|
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ?
So why do people buy cruising catamarans if monohulls in the same price range are just as spacious and can go just as fast ? 1. Shallower draft 2. They can be parked on the beach 3. They don't sink as easily 4. They don't roll like monohulls 5. ??? "Bryan" wrote: We raced our Schock 35 for many years and often there was a multihull fleet sailing the same course. F-28 Corsair Trimarans and others of the same ilk. We were very rarely beaten around the course by those multihulls.. I would tend to agree that in general a large monohull will be as fast if not faster than a cruising cat. |
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ?
|
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ?
|
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ?
|
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ?
wrote:
So why do people buy cruising catamarans if monohulls in the same price range are just as spacious and can go just as fast ? I don't agree with the "just as fast" reason. My cruising cat, a 40' fairly light boat but no racer, has often hit 11 knots in 20 knots of wind. Top speed so far on a beam reach in 25 knots of wind is 15.4 knots for a sustained burst. We're regularly sailing at 9-10 knots in 18 knots. We pray for windy days :) http://www.kp44.org/ftp/KP44Polars.pdf is a link to a Kelly Peterson 44 VPP. Note that wind is APPARENT WIND, not true wind angle. In 16 knots of wind she is predicted to sail at about 7.5 knots pointing at about 35+ apparent (hard to read the graph), or about 45+ true. The PDQ 44 is predicted to sail at 7.8 knots at the same wind strength, same wind angle. On a beam reach in 12 knots, the KP44 is predicted to do 7.7 knots. The PDQ 44 is predicted to go 9.5 knots both switched to a spinnaker at that point. 1. Shallower draft Yup 2. They can be parked on the beach Not often done cause it scrapes off the bottom paint and you're stuck there for a tidal cycle. But useful for painting the bottom or doing maintenance. 3. They don't sink as easily Very true 4. They don't roll like monohulls Not only do they not roll, I find the motion at sea a lot more comfortable because of the reduced motion. My wife left a drink on a fwd. crossbeam for 1/2 hour and it was still there when she returned. Beating upwind into 25 knots 3-4' seas, going 7-8 knots, a glass of orange juice spilled. This was cause for great alarm since nothing like that had ever happened on the boat And at anchor of course they just sit there. 5. ??? A ton more deck and interior volume. Smaller rigs as Jeff suggested. I don't think moorage while cruising is as much of a problem as most people think. Generally we anchor everywhere, but end ties are usually available for the same price. Not everywhere, but they are available. Evan Gatehouse |
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ?
Evan Gatehouse wrote: ... 2. They can be parked on the beach Not often done cause it scrapes off the bottom paint and you're stuck there for a tidal cycle. But useful for painting the bottom or doing maintenance. What about if your boat has reinforced keel shoes ? Are these made of metal so you don't have to worry about scraping the paint ? Fountaine Pajot actually shows you how to do this at: http://www.fountaine-pajot.com/article263-en.html but if you want to see the whole animation you'll have to scroll down quickly or right click on the image and click "Play". |
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ?
wrote in message nk.net... So why do people buy cruising catamarans if monohulls in the same price range are just as spacious and can go just as fast ? 1. Shallower draft 2. They can be parked on the beach 3. They don't sink as easily 4. They don't roll like monohulls 5. ??? "Bryan" wrote: We raced our Schock 35 for many years and often there was a multihull fleet sailing the same course. F-28 Corsair Trimarans and others of the same ilk. We were very rarely beaten around the course by those multihulls.. I would tend to agree that in general a large monohull will be as fast if not faster than a cruising cat. There are a number of errors in logic in the above post. People buy cruising catamarans because they are better than cruising monos, albeit generally more expensive. Firstly let me make a comment about speed. In this perennial argument there always seems to be the anecdotal statement that someone in a mono somewhere beat a multi around a course and that means that multis aren't faster. Let me point out the reality. Cruising multis (of similar size) are slower than racing monos. Racing multis are faster than cruising monos. Racing multis are faster than racing monos (clearly evident from all the long distant records and also from the America's cup farce in NZ between the huge mono and the multi half its size where the cat annihilated the mono to windward and held back off the the breeze so as not to jeopardize the subsequent court case). Cruising multis are faster than cruising monos- but not by much as both tend to be overloaded and the evidence that I have seen suggests about a 10% difference. Shallow draft is great. Movement under sail is arguable as multis have a sharper motion but the lack of heel is a big plus. On my cruising cat we never had a glass spill even in 40- 50 knots ( though I admit we weren't beating into it!). Non-sinkability is a huge safety plus and forgotten by the mono brigade. Here in Oz in the last 25-30 years there have been no deaths from multi capsizes but well over 200 deaths from mono sinkings. Multis here are popular and account for 25-30% of boats cruising, so it's not a statistical error. Clearly capsize is not nearly as dangerous as sinking. Better upside-down on the surface than right way up on the bottom. Beaching is not that common. At anchor they can behave poorly, especially in wind against tide situations. In cold climates they are harder to heat and all the deck space is not much use- the converse is true in the tropics. The spaciousness is great if a cat is large enough so that the bridgedeck is a lounge area. This means that the staterooms are separate, the shower/heads are separate, and the whole setup is more like a house. Monos are more like a dormitory. If, given the choice, I would certainly choose a large multi over a large mono for cruising. Peter HK |
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ?
Peter, I'm not sure why you say a cat is better than a mono? Certainly they
have different attributes but the choice of what makes one type of boat better then another is strictly personal. I grew up racing monohulls and that is what I feel comfortable on. I do see the advantages of a cat: room, sailing flat, shallow draft, but I also see advantages in a mono: load carrying ability, more seaworthy, softer ride. Buying a boat is a personal decision. What is better for you may be worse for me. Fair winds, Bryan "Peter HK" wrote in message ... wrote in message nk.net... So why do people buy cruising catamarans if monohulls in the same price range are just as spacious and can go just as fast ? 1. Shallower draft 2. They can be parked on the beach 3. They don't sink as easily 4. They don't roll like monohulls 5. ??? "Bryan" wrote: We raced our Schock 35 for many years and often there was a multihull fleet sailing the same course. F-28 Corsair Trimarans and others of the same ilk. We were very rarely beaten around the course by those multihulls.. I would tend to agree that in general a large monohull will be as fast if not faster than a cruising cat. There are a number of errors in logic in the above post. People buy cruising catamarans because they are better than cruising monos, albeit generally more expensive. Firstly let me make a comment about speed. In this perennial argument there always seems to be the anecdotal statement that someone in a mono somewhere beat a multi around a course and that means that multis aren't faster. Let me point out the reality. Cruising multis (of similar size) are slower than racing monos. Racing multis are faster than cruising monos. Racing multis are faster than racing monos (clearly evident from all the long distant records and also from the America's cup farce in NZ between the huge mono and the multi half its size where the cat annihilated the mono to windward and held back off the the breeze so as not to jeopardize the subsequent court case). Cruising multis are faster than cruising monos- but not by much as both tend to be overloaded and the evidence that I have seen suggests about a 10% difference. Shallow draft is great. Movement under sail is arguable as multis have a sharper motion but the lack of heel is a big plus. On my cruising cat we never had a glass spill even in 40- 50 knots ( though I admit we weren't beating into it!). Non-sinkability is a huge safety plus and forgotten by the mono brigade. Here in Oz in the last 25-30 years there have been no deaths from multi capsizes but well over 200 deaths from mono sinkings. Multis here are popular and account for 25-30% of boats cruising, so it's not a statistical error. Clearly capsize is not nearly as dangerous as sinking. Better upside-down on the surface than right way up on the bottom. Beaching is not that common. At anchor they can behave poorly, especially in wind against tide situations. In cold climates they are harder to heat and all the deck space is not much use- the converse is true in the tropics. The spaciousness is great if a cat is large enough so that the bridgedeck is a lounge area. This means that the staterooms are separate, the shower/heads are separate, and the whole setup is more like a house. Monos are more like a dormitory. If, given the choice, I would certainly choose a large multi over a large mono for cruising. Peter HK |
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ?
"Bryan" wrote in message ... Peter, I'm not sure why you say a cat is better than a mono? Certainly they have different attributes but the choice of what makes one type of boat better then another is strictly personal. I grew up racing monohulls and that is what I feel comfortable on. I do see the advantages of a cat: room, sailing flat, shallow draft, but I also see advantages in a mono: load carrying ability, more seaworthy, softer ride. Buying a boat is a personal decision. What is better for you may be worse for me. Fair winds, Bryan I agree with you entirely- we all see different priorities and have different opinions. To me cats seem to have advantages over monos for the things that are important to me and for the type of cruising I wanted to do. Perhaps I should have made that clearer. Having said that, now that I have given up cruising, I have a trailerable mono for local daysailing. It has advantages that suit me at the moment. I'm even thinking about power in the future (don't tell anyone) ;-) Peter HK |
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ?
One question nobody has addressed yet is what happens when a cat
capsizes? There is no natural righting moment, as with a mono hull. I have never even sailed on a cat myself, but the heeling of a mono hull seems to offer some comfort advantages, because the combination of sails and pendulum keel act as a kind of 'shock absorber' in wavy conditions. I would prefer to be heeled over and on a steady lean than bounced up and down as one than another hull is lifted and dropped by a wave, especially in short choppy seas. Long rolling waves would probably somewhat nullify this advantage. I am referring more to waves on the beam, but there probably is some effect on a close hauled tack. Sherwin D. wrote: So why do people buy cruising catamarans if monohulls in the same price range are just as spacious and can go just as fast ? 1. Shallower draft 2. They can be parked on the beach 3. They don't sink as easily 4. They don't roll like monohulls 5. ??? "Bryan" wrote: We raced our Schock 35 for many years and often there was a multihull fleet sailing the same course. F-28 Corsair Trimarans and others of the same ilk. We were very rarely beaten around the course by those multihulls.. I would tend to agree that in general a large monohull will be as fast if not faster than a cruising cat. |
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ?
"sherwindu" wrote in message
... One question nobody has addressed yet is what happens when a cat capsizes? There is no natural righting moment, as with a mono hull. I have never even sailed on a cat myself, but the heeling of a mono hull seems to offer some comfort advantages, because the combination of sails and pendulum keel act as a kind of 'shock absorber' in wavy conditions. I would prefer to be heeled over and on a steady lean than bounced up and down as one than another hull is lifted and dropped by a wave, especially in short choppy seas. Long rolling waves would probably somewhat nullify this advantage. I am referring more to waves on the beam, but there probably is some effect on a close hauled tack. Sherwin D. wrote: So why do people buy cruising catamarans if monohulls in the same price range are just as spacious and can go just as fast ? 1. Shallower draft 2. They can be parked on the beach 3. They don't sink as easily 4. They don't roll like monohulls 5. ??? "Bryan" wrote: We raced our Schock 35 for many years and often there was a multihull fleet sailing the same course. F-28 Corsair Trimarans and others of the same ilk. We were very rarely beaten around the course by those multihulls.. I would tend to agree that in general a large monohull will be as fast if not faster than a cruising cat. Ask yourself this question... Would you rather be upright on the bottom or upside down and floating on the surface? Some people don't like the way multis ride in heavy seas.. other do. Ask yourself another question.. What is easier on the crew for days on end.. living on the walls of a monohull or not heeling more than 10 degrees? -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com |
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ?
"sherwindu" wrote in message ... One question nobody has addressed yet is what happens when a cat capsizes? There is no natural righting moment, as with a mono hull. I have never even sailed on a cat myself, but the heeling of a mono hull seems to offer some comfort advantages, because the combination of sails and pendulum keel act as a kind of 'shock absorber' in wavy conditions. I would prefer to be heeled over and on a steady lean than bounced up and down as one than another hull is lifted and dropped by a wave, especially in short choppy seas. Long rolling waves would probably somewhat nullify this advantage. I am referring more to waves on the beam, but there probably is some effect on a close hauled tack. Sherwin D. There are occasional sea patterns that are uncomfortable on a multi, usually with beam seas, but the magnitude of the event needs to be considered. Cats reach max stability at about 5 degrees of heel (when a hull lifts). As this never happens on cruising cats, all heel angles are less than 5 degrees. Short sharp waves can occasionally exceed this a little due to the hulls being in a trough and crest. Compare to a mono rolling downwind where heel angles can be 30 degrees side to side. Multis do have a different motion- shorter and sharper compared to slower but much more amplitude on a mono. Personally I find it quite comfortable. As stated in a previous post a glass never spills, which is a significant observation on the severity of the motion. When a multi capsizes it floats- most are now equipped with hatches to enter a secure part of the hull in a capsize. When a mono sinks however- dragged down by that ballast that makes it self-righting- the only hope is a liferaft. It depends on what you think is the most basic safety feature- nonsinkability or self righting. Peter HK |
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ?
|
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ?
Peter HK wrote:
"sherwindu" wrote in message ... One question nobody has addressed yet is what happens when a cat capsizes? There is no natural righting moment, as with a mono hull. I have never even sailed on a cat myself, but the heeling of a mono hull seems to offer some comfort advantages, because the combination of sails and pendulum keel act as a kind of 'shock absorber' in wavy conditions. I would prefer to be heeled over and on a steady lean than bounced up and down as one than another hull is lifted and dropped by a wave, especially in short choppy seas. Long rolling waves would probably somewhat nullify this advantage. I am referring more to waves on the beam, but there probably is some effect on a close hauled tack. Sherwin D. There are occasional sea patterns that are uncomfortable on a multi, usually with beam seas, but the magnitude of the event needs to be considered. Cats reach max stability at about 5 degrees of heel (when a hull lifts). As this never happens on cruising cats, all heel angles are less than 5 degrees. Short sharp waves can occasionally exceed this a little due to the hulls being in a trough and crest. Compare to a mono rolling downwind where heel angles can be 30 degrees side to side. Multis do have a different motion- shorter and sharper compared to slower but much more amplitude on a mono. Personally I find it quite comfortable. As stated in a previous post a glass never spills, which is a significant observation on the severity of the motion. When a multi capsizes it floats- most are now equipped with hatches to enter a secure part of the hull in a capsize. When a mono sinks however- dragged down by that ballast that makes it self-righting- the only hope is a liferaft. It depends on what you think is the most basic safety feature- nonsinkability or self righting. Peter HK I guess most people prefer to be upside-down-but-floating compared to upright-on-the-bottom of the Atlantic. The next question though, is what are chances of such events to happen? When I cross the Atlantic (or whatever waters) I rather opt for a 1% chance to sink my monohull (and trust on my liferaft) than a 20% chance of capsizing my cat. Now, both figures are probably far from accurate, so my question is, what are chances that such things will happen? Regards, Marc www.marineyacht.com |
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ?
sherwindu wrote:
One question nobody has addressed yet is what happens when a cat capsizes? Since it appears to be "common knowledge" that cruising cats capsize frequently, perhaps you can give us a few examples. The truth is, it is a very uncommon event. I've only heard of a half dozen in the last 20 years, and half of those were delivery crews or racers, carrying too much sail. In fact, none happened when laying to a sea anchor. As someone else mentioned, fatalities are extremely rare. I might guess that more cruising fatalities are from falling overboard than from sinking or capsizing. This would imply that the more stable platform is safer. There is no natural righting moment, as with a mono hull. I have never even sailed on a cat myself, but the heeling of a mono hull seems to offer some comfort advantages, because the combination of sails and pendulum keel act as a kind of 'shock absorber' in wavy conditions. I would prefer to be heeled over and on a steady lean than bounced up and down as one than another hull is lifted and dropped by a wave, especially in short choppy seas. Long rolling waves would probably somewhat nullify this advantage. I am referring more to waves on the beam, but there probably is some effect on a close hauled tack. There is no doubt that some people don't like the motion of a cat. A short, steep chop on the beam can be particularly annoying. The biggest problem I have is that I end up handsteering in these cases, because a firm hand on the wheel can make the ride dramatically smoother. One significant point in these cases is that we're often doing 9 or 10 knots. When I've had a rough ride on a monohull we're often doing half that speed. |
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ?
sherwindu wrote:
One question nobody has addressed yet is what happens when a cat capsizes? Oh c'mon, surely somebody has addressed that point? ;) Jeff wrote: Since it appears to be "common knowledge" that cruising cats capsize frequently, perhaps you can give us a few examples. The truth is, it is a very uncommon event. About as uncommon as monohulls rolling & sinking? .... I've only heard of a half dozen in the last 20 years, and half of those were delivery crews or racers, carrying too much sail. In fact, none happened when laying to a sea anchor. As someone else mentioned, fatalities are extremely rare. And usually more related to hypothermia or trauma than drowning. Still, morbid fear of dying is as unhealthy as any other neurosis... you can lock yourself in a nice safe padded room for decades and you'll still die... so you might as well go & do something interesting! I might guess that more cruising fatalities are from falling overboard than from sinking or capsizing. This would imply that the more stable platform is safer. Good point, I wonder how the man overboard statistics compare between mono- & multi-hulls. There is no doubt that some people don't like the motion of a cat. I don't my self... and BTW I have know cruising cats that would spill a drink, contrary to claims that it never happens. But of course, much much less frequently than on monohulls. ... A short, steep chop on the beam can be particularly annoying. The biggest problem I have is that I end up handsteering in these cases, because a firm hand on the wheel can make the ride dramatically smoother. One significant point in these cases is that we're often doing 9 or 10 knots. When I've had a rough ride on a monohull we're often doing half that speed. That's because you're on the wrong monohull. ;) Fresh Breezes- Doug King |
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ?
I find it interesting that this ultimately pragmatic thread has not
touched on the actual sailing experience itself. I've sailed two cats, a Gemini and PDQ 36. In both cases my wife and I were bored to tears. The PDQ was fast off the wind and there was some novelty in that for a few minutes, but it didn't last. The heeling and motion of a monohul is part of the romance of sailing for many of us. It feels right, even if our drinks spill. I think the fellow who posted that while they are both wind powered, they are too different to truly conpare. No doubt if I was planning extended cruises with little chance of day and night sails, a Cat might be the better pick. But for the way most folks sail, with many daysails and long weekends a mono will be a lot more fun. Then again, the novelty of heeling and having an exciting ride with the rail buried can also lose it's charm. My wife and I plan to buy a larger boat for part-time liveaboard in about 4-5 years and we'll look at cats again, but I expect we've been spoiled to want the fun factor more. Maybe our aging bones will change all of that! I do agree that cats are not attractive, and I'm still young enough (no offense meant here!) to place that high on my list, though I own a "modern" looking boat she's still pleasing to my eye. RB Beneteau First 35s5 http://hometown.aol.com/bobsprit/index.html NY |
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ?
On 12 Jan 2006 06:54:22 -0800, "Capt. Rob" wrote:
I find it interesting that this ultimately pragmatic thread has not touched on the actual sailing experience itself. I find it refreshing that there's been nothing but good, factual information here instead of the usual bunfights. A part of that is that this particular newsgroup is (generally) civil, but another part is that catamarans have evolved and matured not only as a "technology" but as an aesthetic choice (never to be sneered at...look at great but homely cars that don't sell). Cats are here to stay, and while I question their suitability for *all* sailing endeavours, they have in some respects many clear advantages that appeal to a lot of people. Were you to cruise solely the South Pacific or the Caribbean, for instance, I think the shallow draft and downwind performance of cats makes them a logical, and in some cases, nearly inevitable choice. I am quite willing these days to state that my reluctance to consider a cat for self-sufficient world-cruising/liveaboard/ocean passagemaking has much more to do with my own ignorance and the still-excessive price premium of cats than of any perception I hold on their suitability as passagemakers. I do dislike many of the design choices of cats in terms of "floating condos" with "patio doors", etc., but many builders and designers are preserving the "cat logic" and advantages but are keeping the windage down and beefing up the general seaworthiness of cruising cats. So while I am tilting toward the known...a 40-45 foot monohull cruiser...I haven't ruled out buying a cat. I would like to sail one, though. Despite having PDQ Yachts just down the road, seeing a cruising cat on Lake Ontario is very rare (Hobies, sure...) and I have never sailed one, or even been aboard one, nor is there one at my club, although we've had large cruising cats visit on occasion. Strangely, there's quite a few trimarans...I see a few F-27s and F-28s and a good pal just bought a Hobie TriFoiler "for kicks". I don't know if the paucity of catamarans has to do with price (old, smallish monos are a steal here currently), conservatism or the peculiarly short, steep chop you find frequently in Lake Ontario, and which would perhaps wobble a cat on the beam, but I hope to sail one at some point, just to see what all the fuss is about. R. |
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ?
Bob is absolutely right. If your love of boating is based primarily
on the rush of sailing rail down, and your annual cruise is a weekend at the marina across the bay, then a cruising cat is not for you. Ironically, Bob imagines a time in the future when a cat might be the best match for his needs. I've said that my next sailboat will probably be a small overnighter, perhaps 22 feet. Right now we're between long cruises but still spend about 6 weeks each summer aboard, so the cat still serves our needs. Capt. Rob wrote: I find it interesting that this ultimately pragmatic thread has not touched on the actual sailing experience itself. I've sailed two cats, a Gemini and PDQ 36. In both cases my wife and I were bored to tears. The PDQ was fast off the wind and there was some novelty in that for a few minutes, but it didn't last. The heeling and motion of a monohul is part of the romance of sailing for many of us. It feels right, even if our drinks spill. I think the fellow who posted that while they are both wind powered, they are too different to truly conpare. No doubt if I was planning extended cruises with little chance of day and night sails, a Cat might be the better pick. But for the way most folks sail, with many daysails and long weekends a mono will be a lot more fun. Then again, the novelty of heeling and having an exciting ride with the rail buried can also lose it's charm. My wife and I plan to buy a larger boat for part-time liveaboard in about 4-5 years and we'll look at cats again, but I expect we've been spoiled to want the fun factor more. Maybe our aging bones will change all of that! I do agree that cats are not attractive, and I'm still young enough (no offense meant here!) to place that high on my list, though I own a "modern" looking boat she's still pleasing to my eye. RB Beneteau First 35s5 http://hometown.aol.com/bobsprit/index.html NY |
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ?
DSK wrote:
.... Jeff wrote: Since it appears to be "common knowledge" that cruising cats capsize frequently, perhaps you can give us a few examples. The truth is, it is a very uncommon event. About as uncommon as monohulls rolling & sinking? I've often wondered about this - some writers simply hand wave that the chances are roughly equal. My vote would be for avoiding the situation. However, you have to add to the monohull side of the ledger the number of sinkings from other causes. .... I might guess that more cruising fatalities are from falling overboard than from sinking or capsizing. This would imply that the more stable platform is safer. Good point, I wonder how the man overboard statistics compare between mono- & multi-hulls. I know of one well publicized case of a racer falling through the netting. .... |
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ?
Ironically, Bob imagines a time in the future when a cat might be the
best match for his needs. Thanks for keeping this thread civil, Jeff :-) In the real world I can fully understand and appreciate the clear advantages that a 36 foot Cat has over my boat. And I'm sure you can see my side as well regarding the "fun factor" aspect. But for cruising and spending long periods aboard, the Cat is a clear winner if you can meet the price point. I have an open mind about it. You buy what suits your situation, and sometimes passion (such as mine for a slender tender hull) can injure a cruisers dreams in a very obvious way. As I said, if we start looking at a part-time home on the water, a 40 foot Cat is a great compromise vs. a 50 or even 60 foot mono. RB Beneteau First 35s5 http://hometown.aol.com/bobsprit/index.html NY |
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ?
Since it appears to be "common knowledge" that cruising cats capsize
frequently, perhaps you can give us a few examples. The truth is, it is a very uncommon event. About as uncommon as monohulls rolling & sinking? Jeff wrote: I've often wondered about this - some writers simply hand wave that the chances are roughly equal. My vote would be for avoiding the situation. Definitely agreed! However, you have to add to the monohull side of the ledger the number of sinkings from other causes. Agreed again, and while the chances are small (the overwhelming number of sinkings are at the dock) IMHO it strengthens the argument in favor of positive flotation. ... I might guess that more cruising fatalities are from falling overboard than from sinking or capsizing. This would imply that the more stable platform is safer. Good point, I wonder how the man overboard statistics compare between mono- & multi-hulls. I know of one well publicized case of a racer falling through the netting. ... I bet that strained his relationship... I've fallen off, but not thru. I've also fallen on a crossbeam, which was a big "ouch." What I really hate about mesh tramps is the way wave pattersn will unpredictably reinforce themselves between the hulls, so that crossing a small unobtrusive wake suddenly & erratically gives a jet of cold spray right up your pants. Not a problem on bigger cats with solid decks, but you hear the thumping once in a while.... Fresh Breezes- Doug King |
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ?
Interesting perspectives and civil to boot.
I really think if you know the type of sailing you plan to do the right boat will jump out at you. If all we (my wife and I) wanted to sail were the East Coast and Caribbean we would most likely sail a cat. We want to sail across the pond and feel the mono is safer and more comfortable for that application. The cat is built with a hatch in the bottom for a reason, they do flip. Not a problem if there is someone to get you before you get washed off. Certainly roominess goes to the cat. Cost to purchase goes to the mono. Speeds are comparable. You can make a lists that go on and on. In the end you will buy what you want and defend that decision because you want to validate the decision you made. I include myself in that statement. Bryan "Capt. Rob" wrote in message oups.com... Ironically, Bob imagines a time in the future when a cat might be the best match for his needs. Thanks for keeping this thread civil, Jeff :-) In the real world I can fully understand and appreciate the clear advantages that a 36 foot Cat has over my boat. And I'm sure you can see my side as well regarding the "fun factor" aspect. But for cruising and spending long periods aboard, the Cat is a clear winner if you can meet the price point. I have an open mind about it. You buy what suits your situation, and sometimes passion (such as mine for a slender tender hull) can injure a cruisers dreams in a very obvious way. As I said, if we start looking at a part-time home on the water, a 40 foot Cat is a great compromise vs. a 50 or even 60 foot mono. RB Beneteau First 35s5 http://hometown.aol.com/bobsprit/index.html NY |
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ?
"Marc Onrust" wrote in message . nl... I guess most people prefer to be upside-down-but-floating compared to upright-on-the-bottom of the Atlantic. The next question though, is what are chances of such events to happen? When I cross the Atlantic (or whatever waters) I rather opt for a 1% chance to sink my monohull (and trust on my liferaft) than a 20% chance of capsizing my cat. Now, both figures are probably far from accurate, so my question is, what are chances that such things will happen? Regards, Marc www.marineyacht.com The only published figure that I have ever seen for risk was in Chris White's book- The Cruising Multihull. He quotes mortality figures from the US coastguard over a 10 year period and tries to interpret mono and multi separately. Thus, while not capsize versus sinking, it was an attempt to look at overall risk. His estimate is one death per year per 16,500 multis compared to one per year per 12,500 monos. He admits the figures are not rock solid. Overall though it points to very low and equivalent risk in either hullform. Peter HK |
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ?
"Marc Onrust" wrote in message
. nl... Peter HK wrote: "sherwindu" wrote in message ... One question nobody has addressed yet is what happens when a cat capsizes? There is no natural righting moment, as with a mono hull. I have never even sailed on a cat myself, but the heeling of a mono hull seems to offer some comfort advantages, because the combination of sails and pendulum keel act as a kind of 'shock absorber' in wavy conditions. I would prefer to be heeled over and on a steady lean than bounced up and down as one than another hull is lifted and dropped by a wave, especially in short choppy seas. Long rolling waves would probably somewhat nullify this advantage. I am referring more to waves on the beam, but there probably is some effect on a close hauled tack. Sherwin D. There are occasional sea patterns that are uncomfortable on a multi, usually with beam seas, but the magnitude of the event needs to be considered. Cats reach max stability at about 5 degrees of heel (when a hull lifts). As this never happens on cruising cats, all heel angles are less than 5 degrees. Short sharp waves can occasionally exceed this a little due to the hulls being in a trough and crest. Compare to a mono rolling downwind where heel angles can be 30 degrees side to side. Multis do have a different motion- shorter and sharper compared to slower but much more amplitude on a mono. Personally I find it quite comfortable. As stated in a previous post a glass never spills, which is a significant observation on the severity of the motion. When a multi capsizes it floats- most are now equipped with hatches to enter a secure part of the hull in a capsize. When a mono sinks however- dragged down by that ballast that makes it self-righting- the only hope is a liferaft. It depends on what you think is the most basic safety feature- nonsinkability or self righting. Peter HK I guess most people prefer to be upside-down-but-floating compared to upright-on-the-bottom of the Atlantic. The next question though, is what are chances of such events to happen? When I cross the Atlantic (or whatever waters) I rather opt for a 1% chance to sink my monohull (and trust on my liferaft) than a 20% chance of capsizing my cat. Now, both figures are probably far from accurate, so my question is, what are chances that such things will happen? Regards, Marc www.marineyacht.com I don't think I recall hearing about any cruising cats that have capsized. Where are you getting 20% or even 5%? -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com |
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ?
In the end you will buy what you want and defend that decision because
you want to validate the decision you made. I include myself in that statement. Well said, Bryan and certainly true. Anytime you feel bored with civility and intelligence feel welcome to join the Sailing fools Parade at Alt.sailing.asa. There you'll find some of these same discussions as well, though you'll have to wade through a lot of nasty insults (all for fun some would say) to get to the meat of most topics. RB Beneteau First 35s5 NY |
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ?
Thanks but I think I'll pass on that. : )
Bryan "Capt. Rob" wrote in message ups.com... In the end you will buy what you want and defend that decision because you want to validate the decision you made. I include myself in that statement. Well said, Bryan and certainly true. Anytime you feel bored with civility and intelligence feel welcome to join the Sailing fools Parade at Alt.sailing.asa. There you'll find some of these same discussions as well, though you'll have to wade through a lot of nasty insults (all for fun some would say) to get to the meat of most topics. RB Beneteau First 35s5 NY |
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ?
"Capt" Rob wrote:
.... Anytime you feel bored with civility and intelligence feel welcome to join the Sailing fools Parade at Alt.sailing.asa. There you'll find some of these same discussions as well, though you'll have to wade through a lot of nasty insults 90% of which are from one source, it should be noted. BTW if you want to call yourself "Captain" why don't you explain to the nice folks in this newsgroup how you became a captain. DSK |
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ?
Bryan wrote:
Interesting perspectives and civil to boot. We'll see what we can do about that. I really think if you know the type of sailing you plan to do the right boat will jump out at you. If all we (my wife and I) wanted to sail were the East Coast and Caribbean we would most likely sail a cat. We want to sail across the pond and feel the mono is safer and more comfortable for that application. Comfort is very subjective, but safety is not. There's absolutely no evidence that monohulls are safer. On the contrary, for a variety of reasons, cats are a lot safer than monohulls. I'm not sure my PDQ would be my first choice for an Atlantic crossing, but they've done it. A large number of them have been to Bermuda because a few of the old owners do an annual rendezvous there, and one of the charter companies delivered through Bermuda. A Prout (with a very conservative rig) might be a better choice for the passage, but then you'd give up some performance in your local cruising. Of course, you have the same compromises in monohulls. The cat is built with a hatch in the bottom for a reason, they do flip. Actually, most cats don't have the hatch, because, contrary to "urban legend," cruising cats don't flip. OK, they've flipped a few times. But, I challenge you to find even a single link to where a modern production cruising cat capsized while being cruised. Invariably, you'll find the story was about a racing cat (or more likely a tri), or a homemade or archaic design. BTW, consider that virtually every carter cat in the Caribbean sailed there on its own bottom, mostly from France and South Africa. Not a problem if there is someone to get you before you get washed off. Washed off? I think I'd poke the epirb and wait down below for a while. Meanwhile, I'd thank my lucky stars that I didn't have a monohull, which at this point would likely be headed toward the bottom. Certainly roominess goes to the cat. Cost to purchase goes to the mono. Speeds are comparable. You can make a lists that go on and on. true for roominess and cost. Speed depends on how you measure it - by the foot cats are faster, by the dollar maybe not. By the sail area that must be handled, cats are definitely faster. But if you like gensets and A/C's, the cat can lose any advantage. In the end you will buy what you want and defend that decision because you want to validate the decision you made. I include myself in that statement. me too. Bryan "Capt. Rob" wrote in message oups.com... Ironically, Bob imagines a time in the future when a cat might be the best match for his needs. Thanks for keeping this thread civil, Jeff :-) In the real world I can fully understand and appreciate the clear advantages that a 36 foot Cat has over my boat. And I'm sure you can see my side as well regarding the "fun factor" aspect. But for cruising and spending long periods aboard, the Cat is a clear winner if you can meet the price point. I have an open mind about it. You buy what suits your situation, and sometimes passion (such as mine for a slender tender hull) can injure a cruisers dreams in a very obvious way. As I said, if we start looking at a part-time home on the water, a 40 foot Cat is a great compromise vs. a 50 or even 60 foot mono. RB Beneteau First 35s5 http://hometown.aol.com/bobsprit/index.html NY |
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ?
90% of which are from one source, it should be noted.
BTW if you want to call yourself "Captain" why don't you Look up the word Captain, Doug. You might also ask the Coast Guard exactly what a captain is. Here's a hint. It does not have to involve a license. I think plenty of people here know who we are and may even know that you no longer sail and have a trawler, but I won't engage in any nonsense here since this is a real group. You're welcome to fire away....I won't fire back. Have fun. RB 35s5 NY |
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ?
"Capt. Rob" wrote in message
ps.com... 90% of which are from one source, it should be noted. BTW if you want to call yourself "Captain" why don't you Look up the word Captain, Doug. You might also ask the Coast Guard exactly what a captain is. Here's a hint. It does not have to involve a license. I think plenty of people here know who we are and may even know that you no longer sail and have a trawler, but I won't engage in any nonsense here since this is a real group. You're welcome to fire away....I won't fire back. Have fun. Well, you're certainly not a licensed captain. I suppose you can call yourself whatever you want, but the typical definition of Captain is someone licensed by the USCG or other authority. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com |
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ?
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 18:43:55 -0500, Jeff wrote:
if you like gensets and A/C's, the cat can lose any advantage. Pretty much mandatory in the tropics in my opinion unless you REALLY enjoy being hot. |
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ?
Capt. Rob wrote:
I find it interesting that this ultimately pragmatic thread has not touched on the actual sailing experience itself. I've sailed two cats, a Gemini and PDQ 36. In both cases my wife and I were bored to tears. The PDQ was fast off the wind and there was some novelty in that for a few minutes, but it didn't last. The heeling and motion of a monohul is part of the romance of sailing for many of us. It feels right, even if I agree - the feel of a boat heeled over and the romance of spilling your drinks can't be beat. My cat sails like driving a bus most of the time. But when we hit 15 knots there were a lot of big smiles aboard. :) Biggest smile was the woman driving, who had only ever been on a sailboat once before. The turning point for me and my wife: We were anchored at Isla Providencia, a small island in the Carib. that belongs to Columbia. It's about 100 miles east of the Nicaraugan coast. Long way from anywhere. We were sitting out a norther on our monohull. The swell was wrapping around the headland and was on the beam. The wind was strong enough that we didn't want to bridle the boat to face the swells as this would increase the windage. All the monos in the anchorage were rolling their guts out. One furthest out was rolling +/- 30 degrees. We wer feeling seasick at anchor! There was a single cat in the anchorage. The folks aboard were having a picnic lunch in the cockpit. Their 2 year old was having a swing under the davits on their home made swing. THEIR boat just bobbed up and down and they smiled as we rowed to shore to escape the rolling aboard... Evan Gatehouse |
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ?
Capt. JG wrote:
I guess most people prefer to be upside-down-but-floating compared to upright-on-the-bottom of the Atlantic. The next question though, is what are chances of such events to happen? When I cross the Atlantic (or whatever waters) I rather opt for a 1% chance to sink my monohull (and trust on my liferaft) than a 20% chance of capsizing my cat. Now, both figures are probably far from accurate, so my question is, what are chances that such things will happen? Regards, Marc www.marineyacht.com I don't think I recall hearing about any cruising cats that have capsized. Where are you getting 20% or even 5%? Incidences of cruising cats are pretty infrequent. I only know of the following; - PDQ 32 capsizing while entering a cut in the Bahamas while a "rage" was blowing. Pitchpoled in very shallow water in the huge breakers - a Gemini capsizing in Texas; sailed over due to too much sail - a Fountaine Pajot 35 capsized in the Caribbean; sailed over with a charter group aboard - a Catana in the Med; capsized due to a sudden squall hitting with the chute up at night. - a Heavenly Twins 26 or 27 capsizing in Force 10+ north of the British Isles during a rare summer severe storm. I have also heard of the F-P Maldives 32 being pretty susceptible to capsize but that's more innuendo that actual facts and the Iriquois but I don't know if they were capsized during racing or while cruising. Most of the above are smaller, narrower beam cats by the way of fairly old design; the exceptions being the FP 35 and the Catana. When the Wolfson Unit of Southhampton University did a study of trying to capsize cruising cat models the only way they could do it was a beam on breaking wave beam of the boat (similar to a monohull by the way) "MODEL TESTS TO STUDY CAPSIZE AND STABILITY OF SAILING MULTIHULLS" Deakin B. The 15th Chesapeake Sailing Yacht Symposium, January 2001 Evan Gatehouse |
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ?
http://www.rina.org.uk/rfiles/IJSCT/Discuss/deakin.pdf
is the link to the Wolfson study I mentioned earlier. Good reading and not too technical... Evan Gatehouse |
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ?
In article .com,
"Capt. Rob" wrote: I find it interesting that this ultimately pragmatic thread has not touched on the actual sailing experience itself. I've chartered a half dozen 45-48' cats, been on smaller ones, and of course a bunch of monohulls. I can get either type to go well, so that's not an issue. The space of a cat is wonderful -- and horrible. From experience, if we have space, we'll fill it up. We'll make a cat heavy pretty fast. There goes any speed advantage. Price is certainly a factor. We can cruise for a few years on the cost difference for the same amount of space. My major question, though is how long will cats be serviceable? Our little Xan is 33 years old and seems destined to celebrate 50 comfortably. That seems not unusual for most well-maintained monohulls I see. I saw what happened to a Gemini that smacked a wall. It wasn't going that fast, but both hulls shattered and the construction revealed wasn't pretty. (Truth be told, our old Macgregor seemed more solidly constructed.) Friend on an "older" (late 80's) cat is discovering some interesting structural projects. Cats are built relatively lightly, and that's a good selling point, but will it hurt them in the long run? New Hunters and Macgregors certainly are capable of what they're designed for, but I wouldn't trust older ones for serious cruising. -- Jere Lull Xan-a-Deux ('73 Tanzer 28 #4 out of Tolchester, MD) Xan's Pages: http://members.dca.net/jerelull/X-Main.html Our BVI FAQs (290+ pics) http://homepage.mac.com/jerelull/BVI/ |
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ?
Peter HK wrote: There are occasional sea patterns that are uncomfortable on a multi, usually with beam seas, but the magnitude of the event needs to be considered. Cats reach max stability at about 5 degrees of heel (when a hull lifts). As this never happens on cruising cats, all heel angles are less than 5 degrees. Short sharp waves can occasionally exceed this a little due to the hulls being in a trough and crest. Compare to a mono rolling downwind where heel angles can be 30 degrees side to side. Monohulls do not normally rock from side to side, nor do they heel over 30 degrees unless you are racing. With the proper sail trim, they should not heel that much. You missed the point of the sails acting like a shock absorber in union with the' pendulum action of the keel. Multis do have a different motion- shorter and sharper compared to slower but much more amplitude on a mono. Personally I find it quite comfortable. As stated in a previous post a glass never spills, which is a significant observation on the severity of the motion. When a multi capsizes it floats- most are now equipped with hatches to enter a secure part of the hull in a capsize. And what if you are on deck at the time? And what do you do in this secure section of the hull? Wait and hope for rescue because you won't be able to get yourself out of trouble. When a mono sinks however- dragged down by that ballast that makes it self-righting- the only hope is a liferaft. Any boat that fills with water is going to sink. The idea about mono hulls is that they will right themselves before the boat fills with water. It depends on what you think is the most basic safety feature- nonsinkability or self righting. I prefer the self righting. At least I have a chance to recover and continue sailing, in that case. If it sinks, then the life raft is your backup. Peter HK |
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ?
"sherwindu" wrote in message
... Peter HK wrote: There are occasional sea patterns that are uncomfortable on a multi, usually with beam seas, but the magnitude of the event needs to be considered. Cats reach max stability at about 5 degrees of heel (when a hull lifts). As this never happens on cruising cats, all heel angles are less than 5 degrees. Short sharp waves can occasionally exceed this a little due to the hulls being in a trough and crest. Compare to a mono rolling downwind where heel angles can be 30 degrees side to side. Monohulls do not normally rock from side to side, nor do they heel over 30 degrees unless you are racing. With the proper sail trim, they should not heel that much. You missed the point of the sails acting like a shock absorber in union with the' pendulum action of the keel. You're right, but they can in sudden gusts with a relatively inattentive cruising crew. Multis do have a different motion- shorter and sharper compared to slower but much more amplitude on a mono. Personally I find it quite comfortable. As stated in a previous post a glass never spills, which is a significant observation on the severity of the motion. When a multi capsizes it floats- most are now equipped with hatches to enter a secure part of the hull in a capsize. And what if you are on deck at the time? And what do you do in this secure section of the hull? Wait and hope for rescue because you won't be able to get yourself out of trouble. Well, the same argument can be made for a mono if you're on deck and she heels dramatically or takes on water suddenly. Why would you be unable to get yourself out of trouble if you're fairly secure in a hull? When a mono sinks however- dragged down by that ballast that makes it self-righting- the only hope is a liferaft. Any boat that fills with water is going to sink. The idea about mono hulls is that they will right themselves before the boat fills with water. Not completely true, as most modern cats will not sink. Of course, never is an absolute, so I suppose it's possible though remotely so. It depends on what you think is the most basic safety feature- nonsinkability or self righting. I prefer the self righting. At least I have a chance to recover and continue sailing, in that case. If it sinks, then the life raft is your backup. Many who sail cats don't carry a liferaft, because the cat or tri is the liferaft. Now I'm not claiming that a multi is the end all and be all of safety at sea, but most of the time, the prime consideration is crew durability, not boat durability. Crews get tired on a boat that's heeled all the time for long distances. Tired crew make more mistakes. Well, you're certainly not a licensed captain. I suppose you can call yourself whatever you want, but the typical definition is licensed by the USCG or other authority. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com |
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ?
"Jere Lull" wrote in message
... In article .com, "Capt. Rob" wrote: I find it interesting that this ultimately pragmatic thread has not touched on the actual sailing experience itself. I've chartered a half dozen 45-48' cats, been on smaller ones, and of course a bunch of monohulls. I can get either type to go well, so that's not an issue. Same here. The space of a cat is wonderful -- and horrible. From experience, if we have space, we'll fill it up. We'll make a cat heavy pretty fast. There goes any speed advantage. And, safety. One should not overload a multi. Price is certainly a factor. We can cruise for a few years on the cost difference for the same amount of space. Yup... they are more expensive. My major question, though is how long will cats be serviceable? Our little Xan is 33 years old and seems destined to celebrate 50 comfortably. That seems not unusual for most well-maintained monohulls I see. I saw what happened to a Gemini that smacked a wall. It wasn't going that fast, but both hulls shattered and the construction revealed wasn't pretty. (Truth be told, our old Macgregor seemed more solidly constructed.) Friend on an "older" (late 80's) cat is discovering some interesting structural projects. Cats are built relatively lightly, and that's a good selling point, but will it hurt them in the long run? New Hunters and Macgregors certainly are capable of what they're designed for, but I wouldn't trust older ones for serious cruising. Definitely interesting questions/points... no idea really, but there are a lot of older multis out there that are still going. |
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ?
"Capt. JG" wrote in message ... "Jere Lull" wrote in message ... My major question, though is how long will cats be serviceable? Our little Xan is 33 years old and seems destined to celebrate 50 comfortably. That seems not unusual for most well-maintained monohulls To be frank, one needs to compare apples with apples. Many modern day performance monos are very lightly built and not destined for longevity. The same is true for higher performance multis. There are many cruising monos that last an age and certainly, here in Oz, many examples of cruising multis that are well built, will never win a race because they are a bit heavier, but last very well. My last cruising cat was built in 1983 and when I sold it at age 21 years the survey found no issues with the structure of the boat. The gelcoat was a bit faded but had not a single crack. Being vinylester/airex there was no osmosis. It surely had at least another 21 years. She was a little slow by multi standards- 150 mile days were routine but 200 mile days would have needed a racing crew pushing hard. Nothing ever broke. Everything is a compromise. Peter HK |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:29 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com