Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#69
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#70
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Water systems on my boat - need suggestions, please. | Boat Building | |||
Harry's lobster boat? | General | |||
Where to find ramp stories? | General | |||
Fresh Water Tank | Cruising | |||
Hot Water Dispenser | Cruising |