I find it interesting that this ultimately pragmatic thread has not
touched on the actual sailing experience itself. I've sailed two cats,
a Gemini and PDQ 36. In both cases my wife and I were bored to tears.
The PDQ was fast off the wind and there was some novelty in that for a
few minutes, but it didn't last. The heeling and motion of a monohul is
part of the romance of sailing for many of us. It feels right, even if
our drinks spill. I think the fellow who posted that while they are
both wind powered, they are too different to truly conpare. No doubt if
I was planning extended cruises with little chance of day and night
sails, a Cat might be the better pick. But for the way most folks sail,
with many daysails and long weekends a mono will be a lot more fun.
Then again, the novelty of heeling and having an exciting ride with the
rail buried can also lose it's charm. My wife and I plan to buy a
larger boat for part-time liveaboard in about 4-5 years and we'll look
at cats again, but I expect we've been spoiled to want the fun factor
more. Maybe our aging bones will change all of that! I do agree that
cats are not attractive, and I'm still young enough (no offense meant
here!) to place that high on my list, though I own a "modern" looking
boat she's still pleasing to my eye.

RB
Beneteau First 35s5 http://hometown.aol.com/bobsprit/index.html
NY

On 12 Jan 2006 06:54:22 -0800, "Capt. Rob" wrote:

I find it interesting that this ultimately pragmatic thread has not
touched on the actual sailing experience itself.

I find it refreshing that there's been nothing but good, factual
information here instead of the usual bunfights. A part of that is
that this particular newsgroup is (generally) civil, but another part
is that catamarans have evolved and matured not only as a "technology"
but as an aesthetic choice (never to be sneered at...look at great but
homely cars that don't sell).

Cats are here to stay, and while I question their suitability for
*all* sailing endeavours, they have in some respects many clear
advantages that appeal to a lot of people. Were you to cruise solely
the South Pacific or the Caribbean, for instance, I think the shallow
draft and downwind performance of cats makes them a logical, and in
some cases, nearly inevitable choice.

I am quite willing these days to state that my reluctance to consider
a cat for self-sufficient world-cruising/liveaboard/ocean
passagemaking has much more to do with my own ignorance and the
still-excessive price premium of cats than of any perception I hold on
their suitability as passagemakers. I do dislike many of the design
choices of cats in terms of "floating condos" with "patio doors",
etc., but many builders and designers are preserving the "cat logic"
and advantages but are keeping the windage down and beefing up the
general seaworthiness of cruising cats.

So while I am tilting toward the known...a 40-45 foot monohull
cruiser...I haven't ruled out buying a cat. I would like to sail one,
though. Despite having PDQ Yachts just down the road, seeing a
cruising cat on Lake Ontario is very rare (Hobies, sure...) and I have
never sailed one, or even been aboard one, nor is there one at my
club, although we've had large cruising cats visit on occasion.
Strangely, there's quite a few trimarans...I see a few F-27s and F-28s
and a good pal just bought a Hobie TriFoiler "for kicks".

I don't know if the paucity of catamarans has to do with price (old,
smallish monos are a steal here currently), conservatism or the
peculiarly short, steep chop you find frequently in Lake Ontario, and
which would perhaps wobble a cat on the beam, but I hope to sail one
at some point, just to see what all the fuss is about.

R.

Bob is absolutely right. If your love of boating is based primarily
on the rush of sailing rail down, and your annual cruise is a weekend
at the marina across the bay, then a cruising cat is not for you.

Ironically, Bob imagines a time in the future when a cat might be the
best match for his needs. I've said that my next sailboat will
probably be a small overnighter, perhaps 22 feet. Right now we're
between long cruises but still spend about 6 weeks each summer aboard,
so the cat still serves our needs.

Capt. Rob wrote:
I find it interesting that this ultimately pragmatic thread has not
touched on the actual sailing experience itself. I've sailed two cats,
a Gemini and PDQ 36. In both cases my wife and I were bored to tears.
The PDQ was fast off the wind and there was some novelty in that for a
few minutes, but it didn't last. The heeling and motion of a monohul is
part of the romance of sailing for many of us. It feels right, even if
our drinks spill. I think the fellow who posted that while they are
both wind powered, they are too different to truly conpare. No doubt if
I was planning extended cruises with little chance of day and night
sails, a Cat might be the better pick. But for the way most folks sail,
with many daysails and long weekends a mono will be a lot more fun.
Then again, the novelty of heeling and having an exciting ride with the
rail buried can also lose it's charm. My wife and I plan to buy a
larger boat for part-time liveaboard in about 4-5 years and we'll look
at cats again, but I expect we've been spoiled to want the fun factor
more. Maybe our aging bones will change all of that! I do agree that
cats are not attractive, and I'm still young enough (no offense meant
here!) to place that high on my list, though I own a "modern" looking
boat she's still pleasing to my eye.

RB
Beneteau First 35s5 http://hometown.aol.com/bobsprit/index.html
NY

Ironically, Bob imagines a time in the future when a cat might be the
best match for his needs.


Thanks for keeping this thread civil, Jeff :-)
In the real world I can fully understand and appreciate the clear
advantages that a 36 foot Cat has over my boat. And I'm sure you can
see my side as well regarding the "fun factor" aspect. But for cruising
and spending long periods aboard, the Cat is a clear winner if you can
meet the price point. I have an open mind about it. You buy what suits
your situation, and sometimes passion (such as mine for a slender
tender hull) can injure a cruisers dreams in a very obvious way.
As I said, if we start looking at a part-time home on the water, a 40
foot Cat is a great compromise vs. a 50 or even 60 foot mono.

RB
Beneteau First 35s5 http://hometown.aol.com/bobsprit/index.html
NY

Interesting perspectives and civil to boot.

I really think if you know the type of sailing you plan to do the right boat
will jump out at you.

If all we (my wife and I) wanted to sail were the East Coast and Caribbean
we would most likely sail a cat. We want to sail across the pond and feel
the mono is safer and more comfortable for that application.

The cat is built with a hatch in the bottom for a reason, they do flip. Not
a problem if there is someone to get you before you get washed off.

Certainly roominess goes to the cat. Cost to purchase goes to the mono.
Speeds are comparable. You can make a lists that go on and on.

In the end you will buy what you want and defend that decision because you
want to validate the decision you made. I include myself in that statement.

Bryan


"Capt. Rob" wrote in message
oups.com...
Ironically, Bob imagines a time in the future when a cat might be the
best match for his needs.


Thanks for keeping this thread civil, Jeff :-)
In the real world I can fully understand and appreciate the clear
advantages that a 36 foot Cat has over my boat. And I'm sure you can
see my side as well regarding the "fun factor" aspect. But for cruising
and spending long periods aboard, the Cat is a clear winner if you can
meet the price point. I have an open mind about it. You buy what suits
your situation, and sometimes passion (such as mine for a slender
tender hull) can injure a cruisers dreams in a very obvious way.
As I said, if we start looking at a part-time home on the water, a 40
foot Cat is a great compromise vs. a 50 or even 60 foot mono.

RB
Beneteau First 35s5 http://hometown.aol.com/bobsprit/index.html
NY

Capt. Rob wrote:
I find it interesting that this ultimately pragmatic thread has not
touched on the actual sailing experience itself. I've sailed two cats,
a Gemini and PDQ 36. In both cases my wife and I were bored to tears.
The PDQ was fast off the wind and there was some novelty in that for a
few minutes, but it didn't last. The heeling and motion of a monohul is
part of the romance of sailing for many of us. It feels right, even if

I agree - the feel of a boat heeled over and the romance of
spilling your drinks can't be beat. My cat sails like
driving a bus most of the time.

But when we hit 15 knots there were a lot of big smiles
aboard. Biggest smile was the woman driving, who had
only ever been on a sailboat once before.

The turning point for me and my wife:

We were anchored at Isla Providencia, a small island in the
Carib. that belongs to Columbia. It's about 100 miles east
of the Nicaraugan coast. Long way from anywhere. We were
sitting out a norther on our monohull. The swell was
wrapping around the headland and was on the beam. The wind
was strong enough that we didn't want to bridle the boat to
face the swells as this would increase the windage. All the
monos in the anchorage were rolling their guts out. One
furthest out was rolling +/- 30 degrees. We wer feeling
seasick at anchor!

There was a single cat in the anchorage. The folks aboard
were having a picnic lunch in the cockpit. Their 2 year old
was having a swing under the davits on their home made
swing. THEIR boat just bobbed up and down and they smiled
as we rowed to shore to escape the rolling aboard...

Evan Gatehouse

In article .com,
"Capt. Rob" wrote:

I find it interesting that this ultimately pragmatic thread has not
touched on the actual sailing experience itself.

I've chartered a half dozen 45-48' cats, been on smaller ones, and of
course a bunch of monohulls. I can get either type to go well, so
that's not an issue.

The space of a cat is wonderful -- and horrible. From experience, if we
have space, we'll fill it up. We'll make a cat heavy pretty fast. There
goes any speed advantage.

Price is certainly a factor. We can cruise for a few years on the cost
difference for the same amount of space.

My major question, though is how long will cats be serviceable? Our
little Xan is 33 years old and seems destined to celebrate 50
comfortably. That seems not unusual for most well-maintained monohulls
I see.

I saw what happened to a Gemini that smacked a wall. It wasn't going
that fast, but both hulls shattered and the construction revealed
wasn't pretty. (Truth be told, our old Macgregor seemed more solidly
constructed.) Friend on an "older" (late 80's) cat is discovering some
interesting structural projects.

Cats are built relatively lightly, and that's a good selling point, but
will it hurt them in the long run? New Hunters and Macgregors certainly
are capable of what they're designed for, but I wouldn't trust older
ones for serious cruising.


--
Jere Lull
Xan-a-Deux ('73 Tanzer 28 #4 out of Tolchester, MD)
Xan's Pages: http://members.dca.net/jerelull/X-Main.html
Our BVI FAQs (290+ pics) http://homepage.mac.com/jerelull/BVI/

"Jere Lull" wrote in message
...
In article .com,
"Capt. Rob" wrote:

I find it interesting that this ultimately pragmatic thread has not
touched on the actual sailing experience itself.

I've chartered a half dozen 45-48' cats, been on smaller ones, and of
course a bunch of monohulls. I can get either type to go well, so
that's not an issue.

Same here.

The space of a cat is wonderful -- and horrible. From experience, if we
have space, we'll fill it up. We'll make a cat heavy pretty fast. There
goes any speed advantage.

And, safety. One should not overload a multi.

Price is certainly a factor. We can cruise for a few years on the cost
difference for the same amount of space.

Yup... they are more expensive.

My major question, though is how long will cats be serviceable? Our
little Xan is 33 years old and seems destined to celebrate 50
comfortably. That seems not unusual for most well-maintained monohulls
I see.

I saw what happened to a Gemini that smacked a wall. It wasn't going
that fast, but both hulls shattered and the construction revealed
wasn't pretty. (Truth be told, our old Macgregor seemed more solidly
constructed.) Friend on an "older" (late 80's) cat is discovering some
interesting structural projects.

Cats are built relatively lightly, and that's a good selling point, but
will it hurt them in the long run? New Hunters and Macgregors certainly
are capable of what they're designed for, but I wouldn't trust older
ones for serious cruising.

Definitely interesting questions/points... no idea really, but there are a
lot of older multis out there that are still going.

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
"Jere Lull" wrote in message
...

My major question, though is how long will cats be serviceable? Our
little Xan is 33 years old and seems destined to celebrate 50
comfortably. That seems not unusual for most well-maintained monohulls


To be frank, one needs to compare apples with apples. Many modern day
performance monos are very lightly built and not destined for longevity. The
same is true for higher performance multis.

There are many cruising monos that last an age and certainly, here in Oz,
many examples of cruising multis that are well built, will never win a race
because they are a bit heavier, but last very well.

My last cruising cat was built in 1983 and when I sold it at age 21 years
the survey found no issues with the structure of the boat. The gelcoat was a
bit faded but had not a single crack. Being vinylester/airex there was no
osmosis.
It surely had at least another 21 years.

She was a little slow by multi standards- 150 mile days were routine but 200
mile days would have needed a racing crew pushing hard. Nothing ever broke.

Everything is a compromise.

Peter HK

In article .com,
"Capt" Rob" wrote:
I find it interesting that this ultimately pragmatic thread has not
touched on the actual sailing experience itself.


And yet you haven't sailed catamarans enough to say what the
"sailing experience" is.

Jere Lull wrote:
I've chartered a half dozen 45-48' cats, been on smaller ones, and of
course a bunch of monohulls. I can get either type to go well, so
that's not an issue.


It shouldn't be a big issue. Multis do sail & steer
differently. And not all multis steer the same, either.


The space of a cat is wonderful -- and horrible. From experience, if we
have space, we'll fill it up. We'll make a cat heavy pretty fast. There
goes any speed advantage.


Also more thumping under the bridge deck.
But even a heavy cat is as fast, or maybe faster, than a
heavy monohull. And more fuel efficient when motoring (maybe
I shouldn't mention that).

About space... my personal opinion is that the roominess of
multis if oexaggerated. They don't really have more capacity
or cubic, it's just less cave-like. They do have bigger
cockpits and immensely more deck space.


Price is certainly a factor. We can cruise for a few years on the cost
difference for the same amount of space.


Now there's a BIG issue... although the cost of multihulls
is dropping pretty fast on the 2nd-hand market. As more &
more charter cats come out of service & into the market, I
think we'll see prices level off.


My major question, though is how long will cats be serviceable? Our
little Xan is 33 years old and seems destined to celebrate 50
comfortably. That seems not unusual for most well-maintained monohulls
I see.

I saw what happened to a Gemini that smacked a wall. It wasn't going
that fast, but both hulls shattered and the construction revealed
wasn't pretty. (Truth be told, our old Macgregor seemed more solidly
constructed.) Friend on an "older" (late 80's) cat is discovering some
interesting structural projects.

Cats are built relatively lightly, and that's a good selling point, but
will it hurt them in the long run? New Hunters and Macgregors certainly
are capable of what they're designed for, but I wouldn't trust older
ones for serious cruising.


Interesting point. It may be that multis are stressed more
as well as more lightly built... but I don't see why one
couldn't last as long as a monohull, given good care.