NOCALSAILOR

Cat tails from over the horizon

Recommended Posts

40 minutes ago, EarthBM said:

. the incremental difference from 40hp to 75hp is probably small though.

 

~90kg each ... far away from the center

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ugh... then I’m with you for sure.

sometimes I wander about buying an old Catana with bad engines and house systems, stripping all the crap out, putting in a couple Lombardinis. Would it then outsail an Outremer?

Share this post


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

.... the incremental difference from 40hp to 75hp is probably small though.

 

 

1 hour ago, Mordoc said:

~90kg each ... far away from the center

The current volvo penta saildrive range (used on Vismara) does not offer a 40hp so the comparison is between a 3 cylinder d1- 30 at 28 hp or a 4 cylinder d2 - 50 at 51 hp.

If the 28 hp is adequate then a total weight saving for two engines with saildrives is 212 kg. Not trivial.

However if a total of 56 hp is inadequate then the next step up is the d2-50 at 51hp. The d2-50 with sail drive weighs the same as the d2-75 with saildrive (264kg dry) so no weight saving - or going from 102 hp to 150 hp has no weight penalty so why not

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, 30hp seems like the sweet spot. With Yanmar the weight increases progressively though, no free hp for zero weight:
 

yanmar engine only:

29hp 127kg

39hp 172kg

75hp 207kg

110hp  217kg

125hp 229kg

so if you go from 29hp to 39hp you pay 4.6kg/hp. After that it’s <1kg/hp.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, KC375 said:

 

The current volvo penta saildrive range (used on Vismara) does not offer a 40hp so the comparison is between a 3 cylinder d1- 30 at 28 hp or a 4 cylinder d2 - 50 at 51 hp.

If the 28 hp is adequate then a total weight saving for two engines with saildrives is 212 kg. Not trivial.

However if a total of 56 hp is inadequate then the next step up is the d2-50 at 51hp. The d2-50 with sail drive weighs the same as the d2-75 with saildrive (264kg dry) so no weight saving - or going from 102 hp to 150 hp has no weight penalty so why not

 

Brainfart. The D2-50 with saildrive weighs 253 kg with saildrive, the D2-75 with saildrive comes in at 264 kg so a total weight penalty of 22 kg for going from 102 hp to 150 hp.

So (if using Volvo) go with the D1 - 30 if total prop shaft HP of 54 is enough) otherwise d2-75, or Yanmar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Assuming a safety-minded objective of punching 7-8kt at max RPM to deal with inlets, tidal currents, etc (forget motor cruising), what hp is required for 10t, 15t, 20t cats? Is it even answerable?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think if you want your engines to be redundant on a 57' cat you need at least ~55hp each. 75hp isn't a bad idea, then you're really covered for adverse tide, wind, wave etc. Once in a while, it's really handy to have extra power for a little while - that's generally when we use both Volvo D2-55 engines. Otherwise we cruise on one. But if you wanted full redundancy, then the next size up would be the ticket.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We managed a 7T x 40' cat on a single Yanmar 27 HP in one hull. Was quite slow punching into say a 35 knot headwind in flat water (2-3 knots) getting into an anchorage.

Nobody needs 7-8 knots into adverse conditions. If in open water, you can sail faster usually. It's getting into a tight anchorage where short tacking in high winds and a blown tack means you are on a reef, that a reliable engine (1 or 2) is nice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, EarthBM said:

with you on the engines... whenever an ad says “engines upgrades to 110hp” it means the boat can’t sail... the incremental difference from 40hp to 75hp is probably small though.

Especially since these are Volvo-Penta, which means that they are probably d2-75, in other words just d2-55 with turbos.

(On the other hand my experience with turbos for this application is that they fail quickly; on the third hand, when they fail you just have 55hp engines.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Rocket Raccoon said:

Especially since these are Volvo-Penta, which means that they are probably d2-75, in other words just d2-55 with turbos.

(On the other hand my experience with turbos for this application is that they fail quickly; on the third hand, when they fail you just have 55hp engines.)

The add does in fact list them as D2 - 75s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/31/2019 at 5:14 PM, babylon said:

If you shop around that price range you have pretty good options.

I think my fav would be the Seawind 1600 if I had that budget.

It starts with 850k, and you can spec it out with everything carbon. Weight would be similar but nice features like rectractable rudders.

Same for Outremer 51 with all carbon and rotating mast. 

I think the balance is overpriced imo. 1M$ it would be a better consideration but for 1.5M$ thats asking to much.

 

Balance is a very, very well built boat. Better than that Outremer (IMHO), way better. Paarman and his team are good. Both them fellas know how to surf as well. Interior is way better than an Outremer. I'd take one of Phil's boats and be very happy with it. the 526 is a great boat. I don't think there is a comparison between the two.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/31/2019 at 11:30 PM, EarthBM said:

Would be good to see any data... any race, even like ARC, or reliable polars?

At the Georgetown Regatta around the island and then around the buoys, the 57 took line honors in both races by a large margin. They were given a Gunboat 60 full race ready rating...….they came in dead last on corrected ^_^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, mpenman said:

At the Georgetown Regatta around the island and then around the buoys, the 57 took line honors in both races by a large margin. They were given a Gunboat 60 full race ready rating...….they came in dead last on corrected ^_^

What year? what was the competition?

results online anywhere?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, EarthBM said:

What year? what was the competition?

results online anywhere?

This year...Think that it's on Facebook. I don't do social media :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, mpenman said:

Balance is a very, very well built boat. Better than that Outremer (IMHO), way better. Paarman and his team are good. Both them fellas know how to surf as well. Interior is way better than an Outremer. I'd take one of Phil's boats and be very happy with it. the 526 is a great boat. I don't think there is a comparison between the two.

Which ones.  From recall I think (?) the 526 is built down in SA while some of the others are built in China and thought there were some horror stories floating around (no idea the truth of them). 

Share this post


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

Which ones.  From recall I think (?) the 526 is built down in SA while some of the others are built in China and thought there were some horror stories floating around (no idea the truth of them). 

My bad, I meant the SA boats only. With regards to the 45,  I have not spent anytime on it. Had a number of the 526's at our dock. Built very well. I also know Mark, he's knows his stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, mpenman said:

Balance is a very, very well built boat. Better than that Outremer (IMHO), way better. Paarman and his team are good. Both them fellas know how to surf as well. Interior is way better than an Outremer. I'd take one of Phil's boats and be very happy with it. the 526 is a great boat. I don't think there is a comparison between the two.

What exactly is build better on the 526 vs Outremer 51? Sounds like a vague statement. Especially when you can select Carbon bulkheads, carbon roof, optimised foam core, carbon glass compress beam. Which saves weight and adds stiffness and the price point will still be 500k cheaper then a 526.

Im genuinely curious where you see a better quality. 

Share this post


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

What exactly is build better on the 526 vs Outremer 51? Sounds like a vague statement. Especially when you can select Carbon bulkheads, carbon roof, optimised foam core, carbon glass compress beam. Which saves weight and adds stiffness and the price point will still be 500k cheaper then a 526.

Im genuinely curious where you see a better quality. 

Fit and finish with regards to the woodwork/fairing and fit etc. Labor costs for that in SA are way lower than in France. I'm not saying that the Outremers are poorly built (I should have been more clear), it's that the fit/finish in the 526 is fantastic in my opinion of course.

There is a ton of time/faring that goes into a hull of that length. Either boat is fantastic. I would choose the 526. Mark would have my biz if they built a forward cockpit boat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ARC 2019:

Grainger 60 (Muttley) and GB 55 (Allegra) are ahead followed by Sunreef 60 (Deo Juvante), O 5X (BioTrek), and TS5 (Hallucine), with TS42 (Elektra) and TS5 (Amalia) also ahead of the pack.

O51 (2 Canoës) and Lagoon 52 (Greatcircle) are on top of the pack with Catanas mixing it up with FPs and Lagoons mid-pack.

Makes me like TS5 even more...

20175F4C-8C6B-4017-9B25-0BB123A620A8.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, EarthBM said:

ARC 2019:

Grainger 60 (Muttley) and GB 55 (Allegra) are ahead followed by Sunreef 60 (Deo Juvante), O 5X (BioTrek), and TS5 (Hallucine), with TS42 (Elektra) and TS5 (Amalia) also ahead of the pack.

O51 (2 Canoës) and Lagoon 52 (Greatcircle) are on top of the pack with Catanas mixing it up with FPs and Lagoons mid-pack.

Makes me like TS5 even more...

20175F4C-8C6B-4017-9B25-0BB123A620A8.jpeg

Don't think Alegra is a GB55.  Custom Nigel Irens 78'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, EarthBM said:

ARC 2019:

Grainger 60 (Muttley) and GB 55 (Allegra) are ahead followed by Sunreef 60 (Deo Juvante), O 5X (BioTrek), and TS5 (Hallucine), with TS42 (Elektra) and TS5 (Amalia) also ahead of the pack.

O51 (2 Canoës) and Lagoon 52 (Greatcircle) are on top of the pack with Catanas mixing it up with FPs and Lagoons mid-pack.

Makes me like TS5 even more...

20175F4C-8C6B-4017-9B25-0BB123A620A8.jpeg

That Sunreef is outperforming expectations (at least my expectations).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, robalex117 said:

Don't think Alegra is a GB55.  Custom Nigel Irens 78'.

You’re right... looked like GB 55 on the small photo.  Declared LOA 84’...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It probably sails well enough; I'd guess the engine choice is more to do with long Mediterranean days & nights with no wind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Schionning Waterline 1480 "Barrocka" is back on the market after less than a year I think...?

https://yachthub.com/list/yachts-for-sale/used/sail-catamarans/schionning-waterline-1480/242678

Definitely one of my favorite cats out there. I think it was listed at AU$525k last time but I don't know what it sold for.
The current owners seem to have bought new anchor chain, fitted a new chart plotter and put ~100 hrs on the engines, asking AU$529k. It was on the market a long time last time so it'll be interesting to see what happens now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh and here's another cool cat; "Richard Edlin built" 58 footer:

https://yachthub.com/list/boats-for-sale/used/sail-catamarans/richard-edlin-built/241639

There's no mention of a designer anywhere but the hulls remind me of the ones on the Oram 60 in post #33 in this topic.
No mention of a displacement either but the beam to length ratio on those hulls looks good. It looks very well fitted out too.

Share this post


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

Schionning Waterline 1480 "Barrocka" is back on the market after less than a year I think...?

Looks very clean. I almost flew down there last time around when the mast was listed as “carbon fiber”. Turns out it’s cedar wrapped in CF? How much does that weigh compared to alu or CF?

Balsa core is a worry with all Schionnings... like asbestos in buildings.

 

3 hours ago, Tylo said:

Oh and here's another cool cat; "Richard Edlin built" 58 footer:

https://yachthub.com/list/boats-for-sale/used/sail-catamarans/richard-edlin-built/241639

Why is the cross beam placed half way? 
As if the bows were extended after the fact. Sterns look extended too.

Share this post


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

Looks very clean. I almost flew down there last time around when the mast was listed as “carbon fiber”. Turns out it’s cedar wrapped in CF? How much does that weigh compared to alu or CF?

I've asked myself the same question a lot. Mast building seems like one of those dark arts and it's difficult to find weight numbers. In this case I would probably assume Craig Schionning knew what he was doing; from the pics on the Schionning website it looks like he built the mast while building the boat. In that case I'd assume it's as light, or lighter, than a comparable alu mast. Since the ad lists it as "Western red cedar with e-glass and carbon", I'd assume it's a sandwich construction of WRC and e-glass with carbon fiber reinforcements. This one has also been built with no spreaders, just a forestay and two aft-mounted shrouds per side. This would at the very least remove some windage and points of failure compared to a rig with diamonds. I have no idea if it comes out as a weight saving aloft, but maybe.

1 hour ago, EarthBM said:

Balsa core is a worry with all Schionnings... like asbestos in buildings.

 

True. You'd have to get a very good surveyor to make sure it isn't wet and then make sure to always keep on top of it in terms of properly installing fittings and quickly sealing any unfortunate punctures in the outer skin. I've become more relaxed about wood cored boats after seeing how many of them there are out there; as long as it's been properly taken care of and kept dry prior to my ownership I know I'd spend the time and effort to make sure it stays dry. Sure, it'd be great with a foam cored boat for all the advantages they offer, but they're both rarer and more expensive.

1 hour ago, EarthBM said:

Why is the cross beam placed half way? 
 As if the bows were extended after the fact. Sterns look extended too.

Yeah, it's kind of odd. A few reasons for moving the crossbeam aft would be reduced windage and to get the anchor and chain closer to the center of gravity. The trade-off is less trampoline space and different loads on the hulls. The "no crossbeam"-topic was discussed a bit in this thread about a 72' Chris White that has no crossbeam at all: http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php?/topic/183153-chris-white-carbon-70ft-cat-w-freestanding-rig/ and I'm sure it's been discussed somewhere at length with regards to the Gunboat 55/57 when they came out.

The hulls have a very unique shape as you say and they're the reason I'm guessing it's an Oram design, they look very similar to the hulls on "Ciao Bella" (which was listed as an Oram 60) that was for sale a few months ago:

 0_4.thumb.jpg.87b1950120422ef52ad22e6d5c2b9b67.jpg

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Need some opinions on Carbon Masts and Synthetic rigging. Im planing to buy a Cat as live-aboard for a circumnavigation over apx. 3years. Some of the listing online e.g. Outremer 45 have a (rotating) Carbon mast and synthetic rigging. Of course thats great for the performance and stability. But what about the reliability. I read that a Carbon masts can break when hit by Lightning. That a rotating mast has to be taken down once a year to grease the bearings. That the synthetic rigging is affected by the Sun and must be replaced every 3-4 years. How much of that is true? Also that the synthetic rigging is far more expensive than wire and would it be possible to replace the synthetic rigging with wire rigging on a carbon mast at some point?

 I would rather have a boat that is more on the reliable side.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You often hear that Kevlar shrouds should be changed every 5-7 years. In truth they can last a lot longer. But they are harder to inspect so you could have a problem and not know it. Problems occur when you have cuts or water intrusion. Kevlar is sensitive to UVs so you want the cover (sheath) to be in perfect shape.

Because it is more difficult to inspect Kevlar than stainless some insurance companies will ask you to change them every 5 years.

You can inspect them yourselves, it's not hard. You just "milk" them and check for uneveness. Make sure that the sheaths are in perfect condition. Make sure that there is no line chafing on the shrouds. Etc.

I would not recommend them for bobstays or anything that is wet most of the time or exposed to chafe. The weight gain is juts not wroth the trouble on a cruising cat. Just my opinion.

Your mileage may vary, etc.

ETA: I know lots of people who went from stainless to Kevlar back to stainless. No problem at all. And yes, when a carbon mast has been hit by lightening, it will need to be inspected, and there may be invisible problems there as well. Expect your insurance company to make specific demands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are there examples of synthetic standing rigging failing? Think we are still learning the longevity limits because they haven’t been reached yet. Kind of like with fiberglass strength.
 

Colligo has some good info. 

Share this post


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

Need some opinions on Carbon Masts and Synthetic rigging. Im planing to buy a Cat as live-aboard for a circumnavigation over apx. 3years. Some of the listing online e.g. Outremer 45 have a (rotating) Carbon mast and synthetic rigging. Of course thats great for the performance and stability. But what about the reliability. I read that a Carbon masts can break when hit by Lightning. That a rotating mast has to be taken down once a year to grease the bearings. That the synthetic rigging is affected by the Sun and must be replaced every 3-4 years. How much of that is true? Also that the synthetic rigging is far more expensive than wire and would it be possible to replace the synthetic rigging with wire rigging on a carbon mast at some point?

 I would rather have a boat that is more on the reliable side.

 

Spirit had a 19m carbon wing and sailed over halfway around the world and never had problems with it.  We were also based three seasons in SE Asia, which has to be one of the most intense lightning areas in the world to cruise.  It's a myth that carbon conducts better than alloy.  Carbon won't just fall down if struck but it can become damaged from the strike due to the excessive heat at entry and exit points.  If we had the option of an alloy or carbon rig we'd chose alloy every time.

The rig was rotating and we never took the mast down to grease the rotation joint.  We did fit grease nipples in the Galapagos after sailing 4,000nm due to noise not due to any issues with the rotation.  Would I have a rotating rig on our next boat? no! when cruising simplicity is your friend and a rotating rig even though not overly complex does bring into the equation added complexity that isn't warranted on a cruising boat especially for the small benefits you gain performance wise.

Spirit also had synthetic rigging since early 2015, it was supplied by John at Colligo.  Originally it was 9mm diaform but John recommended to replaced it with 13mm Dynex Dux SK75.  It was great as we could repair and replace our own rigging as needed reducing costs and improving serviceability.  Spirit sailed 10,000nm with the Dux and I'd definitely have it on our next boat.  The simplicity and ease of installation and the weight reduction are big winners.  Spirit's was uncovered so you need to keep a good eye on chafe but apart from that it's easy to monitor.  

Our whole philosophy is to keep it as simple as we can and to only have things that add value to the cruising experience. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, trispirit said:

Spirit had a 19m carbon wing and sailed over halfway around the world and never had problems with it.  We were also based three seasons in SE Asia, which has to be one of the most intense lightning areas in the world to cruise.  It's a myth that carbon conducts better than alloy.  Carbon won't just fall down if struck but it can become damaged from the strike due to the excessive heat at entry and exit points.  If we had the option of an alloy or carbon rig we'd chose alloy every time.

The rig was rotating and we never took the mast down to grease the rotation joint.  We did fit grease nipples in the Galapagos after sailing 4,000nm due to noise not due to any issues with the rotation.  Would I have a rotating rig on our next boat? no! when cruising simplicity is your friend and a rotating rig even though not overly complex does bring into the equation added complexity that isn't warranted on a cruising boat especially for the small benefits you gain performance wise.

Spirit also had synthetic rigging since early 2015, it was supplied by John at Colligo.  Originally it was 9mm diaform but John recommended to replaced it with 13mm Dynex Dux SK75.  It was great as we could repair and replace our own rigging as needed reducing costs and improving serviceability.  Spirit sailed 10,000nm with the Dux and I'd definitely have it on our next boat.  The simplicity and ease of installation and the weight reduction are big winners.  Spirit's was uncovered so you need to keep a good eye on chafe but apart from that it's easy to monitor.  

Our whole philosophy is to keep it as simple as we can and to only have things that add value to the cruising experience. 

Well said.  What did you use for the forestay?

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What kind of synthetic rigging is on the boats? I’ve been reading up on Dyneema rigging and have heard that replacing stainless with it costs roughly the same as buying new stainless stuff, but only due to having to buy all the unique hardware (thimbals, terminators, end fittings and so on) but when time comes to renew, and you only need to renew the line itself, it’s a lot cheaper.

Also, since you dimension it’s for creep rather than for breaking strength, there’s a HUGE safety margin in terms of breaking strength while still saving a lot of weight.

Doesn’t have to make it true but thats what I heard. The weight savings compared with the future price savings and the ease of serviceability (learn how to splice it, keep a spool with you and you can replace a shroud on your own anywhere in the world) means I’ll definitely be trying it out on my next boat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I renewed the standing rigging on my Atlantic 57, and talked with Colligo. It only made any sense for the uppers and lowers, the diamonds are too short and it's not recommended for headstays inside furlers. The quote was $10,600, of which $5,147 was the Dynice Dux. As far as I could figure out, the weight saving was about 40 lbs. I didn't do it; stayed with Dyform wire.

Share this post


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

What kind of synthetic rigging is on the boats? I’ve been reading up on Dyneema rigging and have heard that replacing stainless with it costs roughly the same as buying new stainless stuff, but only due to having to buy all the unique hardware (thimbals, terminators, end fittings and so on) but when time comes to renew, and you only need to renew the line itself, it’s a lot cheaper.

Also, since you dimension it’s for creep rather than for breaking strength, there’s a HUGE safety margin in terms of breaking strength while still saving a lot of weight.

Doesn’t have to make it true but thats what I heard. The weight savings compared with the future price savings and the ease of serviceability (learn how to splice it, keep a spool with you and you can replace a shroud on your own anywhere in the world) means I’ll definitely be trying it out on my next boat.

This makes it sound very appealing but why is it not so wide spread in the cruising community? Everytime I see synthetic rigging its usually on performance oriented boats where the owner had big pockets and wanted weightsavings at "any" price.

I also read that UV damage and chaffe is a big concern. Why not cover those lines with simple sock like fabric or thin gardenhose material. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, LMI said:

Well said.  What did you use for the forestay?

Diaform would like to have upgraded to structural and synthetic but $$$$$

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

40 pounds 60 feet above deck is different than 40 pounds at deck level, by whatever integer. I first came across PBO when helping step an Open 60. Its really incredible how light it is but for a cruising application I dunno. I don't know if it passes the cost/benefit/weight/durability analysis. As an aside, there's a thread on Fix it about how loud the synthetic rig is and how to handle the harmonic vibration(not that that couldn't happen w wire).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I ditched the twin 3/8” 1x19 stainless steel head stays on my St. Francis three years ago and upsized to a single 7/16” and only kept the stainless for the furling system requirements.

The shrouds are 9/16” SK75 with Dyneema chafe guard over them, the runners and check stays 5/16” SK75 also covered.

Any time the boat is really powered up my concern is always that something will let go in the headstay assembly even though everything was new with the upgrade - I hate stainless steel - awful structural material.

The very name is fanciful, better term would be stainless iron, not enough carbon to be called steel it’s claim to fame is that it does not rust so long as it is polished. The strength/weight sucks, flex fatigue is horrible, yield point is so low it’s like frozen chewing gum - and then there is crevice cracking - oh joy.

I consider myself fortunate that the rig did not go over the side with the original all stainless set up on this cruising boat, the reduction in weight aloft had a noticeable effect in reducing pitching but the real bonus for me is peace of mind with the added strength, almost infinite cycle life and absence of chafe. I wish I could lose the wire headstay.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, fufkin said:

40 pounds 60 feet above deck is different than 40 pounds at deck level, by whatever integer. I first came across PBO when helping step an Open 60. Its really incredible how light it is but for a cruising application I dunno. I don't know if it passes the cost/benefit/weight/durability analysis. As an aside, there's a thread on Fix it about how loud the synthetic rig is and how to handle the harmonic vibration(not that that couldn't happen w wire).

I agree with that math, but it's not the case on my Atlantic 57. If you consider the geometry of the uppers and lowers, as a SWAG I'd say the center of that 40lb weight loss would be more like 20-25 feet above the deck at the most.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, boardhead said:

I ditched the twin 3/8” 1x19 stainless steel head stays on my St. Francis three years ago and upsized to a single 7/16” and only kept the stainless for the furling system requirements.

The shrouds are 9/16” SK75 with Dyneema chafe guard over them, the runners and check stays 5/16” SK75 also covered.

Any time the boat is really powered up my concern is always that something will let go in the headstay assembly even though everything was new with the upgrade - I hate stainless steel - awful structural material.

The very name is fanciful, better term would be stainless iron, not enough carbon to be called steel it’s claim to fame is that it does not rust so long as it is polished. The strength/weight sucks, flex fatigue is horrible, yield point is so low it’s like frozen chewing gum - and then there is crevice cracking - oh joy.

I consider myself fortunate that the rig did not go over the side with the original all stainless set up on this cruising boat, the reduction in weight aloft had a noticeable effect in reducing pitching but the real bonus for me is peace of mind with the added strength, almost infinite cycle life and absence of chafe. I wish I could lose the wire headstay.

All these points about the drawbacks of SS rigging are basically factually true, yet the cruising fleet is 99.99999% all SS, and still rigs aren't dropping like flies. So somehow the yachting engineering community has found a modus vivendi with SS. One thing to recall - it is pretty cost effective.....

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, boardhead said:

The shrouds are 9/16” SK75 with Dyneema chafe guard over them, the runners and check stays 5/16” SK75 also covered.

What do you use for creep — lashings, turnbuckles, something clever?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, CapDave said:

All these points about the drawbacks of SS rigging are basically factually true, yet the cruising fleet is 99.99999% all SS, and still rigs aren't dropping like flies. So somehow the yachting engineering community has found a modus vivendi with SS. One thing to recall - it is pretty cost effective.....

Need to knock a bunch of 9’s off that number, then take out the rarely and never sailed community and the guy’s who decorate their motor sailers with a rig and then talk to the guy’s who spotted the catastrophe before it happened - stranding, cracks, rust or taking stuff apart, polishing, inspecting and sometimes re-installing and then asking the guy’s who lost rigs why and what they did next at which point the argument for something better gets pretty compelling.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, boardhead said:

I ditched the twin 3/8” 1x19 stainless steel head stays on my St. Francis three years ago and upsized to a single 7/16” and only kept the stainless for the furling system requirements.

The shrouds are 9/16” SK75 with Dyneema chafe guard over them, the runners and check stays 5/16” SK75 also covered.

Any time the boat is really powered up my concern is always that something will let go in the headstay assembly even though everything was new with the upgrade - I hate stainless steel - awful structural material.

The very name is fanciful, better term would be stainless iron, not enough carbon to be called steel it’s claim to fame is that it does not rust so long as it is polished. The strength/weight sucks, flex fatigue is horrible, yield point is so low it’s like frozen chewing gum - and then there is crevice cracking - oh joy.

I consider myself fortunate that the rig did not go over the side with the original all stainless set up on this cruising boat, the reduction in weight aloft had a noticeable effect in reducing pitching but the real bonus for me is peace of mind with the added strength, almost infinite cycle life and absence of chafe. I wish I could lose the wire headstay.

Just look closely at the name itself. 

Stains Less...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, CapDave said:

I agree with that math, but it's not the case on my Atlantic 57. If you consider the geometry of the uppers and lowers, as a SWAG I'd say the center of that 40lb weight loss would be more like 20-25 feet above the deck at the most.

 Take it all apart and weigh it, the difference is nuts depending on how far you want to go. 

For the stem ball attachments on the mast I had to make my own fittings, John Franta wanted me to sell him some actually.

Creep - that is just so stupidly overplayed. I have reels of SK75 from 3/32” up to 5/8” and I can tell you that you need some serious loads in mind when you break out the big stuff, I don’t use a lot of the 5/8”. Most of the creep you hear about is because folks oversize and never put enough load on the cable to compact it. I have rigged a bunch of well used multihulls over the last twenty four years with only one, severely abused, cable fail from which we learned a lot and used that knowledge moving forward. 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

This makes it sound very appealing but why is it not so wide spread in the cruising community? Everytime I see synthetic rigging its usually on performance oriented boats where the owner had big pockets and wanted weightsavings at "any" price.

I also read that UV damage and chaffe is a big concern. Why not cover those lines with simple sock like fabric or thin gardenhose material. 

 

I think it depends on what kind of rigging we’re talking about. The crazy carbon and Kevlar rigging on super yachts and racing yachts is obviously beyond the reach of most of us mortals but dyneema rigging seems like a pretty realistic offering. I’ve seen quite a few youtubers make the change as well so it’s definitely out there. In the end I think it’s just because sailors in general are fond of the “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”-mentality (which there’s nothing wrong with) and having metal holding up the mast gives people a sense of security they don’t get with dyneema (yet).

There are some nice write-ups on sailmagazine where an owner converted to dyneema, see the following links:
https://www.sailmagazine.com/diy/dynex-dux-across-the-atlantic

https://www.sailmagazine.com/diy/dynex-dux-fiber-rigging-after-6000-sea-miles

It looks like they run it unprotected from chafe and UV, and still manage chafe fine and found that after 6000 miles the shrouds had lost 21 and 32% of their strength due to UV and chafe, but even with these losses they were still twice as strong as the stainless rigging they replaced.

There are UV and chafe protection sleeves that I would definitely use at least, even though it might not be strictly necessary. I don’t think dyneema is the 2nd coming of Christ or anything but it’s pretty cool to have a reasonably priced synthetic alternative for the rig.

Share this post


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

 Take it all apart and weigh it, the difference is nuts depending on how far you want to go. 

For the stem ball attachments on the mast I had to make my own fittings, John Franta wanted me to sell him some actually.

Creep - that is just so stupidly overplayed. I have reels of SK75 from 3/32” up to 5/8” and I can tell you that you need some serious loads in mind when you break out the big stuff, I don’t use a lot of the 5/8”. Most of the creep you hear about is because folks oversize and never put enough load on the cable to compact it. I have rigged a bunch of well used multihulls over the last twenty four years with only one, severely abused, cable fail from which we learned a lot and used that knowledge moving forward. 

 

 

Can you comment on the negative heat coefficient of dyneema. Lets say we have a 20m Aluminium mast and dyneema rigging. We install it in a hot climate and then sail in areas with 5c temprature. As the mast shrinks but the dyneema expands at those tempratures. How loose will the rigging become and how easy is it to adjust it on the fly?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, babylon said:

Can you comment on the negative heat coefficient of dyneema. Lets say we have a 20m Aluminium mast and dyneema rigging. We install it in a hot climate and then sail in areas with 5c temprature. As the mast shrinks but the dyneema expands at those tempratures. How loose will the rigging become and how easy is it to adjust it on the fly?

So snug it up! Yeah the cables on Skateaway and my St Francis are slack here today and get VERY slack on REALLY cold days - even with the carbon mast - but with lashings I can adjust the rig, under way, in less time than it takes for my cuppa tea to chill off!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I used dyneema for running backstays to support a cutter staysail forestay. Went to the windard primary winch so never a worry about creep because it was only loaded for hours or a few days at most.

I also used it for a lower shroud that kept breaking (noodly mast section). I had previously gone from 1/4" 1x19 to  -8 rod on recommendation of rigger who said it was better for fatigue. Rod broke at sea too.  It was simple to go up the mast and lash the rope around the front of the spreaders so as to not block the mainsail track.

https://maiaaboard.blogspot.com/2011/08/on-wing-and-prayer-into-fiji.html?m=0

Replaced it with 3/8" dyneema, not the preshrunk type. Had a Colligo lashing + turnbuckle. It was all I had on hand in Fiji.

Yes, on cold days it would get a bit slack so I'd just go with a wrench and screwdriver, pull the cotter pins and give it a few twists until it was tight again. I didn't know about the negative thermal expansion back then and couldn't understand why it would do this!

Share this post


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

Can you comment on the negative heat coefficient of dyneema. Lets say we have a 20m Aluminium mast and dyneema rigging. We install it in a hot climate and then sail in areas with 5c temprature. As the mast shrinks but the dyneema expands at those tempratures. How loose will the rigging become and how easy is it to adjust it on the fly?

This is an argument for matching the standing rigging to the mast. CF has a small negative thermal expansion coefficient, like dyneema. Aluminum has one of the highest coefficients among metals and about twice that of stainless steel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had runners on the last rig of SK75 and they were a real pain. Every time you loaded one it would stretch and 10 minutes later it needed to be re tightened.

I guess as it was not loaded most of the time it never stabilized???

Probably the biggest negative of soft rigging is the extra wind-age, on a fast multi that may offset the extra weight gains.

Share this post


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

I had runners on the last rig of SK75 and they were a real pain. Every time you loaded one it would stretch and 10 minutes later it needed to be re tightened.

I guess as it was not loaded most of the time it never stabilized???

Probably the biggest negative of soft rigging is the extra wind-age, on a fast multi that may offset the extra weight gains.

Like I said, if you over size for a given load the filaments won’t compact and it will lengthen gradually on the pulse load, particularly on runners punching waves. The 12 plait will tend to soften up on the lazy runner and have to re-set each time it gets loaded.

I use Dyneema chafe sleeve and if you milk it real tight onto the well loaded cable the circumferential loading does a pretty good job of keeping the 12 plait compacted on a runner while also producing a smoother cable with additional UV shielding and much better resistance to chafe. The 12 plait diameter drops down, just like dux but without the expense or locking the filaments and losing that wonderful ability to distribute the load throughout the cable on smaller turn radii.

That negative of extra windage pales to insignificance if it makes for the rig keep pointing at the sky and I don’t put covers on or oversized the standing rigging on my quick boat.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just heard that cool looking Richard Edlin 58 foot cat in NZ has sold. I was about to go and take a look too. Not a big trip from Queensland. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/7/2020 at 2:11 AM, Insolent said:

Just heard that cool looking Richard Edlin 58 foot cat in NZ has sold. I was about to go and take a look too. Not a big trip from Queensland. 

Yeah, I asked for the full specs on the 15th of January I believe and got a reply saying it was under contract.

If you fancy a vacay down to NZ there's another cool yacht for sale; NZ$100k more expensive mind you but looks fast: 
https://yachthub.com/list/yachts-for-sale/used/sail-catamarans/hughes-evolution-14/242707

Carbon/Kevlar construction, retracting engines and rudders. The Kiwis seem to have a thing for in-boom furling mains; first the Oram 60, then the Richard Edlin 58 and now this.

 

For anyone who fancies something cheaper, Bob Oram seems to be selling his 46 footer "Slim":
https://yachthub.com/list/yachts-for-sale/used/sail-catamarans/oram-slim/242743

A very unique looking boat and seemingly a very unique design as well. "A 32' boat with 46' hulls" is what he calls it, so probably not the most living space in the world. That being said I'm sure she's very light and for anyone who can live with the quirky steering system and aesthetics I'm sure she's a dream to single-hand with the somewhat stubby rig. She even has a forward cockpit and that makes her almost a Gunboat in my book.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I went and had a look at the 14m Hughes cat in NZ last weekend. Beautifully built boat. Integral chain plates, curved and tapered davits, even some of the turning blocks on deck were integrated during the build. The longeron/forward beam structure is a work of art. It was commissioned by a structural engineer and he was heavily involved at the construction phase. She a lovey boat, undoubtedly quick, but just seemed a little TOO light for what I want (pretty much Soma’s wish list, fast simple cruising for a family of four) in that a tonne or two of water, fuel, and cruising gear (including dive and kiting gear) would represent a big percentage of her total displacement. She also had very little storage space and was a wee bit cramped for me (I’m 6’3”). But a very nicely built boat with lots of good ideas, as you’d expect from a custom built boat for a couple that have owned four boats before her. For a couple I reckon she’d be perfect, and indeed she was designed with a couple in mind.

Saw an Outremer 55 today but she needs a LOT of work. The search continues...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After visiting the 1993 balsa cored Razzle Dazzle 61 sitting very high on its lines n Simpson Bay I felt more comfortable with not all balsa cored boats being time bombs.

This opens up Schionnings, which have the best lines of all cruising cats imho, and this one just popped up:

https://www.yachtworld.com/boats/2009/schionning-waterline-52-3654391/

Talisker has been on the market for a bit, Hawaii is a tricky market:

http://www.catamaransite.com/Schionning-50-catamaran-for-sale-1.html

and of course Barrocka:

https://www.boatsonline.com.au/boats-for-sale/used/sailing-boats/schionning-waterline-1480/242678

Share this post


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

After visiting the 1993 balsa cored Razzle Dazzle 61 sitting very high on its lines n Simpson Bay I felt more comfortable with not all balsa cored boats being time bombs.

This opens up Schionnings, which have the best lines of all cruising cats imho, and this one just popped up:

https://www.yachtworld.com/boats/2009/schionning-waterline-52-3654391/

Talisker has been on the market for a bit, Hawaii is a tricky market:

http://www.catamaransite.com/Schionning-50-catamaran-for-sale-1.html

and of course Barrocka:

https://www.boatsonline.com.au/boats-for-sale/used/sailing-boats/schionning-waterline-1480/242678

Wow - Razzle Dazzle has been for sale a looooong time. Cockpit never looked very comfortable..

Literally 3 years ago - Feb 4, 2017 - I talked to the delivery skipper who sailed Talisker from Oz to Hawaii, been for sale ever since - assuming it hasn't sold since and now for sale again. He gave a decent report of the boat, but it sounded like there were a lot of PIA small to medium things that are endemic to custom one-offs that are usually sorted on serial boats - access issues, gear choice issues, etc. Aside from that he disliked the heads right forward and the helm seat...The boat was purchased by a couple to run charters, didn't work, they broke up, it was her money, she's not a sailor.....could be bought right.

Schionning cats look great, but I always worry about ventilation in main salon - seems a bit hit or miss depending on exact implementation of the design.

Share this post


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

After visiting the 1993 balsa cored Razzle Dazzle 61 sitting very high on its lines n Simpson Bay I felt more comfortable with not all balsa cored boats being time bombs.

This opens up Schionnings, which have the best lines of all cruising cats imho, and this one just popped up:

https://www.yachtworld.com/boats/2009/schionning-waterline-52-3654391/

Talisker has been on the market for a bit, Hawaii is a tricky market:

http://www.catamaransite.com/Schionning-50-catamaran-for-sale-1.html

and of course Barrocka:

https://www.boatsonline.com.au/boats-for-sale/used/sailing-boats/schionning-waterline-1480/242678

So you’ve seen Razzle Dazzle? I’d love to hear your thoughts. I’ve been in touch with the owner and was going to try get a mate in SXM to take a look for me. It’s a lot of boat for the money but she’s heavy. And yeah, the balsa core is always a bit of a red light for me.

 

i agree about the Schionnings. I went to look at a1480 Wilderness here in Brisbane and wasn’t that impressed. Some nice features but other things really put me off, like the central helm, which Barrocka has too, though she seems like a better finished boat. The one in Martinique has a nicer layout IMO.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, ProaSailor said:

This one, Catenza, by John Hughes?  https://nzcatamaran-catenza.weebly.com/

https://yachthub.com/list/yachts-for-sale/used/sail-catamarans/hughes-evolution-14/242707

46 feet, 5.5 tons Light Ship, U.S. $375K - Looks good to me.

0_4.thumb.jpg.ed32fe475a17f7363bc6b24ef09a0f62.jpg

galley_orig.jpg.e1cf79c50669fb850c6d91ef08c25378.jpg

dscf5159_orig.thumb.jpg.44a6eb40af2994c55e0e85af634f3cf2.jpg

Yep, that’s the one, Catenza. She’s a great boat alright, just not quite what I’m looking for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Insolent said:

So you’ve seen Razzle Dazzle? I’d love to hear your thoughts. I’ve been in touch with the owner and was going to try get a mate in SXM to take a look for me. It’s a lot of boat for the money but she’s heavy. And yeah, the balsa core is always a bit of a red light for me.

It was exactly what I expected, without any negative surprises. Just a bit old, like being in a 1950s movie, or like your grandpa’s home. The hardware is good, the engines look good, sits high in the water as I wrote. I can see it sailing well for the next 20-30 years. I think it’s priced above where it can sell, like 60-80% above, and there is a real life reason why the seller won’t budge.

The standing dyform rigging looks good, but it’s from 1993! The mast looks heavy. Haven’t seen the sails.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm interesting. Would love to know how she sails. What’s the real life reason why the seller won’t budge?

1993 rigging might be due a look!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/23/2020 at 12:58 AM, EarthBM said:

After visiting the 1993 balsa cored Razzle Dazzle 61 sitting very high on its lines n Simpson Bay I felt more comfortable with not all balsa cored boats being time bombs.

This opens up Schionnings, which have the best lines of all cruising cats imho, and this one just popped up:

https://www.yachtworld.com/boats/2009/schionning-waterline-52-3654391/

Talisker has been on the market for a bit, Hawaii is a tricky market:

http://www.catamaransite.com/Schionning-50-catamaran-for-sale-1.html

and of course Barrocka:

https://www.boatsonline.com.au/boats-for-sale/used/sailing-boats/schionning-waterline-1480/242678

That Schionning in Martinique looks VERY nice. They seem to have fixed all the things I didn’t like about Barocka and Freedom Express (except the balsa core, though if it’s done right, and on a newer boat...) 

I’m surprised to see they list her displacement at 16 tonnes though. Even with all the cruising gear they’ve piled on to her that can’t be right. Shame it’s such a long way from me. A trip to Martinique might be on the cards!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doing a Jordan Series Drogue for a family from California picking up their new to them , Outremer 55 , Martinique few weeks, early March 2020.

all dyneema rode and bridle legs. 

less than 30 lbs plus tail end weight.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A very interesting discussion, I'm just a dreamer but feel I've learnt a bit just following this and the prior thread, thanks to all that have contributed so far.

Seems like displacement can make all the difference to performance, but it also seems to be one of the least trustworthy numbers. Last two boats mentioned range from 5.5 t for a 46', to 16 t for a 52'. Assuming the 5.5 t is right, and cubic scaling, then you'd expect ~8t for the 52', caeteris paribus. Of course there are many other variables, but how much trust can be put in an advertisement? Do buyers routinely check, if so how?

I guess a genuine light boat could just be under-built, particularly for custom designs/builds, checking this seems to be even less straightforward. Are the only solutions a brand name & a very good survey?

Thanks again for the education, the only "cruising" on a multihull that I've ever done was a couple of deliveries sailing an ORMA 60.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quick update on The Search:

Razzle Dazzle: The owner has been out cruising and sent me a few shots of her under sail, apparently doing 9-9.5 knots on a close reach in 11 knots apparent, which was better than I thought she´d do. But still, she´s an old boat, he´s pretty inflexible on the price and probably a bit more boat than I want, definitely more than I need!

Tika/Outremer 55S: Had a friend check her out in Western Australia yesterday. She was a lot more tired than either of us expected at the price he´s asking. Old sails. The rig hasn't been down for a proper refit since he's had her. And he's kept NO maintenance records! Why do people not do that??? His answer was "I just did what needed to be done when it needed doing." If he's not open to offers I think he'll find he remains the owner for a while, especially with what's happening to world markets right now...

Rosinante/Hughes 63 tri: I've found a good carbon stick for Rosinante, though not in Hawaii unfortunately. Man, if she was closer I'd definitely go take a look. I've heard the seller rejected two offers around the $200k mark. Has anyone actually sailed on this boat? She looks on the heavy side of a performance tri. Doesn´t help that all the sailing pics appear to be in about 5 knots TWS!

Windswept/Crowther 56: I´m looking at her this weekend with a fellow boat builder. Very excited! Big platform, fast, beautiful. She's not quite right as she is, but I think with a few thoughtful mods she could be pretty cool, and I'm inspired by what trispirit has achieved with an ex race boat.

Barrocka/Schionning 1480: Seeing her in a couple of weeks time.

Then there's the other Schionning 52 in Martinique. I REALLY like the look of this boat. What stops me from jumping on a plane is that she displaces almost twice the design weight! I am trying to get in touch with the original owner to find out if this is an error or what the hell he has done to double her weight! Has anyone seen this boat?

Soma, if you´re listening, are you still stoked on your boat? Have you looked into adding a longeron, bow extensions or any of the other bits on the wish list? There´s an Outremer 55 LIGHT I'm pretty keen on, but haven't seen her yet. The only O55's Ive been aboard have been standards. I'm trying to visualise how much extra room 60cms of beam equates to in real life!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please report on the sleeping situation on Windswept, have a friend starting to search for his RTW Cat. Can't tell from the pictures if there is a proper berth for a couple to live on or if it's gonna be one of those "you can snuggle with your guitar" boats. I think that was a factor in Tri Spirit's decision to sell, and when I lived aboard I bought a boat with a nice aft cabin that didn't really sail too great, no regrets. Being able to get out of bed to check how the ground tackle is holding and how other boats are swinging on anchor, pee, etc. without disturbing your partner is a big part of quality of life aboard. 

Also, if Rosinante is your dream boat, you could put the wrecked Spindrift rig and sails on her to get her to where you could install your 20k rig. That would be an adventure and a story I'd enjoy following. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I remember reading on this forum that Rosinante is shockingly slow.  Somebody was in a race in the PNW with them.

Has it ever been weighed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn’t say that Rosinante is my dream boat, but looks interesting at the right price. Definitely less interesting if she’s a total dog though!

At this advanced stage of The Search I am pretty sure it’ll be one of three boats: an Outremer 55, a Schionning 1480 or possibly a Looping 52, with the most likely candidate being the Outremer.

I will let you guys know what I thought of Windswept in a week or so.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/8/2020 at 4:08 AM, nom de boom said:

Seems like displacement can make all the difference to performance, but it also seems to be one of the least trustworthy numbers. Last two boats mentioned range from 5.5 t for a 46', to 16 t for a 52'. Assuming the 5.5 t is right, and cubic scaling, then you'd expect ~8t for the 52', caeteris paribus. Of course there are many other variables, but how much trust can be put in an advertisement? Do buyers routinely check, if so how?

Yes, it should be treated as a rough approximation. Also designers and builders have treated this differently over time.

Traditionally nonohulls were at "1/2 load". This meant some crew, some assumed food and stores, and 1/2 full fuel and water tanks added to the " lightship weight". A lot of these lightship weights were optimistic. 

Multihull builders often quoted lightship weights. A lot of these were VERY optimistic. Eventually the EU cracked down and told production builders to weigh some representative sample boats and publish actual light ship weights (this happened about 10 years ago). Suddenly the French production multis got tons heavier, seemingly overnight.

(If anyone in Europe knows more about the laws associated with boat displacement I would be interested).

I don't know of any buyer who checks; however I often thought if I was rich and having a custom boat built for me I'd add a weight penalty clause to the contract. Something like $20/lb above the contract weight would suit me. It would focus the designer and builder on getting it right (it is common to have speed penalty clauses for commercial naval architecture vessels).

Best way of judging a vessel's weight without access to the lines plan and freeboard measurements? Just look at pictures of the hulls during a haul out. 

Lagoon

2015haulout06.jpg

Outremer

principale-117.jpg

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ as long as you take into account waterline hull beam which would probably be close to double on a Lagoon as compared to a similar length Outremer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, he b gb said:

^ as long as you take into account waterline hull beam which would probably be close to double on a Lagoon as compared to a similar length Outremer.

I think that's part of the point he's making, you need those big fat hulls to support the much heavier design. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With a set of line drawings it is really not that difficult to calculate each hulls underwater volume at specific immersion depths.

Once that volume is established simply multiplying the number of cubic feet by 62.5 pounds or litres by one kilogram will translate into accurate weighs.

For owner built boats with plans available the real numbers can be used to accurately apply bottom paint up to a fully laden waterline to avoid overloading and know how much of that paint will be clear of the surface in light ship trim.

I believe that for trimarans, in particular, knowing the volume and associated flotation in pounds/kilos the amas provide when fully immersed should be one of the published dimensions on the spec sheet, references to 100/200/300 % are often rather vague.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks again all for the wisdom. I especially like Zonker's approach that doesn't require dusting off the planimiter. Squinting at the Mumby above, I'd guess 7 t is perhaps optimistic?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mumby’s are light boats but I’d say he’s about a tonne under. The design weight, which I’m pretty sure is light ship, is 7.2 tonnes, but that boat has a lot more to it than the Mumby’s I’ve seen. I would think that the forward cockpit (which incidentally is not standard, that’s the first one I’ve seen like that) would definitely ad some weight due to additional bulkheads, stiffening etc. There would ordinarily just be a couple of empty lockers there.

I’m in Brisbane so will try take a look next week. Too expensive for me though, even for such a new boat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I saw this a few weeks ago in NZ. It’s a bit of an outlier, but lots of boat for the money so I figured I’d take a look while I was there:

https://openoceanmarine.co.nz/boat/novara-54-luxury-performance-catamaran/

Bit of a strange story: the guy that was refitting her died and no one knew anything about her. Somehow a broker managed to dig up some history and apparently she was built by KKG in Austria, the same Yardney  that built the 50’ Victorinox.

She presents pretty well, very tidy actually, and she is a LOT of boat. The foredeck is just enormous. At 13 tonnes she’s not exactly light, but the hulls are pretty narrow and she carries that over 54 foot of waterline. But a few things I really don’t like:

- the daggerboards go down through mini keels (a bit like a CW Atlantic) but they only protrude 1m below the hull!

- she was launched with outboards but then had diesels fitted later. They’re low hour engines but have saildrives and are below the aft berths, so no watertight engine room bulkhead. With shafts I could probably get past this but with saildrives...?

- Although the bows were seemingly extended at some time (I could see the inside curve of the old bow from inside the fwd deck lockers) she seems light on buoyancy up there, especially with that negative sheer.

- Bridgedeck clearance looks marginal at best

There are a few other things I didn’t like (electro-hydraulic mainsheet and traveller controls, rig in serious need of a service, no prodder for A sails, tiny water tankage, no bimini...) but with the money saved at purchase I could spend a bit to get her how I want. She’s certainly a pretty cool platform at anchor, but of course that’s not all I’m looking for.

I figure I’d really need to go sailing to see for myself, but can’t really be arsed to go back. I guess that should tell me all I need to know! I think I just like the price! But I’m interested in some feedback anyway, so go on, be brutal and talk me out of it!!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Insolent said:

So I saw this a few weeks ago in NZ. It’s a bit of an outlier, but lots of boat for the money so I figured I’d take a look while I was there:

https://openoceanmarine.co.nz/boat/novara-54-luxury-performance-catamaran/

Bit of a strange story: the guy that was refitting her died and no one knew anything about her. Somehow a broker managed to dig up some history and apparently she was built by KKG in Austria, the same Yardney  that built the 50’ Victorinox.

She presents pretty well, very tidy actually, and she is a LOT of boat. The foredeck is just enormous. At 13 tonnes she’s not exactly light, but the hulls are pretty narrow and she carries that over 54 foot of waterline. But a few things I really don’t like:

- the daggerboards go down through mini keels (a bit like a CW Atlantic) but they only protrude 1m below the hull!

- she was launched with outboards but then had diesels fitted later. They’re low hour engines but have saildrives and are below the aft berths, so no watertight engine room bulkhead. With shafts I could probably get past this but with saildrives...?

- Although the bows were seemingly extended at some time (I could see the inside curve of the old bow from inside the fwd deck lockers) she seems light on buoyancy up there, especially with that negative sheer.

- Bridgedeck clearance looks marginal at best

There are a few other things I didn’t like (electro-hydraulic mainsheet and traveller controls, rig in serious need of a service, no prodder for A sails, tiny water tankage, no bimini...) but with the money saved at purchase I could spend a bit to get her how I want. She’s certainly a pretty cool platform at anchor, but of course that’s not all I’m looking for.

I figure I’d really need to go sailing to see for myself, but can’t really be arsed to go back. I guess that should tell me all I need to know! I think I just like the price! But I’m interested in some feedback anyway, so go on, be brutal and talk me out of it!!

 

Well, everything I can think of to say is summed up in one very well proven truism - the most expensive thing in the world is a cheap big boat!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Insolent said:

Although the bows were seemingly extended at some time (I could see the inside curve of the old bow from inside the fwd deck lockers) she seems light on buoyancy up there, especially with that negative sheer.

It's the volume below the waterline that counts, not the sheer.  DEFINITELY take a test sail before buying any boat.  It can reveal many things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, I’m not about to buy anything without sailing it. I was referring to reserve buoyancy, which is reduced by reverse sheer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, CapDave said:

Well, everything I can think of to say is summed up in one very well proven truism - the most expensive thing in the world is a cheap big boat!

Yep, very true!

Share this post


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

I guess the price of "Lord Dickie" has just dropped quite a bit...  This is not the kind of walkthrough I wanted to see. :-(

http://www.ultimedia.com/deliver/generic/iframe/mdtk/01164585/src/fxxxux/zone/1?fbclid=IwAR0LrFUPEHuxg5pYqlH8h1aVkMRG_AC_3g7FlHZP-xQhuZisP-AY8G_Q6OU

wow

anymore info on how this came about

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I guess the price of "Lord Dickie" has just dropped quite a bit...  This is not the kind of walkthrough I wanted to see. :-(

http://www.ultimedia.com/deliver/generic/iframe/mdtk/01164585/src/fxxxux/zone/1?fbclid=IwAR0LrFUPEHuxg5pYqlH8h1aVkMRG_AC_3g7FlHZP-xQhuZisP-AY8G_Q6OU

Is there a date for that video?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw it on Facebook yesterday. Apparently a few days old, couldn't find out anything more.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites