I am looking at several older boats in the 26 foot range +/- . I have no experience in this size of boat. I have sailed under 20 footers inland and bay sailing and have crewed on 35 - 41 footers for coastal cruising. Now I am retired, and would like to do some single-handed cheap cruising with the possibility of island hopping or Gulf crossing from Florida to Mexico.
I would really appreciate some input on two of my finalists (drum roll) - - - A Columbia with outboard power and a Catalina. The Columbia and the Catalina are easily in my budget, but is either a realistic boat for what I want to do?
Guidance please. ???
=
You don't say which columbia or catalina you're looking at....but most of them are more than capable of coastal cruising and making the hop across to the Caribbean islands, provided you watch your weather window carefully. Several of the members of this forum have done just than in boats that are probably smaller than the ones you're looking at.
I would give a slight edge to the inboard-powered boat, since it is far less likely to have the prop come out if you have to motor in heavy seas. However, an outboard can be far simpler to maintain in many ways, since it can usually be removed from the boat in a pinch. That said, the inboard will usually be more versatile, since it can power a decent size alternator, a hot water heater, and engine-driven water maker or refrigerator, which aren't options on the outboard.
The Columbia 26 is a very strongly built boat with at least 2 versions. I think both have a full keel and sail very well. The 26 is very popular and tend to hold their value. I have a book on the Columbias and can send you the specs if you like. I suggest you go to the Columbia web site and ask about the Columbia 26. there are several members who own them on that site. A long shaft on a stern mount should not have a lot of problems with the foot coming out. I would go with this option with a good sized solar panel to charge the batteries. Dan
Have you considered a Cape Dory, specifically either the 25D (my boat, which has an inboard diesel) or the 26 (rarer, and I think some of them had outboards)? These are rugged boats designed by the immortal Carl Alberg!
Just a thought.
--Joe
Joe-
Spoken like a true Alberg fanatic. :) Not that I'm disagreeing. :)
Hey Dan,
There are a few others out there, like L. Francis Herreshoff, Olin Stephens and David Crealock (did I get his first name right?), but their boats tend to be out of our price range.
I didn't mention multihulls, because I'm not familiar with them--that's your department.
--Joe
Believe it is bill Crealock, not David. IIRC, he was the primary designer for Pacific Seacraft.
As for multihull designers--in no particular order, some designers of note.
Ian Farrier-designed many of the Corsair trimarans, as well as many other boats
Tony Smith-designed the Telstar 26, 28, 35 trimarans, and Gemini catamarans
Jim Brown-of Searunner trimaran fame
Arthur Piver-considered the father of the modern cruising multihull
Melvin & Morelli-designed Dennis Conner's Stars & Stripes catamaran, as well as the Gunboat catamarans
Dick Newick-designed the Tremolino trimaran among others
James Wharram-designer of many home-built catamarans
Yup, it's Bill Crealock -- and he was the principal designer of the late Pacific Seacraft.
I also forgot to mention Chuck Paine. His Frances 26 definitely belongs on the list, although the last time I looked at one, it was offered by Morris Yachts for close to $70K.
--Joe
Well jeez-
Let's not forget the master of the sheer line, Phillip Rhodes. That's who designed Tehani, our Meridian 25 and some of the other Seafarer yachts. Take a look at Rhodes Swiftsure for beautiful lines.
The Alberg boats are very very pretty things, but for a lovely sheer line, Rhodes is unmatched.
And on the multihulls, Mr Norman Cross did some beautiful boats. I built and sailed one of his- a 35 foot ketch, and recently made a delivery trip aboard a 34 foot sloop. I"ll be working on restoring hurricane damage on that sloop later this summer.
For home builders I think Jim Brown's Searunners, Cross's boats, and Wharram's cats probably lead the pack in numbers built and miles sailed.
darn, I knew I was forgetting someone... just sailed on a Norman Cross 34' last year. :)
If you would go a bit larger than 26 I would look at the Columbia 8.7 which is what I have. They are real sleepers and therefore (Alan Paine/America's Cup designer) he price is often very reasonable. Most now have a diesel not the Atomic 4. They are very roomy. I have a friend who crossed the Atlantic twice in his 8.7. he was in his 70s both times. I removed the quarter berth and made another cockpit locker. Then there is the Crealock Columbia 28 which has narrower beam but is a very seaworthy great sailing boatboat. They come in both inboard and outboard. Dan
Any thoughts in the Pearson 10M?
I've been aboard a Catalina 30, a Pearson 27, Hunter 36, and a Cape Dory 27 (?) The Cape Dory seems to being build to resist anything mother nature can trow at it. The Catalina 30 was really beamier and roomier inside. The Pearson 27 was well build (felt very solid), and the cabin its HUGE (shower and everything) Also, the engine compartment its easy to reach. The Hunter 36 was ok, big cockpit, but the cabin was cramped IMO.
The first thing I do when I want to compare boats is look them on the Sail Calculator (http://www.image-ination.com/sailcalc.html) to get a look at the design numbers.
To my eye, the two most important numbers on the list are Capsize Screening Ratio (CSR) and the Motion Comfort Ratio (MCR); these two together give some idea of seakeeping if you are comparing boats of roughly the same size and roughly similar designs.
CSR should be as small as possible, and 2.0 is considered the cut-off for what is considered "safe" offshore. Just for grins, use the search feature to look at all the boats in the database with CSR's greater than or equal to 2.0; you'll be surprised by some on that list.
For MCR, the higher the number the 'better' the ride in a given sea state. This is not absolute, but does give a rough way to compare how two boats will "feel" in a seaway.
Now, for some of the monohull boats mentioned or implied (or the closest match in the database) in this thread. I also took the liberty of adding a couple of SailFar Alberg favorites - the Ariel, the Triton and the A-30 just to round out the list a bit.
| Boat | CSR | MCR |
| Columbia 26 | 1.85 | 23.61 |
| Catalina 27 Std Rig | 1.87 | 24.03 |
| Cape Dory 25D | 1.86 | 23.67 |
| Cape Dory 26 | 1.84 | 23.99 |
| Columbia 8.7 | 1.96 | 24.48 |
| Catalina 30 | 2.0 | 24.71 |
| Cape Dory 27 | 1.74 | 30.08 |
| Hunter 36 | 1.86 | 26.76 |
| Pearson 27 | 2.03 | 19.71 |
| Pearson 10M | 1.90 | 26.43 |
| Seafarer Meridian | 1.63 | 29.66 |
| Pearson Ariel | 1.86 | 23.86 |
| Pearson Triton | 1.73 | 27.97 |
| Alberg 30 | 1.68 | 31.67 |
So, looking strictly at the design numbers as proxies for safety at sea indicators, there is little difference between the boats listed (with a couple of exceptions with the CSR at or near that 2.0 cut-off).
Note how CJ's boat looks like a MUCH larger boat (the Meridian) in terms of CSR and MCR! Wow.
Given the similarity of the boats listed design wise, the personal choice for me would be to go as small as I can for ease of handling single/shorthanded. Of course, the old subjective "I like her lines" has to play into the equation as well. ;D
Let me add two to the list, and show how THEY compare to our Meridian
Contessa 26- 1.71 25.33
Folkboat 26 - 1.77 22.37
Meridian 26 - 1.63 29.66
The Contessa 26 is the boat Tania Aebi sailed round the world singlehand. And we ALL know the Folkboat reputation for seaworthiness
In his book "The Seaworthy Offshore Sailboat" John Vigor (I'm a big fan :) ) has a section that helps you evaluate a particular boat. Items such as hull shape, freeboard, rudder size and placement, number of thru hulls, size , number and shape of ports etc. are all given a numeric value. You add up the numbers which result in a comprehensive seaworthiness evaluation.
BTW the last item is 'personal experience' listing various levels of sailing experience.
Oded Kishony
Here I go upsetting the apple cart again....Triton hulls 94 & 96 are really differerent from your numbers...Both were built especially for the heavy air on the San Francisco bay....They put an extra 1500# of lead in the keel. Plus, I have a 64 gallon water tank in the keel. Mine, hull 94, weighs (on certified scale) 9660#...I would imagine that 96 would be comparable in weight....and those numbers are for motion comfort, 35.73 and for capsize ratio a solid 1.56.....because of the extra weight the waterline increases to an even 23'.....which gives it a hull speed of 6.43.
The Sail area/displacement number goes to poop but when you are sailing in 15 to 35 knots all the time, she's a runner. I've had sirena sitting on a solid 7.3..What 28'6" hull does better than that????TJim
Quote from: TJim on April 13, 2008, 06:00:45 PM
Here I go upsetting the apple cart again....Triton hulls 94 & 96 are really differerent from your numbers...
Right. Though the db does not specify so, I imagine those numbers are for East Coast Tritons.
You might want to contact Carl and let him know the numbers on the West Coast models. I think he wants his db to be as accurate as possible.
Ugggg, this thread just shows me how far I have to go to get a respected boat!!! :(
Some day... I'm trailer sailing yet, so I can't expect to have an Alberg 30.... :D
Those numbers aren't even accurate for east coast Tritons...They use the engineering numbers for weights and they were way low...My EC Triton weighed 8003# with a gutted hull on an electronic certified crane scale. If I remember correctly his number is about 7600# or there about. Like most early fiberglass boats, they were way over built because no one had any experience with glass and they wanted to be safe rather than sorry I would suppose....At any rate the only boat of similar length to my Triton that I've been able to find with comparable numbers is a quarter million dollar Bristol Channel Cutter, so I figure that's a replacement cost of a comparable boat to the one I have which I bought for $3825 and stuck another $12000 into. What a steal huh!!! $16000 for a quarter million dollar boat!!!! If you really want a good boat find an old early 60's hull by a good builder and go to work.. A couple years of hard work and you'll have a boat that most of us could never afford to buy .... They just don't make them that way anymore......There are a lot of those hulls out there right now for te te dollars..TJim
Lost Lake,
Don't worry ;). Some people call it a learning curve but I don't think there is any curve to it at all. I think that it's just a straight line that goes up at a steep angle and we're ALL on it some place or another ::). I think that no matter what boat you end up getting, there will always be another boat will come along that you will think that you should have gotten ???. I've been thinking about my "someday" boat for about ,oh, thirty years or so and am still in the dark. Oh, by the way, there is(I have heard) no perfect boat.
Fair winds,
Pappy Jack
P.S. You're not alone ;D.
Ericson made a pretty good boat back in the day and like all used boats they are going cheap.
I'd love to get me an Alberg 30 (I'm thinking in moving aboard) but go find one... That's why my second choice was the Pearson 30.
Quote from: Lost Lake on April 13, 2008, 08:40:50 PM
Ugggg, this thread just shows me how far I have to go to get a respected boat!!! :(
Some day... I'm trailer sailing yet, so I can't expect to have an Alberg 30.... :D
The beauty of this discussion of the boat is that we (except for Oded) have completely ignored what most people consider the single most important 'safety' item on board - the crew.
Just about any boat will handle more than most crews want her to have to handle. Please don't take this discussion to mean that any one boat is not as "good" as any other (my point in showing the numbers was to illustrate how similar most of these boats really are, at least in terms of design safety-at-sea numbers, which completely ignores crew capabilities, rig condition, state of repair, etc).
As the saying goes, the best boat is the one you own now - the one you are using now. The experience you gain with any boat is worth more than theoretical equations that predict 'safety.' Right now, I'd take my little boat (with CSR well over 2.0) out singlehanded in rougher conditions than my Alberg 30, only because I have sailed her more and have more confidence handling her.
Though intellectually, I know the A-30 is the more seaworthy boat, but I admit that I am still a little intimidated by the larger sails, longer hull, etc, etc. That's just because I have not sailed her enough to have that confidence, whereas my little boat and I have bonded a lot, gotten beat up more than a few times and even bloodied each other on occasion.
Well said Capt. Smollett..
As part of that, I'd be your reactions or how you handle the boat in some situations are almost instinctive on the smaller boat, since you have much more time on her, than on the relatively recent Alberg30.
Hi John, & Company,
Mr. Vigor adds 12 points (high score is negative) out of 131 (boat not a likely candidate for ocean crossing) to sailing experience.
His categores are:
Have skippered across an ocean (1)
Have crewed across an ocean (4)
Have skippered on coastal sailboat trips (6)
Have skippered dinghies extensively (7)
Have crewed on coastal sailboat trips (8)
Little or none (12)
I recently watched a gripping movie called "Deep Waters" about a solo circumnavigation race in the early 70's. One of the competitors had no, zero, sailing experience. Literally did not know how to sail a boat.
He dropped out of the race but got surprisingly far. He went on to later circumnavigate the 'wrong way' on a small sailboat.
Oded Kishony
Quote from: AdriftAtSea on April 10, 2008, 08:54:14 PM
Joe-
Spoken like a true Alberg fanatic. :) Not that I'm disagreeing. :)
..........Alberg?? Who is he?? ;D