Shama Lama Ding Dong! - ORC 57 Is Alive

ProaSailor

Super Anarchist
5,925
702
Oregon
...the ORC is more modern with higher bridge deck clearance but I would say less interior space due to finer hulls...?
The difference in bridge deck clearance is insignificant:
  • ORC 57 Bridgedeck clearance : 1.07 m = 42.13 inches
  • A57 Wing Clearance : 41" at Design W/L
Not so sure the ORC 57 hulls are finer either? The ORC 57 hulls are fat! It sure looks to me like the A57 has less windage.
marsaudon-composites-orc-57-qaptur-74.jpg


A7_bows.jpg
 

mpenman

Member
192
144
Pompano Beach
I like them both but the ORC is more modern with higher bridge deck clearance but I would say less interior space due to finer hulls...?
The forward cockpit on the A57 is great in warm weather but cold and wet where I mostly sail.
I expect the ORC to be quicker all around so that and modern look it would be the ORC for me
I really like the ORC and I prefer wider hulls. Should contribute to increased righting moment, which means you can carry more canvas relative to the wind. Also means a little heavier. If you review the hulls they certainly flare a lot more than the 57 above the waterline to increase the interior volume whilst keeping the hull fineness ratio the same. Bridge deck clearance I bet is almost identical.

With the same sail area, I'm not sure I would still give the nod to the ORC, it would be a little too close to call. They have reverse bows which means they have all 57 feet touching the water. Call me old fashioned, but I like a TON of buoyancy in the forward section of the hulls. When running in strong winds and big waves, always comforting to see the hulls giving you a reassuring wink that they're not going under.

Interestingly enough, if it's strictly cruising in colder climates then I would take the forward cockpit over the aft helm position but you do give up interior space. My reasoning is that all sail handling is performed like on the ORC, but after you're done you quickly retreat to the cockpit. ORC necessitates a few more steps back to the aft cockpit.

Like you I prefer the modern look. The 57 needs to come back with a redesigned salon/house that is galley up and the house stretches the whole way across, ala the A47/49 mastfoil and hull#2 of the A72.

I'm also slightly biased towards Chris' boats, but the ORC would be high on my list, if not at the top.
 

ProaSailor

Super Anarchist
5,925
702
Oregon
I really like the ORC and I prefer wider hulls. Should contribute to increased righting moment, which means you can carry more canvas relative to the wind. Also means a little heavier. If you review the hulls they certainly flare a lot more than the 57 above the waterline to increase the interior volume whilst keeping the hull fineness ratio the same. Bridge deck clearance I bet is almost identical.

With the same sail area, I'm not sure I would still give the nod to the ORC, it would be a little too close to call. They have reverse bows which means they have all 57 feet touching the water. Call me old fashioned, but I like a TON of buoyancy in the forward section of the hulls. When running in strong winds and big waves, always comforting to see the hulls giving you a reassuring wink that they're not going under.

Interestingly enough, if it's strictly cruising in colder climates then I would take the forward cockpit over the aft helm position but you do give up interior space. My reasoning is that all sail handling is performed like on the ORC, but after you're done you quickly retreat to the cockpit. ORC necessitates a few more steps back to the aft cockpit.

Like you I prefer the modern look. The 57 needs to come back with a redesigned salon/house that is galley up and the house stretches the whole way across, ala the A47/49 mastfoil and hull#2 of the A72.

I'm also slightly biased towards Chris' boats, but the ORC would be high on my list, if not at the top.
Flared hulls may fool the L/B measurement but they don't fool the waves. In any significant swell, the flared topsides and underwing bulges for interior space will be awash and slow the boat down and/or increase vertical acceleration (bounce).

Do they have the same sail area? Difficult to tell from specs but the extra 6.5 feet of mast height suggests the ORC 57 has more sail area than the A57. I'd prefer to have less sail area and be equally fast.
  • Sail Area Main A57: 983 sq/ft - ORC 57: 107 m² (1,152 sq/ft)
  • Sail Area Genoa A57: 810 sq/ft - ORC 57: 84 m² (904 sq/ft)
I have found it very difficult to get standing headroom above 42 inches of bridge deck clearance while keeping height overall from getting out of hand. The A57 does this by providing standing headroom only in the center of the salon; the sides are lower, suitable only for seating.
 

mpenman

Member
192
144
Pompano Beach
^^^^^ This.

But then I would sell it immediately and buy something I could afford to run!
I've had numerous other cats........ my Atlantic cats have been the cheapest to run by far. Simple systems, well built hulls. Good solid reliable rig......no fancy stuff. Amazing how simple keeps things easy and 'relatively' easy to maintain.
 

tofi33

New member
12
1
lisbon

ProaSailor

Super Anarchist
5,925
702
Oregon
this one looks awesome, but it's hard to find info about. look for Unlimited C53
Thanks. Quite heavy according to that page, compared to the A57 and ORC 57 - 32,408 lbs.
I found it buried (hidden) on the builder's site; it says 28,000 lbs.: https://adriasail.it/unlimited/?lang=en

Unlimited C53 Catamarans
BY MULTIHULLS MAGAZINE ON MAY 15, 2018
https://multihullsmag.com/unlimited-c53-catamarans-2/ (four year old fluff)
 
Last edited:
Top