|
Best 34 foot blue water cruiser
Matt/Meribeth Pedersen wrote:
Most of these can be had for decent prices (sub $30k) and are a little more conservative in design, a lot of them have centerboards. Hello Matt/Meribeth, Wow, impressive list of boats! Thanks for the post! I'd be interested in knowing which of these you liked best and which you've had the opportunity to sail under reduced sail and how they handled. I'm very interested in your comments, specially about pros and cons of centerboards. I just thought it might be yet another thing that could break down so I wasn't considering centerboard boats for my dream trip (even if it meant missing out on shallow anchorages). I may start a new thread on this topic one of these days, seeing as the original post turned into mud-slinging central. Thanks, Bob Whitaker "Free Spirit" |
Best 34 foot blue water cruiser... Jax warning
Subject: Best 34 foot blue water cruiser... Jax warning
From: (JAXAshby) such as "cruising" a sailboat down Interstate 95 and claiming it to be a more accomplished sailing experience compared to those who sail a few dozen miles every weekend? Is that true! LOL Capt. Bill |
Best 34 foot blue water cruiser
I have told about
enough of mine ... .... 275 miles down Interstate 95 is a "sailing experience"? well, for Nimrof 19 owners, maybe ... that the real sailors in the crowd can make up their own minds. DSK |
Best 34 foot blue water cruiser... Jax warning
yes, dougies said that.
such as "cruising" a sailboat down Interstate 95 and claiming it to be a more accomplished sailing experience compared to those who sail a few dozen miles every weekend? Is that true! LOL Capt. Bill |
Best 34 foot blue water cruiser
A fellow "Texan" wrote:
Considering that the poster said he was out of Corpus Christi and most of the bays and anything out of the channel in that area is ultra shallow, having a centerboard boat is an excellent idea. Hello fellow "Texan", Thanks for your input! Even though I have sailed in Corpus Christi it's unfortunately not my home turf (but my dream adventure would probably start out of Corpus or Houston). I read an explanation about why Corpus bay is so shallow. As a fellow Texan you probably already know this, but it turns out that at the end of the last ice age what is now the bay was just the flood plain for the Nueces River. As the Ice Age ended the ocean level rose, filling the plain and creating the bay. Pretty neat I thought when I read that! I currently have a boat with a 4 foot draft that allows me to get by, specially on my home turf. I would be interested in your views on centerboards. As you mentioned, these are definitely a must on Corpus... but how about for extended passages? They are great if you want to anchor in the shallows, but I'd hate to have one more thing that could possibly break? One of these days I may start a new thread to see if we have better luck seeing as the original post has unfortunately turned into a mud-slinging debacle. Bob Whitaker "Free Spirit" |
Offensive Post (was: Best 34 foot blue water cruiser)
Brian Whatcott wrote:
I find the tone of the following post, offensive. Why is it always the pseudonymous posters who want to let rip in this way? Hello Brian, Most newsgroups have many long standing feuds, and "rec.boats.cruising" appears to be no exception. Such a shame. Consider, if you will, my innocent sounding post of a few days ago. I was really looking forward to a good exchange of pros-and-cons of different sailboats. I can't sail them all, but I was really looking forward to sharing knowledge with other sailors. I wanted to know what different people liked about different boats. But out of more than 30 posts, only 3 posts so far were on-topic (thanks to Frank, Matt, and a fellow "Texan"). The rest of the bandwidth has been consumed by long-standing rivals trying to outdo one another. It makes it really difficult to wade through the noise. Such a shame... Such a waste of human knowledge... One of these days I may start a new thread to see if we have better luck. Thanks, Bob Whitaker "Free Spirit" |
Best 34 foot blue water cruiser
Doug "Fresh Toilet" King wrote:
Well, Bob, I wasn't really trying to be snotty. Sorry if I made you cry. OK Doug, I'll take your word for it. I accept your apology. Also, thanks for your genuine concern for my emotional well-being. But let me allay your fears by confiding in you that I am actually quite amused by your posts. Defeating you at your own game provides for great sport even if it's not very challenging. Just go right on believing that Cals are magnificently constructed boats, and that anybody saying otherwise is just being snotty. Sorry Doug but you are once again mistaken. I already explained this to you in great detail in my previous post, but let me explain it again, and this time I'll try to use small words. Since you are obviously confused, let me point out again that the snotty part of your post was when you tried to poke fun at my usage of the term "blue water" by saying that it made me sound like "Tidy Bowl" man. You have already acknowledged above that you were not trying to be snotty, and I'll take your word for it. If you were not _trying_ to be snotty, then perhaps being snotty comes naturally to you without even trying? Can you please elucidate? (Oh... sorry... I promised to use small words... that means "clarify"). If you were not being snotty, then the only other possible explanation is that you were being genuine when you confused the term "blue water" with toilet disinfectants. As stated previously, perhaps your life experiences have made you predisposed to making this embarrassing association? If you were truly not being snotty, then far be it from me to poke fun of you for making this genuine mistake. Pardon me for treading on your illusions. Sigh! ... Wrong, _AGAIN_ Doug. You are not treading on my illusions. You are actually reinforcing the impression I already had from your previous post. You are also reinforcing the old cliche about one rotten apple spoiling the whole barrel. And that's a shame because it seems like you have many things of value to say. It seems that (if you wanted) you could be a contributor whose opinion people respected and someone whose posts are always read eagerly by other members. It's a shame you choose not to be. It seems like you have long-standing feuds with many group members, and that's OK... By all means you should stand your ground and fight "the-good-fight". But don't burn your bridges, Doug. My advice is that you turn the "snot-meter" _WAY_ down when replying to other members with whom you are still in good standing, or when replying to unknown entities. Fresh Toilets- Bob Whitaker P.S. I already extended you an olive branch last time. Even though I was disappointed you didn't take it, I will do so again by offering once more to change the topic. All you have to say is: "--Touche!" and bow gracefully and I'll consider it water under the bridge... In that spirit, have you had a chance to sail on a Cape Dory? What did you like and what didn't you like about the boat? Someone in my club has one but I haven't had a chance to sail on it yet. DSK wrote in message . .. Bob Whitaker wrote: Now, Doug, wouldn't it have been a lot nicer if you had just answered the original question politely rather than trying to be snotty with your post? Well, Bob, I wasn't really trying to be snotty. Sorry if I made you cry. Just go right on believing that Cals are magnificently constructed boats, and that anybody saying otherwise is just being snotty. Pardon me for treading on your illusions. Bye Doug King |
Best 34 foot blue water cruiser
|
Best 34 foot blue water cruiser... Jax warning
JAXAshby wrote: yes, dougies said that. It's as true as the rest of Jax's posts.... ie only a fantasy... Ask Jax about the scary rocks around Cape Hattaras, or submarines attacking Seattle. DSK |
Best 34 foot blue water cruiser
bb wrote:
I thought you were discussing Chuck's boat. What kind of boat does Doug have that you find so offensive? Same as Chuck's. Of course, BittyBill has never seen it in real life. This makes him an expert... as much as all the rest of his non-real-life crapola. BTW here are some pictures http://community.webshots.com/album/63279185YQtgSA Fresh Breezes- Doug King |
Offensive Post (was: Best 34 foot blue water cruiser)
|
Offensive Post
First, I apologize for my part in continuing the offensiveness. It was
perhaps a mistake to treat "JAXAshby" and "BinaryBill" as deserving any reply, for reasons that they make obvious. (Bob Whitaker)wrote: Most newsgroups have many long standing feuds, and "rec.boats.cruising" appears to be no exception. Such a shame. Brian Whatcott wrote: My problem arises because I had access to arpanet-style newsgroups fifteen years ago, for a spell. People mis-spoke then, as now. But when they did, you can be sure that people spoke up and let their distaste be known. So the level stayed civilized. I don't feel the need to invite guttermouths into my study even now, but when they arrive, I believe I would be well-served as would you, to let them know how I feel about their stuff. The problem here is that these two clowns (if indeed they are two different people, my suspicion is that they are both sock puppets) are more entertained by outraged & offended reactions. My intention was to try and pretend it was a serious discussion and maybe some good would come of it all. Best thing to do with trolls is ignore them though. DSK |
Best 34 foot blue water cruiser
On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 07:53:38 -0500, DSK wrote:
bb wrote: I thought you were discussing Chuck's boat. What kind of boat does Doug have that you find so offensive? Same as Chuck's. Seems ok to me. Actually makes a lot of sense. Wish I had one and just might some day. bb |
Best 34 foot blue water cruiser... Jax warning
dougies? you do not now remember you claimed you trailered your Nimrod 19 275
miles (you were specific as to miles) and that you considered this a feat of derring do? tipping the cups last night, were you? yes, dougies said that. It's as true as the rest of Jax's posts.... ie only a fantasy... Ask Jax about the scary rocks around Cape Hattaras, or submarines attacking Seattle. DSK |
Best 34 foot blue water cruiser
Damn, talk about a tempest in a teapot.
From the vitriolic exchange that has been flying back and forth the last couple of days, I thought it was gonna be something **UGLY**. It's certainly not something I'd put on my boat, as it just looks too fake (something about the wide open cabin directly underneath it), but it's hardly anything worth wasting band width or raising your blood pressure over. You guys need to go play with your respective boats. Are they still covered in snow where you live or something? bb wrote: BTW here are some pictures http://community.webshots.com/album/63279185YQtgSA Fresh Breezes- Doug King -- Dan Best - (707) 431-1662, Healdsburg, CA 95448 B-2/75 1977-1979 Tayana 37 #192, "Tricia Jean" http://rangerbest.home.comcast.net/TriciaJean.JPG |
Best 34 foot blue water cruiser
It's a Sundowner 36. I think the same designer also worked on the AMC
pacer when he wasn't moonlighting for Fisher Price. The Sundowner line, (30, 32, 36), was drawn by Jack Sarin. Here's a link where you can view some of the other AMC Pacers he has been turning out......... http://www.jacksarin.com/sarin/index.html |
Best 34 foot blue water cruiser
It's a Sundowner 36. I think the same designer also worked on the AMC
pacer when he wasn't moonlighting for Fisher Price. Gould 0738 wrote: The Sundowner line, (30, 32, 36), was drawn by Jack Sarin. Here's a link where you can view some of the other AMC Pacers he has been turning out......... http://www.jacksarin.com/sarin/index.html Thanks for the link Chuck... never saw this before. That Guardian 85 is a very cool looking boat. I wonder what it's fuel consumption is? It is interesting that he has done so many gov't service and commercial vessels... much more demanding IMHO Doug King |
Best 34 foot blue water cruiser
G I kinda "like" the stack.
otn DSK wrote: bb wrote: I thought you were discussing Chuck's boat. What kind of boat does Doug have that you find so offensive? Same as Chuck's. Of course, BittyBill has never seen it in real life. This makes him an expert... as much as all the rest of his non-real-life crapola. BTW here are some pictures http://community.webshots.com/album/63279185YQtgSA Fresh Breezes- Doug King |
Best 34 foot blue water cruiser
I notice he's so embarrassed by his "Sundowner designs" that he is
careful not to mention them, even briefly, on his website. Very smart on his part. T The Sundowners were designed over 20 years ago. The site features his more recent work. The Sundowner pilot house looks like a late 1950's California fast food joint. All it needs is a little neon framing the windows, and maybe some golden arches for the deluxe model. Would you like some fries with that? LOL! Thank Providence I'm only cursed with a morphodite boat. A person may not always own what he currently owns, but he will always be what he is. You did say, "Supersize me?" :-) |
Best 34 foot blue water cruiser
|
Offensive Post
DSK wrote:
....snip... Best thing to do with trolls is ignore them though. Of course, this is the best advice; but we're (all) only human. It may be cruel; but sometimes I just *hafta* comment/respond when it comes to Jax et al. I mean, without Jax, we wouldn't know that dead reckoning is illegal, that the Gulf Stream is extremely difficult to find, that you can sail upwind under bare poles because of "vectors," and on, and on. For me, the amusement value is worth the price of admission (cluttered bandwidth). Mostly. Frank |
Offensive Post
DSK wrote:
....snip... Best thing to do with trolls is ignore them though. That is, of course, the best thing to do; but we're (all) only human. Cruel as it may be, I sometimes just *hafta* reply to something Jax or one of the other loons says. Ya gotta love 'em. How else would we know that it's illegal to use dead reckoning? Or that the Gulf Stream is extremely difficult to find? Or that you can sail upwind under bare poles because of "vectors?" And an endless stream of other outre bits. Frank |
Best 34 foot blue water cruiser
WaIIy wrote:
You have one beautiful boat. Thank you, WaIIy. It's a great boat, a bit more varnish than ideal, but we are having a marvelous time with it and genuinely appreciate all compliments. Fresh Breezes- Doug King |
Best 34 foot blue water cruiser
(some snippage for brevity)
Bob Whitaker wrote: Thanks for the input. What are the features you like most about them? Frank Maier wrote: The boat which owns my heart, my "Platonic ideal" best boat, is the Freedom 38. I fell in love with Freedoms after about 20 years of sailing, both racing and cruising. When Garry Hoyt/Freedom/TPI produced these boats, it was, for me, an epiphany. Holy ****! Why hasn't this been done before? Well, it sorta had been. Catboats have been around for quite a while. Just materials, like carbonfiber masts, and specifics of design were the innovations which Hoyt gave us with the Freedom line. Are you talking about the late 1980s Freedom 38? IIRC that one was a Gary Mull design. A lot of the same concepts from the original Freedom 40 (one my favorites despite a dislike of 'crab crushers') were carried forward, and the Freedoms were all quite solidly built. Here's one with the "cat-sloop" rig, they also came as cat-ketches. http://www.sanjuansailing.com/charters/sparrow/ ... To give you a "sales pitch" for the idea of buying a Freedom 32... The single "best" feature of Freedoms is their single-handing ability. Even the 'chute can be flown by one person, launched and doused from the cockpit. Their construction is second to none (built by TPI). They have no standing rigging, which means no holes through your deck to admit water, nothing to break, and nothing to replace every decade or so. I've never sailed a 32 specifically. I've been in pretty nasty squally weather on a 30 and a 36 (which is the 38 without the sugarscoop). Thye use single-line reefing, which again speaks to convenience for a single-hander and makes it easy to respond swiftly to deteriorating conditions. (Or easy to catch up if you kinda stay overcanvassed too long and get behind. Something which I have a tendency to be guilty of.) There are a lot of fine boats out there; but Freedom is at/near the top of my personal list. However, like I said, given my prejudices, the Crealock, Cape Dory, et al. are boats which are nowhere near my list, not even at the bottom, although you and many others find them attractive. The PSC Orion (also called a Crealock 32 IIRC) is pretty nice sailing boat. Some of the heavyweights can move, but they still suffer in handling and all-around ability & weatherliness. In general, I keep in mind John Paul Jones dictum: "Give me a ship that sails *fast*" especially to windward (but not at the cost of downwind squirelliness, as many 1970s era racing boats tend to). Getting to windward reliably, and sharp consistent handling are the two most underrated characteristics of 'seaworthiness' IMHO... missing stays, getting caught in irons, being unable to tack without the motor running, etc etc... all are anti-seaworthiness traits. I don't know if they are likely to be found in Bob's price range, but the older Freedom 33 cat-ketch is a nice boat. The centerboard model of course. It's not as nice as the Freedom 40 cat ketch but it's a good smaller sister. Fresh Breezes- Doug King |
Best 34 foot blue water cruiser
DSK wrote:
(some snippage for brevity) Are you talking about the late 1980s Freedom 38? IIRC that one was a Gary Mull design. A lot of the same concepts from the original Freedom 40 (one my favorites despite a dislike of 'crab crushers') were carried forward, and the Freedoms were all quite solidly built. Here's one with the "cat-sloop" rig, they also came as cat-ketches. http://www.sanjuansailing.com/charters/sparrow/ ....snip... Yes. The Gary Mull design. It's interesting to me that you included this particular link. This boat is/was "Nereid" and recently sold here in Seattle for less than $60K. Broke my heart to pass it up. (Note: most F38's are asking over $100K up to around $125K.) Nereid's previous owner purchased a F44 (kind of a stretched 40 with a fin rather than centerboard and a skeg-hung rudder rather than the stern-hung of the 40) in New Orleans and is currently working on that boat in preparation for "heading out." His website is http://www.brigup.com if you're interested in his experiences. I took a hard look at both this boat and the F44 in New Orleans before we made a family decision to RV around the U.S. for a couple of years now, before going cruising; so it was an interesting karma-type thing for me that the New Orleans F44 was bought by the Seattle F38 guy. We have two kids, so the roominess of the 44 is attractive. The PSC Orion (also called a Crealock 32 IIRC) is pretty nice sailing boat. Some of the heavyweights can move, but they still suffer in handling and all-around ability & weatherliness. In general, I keep in mind John Paul Jones dictum: "Give me a ship that sails *fast*" especially to windward (but not at the cost of downwind squirelliness, as many 1970s era racing boats tend to). Getting to windward reliably, and sharp consistent handling are the two most underrated characteristics of 'seaworthiness' IMHO... missing stays, getting caught in irons, being unable to tack without the motor running, etc etc... all are anti-seaworthiness traits. Here's one of those areas where I agree with you, in opposition to "conventional cruising wisdom." When people like the Pardeys start with a heavy, slow boat and then recommend that you use a roachless, battenless main to power it... Ack! I just gotta cringe. I don't know if they are likely to be found in Bob's price range, but the older Freedom 33 cat-ketch is a nice boat. The centerboard model of course. It's not as nice as the Freedom 40 cat ketch but it's a good smaller sister. Agreed. Much as I'm anti-crabcrusher, I agree that I'd be willing to have a F40, although I do prefer the design after Halsey Herreshoff helped Hoyt clean up that "pirate ship" look of his prototype 40 a bit. I think we've touched on this a bit before, maybe in alt.sailing.asa? The newest Freedom offerings, designed by Pedrick, are, IMO, growing back toward mediocrity and away from Hoyt's innovation. I mean, you can now get 'em with running backs in order to fly gennys. That's not the Freedom concept. And at the prices, I could just as well buy a nice used Swan, if I want a boat with standing rigging. And that's my $.02, Frank |
Best 34 foot blue water cruiser
"Bob Whitaker" wrote in message om... Wow, impressive list of boats! Thanks for the post! I'd be interested in knowing which of these you liked best and which you've had the opportunity to sail under reduced sail and how they handled. I'm very interested in your comments, specially about pros and cons of centerboards. I just thought it might be yet another thing that could break down so I wasn't considering centerboard boats for my dream trip (even if it meant missing out on shallow anchorages). I may start a new thread on this topic one of these days, seeing as the original post turned into mud-slinging central. I think the Morgan 34 (and the CCA era M33, not the Out Island) are pretty good boats. The Tartan has a nice reputation but the centerboard doesn't kick up if you run aground and it can be hard to repair the mechanism if you ground hard and bend something. The Morgan 34 CB doesn't kick up either, but if you do break something it is relatively easy to fix since it's a cable mechanism. I have sailed on the Alberg 35, Ericson 35, C&C 34 (deep keel), Ranger 33 and Yankee 30. All of them are decent boats but the C&C is more squirrely than I like going dead downwind. I think the Ranger 33 is probably the best sailing boat of the bunch, it really has no vices. I extensively crewed on a Ranger 33 for a number of years, racing in all weathers. It was my first experience with a keel boat that stayed on its feet in heavy air downwind.. A friend who owned one swears by them.. You might get arguments from owners of the Ericson 35 that they are just as good as the Ranger, but I don't have the heavy air miles on one to confirm the opinion ( and I'm thinking of the Bruce King designed Mark II version here). The Yankee 30 also has a good rep but again my only experience with them is in relatively light air. They are popular in San Francisco, which tells me they do pretty well in a breeze. I do like the Ericson 35 a little more for cruising than the Ranger, the interior and engine access is just marginally enough nicer that it tips the scales to the Ericson. All the boats listed will not be a floating condo - don't expect a lot of room, and some may seem even smaller than the Cal 34. Random thoughts on the boats I haven't sailed: The Allied Seawind was the first fiberglass boat to do a circumnavigation, and I like Tom Gilmer as a designer so it's got to be a good boat ;) The Luders 34 and Alberg 37 are really pretty boats, but I can't comment on their handling. I haven't sailed on the Douglas 32 but it's reportedly a good light air boat and I think Ted Brewer thought it was one of his better designs. I have a friend with a Mercator 30 who has taken it to Alaska several times. Nice boat, enormous V-berth, has a little weather helm. They are not well known outside of the Pacific Northwest, but at least one has done a circumnavigation. They could use a little more sail area, but do make nice cruisers. The Nich 32 is stout, lots of room for a 32'er and even with her bluff bow will do pretty well going to windward. As far a centerboard boats go, for a trip in the Gulf/Florida/Bahamas I think it's almost a requirement. Not so much for some of the Caribbean. The big disadvantage is of course the added maintenence of the board and it's raising/lowering mechanism. That and they can clunk around in the slot in a seaway, which I always found disconcerting. They do help you go to windward if your sails are up to it, but there are many people who glass the board in place and forget about sailing close winded. I wouldn't, but then I hate sailing boats that don't go to weather well. Of course, seaworthiness is always an issue with centerboard boats. Deep keels have more favorable wieght distribution for resisting and recovery from capsize. A competent, well prepared crew should be able to make a centerboarder work for the type of trip your thinking of though. It wouldn't be my choice for a circumnavigation, but would be for for Gulf cruising. AFter the Fastnet storm of 79, there was a lot of research done on characteristics that help or hinder capsize. One fallout of that was a capsize screen formula. It is Beam (feet) divided by displacement^.3333 (displacement to the 1/3 power, displacement in cubic feet). The result of this formula should be a value less than 2. I have always argued that the formula is a little simplistic because it doesn't take into account ballast placement (you could have 4000 pounds of lead at the top of the mast and the formula would say you have a seaworthy boat). However, for the boats under discussion it should give good results. That's about it for now. Follow up if you'd like, and hopefully the discussion won't go off track like an IOR boat in a breeze again. Matt |
Best 34 foot blue water cruiser
Matt/Meribeth Pedersen wrote:
I think the Morgan 34 (and the CCA era M33, not the Out Island) are pretty good boats. The Tartan has a nice reputation but the centerboard doesn't kick up if you run aground and it can be hard to repair the mechanism if you ground hard and bend something. The Morgan 34 CB doesn't kick up either, but if you do break something it is relatively easy to fix since it's a cable mechanism. You might get arguments from owners of the Ericson 35 that they are just as good as the Ranger, but I don't have the heavy air miles on one to confirm the opinion ( and I'm thinking of the Bruce King designed Mark II version here). Pretty comparable boats in many ways, but IMHO the Ranger is a little better looking and the Ericson is better built. The Ranger is more likely to be found at the lower end of the price range, too (not a judgement on them). As far a centerboard boats go, for a trip in the Gulf/Florida/Bahamas I think it's almost a requirement. Not so much for some of the Caribbean. The big disadvantage is of course the added maintenence of the board and it's raising/lowering mechanism. Sure the centerboard is a maintenance item, and some are easier & more reliable than others. IMHO it is well worth the added capability... when we talk about cruising with people who have deep draft boats, they usually say "We can go anywhere we want" dismissively... but then it turns out that there is a long long list of nice places that they "don't want" to go... I also consider it a safety issue, in that you have more options with less draft. ... That and they can clunk around in the slot in a seaway, which I always found disconcerting. That can be fixed relatively easily, depending on the board design. ... They do help you go to windward if your sails are up to it, but there are many people who glass the board in place and forget about sailing close winded. I wouldn't, but then I hate sailing boats that don't go to weather well. Agreed. Getting trapped on a lee shore is guaranteed bad day. Of course, seaworthiness is always an issue with centerboard boats. Deep keels have more favorable wieght distribution for resisting and recovery from capsize. A competent, well prepared crew should be able to make a centerboarder work for the type of trip your thinking of though. It wouldn't be my choice for a circumnavigation, but would be for for Gulf cruising. The big issue I see here is the Center of Gravity (specifically, where it is located vertically) and it's impact on the Limit of Positive Stability. It's a lot easier to get a good LPOS if you can put the ballast nice and low. But the old fashioned centerboarders, somewhat narrow by modern standards, with strong sheer and narrow sterns, can have a better LPOS in practice than a modern boat with high sides and wide transom. That's in theory... in practice, when this is an issue, it's more important to make sure you don't get conked in the head by a flying soup can... not on most people's list of seaworthiness issues ;) AFter the Fastnet storm of 79, there was a lot of research done on characteristics that help or hinder capsize. One fallout of that was a capsize screen formula. It is Beam (feet) divided by displacement^.3333 (displacement to the 1/3 power, displacement in cubic feet). The result of this formula should be a value less than 2. I have always argued that the formula is a little simplistic because it doesn't take into account ballast placement (you could have 4000 pounds of lead at the top of the mast and the formula would say you have a seaworthy boat). However, for the boats under discussion it should give good results. Yes, the point of the capsize screen formula (or ratio) is to compare similar boats... not to scale seaworthiness. In the absence of more detailed data, the CSR and the ballast/disp ratio can tell a lot about a boats hardiness for rough weather. And there are so many other seaworthiness considerations... the rig, the hatches, the stowage, etc etc... that it's easy to give this too much weight. BTW I noticed that nobody has yet mentioned "small cockpits" or recommended double enders... Fresh Breezes- Doug King |
Best 34 foot blue water cruiser
Marc wrote:
Nerieid is a 1986 F36 with the add-on sugar scoop stern. Were there structural and/or condition questions that determined the low price or was it market and/or timing? Marc, F36 Hi, Marc, I did not see a survey for Nereid; but I did do a pretty thorough personal walk-through. She seemed to me to be in excellent shape. My opinion is that the owner was sinking money into his new project much faster than he had hoped and was simply desperate to sell Nereid. And, unlike the East Coast, the Northwest is a geographically self-limited market. Frank |
Best 34 foot blue water cruiser
"Matt/Meribeth Pedersen" wrote:
....lotta good commentary snipped for space... Of the boats Matt mentions, I'd enthusiastically support the Ranger or the C&C. I owned a Ranger 29 for a coupla years and a C&C 34 for a coupla years. Either one would make my list of "boats I'd be willling to own." Guess I should add "again" to that statement. Matt also alludes to the bad designs which were spawned under the IOR rules of the 70s and which culminated in rule changes after the Fastnet disaster. Remember, however, that it wasn't just fin-keeled IOR freak designs which were eaten by that storm. Lotta "blue water cruisers" fared poorly, too. Conversely, there were two J-30s in that storm and they survived easily; one was a single-hander. I doubt anyone would consider the J-30 as a "blue water cruiser;" but considering its performance in those circumstances, compared to a lot of other designs, ya gotta give it snaps. Pretty low on the "creature comforts" scale, however. Of the others, I have no experience with some he mentions; but most are not boats which I personally favor. Alberg, Allied, and Nicholson are all boats which would completely fail to make my personal list; too heavy for my taste. And I'd debate the windward ability of the Nicholson. Oh, and while the sailing ability of the Newport is good because the basic design is by C&C, their build quality is, IMO, the worst in the business. That'd drop Newport off my list. But at this point I'm quibbling from my prejudices. Matt has contributed some great info here and I appreciate reading his comments and opinions. Threads on Usenet almost always go squirrelly; but the good ones retain a core of useful information and reasoned debate. Frank |
Best 34 foot blue water cruiser
DSK wrote :
....snip... BTW I noticed that nobody has yet mentioned "small cockpits" or recommended double enders... After all that worthwhile discussion, there you go starting **** again! grin You're incorrigible. Couldn't we discuss double entendres, instead? IF we did that, I'll bet we could somehow work in the phrase "small cockpit." Frank |
Best 34 foot blue water cruiser
Couldn't we discuss double entendres, instead?
not with dougies in the discussion loop. |
Best 34 foot blue water cruiser
"Frank Maier" wrote in message om... DSK wrote : ...snip... BTW I noticed that nobody has yet mentioned "small cockpits" or recommended double enders... After all that worthwhile discussion, there you go starting **** again! grin You're incorrigible. Couldn't we discuss double entendres, instead? IF we did that, I'll bet we could somehow work in the phrase "small cockpit." Frank Great idea. I love the Southern Cross 31 (although I think it could use a little more stick), and the SC39 is a nice boat. The Valiant 40 is a great all round cruising boat (so is the Esprit 37). Both are really well mannered. Bob Perry owned and raced a 37 for a number of years and got killed by a well sailed Cal 33 with a gift rating, but hey they had fun. I could go for a Tayana 37 as a cruising boat (the ketch rig on this design is better than a cutter, as much as it pains me to say it). If your tastes for teak run higher there is always the Tashiba/Baba/Tayanas. And don't forget the Fast Passage 39. Are we going to talk about the Moses theory of a double ender parting the waves? Actually, they typically do have good balance between fore and aft volume, so that should help in running off. But, if you're being overtaken by an eight foot breaking sea I don't think it matters what the stern shape looks like, your boots are going to get wet. The Norwegians came up with the seaworthy double ender for their pilot boats (I was going to type Redniskote but I'm sure I'd spell it wrong). But it's interesting that the British, under nearly identical sea conditions came up with their plumb stemmed, long waterline cutters for their pilot service. I guess that just goes to show you that a good boat is a good boat, no matter what her fanny looks like. Oh, and as for small cockpits, I've always thought that it's easier to remedy a too big cockpit than a too small one. Whatever you do, don't forget to put big drains in. Matt |
Best 34 foot blue water cruiser
One of the best features my double ender, a Tayana 37, is its' tight and
secure small cockpit. When I settle into it on a warm summer night, there is no better feeling. I think I'd better stop. I'm starting to excite myself. Fair winds - Dan Best Matt/Meribeth Pedersen wrote: "Frank Maier" wrote in message om... DSK wrote : ...snip... BTW I noticed that nobody has yet mentioned "small cockpits" or recommended double enders... After all that worthwhile discussion, there you go starting **** again! grin You're incorrigible. Couldn't we discuss double entendres, instead? IF we did that, I'll bet we could somehow work in the phrase "small cockpit." Frank Great idea. I love the Southern Cross 31 (although I think it could use a little more stick), and the SC39 is a nice boat. The Valiant 40 is a great all round cruising boat (so is the Esprit 37). Both are really well mannered. Bob Perry owned and raced a 37 for a number of years and got killed by a well sailed Cal 33 with a gift rating, but hey they had fun. I could go for a Tayana 37 as a cruising boat (the ketch rig on this design is better than a cutter, as much as it pains me to say it). If your tastes for teak run higher there is always the Tashiba/Baba/Tayanas. And don't forget the Fast Passage 39. Are we going to talk about the Moses theory of a double ender parting the waves? Actually, they typically do have good balance between fore and aft volume, so that should help in running off. But, if you're being overtaken by an eight foot breaking sea I don't think it matters what the stern shape looks like, your boots are going to get wet. The Norwegians came up with the seaworthy double ender for their pilot boats (I was going to type Redniskote but I'm sure I'd spell it wrong). But it's interesting that the British, under nearly identical sea conditions came up with their plumb stemmed, long waterline cutters for their pilot service. I guess that just goes to show you that a good boat is a good boat, no matter what her fanny looks like. Oh, and as for small cockpits, I've always thought that it's easier to remedy a too big cockpit than a too small one. Whatever you do, don't forget to put big drains in. Matt -- Dan Best - (707) 431-1662, Healdsburg, CA 95448 B-2/75 1977-1979 Tayana 37 #192, "Tricia Jean" http://rangerbest.home.comcast.net/TriciaJean.JPG |
Best 34 foot blue water cruiser
Frank Maier wrote:
Without doing a Ph.D. dissertation length post Hello Frank, Well, your post may not have earned you a Ph.D., but it may qualify for a Masters! Thanks for the post. You mentioned ease of sailing, and the fact that you had been on a Freedom 30 and 36 on pretty nasty weather. That's exactly the kind of discussion I wanted to get started. One of the items on my seaworthiness list is that the boat not have a tendency to lay abeam to the wind. Do you know what the Freedoms do under bare poles? Do they go bow to the wind, stern to the wind, or lay abeam? I know that this may be hard to answer unless you have been in that exact situation, so that's OK if you don't know. That's the beauty of Usenet, that there are thousands of human beings willing to share their knowledge. Maybe somebody out there knows the answer. Some of the other "top" items on my list are being able to beat to windward under reduced sail (get yourself away from a lee shore), being able to withstand getting pooped (strong hatches and portholes with positive locking from the inside, small companionway, sealed lazarette lockers that don't lead into the main cabin, well-drained small cockpit, etc.), and good surfing characteristics (positive steering when going downwind, good reserve buoyancy up front, etc.) I think I'll reformulate my question one of these days and offer a punch-style list of desirable characteristics as a starting point for people to expound on the benefits of different boats. For example, Matt Pedersen wrote that (of his list) the Ranger 33 was the best boat of the bunch. He also mentioned the Ericson 35 but he said he didn't have the high wind mileage on the Ericson to compare with. That's the beauty of newsgroups! Somebody out in Usenet land has that experience! Wouldn't it be great if they shared it with us, furthering human knowledge? In your subject line you allude to "blue water cruisers." That's what got you and Doug King at loggerheads. From reading his posts over the years, I find that I tend to agree with Doug much of the time. Well, Frank, since you brought it up, I feel compelled to reply. It seems, that Doug could be a good contributor if he wanted to. My first impression of Doug happened actually about a year ago. I was researching trailers for my Cal-25 and I encountered a thread on "alt.sailing.asa". I reproduced the quote below for your amusement. You can search for it on Google: Ron said about Doug "You are really stupid, a real know-nothing. NOBODY puts a boat, especially a Cal 25 on a flatbed. Bigger boats go on low-boys." What's up with this guy "Ron", I thought to myself? So this other guy "Doug" said "flatbed" when he really should have said "low-boy". What's the big deal? Hardly a point worth arguing about. I remember reading that quote and wondering what kind of person elicits that kind of response? Of course, all it took was _ONE_ post on "rec.boats.cruising" for me to find out! A scant few hours after my first post, Doug King proclaimed his presence and trumpeted right into my newsreader calling me "Tidy Bowl" man. Kind of amusing, I must admit, but hardly appropriate. No wonder this newsgroup gets so cantankerous once in a while... As I mentioned to Doug in my last post, it's a case of a few rotten apples spoiling the whole barrel. He spouts off, complaining about other members and their beligerent posts, and he seems blind to his own behavior. He really needs to take a hard look in the mirror and acknowledge and accept the consequences of his actions. Such a shame. Such a waste of human knowledge. He seems to be knowledgeable, but many people probably dismiss his contributions because he tends to wake up on the wrong side of the bed from time to time. Maybe he was a pleasant person to have an exchange with 15 years ago, but many years of Usenet have taken their toll and by now he has probably developed a Pavlovian response everytime he logs onto a newsgroup. Like I told him on my last post (that he hasn't responded to), I don't expect him to drop his weapons when he gets blindsided by one of his many enemies. On the contrary, I told him to keep fighting the good fight because most of the time the attacks lashed on him seem to be unfounded. His many enemies are ready to pounce at the slightest imperfection in order to get "back" at him. Case in point "flatbed" versus "low-boy". Doug just needs to take a good look in the mirror and realize he's become one of them. Thanks for your posts Frank, I want to reply to Matt now who also has been a great contributor to this thread. Bob Whitaker "Free Spirit" (Frank Maier) wrote in message . com... (Bob Whitaker) wrote: Frank Maier wrote: I'm a big fan of the Freedom line; so, my recommendation would be an early 80s Freedom 32, with a sugarscoop added to make it a 34. Hello Frank, Thanks for the input. What are the features you like most about them? Is it their sailing characteristics? Is it your familiarity with them and loyalty to your first love? (a perfectly valid reason :o) Is it their strength? Workmanship? Have you been caught in nasty weather in one? How did it handle? I know that this is a question without a single answer. There's probably as many answers to this question as there are 34 foot models out there. But it would be fun compiling a list of the top 10, and the reasons why their owners felt that way. I may try to post another thread one of these days, seeing as the original post quickly turned to a mud-slinging festival. Thanks, Bob Whitaker "Free Spirit" Without doing a Ph.D. dissertation length post, I'll state that, as a class, I don't like heavy displacement cruisers. In your subject line you allude to "blue water cruisers." That's what got you and Doug King at loggerheads. From reading his posts over the years, I find that I tend to agree with Doug much of the time. You also meantioned the Crealock 34, a boat which, IMHO, falls into this category, a boat which I would *hate* to sail on. So, those are my prejudices for you to factor into my comments. Also like Doug, the idea of a "project boat" is anathema to me; but I understand that we're all different; and if it's something you enjoy, then good for you. The boat which owns my heart, my "Platonic ideal" best boat, is the Freedom 38. I fell in love with Freedoms after about 20 years of sailing, both racing and cruising. When Garry Hoyt/Freedom/TPI produced these boats, it was, for me, an epiphany. Holy ****! Why hasn't this been done before? Well, it sorta had been. Catboats have been around for quite a while. Just materials, like carbonfiber masts, and specifics of design were the innovations which Hoyt gave us with the Freedom line. To give you a "sales pitch" for the idea of buying a Freedom 32... The single "best" feature of Freedoms is their single-handing ability. Even the 'chute can be flown by one person, launched and doused from the cockpit. Their construction is second to none (built by TPI). They have no standing rigging, which means no holes through your deck to admit water, nothing to break, and nothing to replace every decade or so. I've never sailed a 32 specifically. I've been in pretty nasty squally weather on a 30 and a 36 (which is the 38 without the sugarscoop). Thye use single-line reefing, which again speaks to convenience for a single-hander and makes it easy to respond swiftly to deteriorating conditions. (Or easy to catch up if you kinda stay overcanvassed too long and get behind. Something which I have a tendency to be guilty of.) There are a lot of fine boats out there; but Freedom is at/near the top of my personal list. However, like I said, given my prejudices, the Crealock, Cape Dory, et al. are boats which are nowhere near my list, not even at the bottom, although you and many others find them attractive. Good luck, Frank |
Best 34 foot blue water cruiser
Matt Pedersen wrote:
The Tartan has a nice reputation but the centerboard doesn't kick up if you run aground and it can be hard to repair the mechanism if you ground hard and bend something. Hello Matt, Thanks for your great contributions to this thread. I enjoyed pouring over the many details you provided. I'm glad I'm not the only one with some reservations about centerboards. The fact that they can break, and the reduced righting moment are almost deal breakers in my mind. Granted there will be many places I won't be able to go, but the list of places I _WILL_ be able to go to is already endless so I don't think I'll run out of places to go :o) My main concern is safety... under some circumstances a centerboard may be "safer" but overall I think the balance tips towards a fixed keel. As I mentioned to Frank on a previous post, one of the things I am curious about is how different boats behave under bare poles in heavy winds. Do you know how the Ranger 33 behaves? Or the other boats on your list? Will they go bow to wind? stern to wind? or lay abeam? I don't have that much experience under bare poles but I read somewhere that most designs that lay bow to wind tend to have full keels, whereas most modern designs will tend to lay abeam. Do you have any experience in this? Thanks, Bob Whitaker "Free Spirit" "Matt/Meribeth Pedersen" wrote in message hlink.net... "Bob Whitaker" wrote in message om... Wow, impressive list of boats! Thanks for the post! I'd be interested in knowing which of these you liked best and which you've had the opportunity to sail under reduced sail and how they handled. I'm very interested in your comments, specially about pros and cons of centerboards. I just thought it might be yet another thing that could break down so I wasn't considering centerboard boats for my dream trip (even if it meant missing out on shallow anchorages). I may start a new thread on this topic one of these days, seeing as the original post turned into mud-slinging central. I think the Morgan 34 (and the CCA era M33, not the Out Island) are pretty good boats. The Tartan has a nice reputation but the centerboard doesn't kick up if you run aground and it can be hard to repair the mechanism if you ground hard and bend something. The Morgan 34 CB doesn't kick up either, but if you do break something it is relatively easy to fix since it's a cable mechanism. I have sailed on the Alberg 35, Ericson 35, C&C 34 (deep keel), Ranger 33 and Yankee 30. All of them are decent boats but the C&C is more squirrely than I like going dead downwind. I think the Ranger 33 is probably the best sailing boat of the bunch, it really has no vices. I extensively crewed on a Ranger 33 for a number of years, racing in all weathers. It was my first experience with a keel boat that stayed on its feet in heavy air downwind.. A friend who owned one swears by them.. You might get arguments from owners of the Ericson 35 that they are just as good as the Ranger, but I don't have the heavy air miles on one to confirm the opinion ( and I'm thinking of the Bruce King designed Mark II version here). The Yankee 30 also has a good rep but again my only experience with them is in relatively light air. They are popular in San Francisco, which tells me they do pretty well in a breeze. I do like the Ericson 35 a little more for cruising than the Ranger, the interior and engine access is just marginally enough nicer that it tips the scales to the Ericson. All the boats listed will not be a floating condo - don't expect a lot of room, and some may seem even smaller than the Cal 34. Random thoughts on the boats I haven't sailed: The Allied Seawind was the first fiberglass boat to do a circumnavigation, and I like Tom Gilmer as a designer so it's got to be a good boat ;) The Luders 34 and Alberg 37 are really pretty boats, but I can't comment on their handling. I haven't sailed on the Douglas 32 but it's reportedly a good light air boat and I think Ted Brewer thought it was one of his better designs. I have a friend with a Mercator 30 who has taken it to Alaska several times. Nice boat, enormous V-berth, has a little weather helm. They are not well known outside of the Pacific Northwest, but at least one has done a circumnavigation. They could use a little more sail area, but do make nice cruisers. The Nich 32 is stout, lots of room for a 32'er and even with her bluff bow will do pretty well going to windward. As far a centerboard boats go, for a trip in the Gulf/Florida/Bahamas I think it's almost a requirement. Not so much for some of the Caribbean. The big disadvantage is of course the added maintenence of the board and it's raising/lowering mechanism. That and they can clunk around in the slot in a seaway, which I always found disconcerting. They do help you go to windward if your sails are up to it, but there are many people who glass the board in place and forget about sailing close winded. I wouldn't, but then I hate sailing boats that don't go to weather well. Of course, seaworthiness is always an issue with centerboard boats. Deep keels have more favorable wieght distribution for resisting and recovery from capsize. A competent, well prepared crew should be able to make a centerboarder work for the type of trip your thinking of though. It wouldn't be my choice for a circumnavigation, but would be for for Gulf cruising. AFter the Fastnet storm of 79, there was a lot of research done on characteristics that help or hinder capsize. One fallout of that was a capsize screen formula. It is Beam (feet) divided by displacement^.3333 (displacement to the 1/3 power, displacement in cubic feet). The result of this formula should be a value less than 2. I have always argued that the formula is a little simplistic because it doesn't take into account ballast placement (you could have 4000 pounds of lead at the top of the mast and the formula would say you have a seaworthy boat). However, for the boats under discussion it should give good results. That's about it for now. Follow up if you'd like, and hopefully the discussion won't go off track like an IOR boat in a breeze again. Matt |
Best 34 foot blue water cruiser
How about a Sea Sprite 34 (Luders) build by CE Ryder?
|
Best 34 foot blue water cruiser
There are ,anecdotally, a large percentage of Freedom owners who's
choice of future boats lies only within the Freedom family. I don't have any idea how this degree of brand loyalty compares with other makes and owners, but it is vociferous, myself included, and noteworthy due to the radically different rig and construction methods. On 17 Mar 2004 12:57:34 -0800, (Frank Maier) wrote: Marc wrote: Nerieid is a 1986 F36 with the add-on sugar scoop stern. Were there structural and/or condition questions that determined the low price or was it market and/or timing? Marc, F36 Hi, Marc, I did not see a survey for Nereid; but I did do a pretty thorough personal walk-through. She seemed to me to be in excellent shape. My opinion is that the owner was sinking money into his new project much faster than he had hoped and was simply desperate to sell Nereid. And, unlike the East Coast, the Northwest is a geographically self-limited market. Frank |
Best 34 foot blue water cruiser
You may want to check out John Neal's site at
http://www.mahina.com/cruise.html#anchor30535563 for his comments and list |
Best 34 foot blue water cruiser
"Frank Maier" wrote...
You're incorrigible. Couldn't we discuss double entendres, instead? IF we did that, I'll bet we could somehow work in the phrase "small cockpit." As long as I don't start getting spam about how to enlarge it.... Matt/Meribeth Pedersen wrote: Are we going to talk about the Moses theory of a double ender parting the waves? If running with a drogue, sure. IMHO your idea about the balance between reserve bouyancy fore & aft is right on. The Norwegians came up with the seaworthy double ender for their pilot boats (I was going to type Redniskote but I'm sure I'd spell it wrong). Far be it from me to criticize anybody's spelling. The Redningskoite originated as a fisheries service & rescue boat, developed by a Scotsman named (fanfare of trumpets) Colin Archer. http://www.boat-links.com/Atkinco/Sail/Ingrid.html The funny thing about the Colin Archer designs is that most people who profess to love the type don't really know anything about them... for example, extolling heavy displacement and moderate reserve bouyancy aft... whereas these boats were built as light as possible for the strength required, given the technology of the day, and one of the big changes Colin Archer made in previous design was to dramatically increase reserve bouyancy. The Valiant series is an interesting case study... they are not in any way related to the Colin Archer type, having wall sides, snubbed canoe sterns, and fin keels. Bob Perry once said in an unguarded moment that the Valiat resulted when he took a moderate displacement fin keeler and had fun making it look like a pirate ship. But not to hold that against them, they are good boats and darn well built. And to the superficial glance, they do *look* like a Colin Archer.... The Westsail 32 is another boat often hailed as a modern Colin Archer, but isn't even close. ... But it's interesting that the British, under nearly identical sea conditions came up with their plumb stemmed, long waterline cutters for their pilot service. I guess that just goes to show you that a good boat is a good boat, no matter what her fanny looks like. One thing to keep in mind is that those old timers had a lot more patience than we do, and a much higher tolerance for user-unfriendly systems. These boats sail more like submarines than a modern sailor is likely to put up with. Oh, and as for small cockpits, I've always thought that it's easier to remedy a too big cockpit than a too small one. Whatever you do, don't forget to put big drains in. How about an open transom? Can't get much more drain area than that. The issue is to keep the reserve bouyancy figures similar. Bob Whitaker wrote: Well, Frank, since you brought it up, I feel compelled to reply. It seems, that Doug could be a good contributor if he wanted to. Dear Bob- You take yourself, and me, and probably everybody else far too seriously. As for "Blue Water Cruiser" that is strictly an advertising phrase. Most sailors who actually cross oceans call their boats passage makers, and there is a tremendous amount of discussion (informed and otherwise) on what characteristics make for a desirable passage making sailboat. It appears to me that the most important feature is between the skippers ears, all else is a matter of familiarity, prejudice, and personal taste. People have crossed oceans in waterproofed refrigerator crates, so a real sailboat would have to be pretty bad before it couldn't do it. OTOH you will find a large number of people with some experience in a given type of boat who will vigorously proclaim that this is the ONLY type of ocean capable boat. YMMV Fresh Breezes- Doug King |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:51 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com