I recently posted a page on my site listing 60 plus sailboats up to 32' that are capable or can be easily modified for offshore voyaging. I thought some of you here might like to comment, offer corrections or additions to the list. Not every good boat is on the list. It's not meant to imply that other boats are not suitable, or that those on the list are necessarily "better" than others - just boats falling within my personal criteria as spelled out in the article. I have a separate list for boats I consider more trailerable primarily for coastal cruising which I'm still working on. Thanks.
http://atomvoyages.com/articles/boatlist.htm
James
s/v Atom
Hi James, I like your list. One question though, the cape dory 25 you mentioned reduceing cockpit volume. Would you mind clerifying that for me a little. Id appreciate your input.
The reason he mentions reducing cockpit volume is to reduce the amount of seawater that can sit in the cockpit when the boat is pooped.
In the case of my boat, I installed a bridgedeck, which did two things that made the boat significantly more seaworthy. First, it reduced the chance of downflooding by raising the companionway entrance level to slightly higher than the transom and cockpit seats—which greatly prevents water from getting from the cockpit into the cabin. It also reduced the cockpit volume by FIVE CUBIC FEET—which translates into 320 lbs. of seawater which can't fill the cockpit any longer. This means that the cockpit will drain faster, and the stern of the boat will be depressed less after the boat gets pooped by a wave. I also added a third cockpit drain.
James-
That's an excellent list... I'd also suggest a few others that might be worthy of consideration for inclusion.
I'm rather surprised the Hallberg Rassy Monsun (http://www.hallberg-rassy.com/monsun/monsun.shtml) isn't on the list. It's 31' LOA IIRC. 904 were made, and it can often be found for sale.
The Elizabethan series of boats also comes to mind as some that might be suitable for the list—particularly, the Elizabethan 29, 30 and 31.
Another boat that comes to mind is the Golden Hind 31 (http://cruisingresources.com/Golden_Hind_31). They also made a Golden Hind 26 IIRC.
Excellent list... I particularly liked some of your personal comments....The amazing thing to me is that I'm
so in agreement with someone elses "opinions".....I don't like gas on my boat.....I have a diesel but if it
wasn't paid for and I had to replace it I'd go electric. I mean do I really need the cost and wasted space of a diesel and a 25 gal tank? After all I've used a grand total of 8 gal of diesel fuel in in 2 and a half years. Does that justify the cost and space requirements....I'll probably never replace my diesel because it will probably never wear out. Most of it's running time is idling and starting just to make sure it will. The only boat on your list that I "might" take over my WC Triton ( one of the 2 heavy hulls with 4519# of lead in the keel & weighs 9460#, not a lite air boat)) would be the Bristol Channel Cutter. I don't think that's gonna be a problem though as I don't think Ill hit the lottery. Good dope for us low
end sailors. Way to go..TJ
I was pleased to see our Rhodes Meridian made your list- and DELIGHTED at the comment on the beautiful sheer lines. Lines shared by the Pearson Vangard. I happen to be working on a Vanguard for a customer and when I showed a picture of the boat to my wife, she immediately said- "that may be a Pearson, but Alberg didn't draw it- that's a RHODES design" ;D
All the info we find though, shows the ballast on the Meridian to be 2300 pounds with a total disp of 5300.
Ours is extensively modified, having the companionway narrowed to 24 inches and shortened the same, with a seahood added, and the entry way changed to straight sided, so the drop boards are interchangeable. The fore cabin was totally modified also, to add considerable storage space. And I added settee back storage, which the original Meridian lacked.
If you'd like, I'll send you some pictures of the changes.
great list!
Of the arguments i've read about tiller vs. wheel, I don't think anyone has ever mentioned being able to see the rudder angle at a glance. Thats something I probably would never have thought of until I gained some experience. And it makes enough sense for me to get over the 'yacht look' of a wheel :)
And that's probably the LEAST of the advantages of a tiller. The BIGGEST advantages are simplicity- less to break ( and it WILL break), more room in the cockpit when anchored and simpler self steering.
The last is quite important - there are few things more mind numbing than steering a sailboat, by hand, offshore, on passage. One being steering a sailboat under power, on passage :D
Thanks for the additions to the list. I know I've missed a few that I wanted to include. I added the Monsun 31, Elizabethan 29 and Golden Hind 31.
The comments on cockpit footwell volume are spot on. I can add that I find it equally important to ensure the cockpit lockers are well latched with gaskets and the companionway entrance raised above the footwell. On my Triton, the companionway was already a few inches above the bridgedeck so I added some removable boards to close off the forward 25% of the footwell which is where I ended up stowing some water jugs. If the cockpit lockers can be made watertight from the bilge, all the better, but is hard to do with an inboard engine that needs access for repairs.
Charlie, I'd like to see your modifications photos if you have a link or want to email them.
JamesB
Thank you James for adding the list to your site and I like your comments about each boat. I use to want a steering wheel but I see some of these boats you really want a tiller for more room rather then a wheel. I see some boats that have a wheel and there is just no dang room for it but yeah never thought a wheel would be more things to break. I will for sure be giving you a call when I'm ready to buy in a year for some consulting. Thank you so much for the list.
Chris
James-
Glad to help. :)
BTW, here's a photo of the bridgedeck that I added to the cockpit of my boat—14" high or so, and slightly taller than the transom of the boat.
(http://www.flauntlingerie.com/files/bridgedeck2.jpg)
Here is the original cockpit, as seen on a sister ship, which has a very shallow sill, 3" high or so, at the bottom of the companionway.
(http://www.adriftatsea.com/files/cockpit.png)
Jim,
I have been looking seriously at the Valiant 32, I know they are raced to Hawaii from San Fran. and seem to do well. One other boat you might want to consider.
From a personal bias I was pleased to see the the Cape Dory 26 on your list - note that there were about 20 26D models built with a well-done Westerbeke 10-2 diesel installation instead of the outboard well the straight 26s had. As there weren't many 26Ds built they are a bit hard to come by, but I think the 26D is a big improvement over the 26 and well worth searching out.
Quote from: newt on October 19, 2008, 10:09:18 PM
Jim,
I have been looking seriously at the Valiant 32, I know they are raced to Hawaii from San Fran. and seem to do well. One other boat you might want to consider.
I like the vailant boats but I thought they only made liek from 40ft on up
Ok thanx for the info. I thought it might be a bridge deck issue. i do have a bridge deck in my boat. I think it was improvement cape dory made in 1976 and later 25s. As far as your take on the hatch boards go, I absulutely agree. I have a dow pin on each side of my top board. Not high tech but it works.
Chris,
A number of "big boat" makers started out with pocket cruisers, some of them very affordable, and others more expensive. The ones that I like are Shannon 28's, Valiant 32's, Island Packet 26-through 32's..etc.
I think smaller boats have their limitations, but if you choose quality and you have experience...you can go far (as this list points out)
Another boat that surprises me with its seaworthiness is a carefully outfitted Catalina 27.
BTW- I currently sail a Compac 23 and as I understand its limitations- I am extremely happy with it.
Fuji 32's have cruised the world.
The one I had went from CA. to Hawaii back to Ca back to Hawaii to Guam to Japan and is now back in Hawaii.
Very good capable cruiser and easy to handle for 1 or 2 crew.
Following up on what Newt said... Compac now makes a 37' boat IIRC.
One of oure Posters from Triton groups has just posted that he is looking for a home for his Triton. He has owned it for 38 years. He is no longer able to maintain it. The boat is in Florida and a link to him (You can also check it out on Triton groups) would be TJACMC@aol.com I think he is willing to give it to the right home. He just isn't able to take care of it anymore and can't stand to see go to h.ll TJim
I know someone looking a sturdy boat like Triton. which group is it? maybe I can go in halves and with Sherri, then sell my half back when things get better with the Economy..lol. it'll give me a buddy boat travel with. lol.
Bill
The Triton is gone... went to a local in Florida.... difdn't last long... TJim
good boats sale ...eeerr sell..uhum sail..they get gone fast. lol.
I got a friend that's homeless and boatless so I let her move in with me and I think she'll be back on her feet by spring. if not then it looks like I'll have a crew or house sitter, till we stumble on to abandoned project that's cheap.
if yall can, please keep an eye for a project.
thanks.
Bill
the Coronado 30 ...Cons = deep cockpit, holds lots of water if pooped, low thresh hold from cockpit to the cabin, very small head area, no shower, lockers open to the bilge and not a very good seal, large windows on the cabin, small drains in the cockpit, 3 large lockers in the cockpit that open to the bilge.
pros = shes paid for, strong solid hull/deck, easy to sail single handed, affordable, airy and well lit cabin, large gally for a 30'er, classic woody look in the cabin, large stove and oven. lots of seating for guest, hot water heater.
I like the simple gas A-4 engine. it's simple and easy to maintain. mine is new. it was built up from a bare block. I was raised around the Chris Crafts from the early 50's, and I'm at ease with the gas on the boat. keep everything checked and ventalated, any leaks get fixed right then, and you don't have to worry too much.
the alchol stove that came with my boat, looks brand new. I'm not sure if it's ever been used. I read the directions posted in the manuel, and it is very simple to operate. I like the idea of being able to put out the stove fire, with water. L.P. would be nice but I think I would be on the guard for leak.
I don't like the deep ice box. it's a long reach to get to the bottom, but it does keep things cool. I might consider converting it to 12vdc fridge.
I'm going to add more drains to the cockpit, and add seals to the lockers. I am going to raise the thresh hold on the cabin entrance. I'm looking at thicker lexan to replace the main cabin windows.
I'm working on a fix for the missing leg room in the head. that should not be hard to fix.
the one thing I want to do is rebuild the main hatch, and have the wooden frame built close to the old design, but add a lexan top panel. it may get hot in the summer, so I'm looking at adding a cover to go on the outside to block the sun from shining in.
that's my $0.02 worth.
Bill
WOOT! I made this list ;D
Tingira
Islander 29
I would love to see a few pics of this modification.
Click "re:adriftatsea bridge deck" and just scroll down the page ;)
See post #10 of this thread or click
HERE to see it on my blog (http://blog.dankim.com/2007/07/18/bridgedeck-update/).
Quote from: Tingira on January 07, 2009, 07:47:13 PM
I would love to see a few pics of this modification.
I am interested in the Island Packet 27 and notice that it didn't make the list. Obviously it has wheel steering, which is not ideal, but other than that it seems like the perfect pocket cruiser. It is very roomy for a 27 footer and from what I have read it seems well-made and very sea-worthy. What do you guys think?
Check the boat out on WWW.image-ination/sailcalc.html The capsize ratio (201) does not meet blue water specs. Compare it to Alberg 29 or 30.Or whatever else turns your fancy. TJ
Well the ratio and numbers are just a guide. People have crossed in worse! I would say take her for a test sail and see what you think. See if you like the motion the boat gives you. I recall a thread in the past where people were talking about what passed as a "good passage maker" and being utterly sick on them.
However, Jim brings up a really good point and website. I love that site!!
Heh... the Cape Dory 25D has another issue not mentioned in the quick review: the galley was designed for someone who eats out of a can, and doesn't worry much about washing up. (The galley sink is only accessible *through* the companionway ladder.) Fuel and water tankage are somewhat limiting, but a SA/D of 16.4 coupled with a frankly surprising CR of 27.22 (on a boat of only 25' LOA!) mean the boat is both quicker and more comfortable than you might think. (The trade off for that performance is a need to reef a bit earlier.)
Mmm, but don't take the babblings of someone who owns and loves the boat seriously. I'm a touch biased.
Quote from: Amgine on May 01, 2009, 03:53:56 PM
(The trade off for that performance is a need to reef a bit earlier.)
Typical of Alberg designs of that era?
The A-30 also likes a reef-early approach. I've sailed in 18 knots with a reefed main a genny and even then had noticeable weather helm (though not uncomfortable) and she was still doing hull speed+ offshore in 5-6 seas. It just seemed a bit odd to me to have partial main + genny. Oh well. Seems like lots of newer boats prefer reducing headsail perhaps before reefing.
Interesting, no?
Yes, very much so. Mr Alberg noted the CD 25D should probably be sailed at or below 20° of heel, the flattest of all his designs, more because of that shallow keel than the weather helm.
The weather helm on my boat has been very noticeably improved with the new sails. In lighter air if I don't tighten up the battens the main is actually too flat to get much power upwind. But it's been great fun playing in the dying evening breezes. I'm trying to get as much sailing time as I can right now.
At the same time, I can't wait to get started on the summer cruise... Last time I did this route (circumnavigating Vancouver Island) I had very old and very misshapen sails. Looking forward to the challenge with better sails!
Tehani is a "reef early" boat also. With her 7 foot beam, she loves to lay over. She'll hit 20 degrees in anything over 10-12 knots of wind. So we reef- no biggie.
The rail goes down at 35 degrees.
Last week we came home broad reaching in 22 knots, gusting 30, sailing with just a reefed working jib. Hitting 7.5 mph at times. We did 30 miles in 5 hours and 28 minutes according to the log book.
Not a shabby time huh?
It's very interesting to compare these two boats!
The rail doesn't usually get wet on the deck side until about 40°, and I'm usually very annoyed with myself if I hit that. This may be due to 8 feet of beam? Maybe I'm just a bit too timid. Upwind I usually reef at about 15, but I really do use the inclinometer more than the wind speed with the new main.
Njør∂son doesn't seem to have quite the turn of speed Tehani has. When broad running in 20-25 it will surf and stay right around 7.2 on the gps for fairly long stretches. It seems to get up to 5.4 or so, then it needs a wave to break out. That's using the 110% and the old full main; I haven't had a chance out with the new sails with those winds.
The boat is much more sensitive to the mainsail than the jib. I don't notice having the 130% jib up over 10 knots, but I sure can tell if I need to reef the main and feel the difference when I do. Is that true for other Alberg boats?
I couldn't help but notice my aleutka 26 didn't make the cut... ???- that's what she was made to do ;D sail far and cheap.
:o
Quote from: Amgine on May 03, 2009, 11:28:34 PM
The boat is much more sensitive to the mainsail than the jib. I don't notice having the 130% jib up over 10 knots, but I sure can tell if I need to reef the main and feel the difference when I do. Is that true for other Alberg boats?
I think so. With the relatively large main and small foretriangle, the main really is the main on Alberg's CCA era boats. The A-30 certainly fits that description. She is well known as a "reef early" boat. I recently met with another A-30 owner, and he described similar handling. A-30's like a reef in the main around 15 kts or so, but carry headsail much higher.
I've sailed offshore in 17-18 kts with a reefed main and genny - a kind of odd sail plan in light of what modern designs prefer - and still had some noticeable (but not uncomfortable) weather helm. We were broad reaching about 6 kts in 5-6 ft seas. Later that same day, she sailed upwind close-hauled and self-steered (no gear) for about an hour with the same sail plan, though the wind had dropped a bit.
It's all about balance, eh?
PS: What say you Ariel owners?
I have not sailed her enough to get a strong opinion, but I am guessing that is true. I was out in front of Angel Island one time when I SHOULD have had the main reefed!
I am taking notes :)
[ Later that same day, she sailed upwind close-hauled and self-steered (no gear) for about an hour with the same sail plan, though the wind had dropped a bit.
It's all about balance, eh?
PS: What say you Ariel owners?
[/quote]
I had a similar experience with Revival (ariel) It was a good blow and I had a dble reefed main and full jib. She literally self steered up wind. I've never before or since had a boat do that.
I could be wrong, but it seems to me that all the old Albergs experience weather helm because they are basically over powered on the main and you either shorten sail or you never get them balanced with any appreciable amount of wind. It might help to move the forestay forward a couple of feet. Not sure but was just about ready to Try it with my Triton before I got the Ranger. What say the rest of you Alberg guys?? TJim
Don't know much about Albergs, but on the Rawsons its common to add a bowsprit to get better balance. then a inner forestay is usually added. I'll be doing this soon.
I would not say the Alberg 30 (or any other Alberg design?) has 'improper' balance. It's just that the main is relatively large (compared to the foretriangle) and has a low aspect ratio, so needs to be reefed 'earlier' than other, more 'modern' designs.
If the boat is going hull speed and sailing well with a reefed main at 15-18-ish knots, adding a sprit so one can balance a full main will gain nothing, and MAY hurt handling due to increased leeway. Over-canvassing a boat is a pretty big negative.
Hull speed is hull speed, no matter the sail plan that gets you there.
My two cents...
I've read many discussions on this subject (Alberg boats and weather helm) Many people claim that a new mainsail is in order if it's a problem. Considering most of these boats are pretty old, and I've seen many/most of them sporting pretty old sails too... I have wondered if old mainsails are the culprit. I suspect the newest Alberg boat is still over 20 years old, and some of them are using their original sails. I' haven't had a chance to sail my CD28 yet, so I have no personal knowledge, but I have a friend who sails a Triton, and claims it is surprisingly well balanced. Finger tip control and all that jazz.
My Commander has the same hull as the Ariel.
I have a 135 roller furling genoa, and try to avoid sailing with a partially furled genoa. I'll go with one or even two reefs before rolling up some genoa.
The boat loves this configuration. I get my highest recorded speeds that way
The wind looks a little light in this picture, but what the heck
(http://i132.photobucket.com/albums/q30/commanderpete/grace.jpg)
Talked to Laura just yesterday.She's out singlehand for a few days. She had to reef the main around noon, and said that the boat practically sailed itself for a few hours in that configuration.
Then the winds got up more, she reefed the jib and finished the day that way.
She was anchored last night in 26 gusting 30. The forecast, of course, was for 10 to 15. She's SUPPOSED to come home this afternoon, but just may stay anchored, since it's SUPPOSED to be 10-15 tomorrow.
Of course, Tehani sails with finger tip control, even with the rail down. In fact I once sailed for an hour and wondered why the boat was occasionally wandering ( under tiller pilot) THEN realized I had the unit in stand by rather than turned on ;)
It seems to me that the problem of balance is where the power is centered and if the power is mainly after there would be two possible solutions. The first would be to reduce the power on the main by reefing. That will lower your "possible" speed because you have less power but you go faster because you also reduce your weather helm by bringing the boat more into balance. However, it seems to me that if you move your Forestay forward (a sprite) you have moved your center of power forward and should have reduced weather helm and therefore have more power to sail faster. I mean the reason for reefing really had nothing to do with wind velocity, only with weather helm and rudder drag which was corrected by reducing power rather than moving the power forward to balance
the power without sacrificing power. Am I making sense?? I'm not advocating more sail forward, just the same power moved farther forward, which seems reasonable tome would result in better balance and less weather helm, hence more speed..... I'm not trying to argue with anyone,,,, because I'm not sure of the answer. Just throwing something out there to activate thought processes..
TJ
On some boats that would probably be beneficial.
On a boat like our Meridian, which is SO well balanced as is, I would really hesitate to change things. I feel Phil Rhodes did a great job with the boat.
On of the things the previous owner wanted to do, and had planned, was to increase the rudder size. I'm VERY happy he didn't- it's near perfect as is.
We can often steer just like this-
Quote from: TJim on May 13, 2009, 11:41:31 AM
It seems to me that the problem of balance
Is there a problem of balance with your Triton? I guess this is where I'm confused. Are we having two different discussions?
I don't notice a 'problem' with the A-30's balance. That the design of the rig favors an early reef to keep the boat on her feet (and yes, balanced) does not mean there is a problem to be corrected. If she's doing her max speed at 15 knots with the sail plan that balances the rig, I don't see that as a problem.
It seems that all of Alberg's CCA era boats have this characteristic, but that is not necessarily a problem, right?
So, my question at this point, asked in all honesty (not flaming and certainly not defensive though I own an Alberg designed boat): is it being asserted that the Alberg boats being discussed have some inherent design "issue" that can/should be corrected, and this inherent problem manifests itself as an early reef requirement? Or, has the discussion of a 'correcting a helm balance problem' arisen as a side topic to the OP's observation (http://sailfar.net/forum/index.php?topic=1964.msg24951#msg24951) that he reef's early (for whatever reason)?
Asked another way: is there some unspoken "rule" that states that: If you must reef at 15 knots to get the best possible performance from your boat, that implies an inferior design parameter compared to a boat that gets *ITS* best performance from full sail at 15 knots, even though neither could possibly sail ANY faster or with less leeway (my working definition of 'best possible performance') with increased sail area in those conditions.
One of the problems is that there is no such thing as a "Triton" per say... they were all built from the same basic Alberg design but they weigh any where from just over 7000# up to around 10000# or more. I believe mine is the heaviest at 9660 empty but she holds over 500# of water in the keel tank plus another 160 in a forward tank and another 160 in the holding tank. That's not to mention all the equipment and supplies that go aboard. And yes I feel like I have a weather helm problem caused by an out of balance boat. And when I talk to feel Alberg design owners who sail in the San Francisco bay, most of them feel the same way. This may be because we routinely sail in winds that are 20 to 35 knots. This is not the exception but rather the rule and maybe we experience weather helm that most of you just don't sail in. I do believe that most of the Alberg designs are pretty much different sizes of the same boat and design characteristics, the West Coast boats built by Aero marine being possible exceptions. Both the lightest and the heaviest Tritons were both built by Aero marine and....the fastest and the slowest both were built by Aero marine, but that changes considerable with wind speed. The stronger the wind the faster the heavy boats run because they have a longer water line. In light air they are dogs. The more power you can use, the faster they go. When you reef, you give up power. If you can move your center of power forward, it seems to me you can maintain balance (less weather helm) and increase speed. You can reduce the size of the foot on your main and accomplish the same thing but, again, you are giving up power that would move you faster if it were balanced, or moved forward. Another thing, hull varies directly in relation
to the power available. My (theoretical) hull speed on my Triton is 6.8 knots, The spec'd hull speed is 6.4 knots The extra speed is derived by the extra weight
increasing the water line by 2.5 feet. However I carry the same sail plan as the boat that I'm giving as much as 3000# to. If I have good wind and can use it, I can run .4 knots faster than the light Tritons. I think that's almost 10 miles a day.
This is only true if I can balance the boat and avoid weather held. So the above is why I'm all hung up on. By the way I have averaged 7.4 knots on a downwind run in 15 ft seas and 35 knots of wind. That was with 2 reefs and a 35 sq ft storm sail. So the boat will do it if I can just get it balanced . However, I bought a Ranger 33 and the Triton must be sold... I really hate to give her up but it's a matter of living aboard with more comfort and leisure Things like hot water, showers, a range with an oven, 6" cushions that are both wider and longer and
on and on....etc.... Any way this line of thinking, I'd like to know that it would work or it wouldn't work, who knows, I might have an Alberg 35 or 37 some day. Tjim
Quote from: Captain Smollett on May 13, 2009, 10:17:01 AM
I would not say the Alberg 30 (or any other Alberg design?) has 'improper' balance. It's just that the main is relatively large (compared to the foretriangle) and has a low aspect ratio, so needs to be reefed 'earlier' than other, more 'modern' designs.
If the boat is going hull speed and sailing well with a reefed main at 15-18-ish knots, adding a sprit so one can balance a full main will gain nothing, and MAY hurt handling due to increased leeway. Over-canvassing a boat is a pretty big negative.
Hull speed is hull speed, no matter the sail plan that gets you there.
My two cents...
Okay, my four cents.
If by "Over-canvassing a boat is a pretty big negative" you mean carrying too much sail for the conditions I would agree. But I would argue that few sailboats are burdened with an over canvassed sail plan. Especially many of the CCA era boats when the rules didn't count overlapping jibs so they were deliberately under canvased to enhance their ratings and the overlapping genoa was added back in on race day to make up the missing sail area.
The Triton is a great example. As one person mention they can range in displacement from 7,000 lbs to 10,000 lbs. That is a Sail Area to Displacement ratio of around 16 at 7,000 lbs and 13 at 10,000 lbs. These numbers are a long way from being over canvassed.
And even though hull speed is hull speed, the wind required to reach it makes a huge difference in how often you can actually sail. And the ability to reach hull speed with the wind at, say, 7 kts is pretty nice.
One of my favorite discussions on sail plans is from "The Proper Yacht" by Arthur Beiser
QuoteI believe that the majority of cruising boats today carry rigs that are too small for both performance and convenience. No sailboat should need half a gale or some absurd expedients as oversized genoas and spinnakers in order to really go, yet that is precisely the case far too often. Most weather in most parts of the world contains a good percentage of light winds, and it is simply a crime to design and build a sailboat unable to move well under such conditions. It is not just the that one of the keener joys of sailing is to ghost along in a zephyr; on a long trip, proficiency in light airs usually means days saved.
The shrunken rigs typical of cruising boats have their origins in a number of misconceptions. One is that argument that a large rig is more fragile than a small one and also puts too much stress on the hull. This was certainly true in the past but modern material permits a rig of any size to have any safety margin desired without compromising performance (except in racing, which is not our concern here). And the hull of a properly built modern cruising boat is well able to take all the loads imposed by whatever rig is chosen. An extension of the same train of thought rejects large sails because once upon a time they were heavy and hard to control. Again today's technology comes to the rescue, with soft, lightweight synthetic cloth, strong but supple synthetic line, and powerful multi-speed winches that can incorporate electric drives if desired. Roller furling for jibs, and even for mains, is available to provide further help. So a generous rig need not be any harder to manage than a skimpy one. In fact, experience show that a sizable rig actually makes coping with the sails easier. The point is that with area to spare, one can arrange matters in a seamanlike manner - a well-divided rig, headsails with only moderate overlaps (or none at all), no spinnakers - without worrying about maximum efficiency.
When a person interested in a cruising boat of certain sizes sees a racing boat of that size go by with her army of gorillas all working their tails off, it is natural for him to think, "My God, the rig is too big," and to seek a smaller rig for himself. This reaction does not survive close scrutiny. The basic sail area of a racing boat is heavily taxed by the measurement rule. Accordingly such a boat is obliged to have a rig not larger that absolutely necessary and to rely upon exploiting it to the utmost. Two flukes of the racing rule provide the means the racing boat uses to augment here basic sail area; that part of a jib aft of the mainmast is not counted in the sail area unless it exceeds a generous limit, and spinnakers are also "free" up to a point. Over lapping genoas and huge spinnakers are labor-intensive expedients, which is no handicap since racing boats are the better for plenty of live ballast anyway. There is no reason for a cruising sailor to let the vagaries of a measurement rule govern his life on the water. With sails large enough in area to provide the push required and sensible enough in design to be servants and not masters, a proper cruiser should be able to sail circles around any racing boats with a crew of the same strength. One wants speed and convenience in a cruiser, pleasure for the few instead of work for the many, and an ample rig is necessary to achieve this goal.
Another argument against enough area for light conditions is that, if the wind picks up sail with have to be shortened. Absolutely correct - but it is not compulsory to carry the largest sails if prudence dictates otherwise on a particular day. Most cruising is done in regions where winds of no more than about 15 knots predominate, and it seems silly to have a boat just right from the Roaring Forties anywhere else.
And a little latter in his discussion:
QuoteSince the wetted surface of a boat is rarely stated and is tedious to establish from a lines plan (itself seldom published), the sail area-displacement ratio is the more practical one for comparing different designs. This ratio for the designs in Part Two of this book is platted in the first graph on page 44, and the sail areas themselves against in the second. The average ratio is 16.0, which is greater that the figure of 15.5 often quoted as optimum for cruising yachts and that I consider unduly small.
I guess I can understand if someone wanted to add a bowsprit and or a taller mast to enhance their sailing performance.
Cheers, Bill
AH yes- "The Proper Yacht" by Arthur Beiser
One of my all time favorite books. My copy has lived by my bed, or at least within arms reach for as long as I can recall. In fact, it is within reach of me as I type this.
I still often read through and drool at the lovely lines of the yachts he chose, small to large. To me, the lines of the newer generation of sailboats just don't qualify as "yachts". I just cannot call a Catalina 27 a yacht, sorry.
Our Rhodes Meridian DOES fill that definition in my mind however. Of course I'm not in the least prejudiced ya unnerstand ;D ;D
Even if we do have to reef early :D
One of the reasons moving the center of effort forward will not 'solve' the balance issue is the assymetry of the boat's waterline when it heels, one of the factors which develops weather helm. This is why no matter what the sail layout is it will eventually need to be reefed as the wind picks up - and why the Alberg's relatively narrow waterlines don't get as unbalanced as big-bummed designs at similar angles of heel.
As someone who has recently purchased new sails for an Alberg design, baggy older sails do develop much more heel, so more weather helm. The boat is definitely easier to balance now, but *off* the wind I'm having more trouble getting the autopilot to steer. I hope it's just learning curve.
I think the more significant thing is the fact that the farther aft the center of power is the more it causes the boat to head up with increased wind and the more you have to stand on the tiller to keep her on course. Or the earlier you have to reef. I get weather helm at 20 or 25 degrees, if I drop a reef in the weather helm drops off but it doesn't necessarily change the degree of heel. In fact I can run up past 30 or 35 degrees of heel with no significant weather helm by reefing. But I believe the boat would be going faster at the same degree of heel if I didn't have to reduce power because the center of power was to far aft.......causing the boat to head up.... I have a hard time seeing it another way until someone can explain why ...that makes sense to me... As most of you guys can tell, I'm pretty thick and hard headed...... but when I get it, I get it.... TJim
Well, think of it in a slightly different way: when you reef the sail, usually the center of effort (COE) does not actually move forward more than a few inches. When you find the center of effort of the reefed sail, you'll find it mostly moved down, not forward, and moving down means it will heel the boat less. (The distance from the center of buoyancy is reduced, reducing the lever arm of the force heeling the boat.)
When you look at the COE in three dimensions, though, you see that not only is the unreefed COE somewhat higher, it is also several to many feet to leeward depending on the angle of heel. The more heel, the more feet to leeward. And, as I'm sure you're aware, every foot to leeward means every pound of effort gets a multiplier for foot pounds of force trying to spin the boat up into the wind. So if you can lower that COE, you do two things: reduce heel, and reduce how far the COE is to leeward. This combined effect is actually greater than moving the COE forward.
And, of course, there's the hydrodynamic force of the heeled waterline. With less distance to travel, the water to windward has greater pressure giving a slight twisting force to windward but reducing the windward lift effect of the keel (doesn't affect the righting effect of the keel, which is a factor of its lever arm, just the amount of 'gain' on VMG to windward.) This isn't all that great a force, but it's still something to keep in mind and narrower beam-to-length ratios will tend to have the lowest amount.
For my boat, an Alberg-designed Cape Dory 25D with a modified full-keel shape of shallow draft, the designer suggested the boat be sailed quite flat, preferably less 21°. Looking into this I learned that about 25° the lateral resistance will drop substantially, meaning the boat starts making leeway much more rapidly, plus the effective sail area curve falls off pretty fast, the COE being way out to leeward results in rudder angles of more than 5° so it's acting more as a brake. By reefing earlier I can often increase my speed over the ground and point a little higher, so my VMG to weather is better.
But I admit that last week I was sailing with the inclinometer maxed (40°.) Too much sail for the breeze, but it was sure exciting! Only the second time I've actually had water over the toe rail.
Good stuff, Tnx.... TJim