Cruiser size

[John]

Well, let's get the New Year started off right, by asking what might be a controversial question.

For Christmas, my wife gave me two books written by Lin and Larry Pardey - their first two on cruising in their 24' "Serafyn". In the end of their second book, Larry comments on boat size for cruisers. As people who are familiar with them know, the Pardey's are real minimalists. They don't have a motor and if I'm not mistaken only recently got a gps - although they've been live aboard cruisers for - what? - maybe some 20-30 years.

The Pardey's advice is to cruise in a boat no more than 30 feet. Their reasoning is that a properly built boat of that size is perfectly sea worthy and sea kindly. Although it might be a little cramped at times, they feel it's easier to handle, especially handling the sails. Also, it's easier to maintain and the cost of maintenance is significantly lower, according to them.

On the other hand, I've read people who say to buy as big a boat as you can afford.

What do people think? Bear in mind, I'm talking about long distance, blue water cruising.

 

[RichH]

Buy the longest 'waterline length' that you can afford .... speed is safety - to move away from storms and rough weather ..... with the biggest sail no larger than you can physically manhandle on a violently pitching deck (probably a mainsail about 400-500 sq. ft.) .... that gets you probably to a 40 ft. boat. Anything larger than 40 ft. requires a 'complicated rig' - powered winches, etc. etc. etc.
The current average size of circumnavigators is ~40ft. (Americans), those from the EU tend to be slightly smaller. Valiant, Tayana, Passport, Rassey, PacificSeacraft, etc.

 

[MoonSailer]

A well made/designed smaller boat is better than a larger boat of lesser quality. Comfort is another issue. IMHO the smallest boat that you can live with is best. My wife and I have a 32' boat and would like more room. But more room comes at a high price. Also you can have more freedom in a smaller boat. From personal experience smaller boats are easier to get off after a grounding or other mishap. So knowing that you can survive a grounding opens up a lot of waters that are closed to larger boats. But there is absolutely no denying that a larger boat can carry more stuff. But even an extremely large sailboat has less room than a typical small house. If you want all of your "stuff" it might be better to stay ashore.

 

[sailingdog]

It really depends on what your real priorities are. If getting out there and cruising for a long time is your goal, and you don't require all the amenities of a shore-based life... go with a smaller boat and go now.

As boats get bigger costs go up dramatically.

If you need the amenities of a shore-based life... you gonna need a bigger boat.

Just remember, unless you're in a really big boat or in a fast multihull—speed isn't going to mean a whole lot. A smaller boat can be safer than a big boat in some ways, and in others a bigger boat will be safer than a smaller one. But to the ocean, even a 40' boat is a small boat.

Plenty of circumnavigations and long voyages have been done in boats in the 26-35' range.

Personally, I'd rather be in a well-found smaller boat than a larger, less well built boat.

One final point—even most smaller boats are far more durable and seaworthy than their crews. Many times, sailboats have been abandoned, only to turn up just fine by themselves many thousands of miles later. If you haven't prepared yourself and your crew—the boat does not matter.

 

[John]

The other thing the Pardeys mentioned about this was that it's easier to find a safe haven from a storm in a smaller boat.

As for myself - we don't have any immediate plans to do this sort of cruising. But in any case, as one who used to do a lot of camping including backpacking, I think that anybody who wants all the amenities won't really be happy on a sailboat of almost any size (other than the multi million dollar super yachts). I was just curious what others think of the Pardeys view on this. The other point, obviously, is that if you're planning on cruising with a family of four, then a bigger boat would be a necessity. But it sounds like for my wife and me, if we were to plan to do this, a bout of about 40' would be ideal.

John

 

[kloudie1]

Remember too that the Pardey's are both about 5 feet tall !
There are a lot of great boats in the 36-40 foot range ..

 

[Napa Ed]

I am of the mind "smaller is better". No way I could manhandle a 400-500 sq. ft. mainsail in a storm. Reefing would be ok but an all out failure of headboard/track or blown sail would be a hassle to say the least.
My neighbor has a Flicka but she's tiny so a good fit. I'm 5'11" and I'd take a Dana in a heartbeat. (with someone else providing the donations)

 

[Scott T-Bird]

I recently read "How to Sail Around the World" by Hal Roth and find that he has a very good perspective on the necessities for long distance cruising. I highly recommend the book. His main point about boat size is that when planning the needs for a cruising couple, the equipment and provisioning that is required is going to be almost exactly the same in terms of volume and bulk no matter if you are going to be on a 27' boat or a 37' foot boat. Although it can be done on a 27' boat, the sacrifice in comfort is far too great. He seems to think that a 37' boat is about right for a cruising couple.

It seems like you already have a boat with ideal size. I would imagine that you already have the experience to figure out your needs for space. We have a 27' pocket cruiser. While I can imagine that I could find it a good size to single hand for extensive voyages, I can't imagine my wife being happy for more than an overnight. I think that 37' would be the minimum for any extended periods on board with my wife! We've been looking at many boats and we always gravitate towards the size range from 37' minimum to about 42' maximum for a livable space that would be manageable for sailing. But we also consider that sailing would frequently involve guests as we have numerous older children who are interested in spending time on board with us.

 

[larryw]

I have a Beneteau OC400. We bought this boat several years ago to go off on our Grand Cruise, but, plans change, and there is not going to be a Grand Cruise. It is a really nice boat and very comfortable, fast, with all the goodies, but it is more boat than I need for the type of sailing we do now, so, it is For Sale. Check sailboatlistings.com and look for MOONDANCE.

 

[Ross]

I read most of what was written by the Pardeys' and much by Hal Roth when we set about choosing a hull to rebuild. I would have liked to get a boat that was fuller below the WL for storage but what we have is enough for provisioning for 2-3 weeks away from replenishment. We are 30 feet on deck and about 5 tons, Talesin is about 29 feet on deck and about 8 tons. We carry an engine which demands about 50 cubic feet of space for the engine room , fuel tank and batteries. We can provide berths for three very good friends but it is better for just two. We have a minimal AM-FM broadcast radio/tape player, about 10 feet of book shelves. There is no hot running water and cold water is pumped into a day tank and pressurized by hand. (you can't waste more than 2-3 gallons of water if you leave a faucet open)We back up our electric lighting with kerosine lanterns including navigation lights.

 

[tsmwebb]

Buy the longest 'waterline length' that you can afford .... speed is safety - to move away from storms and rough weather .....

Well, "speed" is aesthetically pleasing. And, faster passages do expose you to less weather. Still, I'm not convinced that there is a huge difference in safety within the typical variance of the cruising fleet. Too, if you want to be able to avoid weather you probably want a boat that can maintain over 9 knots in a calm for some days. Many times avoiding a serious low means moving towards either the new high pressure or holding on to the old pressure as it moves away. In either case you need to be able to go quickly in little or no wind. Not many cruising boats can do that and most of us just sail in season and look for decent weather patterns before taking off on passages... Then we put up with the weather we get

--Tom.

 

[newly anonymous]

take a look at this year's ARC entries.

Here is the list of boats that participated in this year's Atlantic Rally for Cruisers (Gran Canaria to St. Lucia). http://www.worldcruising.com/arc/entries.aspx You'll notice that very few boats are under 12 meters (40') and the majority of boats are in excess of 14 meters (46').

More and more people who are actually out there cruising seem to be doing so in larger boats.

 

[tsmwebb]

Here is the list of boats that participated in this year's Atlantic Rally for Cruisers (Gran Canaria to St. Lucia). http://www.worldcruising.com/arc/entries.aspx You'll notice that very few boats are under 12 meters (40') and the majority of boats are in excess of 14 meters (46').

More and more people who are actually out there cruising seem to be doing so in larger boats.

There may be some distortion because of the absolute minimum size and some other requirements that could discourage smaller entries. http://www.worldcruising.com/faq.aspx

Generally, though, I think you're right that the average size of the fleet has gone up over time. I'd guess the "average" length of the typical world cruiser is close to 40' now. But, the age and, at least on paper, wealth of cruisers seems to have gone up, too. However, there are still folks out here cruising small boats on small budgets. I expect that with the troubles in the world the fleet will get smaller.

--Tom.

 

[newly anonymous]

no distortion here, guest

read closely! the minimum boat length for the ARC is 27'.You are probably confused because the minimum for the ARC around-the-world rally is 40'. the link I posted was for the ARC (Gran Canaria to St. Lucia), as I specified. In other words, those boats could have been as small as 27', but very few were under 40'.

 

[Ross]

Re: no distortion here, guest

The size of the boats probably reflects the financial status of the sailor more than the need for a larger vessel.
2000 calories per day per person meets the needs for a crew and a gallon of water per day is adequate if you don't insist on a hot shower every day. Water makers, batteries, water heaters, refrigerators and freezer are big, heavy and power hungry and you don't "Need" them. They are very nice but not necessary.

 

[tsmwebb]

read closely! the minimum boat length for the ARC is 27'.You are probably confused because the minimum for the ARC around-the-world rally is 40'.

What me, confused? Only when I'm trying to think...

I actually understood the FAQ, but it does rule out boats under 27' and boats that can't afford the significant fees, the SSB or sat comms, the life raft and so on. All those would, I think, tend to discriminate against smaller boats and budgets. Which is kind of what I was trying to get at with "minimum size and some other requirements".

--Tom.

 

[sailingdog]

Not only do all the requirements and fees generally discriminate against smaller boats, which usually have more modest budgets, but a lot of the boats that are in the ARC are being crewed by professional delivery captains and are intended for the charter trade in the Caribbean IIRC. The boats intended for the charter trade are going to drive up the size of the boats on average, since most of the charter boats tend to be larger, rather than smaller.

Here is the list of boats that participated in this year's Atlantic Rally for Cruisers (Gran Canaria to St. Lucia). http://www.worldcruising.com/arc/entries.aspx You'll notice that very few boats are under 12 meters (40') and the majority of boats are in excess of 14 meters (46').

More and more people who are actually out there cruising seem to be doing so in larger boats.

 

[Ross]

Tom, Tanya Abei, and Robin lee Graham , didn't have the benefit of sat com, sat nav , GPS but they did have moxie and a support group. They both sailed in less than 26 feet and persevered when many would have activated an EPIRB (which also didn't exist).
There is much written here about speed and storm avoidance but the Pardeys detected an approaching storm between the Azores and Ireland and sailed west in Serefin and let the storm pass to their east. On a good day they could make 120 miles noon to noon. Donna Lange just completed a solo circumnavigation in a Southern Cross 28 with three stops. She had excellant coms but not a large boat.

 

[MoonSailer]

Size and speed are related but it takes a lot of waterline to increase speed a lot. 20' waterline hull speed is 5.99 knots, 30' = 7.34 and 40' is still only 8.47 knots. So going from a 20' waterline to a 40' waterline only increases your hull speed 2.5 knots. So in 24 hours a 20' boat can go 144 miles and a 40' waterline an additional 60 miles. running from a hurricane 200 miles across 60 miles doesn't seem that far. Especially since we are talking maximim speed. It gets harder and harder to get that additional speed as you approach hull speed.

 

[sailingdog]

Of course, you could go multihull, and the speed equation changes a bit more dramatically. My 28' LOA trimaran can out pace many 40' monohulls... however, you give up quite a bit of cargo capacity in the process.

A good compromise between speed, living space, cargo capacity and size might be a 30-35' catamaran. However, most catamarans, in good shape, are more expensive than their monohull counterparts, and fewer are usually available.

A catamaran, like the Gemini 105M or the Catalac 9M would probably give you more living space than most 40-45' monohulls, and be faster downwind as well. Upwind, it would depend a lot on the boat and how she was rigged.

Size and speed are related but it takes a lot of waterline to increase speed a lot. 20' waterline hull speed is 5.99 knots, 30' = 7.34 and 40' is still only 8.47 knots. So going from a 20' waterline to a 40' waterline only increases your hull speed 2.5 knots. So in 24 hours a 20' boat can go 144 miles and a 40' waterline an additional 60 miles. running from a hurricane 200 miles across 60 miles doesn't seem that far. Especially since we are talking maximim speed. It gets harder and harder to get that additional speed as you approach hull speed.