G
Gary Wyngarden
I am obsessed about sailing. If you don't believe me, ask my wife, kids, friends, etc. For me sailing is right up there in order of importance with breathing. When I'm not doing it, I'm thinking about it, reading about it, writing about it.Part of my reading of course is about what makes a really good sailboat. Conventional wisdom about what makes a good sailboat in magazine articles and books says that the terms "really good seaworthy sailboat" and "production sailboat" do not belong in the same sentence--maybe not even in the same paragraph. The cumulative weight of all those comments swayed me to the point that I was thinking "if I'm really serious about this sailing thing, my Hunter 335 is not a serious enough boat for me."This got me looking around at other boats and reading even more stuff about boat design, talking to people, going out on other boats, etc. This has led me to some interesting conclusions which I'll share for what they are worth.I've concluded that my 1992 Hunter 335 is not a boat I'd want to sail to Tonga for a variety of reasons which I'll cover in a minute. I've also concluded that I really don't want to sail to Tonga (or Tahiti, or New Zealand). At the end of the day, I like to be in a secure anchorage, grilling a filet of sockeye salmon off the stern rail with a glass of wine in my hand. When the gales blow and seas are 20 feet or more, I'd rather be reading about sailing than doing it. Having reached the conclusion that I don't want to cross oceans, I've also reached the conclusion that the "really good seaworthy boats" of conventional wisdom have some serious disadvantages for a coastal cruiser like me.A good friend of mine has a pilothouse sloop that is a foot and a half shorter than Shibumi but has a displacement that is 2.5 times as much. Whenenver we talk sailing and I might comment about reefing the main, he will say, " oh 30 knots, that's when my Tern really starts to sit up and take notice." There's a definite condescension that my Hunter is somehow inadequate. What he doesn't say is that in the 10-15 knot winds we normally sail in, his tank is dead in the water and I sail rings around him. If you want to go to sea or to play around here in gales, more displacement is appropriate (obviously in balance with length, sail area etc.) But the price of more displacement is that it either compromises performance or begets more sail area which begets heavier rigging, sometimes bowsprits etc., all of which create work and expense and are major tradeoffs in my opinion. On a recent sailing trip I helped another boater move his Formosa 41 ketch from one slip to another and marvelled at the difficulty he had maneuvering his very heavy boat with a full length keel in close quarters. Sure the full length keel will keep you on track in a cross sea. But if you're not sailing in cross seas, the lack of maneuverability imposed by a design of an unseparated full length keel and rudder are a heavy price to pay when you're going in and out of slips, fuel docks, pump out stations etc. The experience made me appreciate my fin keel and balanced rudder all the more.The wisdom is that the cockpit shouldn't be too big on the serious boat because if you get pooped you don't want to take on too much water. You also need a bridgedeck to help keep water from flooding down the companionway. Well we've been in nine foot waves and are highly unlikely to get pooped in the kind of sailing we do. A bridgedeck (while appropriate for a blue water boat) is a pain in the rear to climb over all the time, and we like our largish cockpit for stretching out and entertaining. Another good friend has a Valiant 40 which I sail with him. The Valiant 40 is a Robert Perry design and a highly successful ocean crosser. My friend has made two voyages to the South Pacific in his. Below decks, he has no more room than our 335. It's much darker and doesn't have the headroom as the profile is lower and the portlites and hatches are smaller in defense against breaking waves. The berths are much smaller and less comfortable so you can wedge into them or use a lee cloth when you're trying to sleep in a lumpy sea. He also feels he can't singlehand even on a daysail.Then there's the cost thing. I paid $58,000 for my Hunter 335 five years ago. I've invested in upgrades, improvements, and maintenance and Shibumi is in really good shape. The serious boats I reallly like that are reasonably new cost $250,000 or more. I've seen others that are in the low 100's, but they are at least 20 years old and in need of a lot of work.So given that I don't want to cross oceans,my view is that a decision to get a "serious" boat would cost me a ton of money for capabilities I don't need at the possible cost of speed, maneuverability, and comfort.What's my purpose here? I'm not trying to rationalize that my boat is perfect. I'm not suggesting that the conventional wisdom regarding blue water boats is wrong. If you're going to cross oceans, you need the strength and design to put up with conditions you can't avoid by either staying home or running into a harbor. What I'm advocating is that intended use is the number one criteria in boat selection. And if you choose to not cross oceans as I have, there is no reason to feel that your coastal cruiser is in any way inadequate for your needs despite what you may read in the sailing press or hear around the marina.At least that's my opinion!Gary WyngardenS/V Shibumi H335