Beneteau, Hunter, Catalina and Jeanneau. Are these vessels (40' size) capable of doing long offshore ocean passages? Most of these boats have the typical find keel and I would like to know if it they are considered appropriate and strong enough for this type of demand? Comments...
Oceanworthy Sailboats
- Thread starter Paul8753
- Start date
- Status
Offshore capabilities
The question should really be: "Am I (and my crew) capable of doing long offshore ocean passages?" There are few (if any) production boats that are designed and built for offshore passagemaking. I’ve never seen a production boat that didn’t have major engineering and construction flaws and/or limitations (IMHO). That said, nearly any boat (in good condition) can be made (at least) “minimally-acceptable” for offshore work. Hundreds of sailors will attest to their successful cruises aboard production boats (of varying “suitability”), including “Hunta-Benna-Lina’s” and the like. You’ll be able to recognize a given boat’s passagemaking capabilities, when YOU are ready & capable of offshore work.
The question should really be: "Am I (and my crew) capable of doing long offshore ocean passages?" There are few (if any) production boats that are designed and built for offshore passagemaking. I’ve never seen a production boat that didn’t have major engineering and construction flaws and/or limitations (IMHO). That said, nearly any boat (in good condition) can be made (at least) “minimally-acceptable” for offshore work. Hundreds of sailors will attest to their successful cruises aboard production boats (of varying “suitability”), including “Hunta-Benna-Lina’s” and the like. You’ll be able to recognize a given boat’s passagemaking capabilities, when YOU are ready & capable of offshore work.
Yes
I can only speak about Hunter and Beneteau because I have done offshore passages on two Hunters (37.5 and Passage 420) and the Beneteau was a 351. The 351 was a little light for the job. Not saying that it was unsafe but in waves over say 4 feet it was very hard to go upwind. It would get on top of a wave and with the small keel it would want to turn on the keel if you had a wind shift, and then you would have to fight it back on course. We tried many different sail settings but the only thing that worked was to fall off to about 55 degrees off the wind. But we did get into a gale with 15 foot waves and 45 knots winds and ran down wind with it. It did not want to hold its course very well at first but then we started the engine and ran it at 1000 rpm’s which allowed us to hold course. The heaviest conditions that I have been in on the Hunters was waves around 12 feet and winds 25 to 30 with gust to 45. Both handled very well. As some great sailor said “the boat will take more than the crew will”
I can only speak about Hunter and Beneteau because I have done offshore passages on two Hunters (37.5 and Passage 420) and the Beneteau was a 351. The 351 was a little light for the job. Not saying that it was unsafe but in waves over say 4 feet it was very hard to go upwind. It would get on top of a wave and with the small keel it would want to turn on the keel if you had a wind shift, and then you would have to fight it back on course. We tried many different sail settings but the only thing that worked was to fall off to about 55 degrees off the wind. But we did get into a gale with 15 foot waves and 45 knots winds and ran down wind with it. It did not want to hold its course very well at first but then we started the engine and ran it at 1000 rpm’s which allowed us to hold course. The heaviest conditions that I have been in on the Hunters was waves around 12 feet and winds 25 to 30 with gust to 45. Both handled very well. As some great sailor said “the boat will take more than the crew will”
Are they capable ? Sure. And even lesser boats
All one needs to do is visit a harbor in remote islands all over the four corners of the world. You'd be **amazed** at some of the vessels you'd see anchored out there. I've seen some that I don't think I'd even feel comfortable taking out for a day sail. Most boats can handle to ocean just fine, and the crew is more likely to "fail" at sea than a boat "cracking in half and falling into Davey's locker"
All one needs to do is visit a harbor in remote islands all over the four corners of the world. You'd be **amazed** at some of the vessels you'd see anchored out there. I've seen some that I don't think I'd even feel comfortable taking out for a day sail. Most boats can handle to ocean just fine, and the crew is more likely to "fail" at sea than a boat "cracking in half and falling into Davey's locker"
John Vigor's Book
John Vigor wrote two books on offshore boats that I have read. 20 boats to take you anywhere and the Capable offshore boat. Maybe the titles are a little different. He gives standards for an offshore boat that seem reasonable. Ask the company!!! I have a Pearson 323 and it's designer says that it was designed as a rugged coastal cruiser. But I've contacted a person that sailed to Bermuda from Chesapeake Bay. I've read about passages from to Key west directly across the gulf. Gord May's suggestion that when you are ready you'll know if the boat is appropriate is good advice. We have been sailing our P323 for almost a year now and have been happy with our choice. We have been out in rough stuff in Mobile bay and she did well. In the open gulf we have only been out in 15-20 knots with 4-6' waves and it was great. The boat felt solid and safe. The only problem I have noticed is that she doesn't handle well going down wind coming off of waves. It takes constant steering. No problem for a few hours but for a day or two it would be exhausting.
John Vigor wrote two books on offshore boats that I have read. 20 boats to take you anywhere and the Capable offshore boat. Maybe the titles are a little different. He gives standards for an offshore boat that seem reasonable. Ask the company!!! I have a Pearson 323 and it's designer says that it was designed as a rugged coastal cruiser. But I've contacted a person that sailed to Bermuda from Chesapeake Bay. I've read about passages from to Key west directly across the gulf. Gord May's suggestion that when you are ready you'll know if the boat is appropriate is good advice. We have been sailing our P323 for almost a year now and have been happy with our choice. We have been out in rough stuff in Mobile bay and she did well. In the open gulf we have only been out in 15-20 knots with 4-6' waves and it was great. The boat felt solid and safe. The only problem I have noticed is that she doesn't handle well going down wind coming off of waves. It takes constant steering. No problem for a few hours but for a day or two it would be exhausting.
Never been but plan to...
cruise offshore. Based on what I have seen & read in books, trip reports, cruising guides, online etc etc etc... a solid well equiped boat handled by reasonable competent crew will do just fine. Not a cake walk but likely not Fstnet 1979 either. That is to say that a poorly built boat handled by <insert your favorite ocean voyaging sailor here> may not be saved by their abilities. Would I want to go to Morrea in a bone stock Catalina 22? No ... would I go in a bone stock Valiant 42? yes. In a bone stock Catalina 350 no... with some mods yeah I probably would. I find the one post "You’ll be able to recognize a given boat’s passagemaking capabilities, when YOU are ready & capable of offshore work." a bit elitist... Many have crossed oceans in boat they have built themselves without having spent significant time or ANY time on blue water. Is it prudent? Depends on your risk tolerance. Eventually you have to go and do it... there is a first time for everything and we were all beginners once. That said I think that much can be learned from the experience of other that have done it... thus the reason for the original post. David
cruise offshore. Based on what I have seen & read in books, trip reports, cruising guides, online etc etc etc... a solid well equiped boat handled by reasonable competent crew will do just fine. Not a cake walk but likely not Fstnet 1979 either. That is to say that a poorly built boat handled by <insert your favorite ocean voyaging sailor here> may not be saved by their abilities. Would I want to go to Morrea in a bone stock Catalina 22? No ... would I go in a bone stock Valiant 42? yes. In a bone stock Catalina 350 no... with some mods yeah I probably would. I find the one post "You’ll be able to recognize a given boat’s passagemaking capabilities, when YOU are ready & capable of offshore work." a bit elitist... Many have crossed oceans in boat they have built themselves without having spent significant time or ANY time on blue water. Is it prudent? Depends on your risk tolerance. Eventually you have to go and do it... there is a first time for everything and we were all beginners once. That said I think that much can be learned from the experience of other that have done it... thus the reason for the original post. David
I am an elitist !/?
The original query seemed to be seeking a simple answer to a very complex equation. I apologize for the condescending tone of my reply, which was totally unintended. I'll respond to the "elitist" tag later. Others have expressed it much better - ie: “the boat will take more than the crew will”, and “the crew is more likely to ‘fail’ at sea than a boat ". I was trying to make 3 points: 1. Human error is probably a bigger factor in marine accidents, than is equipment failure (as above). 2. Even coastal cruisers can be made fit (to someone’s standard) for offshore work. Even (what I’d judge) “unfit” boats can & have made successful offshore passages. 3. None of the “brand” production boats are intended for serious offshore work - they’re designed and built to be economical (price sensitive) coastal cruisers. Basically, you have to take a good structure and make it “more” suitable for your intended purposes. This process does not lend itself to simple “do this, add this” formulae - it takes a great deal of experience, and a little luck. CSY Man, over on the Cruisers Forum (http://cruisersforum.com/index.php?referrerid=79 ), described the “luck” factor pretty well (*they have a forum on “Winged Multi-hulls & Amphibians) : “When ya start flying* ya have 2 buckets: One is empty and is called experience. The other one is full and is called luck. As ya fly along, the first bucket keeps filling up and the second one keeps draining.” The Fastnet storm evidence supports the crew-failure hypotheses. In August 1979, 303 yachts began the 600-mile Fastnet Race from the Isle of Wight off the southwest coast of England to Fastnet Rock off the Irish coast and back. It began in fine weather, then suddenly became a terrifying ordeal. A Force 10, sixty-knot storm swept across the North Atlantic with a speed that confounded forecasters, slamming into the fleet with epic fury. For twenty hours, 2,500 men and women were smashed by forty-foot breaking waves, while rescue helicopters and lifeboats struggled to save them. By the time the race was over, fifteen people had died, twenty-four crews had abandoned ship, five yachts had sunk, 136 sailors had been rescued, and only 85 boats had finished the race. Note that of the twenty-four abandoned ships, only 5 actually sunk. I highly recommend that any prospective passagemaker read & study about the ‘79 Fastnet, and the Sidney-Hobart race of 1998. Very instructive. Heartily disagreeing with David, who said “would I go (to Morea) in a bone stock Valiant 42? yes.” Given equal condition; I would chose a well-built (& designed) modern moderate displacement Fin-Keel boat, appropriately equipped - over a “classic” (read archaic) heavy-displacement Long (full) Keel (factory stock) “traditional” boat, for all purposes, including offshore passagemaking. I NEVER seen a factory stock boat that I'd be happy taking offshore, and most would make me a little nervous in a coastal environment. OMO
I'm only an opinionated "armchair expert" (with 35 years of boating/sailing experience, and 10 years cruise/liveaboard, and professional boatwright), not an "elit" offshore sailor; but I don't (in this case) object to the characterization as an "elitist". Competant offshore sailors ARE the elite, and I do recommend that experience is a much better tool than luck. Respectfully, Gord
The original query seemed to be seeking a simple answer to a very complex equation. I apologize for the condescending tone of my reply, which was totally unintended. I'll respond to the "elitist" tag later. Others have expressed it much better - ie: “the boat will take more than the crew will”, and “the crew is more likely to ‘fail’ at sea than a boat ". I was trying to make 3 points: 1. Human error is probably a bigger factor in marine accidents, than is equipment failure (as above). 2. Even coastal cruisers can be made fit (to someone’s standard) for offshore work. Even (what I’d judge) “unfit” boats can & have made successful offshore passages. 3. None of the “brand” production boats are intended for serious offshore work - they’re designed and built to be economical (price sensitive) coastal cruisers. Basically, you have to take a good structure and make it “more” suitable for your intended purposes. This process does not lend itself to simple “do this, add this” formulae - it takes a great deal of experience, and a little luck. CSY Man, over on the Cruisers Forum (http://cruisersforum.com/index.php?referrerid=79 ), described the “luck” factor pretty well (*they have a forum on “Winged Multi-hulls & Amphibians) : “When ya start flying* ya have 2 buckets: One is empty and is called experience. The other one is full and is called luck. As ya fly along, the first bucket keeps filling up and the second one keeps draining.” The Fastnet storm evidence supports the crew-failure hypotheses. In August 1979, 303 yachts began the 600-mile Fastnet Race from the Isle of Wight off the southwest coast of England to Fastnet Rock off the Irish coast and back. It began in fine weather, then suddenly became a terrifying ordeal. A Force 10, sixty-knot storm swept across the North Atlantic with a speed that confounded forecasters, slamming into the fleet with epic fury. For twenty hours, 2,500 men and women were smashed by forty-foot breaking waves, while rescue helicopters and lifeboats struggled to save them. By the time the race was over, fifteen people had died, twenty-four crews had abandoned ship, five yachts had sunk, 136 sailors had been rescued, and only 85 boats had finished the race. Note that of the twenty-four abandoned ships, only 5 actually sunk. I highly recommend that any prospective passagemaker read & study about the ‘79 Fastnet, and the Sidney-Hobart race of 1998. Very instructive. Heartily disagreeing with David, who said “would I go (to Morea) in a bone stock Valiant 42? yes.” Given equal condition; I would chose a well-built (& designed) modern moderate displacement Fin-Keel boat, appropriately equipped - over a “classic” (read archaic) heavy-displacement Long (full) Keel (factory stock) “traditional” boat, for all purposes, including offshore passagemaking. I NEVER seen a factory stock boat that I'd be happy taking offshore, and most would make me a little nervous in a coastal environment. OMO
I'm only an opinionated "armchair expert" (with 35 years of boating/sailing experience, and 10 years cruise/liveaboard, and professional boatwright), not an "elit" offshore sailor; but I don't (in this case) object to the characterization as an "elitist". Competant offshore sailors ARE the elite, and I do recommend that experience is a much better tool than luck. Respectfully, GordThanks Gord
Solid info. The reality is if offshore passagemaking is something that we want to aim for then we should first get plenty of experience. I might suggest offshore schools and finding rides with experienced mentors who can prepare us for the day when we actually do it ourselves. Along the way study and locate appropriate vessels that will make the trip safe. Comments
Solid info. The reality is if offshore passagemaking is something that we want to aim for then we should first get plenty of experience. I might suggest offshore schools and finding rides with experienced mentors who can prepare us for the day when we actually do it ourselves. Along the way study and locate appropriate vessels that will make the trip safe. Comments
experience
YEP - EXPERIENCE is fundamental to successful, comfortable, and (relatively) safe offshore passagemaking. There are so many variables to boat and equipment selection, installation, and usage - that any quick & easy answers would be mere “fluff”. By way of analogy: Offshore passagemaking is to Coastal sailing - what F1 Racing is to rural backroads Sunday driving - or sprinting the 100 Yard/Meter dash in 9.2 sec is to crawling the rug. - or graduating middle school (junior high) is to a Master’s degree. As with each of the above, courses, and self-study are very useful BEGINNINGS. Then comes much practice doing it (beginning at a less "elite" minor-league level, and working up to the big leagues). Regards & best of luck (even when well-seasoned, you'll still need some) Gord
YEP - EXPERIENCE is fundamental to successful, comfortable, and (relatively) safe offshore passagemaking. There are so many variables to boat and equipment selection, installation, and usage - that any quick & easy answers would be mere “fluff”. By way of analogy: Offshore passagemaking is to Coastal sailing - what F1 Racing is to rural backroads Sunday driving - or sprinting the 100 Yard/Meter dash in 9.2 sec is to crawling the rug. - or graduating middle school (junior high) is to a Master’s degree. As with each of the above, courses, and self-study are very useful BEGINNINGS. Then comes much practice doing it (beginning at a less "elite" minor-league level, and working up to the big leagues). Regards & best of luck (even when well-seasoned, you'll still need some)
Gordcaptain bligh
captain bligh sailed 3500 miles in the pacific ocean in a 21 foot open boat with 19 men. not only did he do this, but charted the great barrier reef with accuracy not superceded until satelite imagery came along. he would have loved to have had a boat like any production boat (even a mcgregor..no offense to mcgregor owners, but they are about the lightest boat i know of).
captain bligh sailed 3500 miles in the pacific ocean in a 21 foot open boat with 19 men. not only did he do this, but charted the great barrier reef with accuracy not superceded until satelite imagery came along. he would have loved to have had a boat like any production boat (even a mcgregor..no offense to mcgregor owners, but they are about the lightest boat i know of).
Thanks Gord
I do appreciate your additional comments and excellent perspective. My only point is that the original poster was looking for information which did not seem to be coming but rather responses which seemed to say that if you have to ask you aren't ready. Now having said that, as you have a preference towards a "well-built (& designed) modern moderate displacement Fin-Keel boat, appropriately equipped"... can you give us some examples? The Valiant 42, which by the way I hardly consider a full keel boat compared to say an Island packet (sticking to production boats), is arguably one of the most cruised boats out there, it came to my mind simply because so many have made major ocean crossings. Their performance can hardly be discounted as archaic. IMHO of course... Experience is vital because as I said and Robert from Kemah said, a well found boat in the hands of the inexperienced may perform more poorly, be less safe than a "production" boat in experienced hands under the same conditions. A test which will never occur obviously. Respectfully David
I do appreciate your additional comments and excellent perspective. My only point is that the original poster was looking for information which did not seem to be coming but rather responses which seemed to say that if you have to ask you aren't ready. Now having said that, as you have a preference towards a "well-built (& designed) modern moderate displacement Fin-Keel boat, appropriately equipped"... can you give us some examples? The Valiant 42, which by the way I hardly consider a full keel boat compared to say an Island packet (sticking to production boats), is arguably one of the most cruised boats out there, it came to my mind simply because so many have made major ocean crossings. Their performance can hardly be discounted as archaic. IMHO of course... Experience is vital because as I said and Robert from Kemah said, a well found boat in the hands of the inexperienced may perform more poorly, be less safe than a "production" boat in experienced hands under the same conditions. A test which will never occur obviously. Respectfully David
Gord, I think you have it back wards
I find coastal sailing much harder than blue water. Coastal has more collision risk, grounding risk, weather risks (lee shore), fatigue risks, (harbor to harbor w/no sleep) and just plain more work to do because of raising and dousing and anchoring. Oh, IMHO.
I find coastal sailing much harder than blue water. Coastal has more collision risk, grounding risk, weather risks (lee shore), fatigue risks, (harbor to harbor w/no sleep) and just plain more work to do because of raising and dousing and anchoring. Oh, IMHO.
"Stock" Valiant
Gord: I keep my stock production boat in the marina where the Valiant factory is located. For all it’s traditional looks, Robert Perry designed the boat for quick passages. It has done very well in many offshore races including a first place in the production boat class of the round the world single-handed race. That said, no Valiant is ever truly “stock”. Each boat is built when the order is placed. The future owner gets lots of say in the interior layout and amenities. One had an underwater dome built in front of the keel for observing whales off Alaska! I’ve been aboard several and when I win the lottery…..
Gord: I keep my stock production boat in the marina where the Valiant factory is located. For all it’s traditional looks, Robert Perry designed the boat for quick passages. It has done very well in many offshore races including a first place in the production boat class of the round the world single-handed race. That said, no Valiant is ever truly “stock”. Each boat is built when the order is placed. The future owner gets lots of say in the interior layout and amenities. One had an underwater dome built in front of the keel for observing whales off Alaska! I’ve been aboard several and when I win the lottery…..
OK
OK - you guys caught me with my foot in it. As always, I don't have the skills to keep it short, and still get my point(s) accross. Valiants ARE good cruisers, tho' I have a few reservations. And Coastal cruising CAN BE as (or more) difficult than offshore (sometimes...) I'll respond more fully this weekend, as I'm just preparing to hit my "trapline" (a bunch of out-of-town project inspections). Regards, and apologies for my overstatements & errors. E. & O. E. -&- Without Prejudice, Gord
OK - you guys caught me with my foot in it. As always, I don't have the skills to keep it short, and still get my point(s) accross. Valiants ARE good cruisers, tho' I have a few reservations. And Coastal cruising CAN BE as (or more) difficult than offshore (sometimes...) I'll respond more fully this weekend, as I'm just preparing to hit my "trapline" (a bunch of out-of-town project inspections). Regards, and apologies for my overstatements & errors. E. & O. E. -&- Without Prejudice,
Gord
Blue Water DESIGN
Although I own a Valiant competitor (Pacific Seacraft), it is pretty obvious that any of the blue water boats (Valiant, PSC, Island Packet and the fin keeled, Swedish boats ...HR, Najad) are better prepared to handle the seaway by virtue of design. I like the Captain Bligh point...most any boat can be made to do any sail with the right crew, equipment and conditions. All boats are a mixture of concessions and advantages. I love the floating condos when I'm rafted to one in the Chesapeake, but I don't know how useful a bathtub, a flat panel TV or an ultrasuade dinette would be in dirty weather on an ocean passage. (They are all great for a party).
Although I own a Valiant competitor (Pacific Seacraft), it is pretty obvious that any of the blue water boats (Valiant, PSC, Island Packet and the fin keeled, Swedish boats ...HR, Najad) are better prepared to handle the seaway by virtue of design. I like the Captain Bligh point...most any boat can be made to do any sail with the right crew, equipment and conditions. All boats are a mixture of concessions and advantages. I love the floating condos when I'm rafted to one in the Chesapeake, but I don't know how useful a bathtub, a flat panel TV or an ultrasuade dinette would be in dirty weather on an ocean passage. (They are all great for a party).
I would ask
the manufacturer. Yes they are capable but is it recommend! Ask the manufacture or someone from Practical Sailor. Don't trust people you don't know.
the manufacturer. Yes they are capable but is it recommend! Ask the manufacture or someone from Practical Sailor. Don't trust people you don't know.
Ask them last
A- they want to sell boats but B- they don't want any liability from some novice that has no idea.
A- they want to sell boats but B- they don't want any liability from some novice that has no idea.
Musings and maunderings.
Well, I haven't had much to say recently, so I might as well wade in with a few musings and personal observations as well. I pretty much agree with everything that has been said so far, especially as clarified by subsequent postings of the various authors. But, I would suggest a few distinctions, that are implicit, but perhaps have not been so clearly articulated. Pardon the lengthiness of the post, but I feel that these points should me made in any discussion of the relevant merits of bluewater and coastal cruisers being engaged in by a mixed company of experienced and not so experienced sailors. Mostly of these ideas are inherently understood by knowledgeable sailors. But, somehow, they often get lost in the debate between the specific design characteristics of both categories of cruisers. I believe that a self-inventory of personal characteristics tends to eliminate the design debate. I'm not convinced that there really is much difference in the sailing skills required for safe and competent inshore racing, offshore racing, coastal cruising and bluewater voyaging. Coastal cruising (encompassing most of my 35+ years of experience) just as other posters have observed, has provided me with the most anxiety and seemed to me to be the most dangerous sailing I have experienced. My limited off-shore sailing experience has required the most self-sufficiency from me. If you can tough it out for 24 hours along the coast, you can almost always get to assistance when needed. Off-shore, you better be able to deal with the problems yourself...period. I believe that present day boat building has evolved more into a comfort and price issue than a safety one. Of course, increased comfort enhances safety, but lets face it, most boats above 27' (yeah, there are several competent shorter boats, but this is a generalization after all)built within the last 15 years can be safely sailed anywhere in the world by a competent crew with modest modifications. Modern coastal cruisers are typically designed to be fast, agile and spacious. They are ideally suited to the needs of the vast majority of sailors out there. They entice one out for short duration trips, day sailing and dockside lounging. They are inviting to non-sailors and they are easy for the inexperienced to sail credibly. They are fast enough for the experienced, land-bound, skipper to extend the vacation cruising range significantly. Bluewater boats are designed to track well with a minimum of sail trim or helm attendance. They are designed to reduce the labor involved in sail handling and to stow a large volume of gear and provisions securely. Living spaces are more confined in order to minimize damage to crew in rough weather. They are over-designed and over-built to be able keep things from breaking during extended periods of rough weather and in locations far from repair facilities. They are COMPARATIVELY (pardon the shouted emphasis) slower, less maneuverable, and less spacious. Most long term sailors have owned more than one boat. Experience, income, lifestyle changes and personal desires evolve constantly, often making earlier choices no longer suitable. I really believe that the process of deciding on a choice between designs and manufacturers should start with a stringent and brutally honest self-evaluation. That will determine whether a bluewater or coastal cruiser will be the categorical choice. When that choice is made, the relative price, design and quality merits of the various builders within that category can and should be vigorously debated and considered. If bluewater cruising is a dream for a sailor without significant experience, it can be compared to the stereotypical ghetto fantasy of MBA greatness. Many aspire, but few are suited and far fewer realize the dream. Buying a bluewater cruiser for the off-shore dreamers is, often, a major force in those dreams being dashed. Budget considerations frequently result in a project boat that wears down the novice with sweat, unending work and expense while providing little opportunity for sailing. The sailing characteristics of these boats do not lend themselves to enticing one to indulge in spur-of-the-moment outings that provoke both the joy and the added experience that ultimately lead the dreamer to far shores. Time restraints and speed limitations often prevent exploring much beyond the local cruising ground. Obviously, if one has decided to take the plunge and actually cast off on an extended bluewater voyage in the reasonably near future, disregarding the accumulated wisdom of veterans of tens (hundreds?) of thousands of open ocean miles is utter foolishness. A coastal cruiser will wear you down on an extended passage and markedly increase your chances for injury. It simply does not have tankage and stowage sufficient for the crew its sea-keeping tendencies demand. A bit of my personal history may be illustrative. I built my first boat at age fourteen. My first offshore cruise to the Bahamas occurred at age nineteen. It was aboard a homebuilt 24-foot, wooden, gaff rigged center-boarder. Moku Makai had wooden spars, hoops, canvas sails, hemp lines, galvanized stays and shrouds, no winches, no water tank, no head, no icebox and no galley. The only instruments were a compass, watch, sextant and an ancient portable RDF unit. Until about age 30, I believed that only wooden sailboats were worth owning. In various trades, occupations and avocations, I developed sufficient skill and expertise to be able, not only to own, maintain and sail a wooden bluewater cruiser, but even to build one. From my earliest remembrances, my heart was set upon sailing across the oceans to foreign lands and distant islands. Ironically, life choices and limited opportunities conspired to most frequently put me aboard those accursed 'bleach bottles'. I eventually learned that the resolution of my personal cravings lay in sailing often in any form and that the destinations were but the targets that focused me on getting off the dock. Now approaching my mid-fifties, I know that while the dream has not been extinguished, its realization is highly unlikely to occur in the foreseeable future or if so, not in a boat of my own. I am probably at the peak of my career and love what I am doing. My life partner of over thirty years, loves cruising but is completely intimidated by the ocean. I would be miserable being separated for much more than short time. So, sailing, if it to be indulged in as often as possible, must be aboard an easy boat. Easy to depart, easy to sail shorthanded, easy to maintain, easy to log miles quickly and easy on these aging muscles, joints and bones. Thus, for us, personal characteristics defined a coastal cruiser as the most suitable category. Within that category, the Catalina 320 was an easy choice. It is stiff enough to comfortably handle the nasty chop and mean summer squalls so frequent in the shallow Pamlico Sound. It is fast and agile enough to extend our cruising grounds North to the Chesapeake or South to Charleston during a week-long vacation. It is comfortable enough for us to happily take our youngest and her three friends out for a day sail last Saturday after returning Friday evening from an eight-day vacation cruise aboard. It is pleasurable enough to prompt us to frequent impromptu, week-night, dinner cruises after work when the weather is inviting. Would I take it to Bermuda, the Bahamas or down the Coast, across the Gulf to Central America? In a heartbeat, if the opportunity ever arises. Trans-oceanic? Extremely unlikely...though...never say never. Am I now, ever tempted by the lines of a lovely schooner, a well maintained Herreshoff ketch or an old Bermuda 40? Not really. But I confess they do attract my eye. Much in the same way a lovely spirited lass can not fail to draw my gaze. But, just as I am totally committed to the Admiral, I am happy with my choice ov vessels and am never truly tempted. And to add one small bit of wisdom these sparse gray hairs have accumulated over the decades. Never, ever, ever, ever...ogle...no matter how innocently! Your boat may forgive you, but she will never forget. Best regards and Fair winds, Chris
Well, I haven't had much to say recently, so I might as well wade in with a few musings and personal observations as well. I pretty much agree with everything that has been said so far, especially as clarified by subsequent postings of the various authors. But, I would suggest a few distinctions, that are implicit, but perhaps have not been so clearly articulated. Pardon the lengthiness of the post, but I feel that these points should me made in any discussion of the relevant merits of bluewater and coastal cruisers being engaged in by a mixed company of experienced and not so experienced sailors. Mostly of these ideas are inherently understood by knowledgeable sailors. But, somehow, they often get lost in the debate between the specific design characteristics of both categories of cruisers. I believe that a self-inventory of personal characteristics tends to eliminate the design debate. I'm not convinced that there really is much difference in the sailing skills required for safe and competent inshore racing, offshore racing, coastal cruising and bluewater voyaging. Coastal cruising (encompassing most of my 35+ years of experience) just as other posters have observed, has provided me with the most anxiety and seemed to me to be the most dangerous sailing I have experienced. My limited off-shore sailing experience has required the most self-sufficiency from me. If you can tough it out for 24 hours along the coast, you can almost always get to assistance when needed. Off-shore, you better be able to deal with the problems yourself...period. I believe that present day boat building has evolved more into a comfort and price issue than a safety one. Of course, increased comfort enhances safety, but lets face it, most boats above 27' (yeah, there are several competent shorter boats, but this is a generalization after all)built within the last 15 years can be safely sailed anywhere in the world by a competent crew with modest modifications. Modern coastal cruisers are typically designed to be fast, agile and spacious. They are ideally suited to the needs of the vast majority of sailors out there. They entice one out for short duration trips, day sailing and dockside lounging. They are inviting to non-sailors and they are easy for the inexperienced to sail credibly. They are fast enough for the experienced, land-bound, skipper to extend the vacation cruising range significantly. Bluewater boats are designed to track well with a minimum of sail trim or helm attendance. They are designed to reduce the labor involved in sail handling and to stow a large volume of gear and provisions securely. Living spaces are more confined in order to minimize damage to crew in rough weather. They are over-designed and over-built to be able keep things from breaking during extended periods of rough weather and in locations far from repair facilities. They are COMPARATIVELY (pardon the shouted emphasis) slower, less maneuverable, and less spacious. Most long term sailors have owned more than one boat. Experience, income, lifestyle changes and personal desires evolve constantly, often making earlier choices no longer suitable. I really believe that the process of deciding on a choice between designs and manufacturers should start with a stringent and brutally honest self-evaluation. That will determine whether a bluewater or coastal cruiser will be the categorical choice. When that choice is made, the relative price, design and quality merits of the various builders within that category can and should be vigorously debated and considered. If bluewater cruising is a dream for a sailor without significant experience, it can be compared to the stereotypical ghetto fantasy of MBA greatness. Many aspire, but few are suited and far fewer realize the dream. Buying a bluewater cruiser for the off-shore dreamers is, often, a major force in those dreams being dashed. Budget considerations frequently result in a project boat that wears down the novice with sweat, unending work and expense while providing little opportunity for sailing. The sailing characteristics of these boats do not lend themselves to enticing one to indulge in spur-of-the-moment outings that provoke both the joy and the added experience that ultimately lead the dreamer to far shores. Time restraints and speed limitations often prevent exploring much beyond the local cruising ground. Obviously, if one has decided to take the plunge and actually cast off on an extended bluewater voyage in the reasonably near future, disregarding the accumulated wisdom of veterans of tens (hundreds?) of thousands of open ocean miles is utter foolishness. A coastal cruiser will wear you down on an extended passage and markedly increase your chances for injury. It simply does not have tankage and stowage sufficient for the crew its sea-keeping tendencies demand. A bit of my personal history may be illustrative. I built my first boat at age fourteen. My first offshore cruise to the Bahamas occurred at age nineteen. It was aboard a homebuilt 24-foot, wooden, gaff rigged center-boarder. Moku Makai had wooden spars, hoops, canvas sails, hemp lines, galvanized stays and shrouds, no winches, no water tank, no head, no icebox and no galley. The only instruments were a compass, watch, sextant and an ancient portable RDF unit. Until about age 30, I believed that only wooden sailboats were worth owning. In various trades, occupations and avocations, I developed sufficient skill and expertise to be able, not only to own, maintain and sail a wooden bluewater cruiser, but even to build one. From my earliest remembrances, my heart was set upon sailing across the oceans to foreign lands and distant islands. Ironically, life choices and limited opportunities conspired to most frequently put me aboard those accursed 'bleach bottles'. I eventually learned that the resolution of my personal cravings lay in sailing often in any form and that the destinations were but the targets that focused me on getting off the dock. Now approaching my mid-fifties, I know that while the dream has not been extinguished, its realization is highly unlikely to occur in the foreseeable future or if so, not in a boat of my own. I am probably at the peak of my career and love what I am doing. My life partner of over thirty years, loves cruising but is completely intimidated by the ocean. I would be miserable being separated for much more than short time. So, sailing, if it to be indulged in as often as possible, must be aboard an easy boat. Easy to depart, easy to sail shorthanded, easy to maintain, easy to log miles quickly and easy on these aging muscles, joints and bones. Thus, for us, personal characteristics defined a coastal cruiser as the most suitable category. Within that category, the Catalina 320 was an easy choice. It is stiff enough to comfortably handle the nasty chop and mean summer squalls so frequent in the shallow Pamlico Sound. It is fast and agile enough to extend our cruising grounds North to the Chesapeake or South to Charleston during a week-long vacation. It is comfortable enough for us to happily take our youngest and her three friends out for a day sail last Saturday after returning Friday evening from an eight-day vacation cruise aboard. It is pleasurable enough to prompt us to frequent impromptu, week-night, dinner cruises after work when the weather is inviting. Would I take it to Bermuda, the Bahamas or down the Coast, across the Gulf to Central America? In a heartbeat, if the opportunity ever arises. Trans-oceanic? Extremely unlikely...though...never say never. Am I now, ever tempted by the lines of a lovely schooner, a well maintained Herreshoff ketch or an old Bermuda 40? Not really. But I confess they do attract my eye. Much in the same way a lovely spirited lass can not fail to draw my gaze. But, just as I am totally committed to the Admiral, I am happy with my choice ov vessels and am never truly tempted. And to add one small bit of wisdom these sparse gray hairs have accumulated over the decades. Never, ever, ever, ever...ogle...no matter how innocently! Your boat may forgive you, but she will never forget. Best regards and Fair winds, Chris
- Status