![]() |
|
choate 41 for cruising
It seems more sensible to me that a light, strongly built
boat with a fast hull, would carry loads much better than a boxy hull that was heavier to begin with. Wayne.B wrote: It really boils down to what is the impact of your cruising gear on a light displacement boat vs heavy displacement. Agreed. But I think it's easy to overgeneralize in a way that reinforces one's prejudices. ... Let's for the sake of argument say that you've got 4,000 lbs of cruising "stuff", e.g., extra water, extra fuel, larger batteries, extra anchors, chain, windlass, solar panels, cruising canvas, food, refrigeration, tools, spares, dinghy, motor, etc, etc. On a 10,000 lb boat, that is a 40% increase, a considerable amount which will no doubt adversely affect performance. Same gear on a 20,000 lb boat is only a 20% increase. Except that it doesn't quite work that way. What you need to know is how the load will affect the center of gravity and the wetted surface area, mostly... lighter weight boats generally have higher ballast displacement ratios and more reserve stability, and have so much less wetted surface than a crab-crusher that the increase from loading is negligible. A useful figure would be the pounds-per-inch-immersion for each hull. Just a percent of gross displacement isn't going to say anything that can be generalized about how the two boats sail, comparatively. Assuming both were the same speed to begin with, the lighter boat will be more severely impacted. Well, show me two boats of the same LWL with the same PHRF rating, one at 10k and the other at 20k! Another factor is that the heavier hull will have a lot more volume and tend to be more heavily loaded. And the faster boat will have more sail area, so the SA/D ratio isn't going to take such a hit (given equal increases in disp). Of course, my prejudices tend towards performance boats and so I work towards justifying that.... but there is a good bit of logic along with some real world experience in the justification also. Fresh Breezes- Doug King |
choate 41 for cruising
On Mon, 26 Jun 2006 13:06:28 -0400, DSK wrote:
Of course, my prejudices tend towards performance boats and so I work towards justifying that.... but there is a good bit of logic along with some real world experience in the justification also. I did two Newport-Bermuda races on a nice fast Frers 41 displacing about 10,000 lbs give or take. No extreme conditions encountered, just typical offshore 15 to 20 kts, fast reaching through 6 to 8 footers. The boat was extremely uncomfortable with a fast squirrelly motion that defies explanation, but in my view totally unsuited to extended cruising in those conditions. On two other N-Bs with a custom Ron Holland 50 displacing over 40,000 lbs, and in far worse conditions, we had a very comfortable ride. Not exactly an apples to apples comparison because of the length difference, but two very valid data points nevertheless. It's one thing to go out for a couple of days on a light weight boat and bash around a race course, but an entirely different proposition to take off for 6 months or more of serious liveaboard cruising. |
choate 41 for cruising
Wayne.B wrote:
I did two Newport-Bermuda races on a nice fast Frers 41 displacing about 10,000 lbs give or take. No extreme conditions encountered, just typical offshore 15 to 20 kts, fast reaching through 6 to 8 footers. The boat was extremely uncomfortable with a fast squirrelly motion that defies explanation, but in my view totally unsuited to extended cruising in those conditions. understood... and to a large extent agreed... a boat can be relatively light and not be bouncy though. It's a combination of straight D/L ratio, PPI, reserve bouyancy, CG, and weight distribution. It may be that this very same bouncy uncomfortable boat would change it's motion noticably if about 2 tons of cruising were added, and the weight distributed to dampen the bounciness. On two other N-Bs with a custom Ron Holland 50 displacing over 40,000 lbs, and in far worse conditions, we had a very comfortable ride. Not exactly an apples to apples comparison because of the length difference, but two very valid data points nevertheless. It's possible that the D/L ratios of the two boats were not that different. Size alone makes a big difference... aircraft carriers give an extremely smooth ride. It's one thing to go out for a couple of days on a light weight boat and bash around a race course, but an entirely different proposition to take off for 6 months or more of serious liveaboard cruising. As you pointed out, it wouldn't be a light weight boat then ;) Fresh Breezes- Doug King |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:53 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com