Nice troll, Boobie, especially quoting a presumably "famous" book
without attribution. Thus, if anyone contradicts anything, you can
jump in say, "So you think so-and-so doesn't know what he's talking
about?"

Defining "performance" strictly as pointing ability may be of some
value to a round-the-buoys racer, but is meaningless for almost all
other sailors. I just posted the polars for two well known "high
performance" racers, which show that while they may be to achieve very
small angles, the VMG at 45 degrees is almost as good, if not better,
especially in light air. If this is true for a C&C 99, why would the
owner of the Cat 42 who doesn't race give rat's ass if his boat
"falters" at 40 degrees?

Performance is truly defined as how well something fulfills its
intended purpose. Thus, a round-the-buoys racer has to point well to
be considered "high performance." A cruiser has to do other things
well, including providing a stable, comfortable environment; well
ventilated; allowing basic living functions to continue while
underway; provide a comfortable home away from home, regardless of the
destination, plus many other attributes. A "racer/cruiser" should do
both well; if it doesn't, it can't be considered "high performance."

Further, to perform well, a boat should be used for its intended
purpose. In my opinion, a racer that is never raced, or a cruiser
that is never cruised is not a high performance boat regardless of its
pedigree. A fine philosophical point, perhaps, but someone who never
races has no credibility to claim the "best performing racer"
regardless of how the term is defined.

So maybe you have the "best performing flat water day sailer" in the
group, Bob. Congrats.


Capt. Rob wrote:
What constitutes performance in a sailboat design is a common point of
dissension among sailors. Let's cut to the chase. A 40 foot vessel that
sails at 10 knots on a reach, but falters at 40 degrees true is not a
great performing boat in spite of it's formidable downwind ability.
From the perspective of a designer and sailor, performance equates to
the widest range of directional velocity or VMG. In short; the higher
pointing hull is superior regardless of speed or size. A small racer
like a J24 is a better performing boat than a Catalina 42. Does this
mean the J24 is faster. Perhaps at times and in certain conditions, but
the Catalina 42 LWL will prove to be too much for the J24 off the wind.
No matter, the J24 is the better performing boat. Let's try an
off-the-wall example...a Mazda Miata vs. a Ford Crown Victoria. The
Crown Vic, used by police is a big fairly fast car. It's faster than
the Miata and can hold high speeds longer with less driver fatigue. But
the Miata is a better performing car. It's responsive
transmission/engine, fine balance and suspension make it able to turn
faster and return generous feedback to the wheel and brakes. The faster
car is not the better performing car in all cases. Performance is not
all about speed...with cars or boats.
And so it is with sailboats. A J24 is a better performing boat than a
C&C 32, in spite of the fact that the C&C is faster in many situations.
The only other true performance boats on this list are Loco's and
Donal's. You can cry and wine all day and night about it. Jeff can
claim his boat goes 200 knots downwind. Mooron can claim his boat would
fare better over 2000 miles of reaching through tsunamis. Neal can
claim he'll fly a 344% genoa generating an S/AD of 77.9. It doesn't
matter. You can all claim my interior is not suited for Atlantic
crossings. It wasn't bought for that. You can jump up and down that
she'll be uncomfortable in 10 foot swells. We won't take Thomas into
that any time soon.
We bought the best boat for our needs and conditions. What angers so
many folks here is that our choice just happens to easily eclipse
there's and that's more than they can handle.
We simply have the nicest boat here...and the best performing one as
well.

(Yes. I stole the opening from a certain book on racing. So what? It
only afirms my point.)

Capt. Robert B
35s5
NY