"Maxprop" wrote in message
ink.net...

"JG" wrote in message

"Maxprop" wrote in message


"JG" wrote in message

Yup, you're clearly very upset with me. Why's that?

You really do need to seek some professional help, Jon.

Starting to rant there Maxipad? You keep saying the same thing over and
over.

nice pics Doug
Scout

"DSK" wrote in message
...
Lady Pilot wrote:
Thanks for the pictures, Doug.

LP (nice boat)

You're welcome.

DSK

What's wrong with Jeanneau? That name has gone on a lot of different boats
built in different plants. Some are very respectably well-built.

Maxprop wrote:
They aren't bad, but they really are no better than Beneteau or Dufour.

Did you not process that above info some how?

You may have checked out a Jeanneau built for charter, or a BenT built
in SC to compete with Hunters & Catalinas.

Listen carefully- not *all* Jeanneaus were built by the same people same
plant etc etc. Got it?

Some Jeanneaus are quite well built. For a while they were building
semi-custom boats with Kevlar hulls. Robert Perry once wrote that a
Jeanneau he sailed was "one of the best built boats I've seen."




They are all boats priced to sell in a range that is similar to or slightly
more than Catalina and Hunter boats.

No, they're not.

I think there is relatively little point in comparing custom built boats
to mass-produced ones.


Granted some of them are custom or semi-custom. Especially Morris,
Hinckley, Shannon, and Kantor. The others are generally production boats,
but far from the production levels as, say, Beneteau, which is the largest
producer of yachts in the world.

You can build a lot and still build well. You can also build custom
boats that are crap. It all depends on where the money goes.





That said, the best built boat I have ever personally inspected was an
Oyster. But Kirie has also done impressive job on many of their boats, and
the Dufour built Dynamique is the equal of any other semi-custom you can
name.


Haven't seen the Dynamique--only photos. Agreed that Oyster is an
impressive boat. The finest boat I've ever seen was a Stellar, unless we're
talking about megayachts.

Never heard of a Stellar.

The Oyster was extremely impressive. It was like a textbook example of
how to build a boat perfectly.

The Fleming line of motor yachts is also quite impressively well built.





Max your emotional commitment to political jokes is getting the better of
you again....


Huh?


Re-naming your French fries?

DSK

To some extent, yes. However when the horsepower available is far in
excess of anything the prop & the hull are going to keep up with, then
what is the purpose?


Maxprop wrote:
You're preaching to the choir on this point. But to make conversation, some
folks just seem to thrive on power, despite the skewed relationship between
power vs. hull design vs. displacement, etc.

Sure.

I love horsepower, but it should have some purpose. Driving an F1 car to
the grocery store makes no sense at all. Boats with huge amounts of
horsepower which don't do anything except make loud noise & burn fuel is
kind of pointless & stupid.


... I demo'd a Nordic Tug 37 this
past summer and was impressed by how fast the thing could actually go when
planing. But it threw a monstrous wake, was noisy, and would probably get
to a typical destination only about half an hour faster than if at hull
speed. The premium, however, was fuel cost: about 6 times that of 8kts.
for roughly twice the speed. Not a good trade, IMO.

Agreed. But the Nordic Tugs have always been overpowered, it's just been
getting silly lately. The worst part of the trade-off is that to get
that "high speed" capability, you make the boat a lot heavier, more
expensive, sacrifice steering at low speed, make more wake at low speed,
and give up a lot of internal volume to engine & fuel.




Nope. It will be in the 40'-44' range, which should easily do 7kts. under
power, and somewhat better under sail in the right conditions. We've looked
at a Cheoy Lee Pedrick 41, a Passport (Perry) 40, and a Baltic Doug Peterson
42, any of which would fit the bill.

Look at a Nordic 40 or 44. Another Perry design.

The Baltic DP is a great boat.



There are a lot of better boats available *much* cheaper IMHO.


The quality of the Sagas is excellent

Not my impression of them. Have you looked carefully in all the nooks &
crannies?

... and they are very fast for boats with
such an accomodating cruising interior.

Again I disagree. They're pretty fast, but not to touch a *fast* 43
footer. And they're not all that roomy, they're too narrow. Makes them
tender, too.

I understand there is a Saga 43 that sails to a 78 PHRF rating on the
Chesapeake, but the one here that I've sailed would have a hard time
being competitive at 100+. And that's not fast for a 40+ footer.

But I should be careful, we have a friends with one. It's a really
really nice boat. For the money, they could have had a Baltic or
Dynamique, but they are happy with the Saga and that's what counts.

Fresh Breezes- Doug King

"DSK" wrote

I love horsepower, but it should have some purpose. Driving an F1
car to
the grocery store makes no sense at all. Boats with huge amounts of
horsepower which don't do anything except make loud noise & burn
fuel is
kind of pointless & stupid.

This is America, where people buy Hummers to drive to the mall.
--
Merry Christmas......
Scotty

"Scout" wrote:

Hey Donal,
I just sold one of my bikes to one of your countrymen at
http://www.barronbikes.com/
Scout

How could you sell a motorcyle to Ireland when you live in the USA?

Are shipping costs that low nowadays?

LP

"Capt. Neal®" wrote:

"Lady Pilot" wrote :

"Capt. Neal®" wrote:



"Lady Pilot" wrote:

"Joe" wrote

I was going to get Bob a directing job fiming the flick version but
after his dis'n me as bb Im not so sure.

Let me know if you ever get the movie project off the ground. I have
a
friend that might be interested. He was co-Producer on the Godfather
III.
He's back home now in OKC. Last time we had dinner together he was
working
on a movie about Wiley Post and was needing technical advise on stunt
pilots, etc.

http://theoscarsite.com/whoswho5/frederickson_g.htm

Of course for my help, you will have to get me an actor's role in the
movie.
:-)

LP

Oh oh! Maybe BinaryBill is right about your being a man.
A woman would surely ask for an actress role, not an actor's role.

Only in your dreams, cedar bucket boy...

Maybe you've been out to sea too long, sailor.
Do you call your mailman a mailwoman?
Maybe you should get up with the times, and I quote from:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actor

A female actor is an actress, although an increasingly large group feel
that
the term "actor" should be redefined as being gender-neutral and used for
both men and women.

I have a sick feeling in the pit of my stomach.

Maybe you ate too much Key Lime Pie?

LP


Ah Hah! Caught you in yet another inconsistency, dear *Lady* Pilot.

No you didn't...

In previous posts, you claim to be a conservative woman. Yet, in this
post,
you are embracing and advocating for liberal politically correct speech.
How can this be? I suppose you will also get upset if I hold a door open
for you?

I would be elated for you to hold the door open for me, Captain. If you
didn't I wouldn't think so highly of you than I do now.


First, she's a conservative woman.

Now, she's a conservative woman with a liberal bent.

It follows that she could easily be a liberal man. Good Grief!

You have heard my voice and you still make scripts for plays like you do?
rofl

Gotcha!

You probably wish in your dreams that you Gotcha any warm attractive female
body that crosses your path...

CN (too intelligent to be fooled by any sock)

Did you forget my address, again?

LP ;-)

"Scout" wrote:
"Capt. Neal®" wrote
CN (too intelligent to be fooled by any sock)

Let he who has never been thrilled by a sock cast the first stone!
Scout

Amen!

LP

"DSK" wrote in message

Maxprop wrote:

Nope. It will be in the 40'-44' range, which should easily do 7kts.
under power, and somewhat better under sail in the right conditions.
We've looked at a Cheoy Lee Pedrick 41, a Passport (Perry) 40, and a
Baltic Doug Peterson 42, any of which would fit the bill.


Look at a Nordic 40 or 44. Another Perry design.

I remember when those boats first hit the market, and they looked great.
Unfortunately they seem rather rare. None anywhere around here, and not too
many on Yachtworld.com either.

The Baltic DP is a great boat.

The one we saw was a bit beat up, but could be reconditioned. I'd like to
find a better example. We also saw a Baltic J/V and it, too, was a touch
under the weather. The Baltics are among our first choices for a
replacement to our current boat.

The quality of the Sagas is excellent

Not my impression of them. Have you looked carefully in all the nooks &
crannies?

Not really. A friend has an '02 Saga 43, and on the surface it looks like a
quality machine, but we didn't actually did into the boat. It is very fast,
however, and handles wonderfully in a trailing sea.

... and they are very fast for boats with such an accomodating cruising
interior.

Again I disagree. They're pretty fast, but not to touch a *fast* 43
footer. And they're not all that roomy, they're too narrow. Makes them
tender, too.

I didn't detect this when sailing our friend's boat. We had 20-30kts. with
5-7' rollers on the port quarter for a 35 statute mile trip, which we made
in just over 3 hours, pierhead to pierhead. I tend to favor narrower boats
for some reason. Perhaps it has something to do with watching all the
newer, beamier plastic fantastics pushing tons of water out of the way,
leaving a substantial wake, dragging transoms, etc. Probably a visceral
reaction, rather than one based upon facts and performance.

I understand there is a Saga 43 that sails to a 78 PHRF rating on the
Chesapeake, but the one here that I've sailed would have a hard time being
competitive at 100+. And that's not fast for a 40+ footer.

But I should be careful, we have a friends with one. It's a really really
nice boat. For the money, they could have had a Baltic or Dynamique, but
they are happy with the Saga and that's what counts.

As I mentioned earlier, they're all too new for us to consider. I'm not
willing to take the whopping first several years' depreciation on any boat,
so we're not considering anything newer than roughly eight years old. No
Sagas in that category. I'd rather have a Swan or Baltic anyway. And I
just got a lead on a pristine Passport 40 today. We'll take a look at it
when the snow begins to melt, if it's still available.

Max

"DSK" wrote in message

What's wrong with Jeanneau? That name has gone on a lot of different
boats built in different plants. Some are very respectably well-built.

Maxprop wrote:
They aren't bad, but they really are no better than Beneteau or Dufour.

Did you not process that above info some how?

You may have checked out a Jeanneau built for charter, or a BenT built in
SC to compete with Hunters & Catalinas.

Listen carefully- not *all* Jeanneaus were built by the same people same
plant etc etc. Got it?

Some Jeanneaus are quite well built. For a while they were building
semi-custom boats with Kevlar hulls. Robert Perry once wrote that a
Jeanneau he sailed was "one of the best built boats I've seen."

Your derision of my comment makes the presumption that I might actually give
a rat's posterior about Jeanneau boats enough to research them and determine
which are made where and in what manner. You may be rest assured that I
don't. But for the sake of discussion, I've seen roughly 20 Jeanneaus over
the past 20 years. Some were smaller, rather austere-looking cruisers, and
some were more opulent, such as the 54 I was on this past August. And I'd
have to conclude that they all seemed to come from the same basic design
philosophy, which is, essentially, that they are built to a price, not built
to a superior quality level and priced accordingly. All were
Bendytoy-quality boats, at least to my eyes. Bob Perry knows far more about
boats than I'll ever know, so I'll defer to his evaluation. However, if
Jeanneau truly makes semi-custom boats of superior quality, they are
succeeding at keeping it a well-guarded secret.

They are all boats priced to sell in a range that is similar to or
slightly more than Catalina and Hunter boats.

No, they're not.

Granted some of them are custom or semi-custom. Especially Morris,
Hinckley, Shannon, and Kantor. The others are generally production
boats, but far from the production levels as, say, Beneteau, which is the
largest producer of yachts in the world.

You can build a lot and still build well. You can also build custom boats
that are crap. It all depends on where the money goes.

True, but you cite the exceptions rather than the rule. The boats I've
named above have absolutely no reputation for building "crap." The boats
you seem to be defending have a lengthy reputation for building
cookie-cutter boats for the low-end market and for the charter market.

Haven't seen the Dynamique--only photos. Agreed that Oyster is an
impressive boat. The finest boat I've ever seen was a Stellar, unless
we're talking about megayachts.

Never heard of a Stellar.

Custom. Premium in every respect. Similar in design and appearance to some
of the newer Trintellas. Not sure where they're made.

The Oyster was extremely impressive. It was like a textbook example of how
to build a boat perfectly.

The Fleming line of motor yachts is also quite impressively well built.

I've been aboard a couple of Flemings, and they are very nice. Not exactly
my thing, however. Have you seen a new Symbol 45 Pilothouse fast trawler?
Most impressive, especially considering the price.

Re-naming your French fries?

LOL. Nah--I've always called them "Frogs." At least I capitalize it.

Max