JimH wrote:

A shame that a 32 footer can handle only sheltered water because the cockpit
will flood, especially in following seas. I can't seem to find where you
mention that in your review though. ;-)

One has nothing to do with the other.

Bluewater boaters routinely see water on deck. That's why scuppers are
built into bulwarks.

This boat is relatively shallow draft, moderate freeboard, and fairly
light displacement.
Nobody would recommend this boat for offshore use under "small craft
warning" weather conditions, certainly including the manufacturer.
Wouldn't matter if it had a transom 4 feet high.

A following sea would not routinely flood the cockpit. Anybody who
would panic if a strong following sea broke across the swim platform
and momentarily put a half inch of water into the cockpit would be well
advised to choose a heading that doesn't expose the stern directly to a
following sea.

(I could probably dig up a link to an entire series of racing sailboats
built with no transom at all........)

"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
oups.com...

JimH wrote:

A shame that a 32 footer can handle only sheltered water because the
cockpit
will flood, especially in following seas. I can't seem to find where
you
mention that in your review though. ;-)

One has nothing to do with the other.

Bluewater boaters routinely see water on deck. That's why scuppers are
built into bulwarks.

This boat is relatively shallow draft, moderate freeboard, and fairly
light displacement.
Nobody would recommend this boat for offshore use under "small craft
warning" weather conditions, certainly including the manufacturer.
Wouldn't matter if it had a transom 4 feet high.

A following sea would not routinely flood the cockpit. Anybody who
would panic if a strong following sea broke across the swim platform
and momentarily put a half inch of water into the cockpit would be well
advised to choose a heading that doesn't expose the stern directly to a
following sea.

(I could probably dig up a link to an entire series of racing sailboats
built with no transom at all........)


No one said anything about open bluewater or offshore use Chuck. You said
the boat was built only for calm sheltered water as the boat will take on
water in rough or following seas. A shame a 32 footer is not built to take
on some moderately rough conditions. And that was my point because in your
review you never said anything about these deficiencies. ;-)

Harry Krause wrote:
There's only "sheltered water" up there in the balmy Pacific Northwest.

Generally correct. It's possible to run from the south end of Puget
Sound all the way to Alaska while encountering only a couple of
stretches of "open ocean" conditions.
We have boats running to Alaska that you would never consider taking
outside the ICW on the Atlantic Coast- (they simply lay in port waiting
for a favorable weather window before tackling the tricky bits), and
virtually nobody- regardless of type of boat owned- attempts to make a
pleasure cruise to Ketchikan or Glacier Bay in the winter months.

I'd estimate that 10% of Puget Sound Boaters won't ever get as far
north as the San Juan Islands, 40% won't get north of Nanaimo, and
probably 80% won't get north of Campbell River or Desolation Sound.
Knowing what I know about our local conditions and
after examining this boat, I would personally have no difficulty using
it in any of those areas during our typical recreational boating months
and (like most of us do anyway)
staying in port when it's truly nasty.

On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 08:03:12 -0400, " JimH" not telling you @ pffftt.com
wrote:


"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
roups.com...

JR North wrote:
They should shoot that rear shot at the bottom of the page with about a
2 foot following sea.
JR


If a following sea broke across the swimstep there could be some
flooding of the cockpit, but not as much as you might expect. ( There
is a huge, recessed deck drain just outside the companionway door). The
sunpad and locker substitutes for a traditional transom, and the
passages to port and starboard are partially protected with
what would be, in effect, "reduced flow" transom doors. If the
following sea wasn't breaking, the boat would just ride up and over the
top like any other and the increased pressure and effect on steering
would all be taking place below the waterline.

Tha said, the most natual fit for this boat would be somewhat sheltered
waters. I don't think it was really intended to slop around in 30-kt
winds and 5-foot chop.


A shame that a 32 footer can handle only sheltered water because the cockpit
will flood, especially in following seas. I can't seem to find where you
mention that in your review though. ;-)


Do you never tire of it?

JimH wrote:

I wonder how much water gets into the cabin when the cockpit starts to
flood? Lets hope it has some monster bilge pumps.

You would need to ship water into the cockpit all the way to the
companionway door.
Very unlikely scenario. There is a big drain under a grate at the
companionway door, designed more for the purpose of preventing water
from entering the cabin when hosing down the cockpit. If you are 1)
shipping a lot of water from breaking following seas and 2) shipping so
much water that you are going to flood the cabin you have no business
out in those conditions in a small pleasure boat of any type.

Since you seem so fixated on this, how well does your own boat handle
following seas breaking over the transom? (If you don't know, that
probably says more for your seamanship than if you do).

JimH wrote:
"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
oups.com...

JR North wrote:
They should shoot that rear shot at the bottom of the page with about a
2 foot following sea.
JR


If a following sea broke across the swimstep there could be some
flooding of the cockpit, but not as much as you might expect. ( There
is a huge, recessed deck drain just outside the companionway door). The
sunpad and locker substitutes for a traditional transom, and the
passages to port and starboard are partially protected with
what would be, in effect, "reduced flow" transom doors. If the
following sea wasn't breaking, the boat would just ride up and over the
top like any other and the increased pressure and effect on steering
would all be taking place below the waterline.

Tha said, the most natual fit for this boat would be somewhat sheltered
waters. I don't think it was really intended to slop around in 30-kt
winds and 5-foot chop.


A shame that a 32 footer can handle only sheltered water because the cockpit
will flood, especially in following seas. I can't seem to find where you
mention that in your review though. ;-)

Jim, you don't know a damned thing about the capabilities of that boat!
You're just on another of your monthly period bipolar rants. You act
like you want harmony in the newgroup and do NOTHING but try and pick
petty childish fights.
As Gandhi said "you must be the change you wish to see in the world."

"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
ups.com...

JimH wrote:

I wonder how much water gets into the cabin when the cockpit starts to
flood? Lets hope it has some monster bilge pumps.


Since you seem so fixated on this, how well does your own boat handle
following seas breaking over the transom?


I don't know as I don't venture out in those types of seas and keep my eye
on the weather so I do not get caught in conditions that would result in
following seas crashing over my transom. It is a 20 foot runabout Chuck,
not a 32 foot cruiser. ;-)


(If you don't know, that
probably says more for your seamanship than if you do).


Why are you turning this personal Chuck? I thought you wanted a discussion
of the boat you reviewed.

"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 08:03:12 -0400, " JimH" not telling you @ pffftt.com
wrote:


"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
groups.com...

JR North wrote:
They should shoot that rear shot at the bottom of the page with about a
2 foot following sea.
JR


If a following sea broke across the swimstep there could be some
flooding of the cockpit, but not as much as you might expect. ( There
is a huge, recessed deck drain just outside the companionway door). The
sunpad and locker substitutes for a traditional transom, and the
passages to port and starboard are partially protected with
what would be, in effect, "reduced flow" transom doors. If the
following sea wasn't breaking, the boat would just ride up and over the
top like any other and the increased pressure and effect on steering
would all be taking place below the waterline.

Tha said, the most natual fit for this boat would be somewhat sheltered
waters. I don't think it was really intended to slop around in 30-kt
winds and 5-foot chop.


A shame that a 32 footer can handle only sheltered water because the
cockpit
will flood, especially in following seas. I can't seem to find where you
mention that in your review though. ;-)


Do you never tire of it?


John, it is truly a shame that your *contribution* to the NG has sunk to
Kevin's level.

JimH wrote:
No one said anything about open bluewater or offshore use Chuck. You said
the boat was built only for calm sheltered water as the boat will take on
water in rough or following seas. A shame a 32 footer is not built to take
on some moderately rough conditions. And that was my point because in your
review you never said anything about these deficiencies. ;-)

You *completely* distorted my comments, and then crafted an argument
based not on my comments but on your own distortion. (You really need
to switch to a different type of radio programming).

I said: (cut and paste from the post)

"Tha said, the most natual fit for this boat would be somewhat
sheltered
waters. I don't think it was really intended to slop around in 30-kt
winds and 5-foot chop. You would want to be off the water if you owned
this boat- as well as most other boats, when something nasty like that
kicks up."


You said I said:

"You said the boat was built only for calm, sheltered water as the boat
will take on water in rough or following seas"


Not much point to continue to defend a position that I never stated in
the first place, is there?

I stand by my original comment quoted above. What that has to do with
what you tried to read into it, I'll never know.

"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
ups.com...

JimH wrote:
No one said anything about open bluewater or offshore use Chuck. You
said
the boat was built only for calm sheltered water as the boat will take on
water in rough or following seas. A shame a 32 footer is not built to
take
on some moderately rough conditions. And that was my point because in
your
review you never said anything about these deficiencies. ;-)

You *completely* distorted my comments, and then crafted an argument
based not on my comments but on your own distortion. (You really need
to switch to a different type of radio programming).

I said: (cut and paste from the post)

"Tha said, the most natual fit for this boat would be somewhat
sheltered
waters. I don't think it was really intended to slop around in 30-kt
winds and 5-foot chop. You would want to be off the water if you owned
this boat- as well as most other boats, when something nasty like that
kicks up."

Sorry if I distorted things. I did conclude though that it is a shame that
this 32 foot boat cannot handle open water or 5 foot seas without the fear
of flooding the deck. ;-)

Poor engineering.