Best 30-32 ft performance cruiser - REPOST

[Skipper]

I remembered this thread today http://forums.lancer.sailboatowners.com/showthread.php?t=123967&page=2

It's from a couple years ago, but I thought I might update it. Not that anyone would be wide-eyed with interest.

At one point, I had stated that I was looking for a boat that would be "exceptional in 5-10 knot wind speed but designed and built to go offshore" Most responders declared that such a boat didn't exist, and one poster even said, "I'd sure like to know if you can ever find something like that." (hence my re-post)

Well, I found it. A couple years ago, but still. It's a late-model Bristol 29.9 tall rig. Shockingly fast, even faster vs wind speed than my old Capri 26, which was quicker to accelerate but not as fast. I beat most boats sailing on the same tack\direction as me.

The boat was designed as an offshore racer\cruiser. The original model was low on sail area, and not ultimately suited for speed in light winds. However, the tall rig initiates heel easier, and of course adds sail area. Her bottom and keel are a compromise, but her speed doesn't show it, and she tracks well with a cutaway full keel and skeg rudder.

I can't find a consistent PHRF for the tall rig version, for there were only 7 built, and I'm guessing most of them don't race formally. Mine doesn't.

The build quality is stunning, and the boat has dozens of features improved over the previous model, or ones that didn't exist at all on the older ones. Many of the improvements were apparently based on Practical sailor's (and others') review of the boat, for the noted shortcomings had been fixed.

There is adequate single-hand tankage at 63 gal water, 20 gal fuel, etc., loads of storage, and offshore-design factory upgrades. Anyway, I could go on forever. Suffice to say I found it.

 

[TLW]

PHRF shows an average handicap number of 189. with tall rig.

 

[Skipper]

PHRF shows an average handicap number of 189. with tall rig.

Which is about the same as the std version (195), which means it's inaccurate. You're reading the US Sailing data, I assume. Again, there were only 7 TR's made, some percentage of which aren't recorded in PHRF, so there is no comprehensive history. a PHRF rating doesn't even exist on older lists (2011)

 

[Sailor Sue]

Another option.

We recently sold a Tartan 372. We wanted a smaller boat that would sail better and still have the capability of extended cruising. Just about any discussion of boats that sail well always includes J Boats. We eventually settled on a J/32. J Boats considers it an Offshore Cruiser, and after sailing it from Maine back to the Great Lakes I can't argue with that. PHRF is around 120. Our J carries 100 gallons of water and 24 gallons of diesel. No quarter berth so lots more storage. Design and build quality is much better than the Tartan. The boat has a collision bulkhead. You can trim the main and headsail while driving. Plumbing and other systems are accessible on the boat. Very functional interior with no artsy-fartsy angles and curves. They made 85 of them so you still have a chance of finding one, just not ours!
http://www.jboats.com/j32-performance

 

[Barnacle Bill]

Bristols are great boats and so are J's.

 

[Skipper]

We recently sold a Tartan 372. We wanted a smaller boat that would sail better and still have the capability of extended cruising. Just about any discussion of boats that sail well always includes J Boats. We eventually settled on a J/32. J Boats considers it an Offshore Cruiser, and after sailing it from Maine back to the Great Lakes I can't argue with that. PHRF is around 120. Our J carries 100 gallons of water and 24 gallons of diesel. No quarter berth so lots more storage. Design and build quality is much better than the Tartan. The boat has a collision bulkhead. You can trim the main and headsail while driving. Plumbing and other systems are accessible on the boat. Very functional interior with no artsy-fartsy angles and curves. They made 85 of them so you still have a chance of finding one, just not ours!
http://www.jboats.com/j32-performance

Yeah, the J32 was a good fit, too. Even better in some ways. We looked hard at a couple of them. In the end, the Bristol appealed to my traditional side, in her beauty, rarity, and pedigree. Also, as the J32 was a much newer model, the price tags were 3 times what the Bristol ultimately cost (I factored in added work\equip I wanted for the particular Bristol). I wanted the J32's performance and layout, but that want wasn't worth 3 times the $.

 

[Warren Milberg]

Everything about sailboats involves tradeoffs....and making sure you make the ones best for you and your circumstances. Sounds like both of these sailors did.

 

[higgs]

While a fan of J boats, I would not consider them cruisers. They are pretty short on comforts, especially in the 30 ft range. What constitutes "comfort" is, of course, very subjective. To me, the J boats in this range are more like camping.

 

[Jackdaw]

Hmmm. Everyone will have their own definition of 'performance', but I can't get yours. Your 30 foot Bristol shares a PHRF number with a bunch of very ordinary 22 foot boats.

As for J's, here is the 'camping' interior of a J/30 that will run circles (no disrespect intended) around you.

 

[Sailor Sue]

While a fan of J boats, I would not consider them cruisers. They are pretty short on comforts, especially in the 30 ft range. What constitutes "comfort" is, of course, very subjective. To me, the J boats in this range are more like camping.

...did you ever see a J/32, or look at the web link? Hot and cold pressure water, propane stove top and oven, refrigeration, aft head with shower, over 6 foot standing headroom, 4 inch V-berth cushions, Espar diesel heat, AND the ability to actually sail upwind, fast. Yup, we're really "roughing it".

 

[Skipper]

Hmmm. Everyone will have their own definition of 'performance', but I can't get yours. Your 30 foot Bristol shares a PHRF number with a bunch of very ordinary 22 foot boats.

As for J's, here is the 'camping' interior of a J/30 that will run circles (no disrespect intended) around you. .

Again, (amazing how many times this must be repeated) there were only 7 TR's made, some percentage of which aren't recorded in PHRF, so there is no comprehensive history. a PHRF rating doesn't even exist on older lists (2011).

I cream the std version. There are 2 other 29.9's in my patch that I've toured with, one of which I've sailed aboard. There's no comparison. I also consistently edge past Cat 30's, Ericson's, Beneteau's and the like, which have lower PHRF ratings. Also, PHRF does not gauge performance in specifically light wind, which I clearly referred to throughout the entire thread, and which the TR version excels at.

The PHRF rating is irrelevant in this case, and should be discarded. The boat is fast. Trust me. I wouldn't have bought it if it weren't.

And by the way, it was another poster who called the J32 camping. I loved the J32. I just thought the Bristol was a bit more traditionally robust in appearance and construction. Also, it has a quarterberth which was a necessity, and encapsulated keel, and many other desireable features. I lusted after the J's speed and aft head, among other things, but the cost and comparison went to the Bristol.

 

[Sandy Stone]

Somewhere in the middle in terms of performance, and probably lower in price than either, lies my old boat - a Pearson 32. (If you like plastic classics)

 

[Jackdaw]

Well...

According to US sailing PHRF data available to members, the average 30 footer of that vintage gets a 9 second deduction for a tall rig on the Chesapeake.

The standard 29.9 rates a 210 there, slow mostly because of the light air and the rather low SA/D ratio of the standard boat. Most areas rate the boat (on average) around 200.

The Chesapeake rating for the 29.9 TR is 189, which is almost the exact same rating it gets in the other 2 places it has been raced (Port Authur & Texoma) where is rated 190. That Chessy rating is based on the sailing performance of an actual boat.

That also correlates with the typical 9 second credit for a tall rig in your area. I'd say the rating is fair. Boats get good PHRF numbers mainly by their ability to go to windward. Boat speed aside, there is no way the Bristol can point with a J, and that is represented in the numbers, which don't lie.

 

[Skipper]

Well...

That also correlates with the typical 9 second credit for a tall rig in your area. I'd say the rating is fair. Boats get good PHRF numbers mainly by their ability to go to windward. Boat speed aside, there is no way the Bristol can point with a J, and that is represented in the numbers, which don't lie.

True. Not a great windward sailor. Fabulous to about 50-45 degrees, then just adequate to about 40 with a lot of adjusting and finesse, then it stalls completely. Can do a little better with the working jib, which I can lead the sheets inboard of the shrouds without furling and muckering up the luff shape. But then I lose light air speed at other points of sail vs the big genoa.

Not racing quality. But I'm not racing. I wanted the boat speed; for fun, usability in light Chesapeake wind, and offshore travel expedience. This, combined with the minimal examples of boats for analysis, is why I didn't put stock in the ratings I found regarding my requirements. Since I'm not racing, the choice really was not a compromise. It was a perfect combination of addressing my wants.

 

[Jackdaw]

True. Not a great windward sailor. Fabulous to about 50-45 degrees, then just adequate to about 40 with a lot of adjusting and finesse, then it stalls completely. Can do a little better with the working jib, which I can lead the sheets inboard of the shrouds without furling and muckering up the luff shape. But then I lose light air speed at other points of sail vs the big genoa.

Not racing quality. But I'm not racing. I wanted the boat speed; for fun, usability in light Chesapeake wind, and offshore travel expedience. This, combined with the minimal examples of boats for analysis, is why I didn't put stock in the ratings I found regarding my requirements. Since I'm not racing, the choice really was not a compromise. It was a perfect combination of addressing my wants.

Then its clear that you picked the right boat for yourself, and the Bristols are very well made.

Its interesting to look at the nature of 'Tall Rigs'. Most came about as an option from the builder after a particular boat was found wanting for power in light air venues. It's amazing how many of these requests to builders came from their dealers in the Chesapeake!

 

[Skipper]

Then its clear that you picked the right boat for yourself, and the Bristols are very well made.

Its interesting to look at the nature of 'Tall Rigs'. Most came about as an option from the builder after a particular boat was found wanting for power in light air venues. It's amazing how many of these requests to builders came from their dealers in the Chesapeake!

Yep.

 

[FastOlson]

Good solid fast cruisers....

Among the great suggestions of boats like the J-30, I would add the S2 30 (Grand Slam model) and the Olson 911S. Also the Ericson 30-2, 30+, or the E-32-3 or the E-32-200 series.

Loren

 

[noanker]

it is a proven fact that everybodys boat is the best. the difference being that some skippers blow harder than others. I just choose to enjoy mine. that's why I bought it

 

[Gunni]

We get it all in the Chesapeake: light winds, moderate winds, fresh breezes, gales, waterspouts, no winds, wonderwinds...all before sunset. Oh, and THAT is why we like our masthead rigs Jack!

 

[TLW]

When I posted the PHRF number immediately after the first post, I bit my tongue not to comment further. I did know, however, that the rest would follow and it certainly has been entertaining.

On a slightly related matter I would mention that PHRF numbers are supposed to be divisible by 3 - 1/20 of a minute. The mention of a number of 190, in Tacoma I believe, is either in error or the result of a local club unaware of how the system works. Sometimes a club will average numbers from several other areas, but should be aware of the system.