Mastere Dreade said:

i like that, clean it with a power washer.. 

12m just about the same.

Wife sees the 12m interior and says “I can cruise in this.”  Well, that was easy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Grande Mastere Dreade said:

i like that, clean it with a power washer.. 

:lol::lol: Would make maintenance rather easy, like a Jeep or the Honda Element

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Dennis6748 said:

Take a look at the Landmark 43, they are awesome boats

Oh that's nice, if a bit pricey for its age. 

Why is it that all the cool boats are on the other side of the world?! Azuree 40, Salona 41, Elan 450 ... I would probably buy any one of those - and all under $200k but... Again... Nowhere near here!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Might be still worth looking at - even with shipping would be cheaper than a custom build.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/6/2019 at 12:26 PM, him&her said:

Why do some hull/rig designs don't seem to "sail to their rating" under VPP-driven handicap systems? Or put another way, why do some hull/rig designs DO sail to their rating, 

him&her, the answer is ultra simple.

Turn the question around: Why do boats that rate the same (12 meters, TP52s, One Tonners, etc.) sail at different speeds?

The answer: some boats are designed better than other boats.

There are many more factors than that simple answer, but that's the crux of it right there.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, sam_crocker said:

I think Merfyn Owen (sp) designed a cruising version of a classe 40. It had a pretty fly anchor handling get up.

https://www.owenclarkedesign.com/40_blue_water_custom_cruising_yacht

THAT is exciting, the interior a bit tight for liveaboard but I did say I'm a minimalist.

Lifting keel, check. Awesome anchor, check. Still the hullform not so great for light air, but good food for thought. 

I wonder what one of those would go for... 

~him

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So far, if I had to choose a used production boat, it would either be the Elan 450 (but not particularly fast), or the Salona 41 (but not particularly "big", as compared to my current boat).

Either one would have to be imported, i.e. sailed by me over here.

~him

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope you realize just how large or difference in performance potential you have gone through in this thread.

The question that I would be asking myself if I were you is what are you really looking for and looking to accomplish.

As I have been reading everything I am coming to conclusion that that a certain look may be higher on the priority list than the actual on the water and live-able performance. Nothing is wrong with that as long as you can remember what the priorities were when you aren't getting the performance of a faster boat. 

Other than the marten 49 (which would be a better all around boat in my opinion) this is a bit higher class and a bit faster machine that could potentially fit the bill of the performance and cruising potential that you started this conversation about.  https://www.yachtworld.com/boats/2010/murtic-52-3052816/?refSource=enhanced listing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/6/2019 at 2:01 PM, Left Shift said:

Where and how are you going to race?  Short course?  Offshore?  Salish Sea.  You are in Seattle so you have a light air, flat water venue most of the time.  With 25+ and a nasty chop a couple of times a year.   And great summer cruising.

Several of the boats you cite aren't really that fast anymore.  The SC52s and Stealth Chicken are quick cruising boats, primarily due to their length.  As raceboats, they are relatively no faster than a J120 under most handicap systems.   Grey Wolf is fast under certain conditions, but it needs much more horsepower downhill.  Madrona, the Farr 395's, etc. regularly beat it racing.  

Bieker boats are very nice and deserve a look as well.   But they are apples to grapefruits compared to the SC52s/Stealth Chicken boats.  Another Blue would be fun to have in the area though.  Typically, water ballast is treated very harshly under most handicap systems, unless your crew can push the boat.  

Sounds like what you really want is a Cookson 50.  Rocketship fast, reasonably comfortable and much cheaper than a custom build.  Plus Jim Betz is really busy these days. 

 

 

 

You do understand "Madrona" IS Carl Buchan right? And a design of his own. Probably did a lot of the work himself too. But that's Carl. I have raced on Dark Star as well.  2 Southern Straits races as well with a first in Div. and 2nd overall. In PHRF and not a particularly windy race downwind either. I don't know you get a million bucks out this as Jonathan was heavily involved with the build and it was structured for cruising as racer/cruiser. I believe the boat has a Farr 40 rig in it to cut costs. I don't want to put Jonathan words in my mouth but it was set up for that very thing. The second Straits race was pretty light and I felt it was underpowered for that. A little sticky because of it. "Blue" on the other hand was designed from the ground up and Betts was chosen for the build. The first Straits it didn't do so hot as it was barely out of the box and still trying to figure it out. Last year's Straits? Won going away. Actually was only 15 minutes behind the next boat to boat was a TP 52. The TP 52 was ORC when Blue was in the PHRF fleet. I don't have it in front of me but working the math backwards it would have been a difference of 45 minutes or so to the good for Blue. Don't believe me? The picture doesn't lie. That shot (I took) is the TP52 Shadow ll finishing and Blue on the horizon; that close. I didn't believe it at first and seeing the next boat was blue's spinnaker out there. I thought: holy phuquoly! is that Blue??? Yep. Team Shadow are no dummies either. A good, long and well run program as well. Talking to Mckee afterwards he said it got up to 18 knots or so. Not a earth-shattering event really. Yes, Riptide boats rock!                  

_IGP2415 (1024x685).jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Maxx Baqustae said:

You do understand "Madrona" IS Carl Buchan right? And a design of his own. Probably did a lot of the work himself too. But that's Carl. I have raced on Dark Star as well.  2 Southern Straits races as well with a first in Div. and 2nd overall. In PHRF and not a particularly windy race downwind either. I don't know you get a million bucks out this as Jonathan was heavily involved with the build and it was structured for cruising as racer/cruiser. I believe the boat has a Farr 40 rig in it to cut costs. I don't want to put Jonathan words in my mouth but it was set up for that very thing. The second Straits race was pretty light and I felt it was underpowered for that. A little sticky because of it. "Blue" on the other hand was designed from the ground up and Betts was chosen for the build. The first Straits it didn't do so hot as it was barely out of the box and still trying to figure it out. Last year's Straits? Won going away. Actually was only 15 minutes behind the next boat to boat was a TP 52. The TP 52 was ORC when Blue was in the PHRF fleet. I don't have it in front of me but working the math backwards it would have been a difference of 45 minutes or so to the good for Blue. Don't believe me? The picture doesn't lie. That shot (I took) is the TP52 Shadow ll finishing and Blue on the horizon; that close. I didn't believe it at first and seeing the next boat was blue's spinnaker out there. I thought: holy phuquoly! is that Blue??? Yep. Team Shadow are no dummies either. A good, long and well run program as well. Talking to Mckee afterwards he said it got up to 18 knots or so. Not a earth-shattering event really. Yes, Riptide boats rock!                  

_IGP2415 (1024x685).jpg

I remember Carl showing me the line drawings for Madrona in a parking lot before the hull was laid up, and then stopping by N. Lake Union where he was detailing molds for some of the very comfy interior bits.  Then having a lot of fun sailing against him for quite a few years.  So, yeah, I do realize it is his boat.  And that a great deal was hand built in true Buchan tradition.  Stupidly, when he showed me the drawings, I didn’t think it was going to be fast.

I also remember Johnathan showing me the Riptide interior when it first showed up, and being impressed with its amenities.

PNW sailing really demands dual purpose.  It’s too gorgeous not to be able to drop a hook and kick back.  Then go race.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Wang said:

I hope you realize just how large or difference in performance potential you have gone through in this thread.

Absolutely, and again that's my issue - there are very few production boats that truly move AND are adequate enough to liveaboard on. Cooksons are far too race focused, Beneteaus are slow, and a Marten 49 is half a million dollars (might as well build custom) and not setup for shorthanding.

Otherwise what do you get that is of modern design (large interior volume), with speed, for around 200k? That's how I've slowly landed on pretty... Mediocre options. Certainly nothing that is truly exciting, but that's what a "budget" does huh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Left Shift said:

PNW sailing really demands dual purpose.  It’s too gorgeous not to be able to drop a hook and kick back.  Then go race.

Amen. And not only that, but it also requires adaptable boats that can move in 2kt summer winds, or 30kt Swiftsure fun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, him&her said:

Absolutely, and again that's my issue - there are very few production boats that truly move AND are adequate enough to liveaboard on. Cooksons are far too race focused, Beneteaus are slow, and a Marten 49 is half a million dollars (might as well build custom) and not setup for shorthanding.

Otherwise what do you get that is of modern design (large interior volume), with speed, for around 200k? That's how I've slowly landed on pretty... Mediocre options. Certainly nothing that is truly exciting, but that's what a "budget" does huh.

I once raced with/for a woman who lived aboard her 2-Tonner.  She had modular clothes racks, dish and food containers, etc. and could move all the live-aboard stuff off the boat in about 15 minutes with her crew.  Stowed it all in a fitted out minivan.   She didn't look for the "perfect" boat, she found a boat that worked well and then figured it out.  

We did quite well.   

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, him&her said:

there are very few production boats that truly move AND are adequate enough to liveaboard

There's a correlation here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 = Not every boat/design is owned by a PHRF director

a boats ability to sail to their rating comes and goes  accordingly

 

at least that's something everyone can agree with putting the debait to rest

 

 

 

 

 

 

:o:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Left Shift said:

I once raced with/for a woman who lived aboard her 2-Tonner.  She had modular clothes racks, dish and food containers, etc. and could move all the live-aboard stuff off the boat in about 15 minutes with her crew.  Stowed it all in a fitted out minivan.   She didn't look for the "perfect" boat, she found a boat that worked well and then figured it out.  

We did quite well.

I can relate perfectly to this, thanks for posting! This is exactly how I live, all of my food and dishes are in containers, etc. Quite modular. 

You make a perfect point, as my current boat isn't perfect either but rather I've just made it work "well enough". 

Based on this, I suppose the question is weather I compromise on comfort (but have more performance), or compromise on performance (and have more comfort). 

Come to think of it, as we race in a world of handicaps, I think I rather compromise SLIGHTLY in performance for a more comfortable living experience - as long as the boat is still competitive under modern handicap rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, him&her said:

I can relate perfectly to this, thanks for posting! This is exactly how I live, all of my food and dishes are in containers, etc. Quite modular. 

You make a perfect point, as my current boat isn't perfect either but rather I've just made it work "well enough". 

Based on this, I suppose the question is weather I compromise on comfort (but have more performance), or compromise on performance (and have more comfort). 

Come to think of it, as we race in a world of handicaps, I think I rather compromise SLIGHTLY in performance for a more comfortable living experience - as long as the boat is still competitive under modern handicap rules.

Thus the Beneteau 40.7 or the Farr 395 will do well, as will the J-122.  All have had a good deal of success and after that it's just a matter of aesthetics and budget. 

Around here, the ability to get out of a hole and on with the race is far better on the race course than the "perfect" rating.  So sail area is vital, as is being able to sail upwind in some breeze and relatively deep downhill as we are a windward/leeward region.  The boats noted above have those abilities.  As do boats as diverse as "Different Drummer" or "Night Runner".  Boats that do NOT do well on handicap - around the PNW - typically, are those with shallow draft, inefficient keels and/or are designed to excel at reaching*. 

But, frankly, around here its mostly the sailors not the boats that win the races.  However, as a wise person once said "Life is too short to sail on a slow boat".  And "Fast is fun".  

 

(Reaching*:  With the exception of the planing ultralights like the Melgi or the Riptides, which are not what you should be thinking about.)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Left Shift said:

Thus the Beneteau 40.7 or the Farr 395 will do well, as will the J-122.  All have had a good deal of success and after that it's just a matter of aesthetics and budget. 

Around here, the ability to get out of a hole and on with the race is far better on the race course than the "perfect" rating.  So sail area is vital, as is being able to sail upwind in some breeze and relatively deep downhill as we are a windward/leeward region.  The boats noted above have those abilities.  As do boats as diverse as "Different Drummer" or "Night Runner".  Boats that do NOT do well on handicap - around the PNW - typically, are those with shallow draft, inefficient keels and/or are designed to excel at reaching*. 

But, frankly, around here its mostly the sailors not the boats that win the races.  However, as a wise person once said "Life is too short to sail on a slow boat".  And "Fast is fun".  

 

(Reaching*:  With the exception of the planing ultralights like the Melgi or the Riptides, which are not what you should be thinking about.)

A lot of money can help. There is such a thing as "operator error" of course. "It can't be me! It's the rating that sucks!". I'm being cheeky of course but that sometimes it can actually be that. And a racing/sailing administrator in our area when people were bitching about PHRF ratings etc and he said at one point: "What do expect with a $35 dollar (at that time) a year rating system?" I sort of laughed at that point and I thought he was being a bit of an a..hole but it boiled down to that. He was right. You can't please everyone in a linear system like that. PHRF was made for your dad's Oldsmobile racing. Not for grand prix racing - it just can't happen. We introduced ORC (club) here with actual measurements, weights etc into the computer/system. As an old IOR guy (even with its foibles) it was an actual measurement system that is measured. Not someone's idea or opinion. We tried it and still use it. We did okay for our program although it made it harder to win/do well. Some of the PHRF guys walked away after a year or so using it saying it was an awful system and you couldn't win for Adam. Funny, it was the same guys that were fourth all the time. And only Jesus came fourth! We just kept on going with no real bitching with us. For many years I was cross-pollinating from areas, particularly Seattle, and were semi-bitching about PHRF-NW and the semi-gold platters and boat's like Riptide's etc. I said you guys are nuts - get ORC or something. ORR? It took a very long time for anything to change; if at all.

That's said there are some more dual-purpose right on the shelf like X-Yachts that are always contenders but even X-Yachts is going more and more cruisier as they go long. It's just marketing really. 

Do yourself favor and look at that.           

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Maxx Baqustae said:

That's said there are some more dual-purpose right on the shelf like X-Yachts that are always contenders but even X-Yachts is going more and more cruisier as they go long. It's just marketing really. 

X-Yatchs are right on point, no doubt. Would truly make a good dual purpose boat as they are nice enough (modern) inside... Problem is they are quite pricey compared to other "lesser known" options. An XP44 is still in $350k territory :/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, him&her said:

X-Yatchs are right on point, no doubt. Would truly make a good dual purpose boat as they are nice enough (modern) inside... Problem is they are quite pricey compared to other "lesser known" options. An XP44 is still in $350k territory :/

I hear ya but you have to pay for the quality. But you get more back on resale other than lesser boats that don't last as well. Wear & tear etc, etc, etc  Having spent a lot of time on X-Yachts I understand that completely. A lot of it some simple things. Smart things. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/13/2019 at 10:43 AM, Squalamax said:

That's why you did so great racing IRC with Hustler? 

We suck, so it makes sense

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/19/2019 at 12:03 AM, him&her said:

X-Yatchs are right on point, no doubt. Would truly make a good dual purpose boat as they are nice enough (modern) inside... Problem is they are quite pricey compared to other "lesser known" options. An XP44 is still in $350k territory :/

An XP44 is everything but a fast and sporty boat. This thing weights over 9 tons

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/7/2019 at 8:00 AM, him&her said:

I don't think it needs to be that expensive however. ...

This boat would be perfect - Neo 400 - but again at $380k + 20% vat - we are again in custom built territory anyway -_-

You own a boat, so you already know: it will cost quite a bit more than you think. Hence, the more complete, the more likely the price is actually known (or knowable).

You are not in Europe, so you will pay $0 VAT. 

You might have to pay tariffs nowadays on import.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/7/2019 at 2:08 PM, carcrash said:

You are not in Europe, so you will pay $0 VAT. 

You might have to pay tariffs nowadays on import.

I have actually been looking at this, getting a boat from Europe that hasn't paid VAT - plus the Euro has been weakening which would also make it a good currency play. 

However I know nothing of import tariffs on our side :huh: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now