Some Guys Like a Big Transom on Their Girl

Aug 2, 2011
90
Newport 30 MKIII Madeira Beach, FL
Was at the the St. Petersburg Boat show yesterday looking at the new Catalinas, Hunters, Jeanneaus & Beneteaus. Compared to my Newport 30, even the new 31's are huge. With the full beam carried aft the inside volume below is incredible and the cockpits are the size of a dance floor. Transoms are like room additions.

The design generally features a flat bottom, hard chine and a deep fin keel or bulb and in some cases dual wheels and rudders.

Aside from aesthetics and personal preference I wonder how the new designs compare to the more traditional boats of the 70's, 80's and 90's under sail. I can't help but think that the more traditional, narrower cockpit offers greater protection in heavy conditions. But what about performance and comfort? Size for size the newer boats are lighter weight as well.

Windborne
 
Sep 15, 2009
6,243
S2 9.2a Fairhope Al
Size for size the newer boats are lighter weight as well.

Windborne
that ought a tell ya some thing ...they building em bigger and lighter ...that tells me that they have figured out how to use less fiberglass in the build (read thinner hull) the older boats did not know how strong fiberglass was at the time so they built heavy because of the unknown ...technical advances have made it possible to lighten up the material ...my guess in time there will be fewer and fewer good old boats because of this....
 
Mar 28, 2007
637
Oday 23 Anna Maria Isl.
while some weight has been removed, it is quite possible that some strength has been added with the ever better designed hull liner grids. you would probably have to look at it on a boat by boat basis.
 
May 17, 2004
5,679
Beneteau Oceanis 37 Havre de Grace
This season we switched from a traditionally shaped O'Day 28 to a modern flat-bottomed, wide-transom Beneteau 37. No doubt the new design probe idea more room. As for performance, we haven't had the new one in any significant seas, but I definitely notice a difference in heeling characteristics. The O'Day would heel progressively more in increasing wind, getting the rail in the water with relative ease, but feeling under control the whole time. The Beneteau I find heels to a point (at a relatively low angle), then settles there even in increasing pressure. This means generally a more comfortable ride, to a point. The downside is that when the pressure becomes too much to keep that constant angle, it feels like the boat "tips" beyond an edge and starts to get quickly uncomfortable, and with the flat bottom it rounds up stalling the rudder (something I never experienced in the O'Day). The other thing I notice about the flat bottom is that in tight quarters it seems to "slide over" the water rather than "digging in". In other words once you start spinning or sliding the back of the boat sideways it keeps going that way, whereas the deeper bottomed O'Day would stop the spin relatively quickly. This can work for or against you depending on if you anticipate it.
 
Aug 14, 2012
9
several several trailer sailer
I like the speed of the modern flat bottom with the beam carried to the stern. But I once had a set of steep following waves that seemed to have just the right period to make helm control begin slipping away. The narrow bow dug in while the broad stern was lifted and tried to pass the bow. Usually you can correct with the rudder, but the waves came just a bit to quickly to fully correct, almost like a harmonic building. With each wave I was just a little further from where I needed to be, I could feel I was gradually losing it and would broach if the heavy set of waves didn't die off pretty soon. They did let up and nothing bad happened, but it made a big impression on me.

I just deliberately purchased an older boat with a narrower stern and longer (not deeper) keel. I really did not like the feeling of gradually losing control, and am willing to give up the speed my wife likes for a better chance of control during stressful rather than ideal conditions. The "new" old boat is on the hard and I have not tried it. It was 1° F. this morning, I'm in Maine, and I won't be trying it for a long while yet. Just theory at this point.
 

richk

.
Jan 24, 2007
495
Marlow-Hunter 37 Deep Creek off the Magothy River off ChesBay
I think I agree with what Davidasailor26 has to say. We have a 2014 Marlow Hunter 37. She's on the hard right now, only had her wet from July to October so we don't have a lot of experience sailing her. A feature which attracted us to her was her stern platform. This was wonderful for grandkids and us. Grandkids launch off it and we use it for fishing and dinghy boarding with our golden.

More info about sailing characteristics next summer....
 

zeehag

.
Mar 26, 2009
3,198
1976 formosa 41 yankee clipper santa barbara. ca.(not there)
i LOVE my big heavy fat bottomed girl with her heart shaped transom.
perfect cruiser.
 

WayneH

.
Jan 22, 2008
1,094
Tartan 37 287 Pensacola, FL
I'm sure that destroyer bows and wide transoms are the result of lots of wave tank testing to build faster and faster monohulls. Good for them.

But they don't appeal to me. That's why I bought a 31 year young Tartan 37. She looks like a sailboat to me and she has enough armor under the gelcoat to survive my not-quite-perfect skills. She sails just fine in all sorts of conditions which we get here on the Texas Coast. If I could just figure out how to make her go as fast downwind as she does upwind, I'd be happy.
 

Pat

.
Jun 7, 2004
1,250
Oday 272LE Ninnescah Yacht Club, Wichita, Ks.
We saw the same trend at this year's Newport Boat Show....much broader at the stern and probably to
add interior space, esp. the all-important aft quarters...I had always heard that boats with broad
sterns were more affected by heavy following seas, everything else being equal as to length, beam, etc., I don't believe I would enjoy sailing in a following sea with a boat prone to lifting and sliding to
port or starboard...Being on an inland lake however, my opinion may not be based on reality.
 
Dec 7, 2014
4
Catalina Catalina 36 McKinley
Aside from aesthetics and personal preference I wonder how the new designs compare to the more traditional boats of the 70's, 80's and 90's under sail. I can't help but think that the more traditional, narrower cockpit offers greater protection in heavy conditions. But what about performance and comfort? Size for size the newer boats are lighter weight as well.

Windborne
The ocean racers have gone to the design for speed. The new consumer boats are modeled after the Open 60's and similar sleds, but few of them "get it". While the designs look like the ocean racers, they will not get up and scoot across the surface at 20+ knots in a similar fashion. The modern consumer boats seem to make use of the design style to create great large cocktail platforms at dock, not to surf off waves at 25 knots.

This reminds me of the 1980's and wing keels. An America's Cup boat won with a radical design that had winglets on a deep keel. Consumer boat manufactures claimed America's Cup technology with their new wing keels, but in fact they were only to provide for shoal clearance. The winglets on a cup boat made it point better. The winds on a consumer boat allow it to go sideways.

If you read "Perry on Design" column he'll tell you that the wide butt on the boat will help at speed, but the increased wetted area will really slow the boat down in light air.

GJ
 
Nov 8, 2010
11,386
Beneteau First 36.7 & 260 Minneapolis MN & Bayfield WI
Wide-transomed sailboats have been around since the mid-90s, and are born from the French ocean racing (VOR and Vendee) boats. Typically these boats will have a ‘pizza-slice’ hull-form with a very flat aft underwater section. The rig is very typically a 9/10s fractional with the mast set quite far aft for a fractional boat. The design offers several benefits.

It’s not surprising that the European builders (Beneteau, Jeanneau, Elan, Pogo, Bavaria etc) started this wide transomed cruiser craze, as unlike US builders that use internal designers, the European builders use the same famed yacht design firms (Finot, Farr, VLPP, Humpreys) that design these race boats. Although most are NOT resigned to race, to the average cruiser, a wide transom boat will have immense interior volume, which often gets put to use as dual aft cabins in boats as small as 32 feet. It also creates a boat with very high initial (form) stability, meaning the boat will resist heeling and sail flatter and more comfortably in most conditions.

To a high performance sailor, the boats are a total treat. The wide flat aft sections make a boat much more likely to plane. Also due to the hull increasing in beam over most of its length, the water flow will stay laminar for longer, resisting drag. In addition, the wide transom gives much better resistance to ‘death-roll’ when sailing fast downwind. The reserve buoyancy in the transom area with is lifted out of the water resists being submerged, and keeps the boat on its feet.

If you can get enough sail area downwind, and crew weight back, the boat will lift out of the water and plane, and the ‘bow wake’ starts to build not at the bow but under the mast. We call this ‘sending it’. The so-called transom wake is 10 feet off the back of the boat. A traditional boat just digs a hole in the water and rolls.


Potential downsides? Normally wide transom boats have more wetted surface area, so they are ‘stickier’ in very light airs. And as a rule they do not point quite as well as an equal boat with narrower beam.

We sail 3 high performance boats regularly, a

Pogo 12.50 (40 feet), a
First 36.7 (35 feet) and a
First 260 (24.5 feet).

Both the Pogo and the 260 are wide transomed boats (LOA / transom beam ratio <3) and are VERY fast and stable off of the wind. The Pogo is good for 17+ knots in a blow, and in more than 20 knots of breeze, the little 260 is FASTER than the vaunted 36.7 as it will readily plane.

People talk about the wide cockpit being unsafe but its mostly perception and getting used to the space and the lifelined open transom. We have had the Pogo in crazy 15 foot+ seas in Greece and never felt unsafe or in danger. Its sea manner and motion was different to a traditional hulled boat, but not worse.

The vast majority of people that knock the design have NEVER been on one sailing, or more tellingly on a boat that planes. In many ways it is the way of the future. Even Hinckley believes so. Have you seen the brand new Bermuda 50?? Go take a look.
 
Nov 8, 2010
11,386
Beneteau First 36.7 & 260 Minneapolis MN & Bayfield WI
the older boats did not know how strong fiberglass was at the time so they built heavy because of the unknown ...technical advances have made it possible to lighten up the material ...my guess in time there will be fewer and fewer good old boats because of this....
Woodster,

This is actually not true, but an often-told misconception.

From the mid 30s thhrough the end of WWII, the US government commissioned Owens-Corning, DuPont, and American Cyanamid with developing fiberglass for aircraft design, and lavished millions of dollars on the work. By the end of the war, the strength, durability, and design characteristics of fiberglass were VERY well known.

At least to engineers.

What IS true is that many old-school boat builders simply used fiberglass as a replacement for wood, and used the scantlings and schedules for wood boats on the new boats. As the majority of them were not engineers, it would take a new generation of engineer/navel architects to sort that out.

Fast forward. Now we have boats that are stronger, lighter and faster than the old designs. Gotta love science.
 
Jan 1, 2006
7,586
Slickcraft 26 Sailfish
I don't know if my H356 from 2002 or 2004, I don't remember, would be considered as one of these wide transom yachts. It did have quite a bit of volume in the transom but I wouldn't say the bottom was flat by today's standards. Nevertheless, it was tiresome to steer downwind in waves. The waves would catch us and the throw the transom around. The helmsman had a time to steer straight. If the boat were fast enough to sail over the waves it would have been entirely different. But it wasn't fast enough. So, I'd offer that speed is what makes the difference between a wide transom fun or a pain in the butt.
 
Nov 8, 2010
11,386
Beneteau First 36.7 & 260 Minneapolis MN & Bayfield WI
I don't know if my H356 from 2002 or 2004, I don't remember, would be considered as one of these wide transom yachts. It did have quite a bit of volume in the transom but I wouldn't say the bottom was flat by today's standards. Nevertheless, it was tiresome to steer downwind in waves. The waves would catch us and the throw the transom around. The helmsman had a time to steer straight. If the boat were fast enough to sail over the waves it would have been entirely different. But it wasn't fast enough. So, I'd offer that speed is what makes the difference between a wide transom fun or a pain in the butt.
Andrew,

That's a great observation. If you are moving faster than the waves going downwind, its amazing (if somewhat hair raising) sail. Once the breeze fell off, the speeds crept down and the waves caught us. Then it's different work; keeping the nose of the boat in front of the back as the back lifts. But that happens in a traditional hull as well. Unless the waves brakes, the wide transom's extra reserve buoyancy helps lift the boat.

Your 356 was probably more of a transitional design, partially owning to the builder knowing its customers as well as the era. But Hendo knew how to design a fast boat when left to his own devices!
 
Sep 8, 2014
2,551
Catalina 22 Swing Keel San Diego
Not for a 1/4 million $...

Performance characteristics of the newer hull designs aside, my observations of the boats from all the same builders mentioned above is this; (San Diego International Boat Show, 2014) I saw very poor craftsmanship and lack of any attention to detail on many of these yachts from the $150 to $500K price range. Mostly on the interiors, but also a few exterior and rigging details were lacking. Most in particular on the interior were panels that had wide and inconsistent gaps, poorly aligned fasteners and even more 'cheap' fasteners and hardware, poorly fitting cabin soles and even worse fitting cabin sole access covers. I am very well aware of the factory setting and how these vessels are built, but there appears to be a complete lack of ownership in the job, pride in the craftsmanship. When a yacht goes above the 1/4 million $ mark I expect a certain attention to detail... That was completely lacking in so many new models, they seemed like cheaply constructed motor homes.
The only modern fiberglass hull production hulls I saw that day that did not have such epic failures and showed true craftsmanship in construction were the J Boats, and the few examples on hand were used boats! If am going to spend that kind of money I think I'd be better off finding an older production hull with great pedigree for less than $50K and then spending the time and money to get it the way I want it.
 
Nov 8, 2010
11,386
Beneteau First 36.7 & 260 Minneapolis MN & Bayfield WI
Performance characteristics of the newer hull designs aside, my observations of the boats from all the same builders mentioned above is this; (San Diego International Boat Show, 2014) I saw very poor craftsmanship and lack of any attention to detail on many of these yachts from the $150 to $500K price range. Mostly on the interiors, but also a few exterior and rigging details were lacking. Most in particular on the interior were panels that had wide and inconsistent gaps, poorly aligned fasteners and even more 'cheap' fasteners and hardware, poorly fitting cabin soles and even worse fitting cabin sole access covers. I am very well aware of the factory setting and how these vessels are built, but there appears to be a complete lack of ownership in the job, pride in the craftsmanship. When a yacht goes above the 1/4 million $ mark I expect a certain attention to detail... That was completely lacking in so many new models, they seemed like cheaply constructed motor homes.
The only modern fiberglass hull production hulls I saw that day that did not have such epic failures and showed true craftsmanship in construction were the J Boats, and the few examples on hand were used boats! If am going to spend that kind of money I think I'd be better off finding an older production hull with great pedigree for less than $50K and then spending the time and money to get it the way I want it.
Well that sounds a little like a fox and the grapes story, but I'll bite.

Any new $250000-$500000 production boat (just like a house for that matter) will have issues that need to be corrected after the sail. Buy a new house, and the punch list keeps the contractor coming back for a solid month. Same with boats. When buying a new boat, you pick the boat and the dealer. Visit the yard when it's being built. Review it before it ships. Review it after it gets to the dealer. Dealer sails with you for a shakedown. I have friends with J-109s and J-111s and they had to do the same thing.
 
Nov 8, 2010
11,386
Beneteau First 36.7 & 260 Minneapolis MN & Bayfield WI
ya wont do that on a Morris or a Hinkly
Yes you do. Those owners just fret about a different level of deal. A friend of mine (a Hink owner) made 7 trips to oversee the construction. And he still had a punch list.

And for 1.5 million bucks, you deserve to have an interior whittled out of a solid block of Maine hardwood. Mere mortals like me, I have to put up with the odd uneven trim panel!

BTW - Hink and Morris both make exactly ONE SAILBOAT per year. Not because they want to. Very few people want what they are offering any more.

You two should go start a new thread with your issues. Let me know if you need a suggestion for a title.
 
Nov 8, 2010
11,386
Beneteau First 36.7 & 260 Minneapolis MN & Bayfield WI
That's a real jack-ass thing to say, the reference to the Fox and Grapes fable... I guess you know me well enough to assert that I could not buy one of those boats if I wanted to. Regardless if I could or could not, I guess you don't think its ok to hold people to a certain standard of craftsmanship when a there is a purchase price exceeding 1/4 million. Sorry, I am probably way younger than you, but my head is stuck in an era when people who built things took great care in what they produced. Those things built at that time; cars, buildings, or hulls, have stood the test of time. Today's products don't hold a candle to that standard because profit is job number 1, not quality.
Cloud,

I TOTALLY get what you are saying. And I respect your choice on what to do with your own money. My comment (and it was a bit snarky, sorry!) was directed at the placement of your comment HERE, in this very interesting thread about modern sailboat performance. Interjecting a comment on your option on the built quality of these boats without ANY thought on the actual topic sounded unseemly, and well, like sour grapes. If you want to start a thread about construction details on new boats, start one. I'll probably comment. I have my fair share of stories.