Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 07-02-2014, 11:31 AM   #21
Guru
 
psneeld's Avatar
 
City: Avalon, NJ
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Freedom
Vessel Model: Albin 40
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 15,864
Quote:
Originally Posted by ksanders View Post
If the stabilizer companies just sold stabilizers to folks with Full Displacement hulls, they would soon be out of business.

Everybody with a FD hull is going to say the only acceptable boat for any area is a FD hull. Thats just how people are.

Everybody is going to say their waves are bigger, or more constant than other areas waves. Thats again just how people are.

The fact is that actual real cruisers can, have, and will continue to cruise in the open ocean in all sorts of boats, and they have a good time doing it.

Think of this. There are a series of books written by Melanie Wood that document her and her husbands accounts in their 38' Bayliner. They started in Canada and are now in Honduras. Nobody would dream of arguing that a 38' Bayliner is a great open ocean boat, yet these people did it, and had a great time.

So, my advice is that the actual boat is MUCH less important than we think here sitting behind our keyboards. Pick a boat you're comfortable with. Pick a boat you can afford. Pick a boat that doesn't delay your date to start cruising because it requires you to work later in life to pay for. Then GO CRUISING.

If you want, and can afford stabilizers, get them. You'll be more comfortable. If the 50K for stabilizers will delay your departure, forget about them and set sail. You will not stop the clock of life, and I guarantee you'll be happier cruising in the boat you can afford than sitting at your desk at work for several more years paying for the optimum boat.
__________________
Advertisement

psneeld is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2014, 12:03 PM   #22
Guru
 
Nomad Willy's Avatar
 
City: Concrete Washington State
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Willy
Vessel Model: Willard Nomad 30'
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,707
ksanders wrote;
"Everybody with a FD hull is going to say the only acceptable boat for any area is a FD hull. Thats just how people are."

Is that the reason passagemakers are all or almost all FD boats?

I think we people here on TF are a LOT more objective than your quote above says. FD is far better at sea but I suppose what I say is meaningless since I have a FD boat. Hmmm.
__________________

__________________
Eric

North Western Washington State USA
Nomad Willy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2014, 12:13 PM   #23
TF Site Team
 
ksanders's Avatar
 
City: SEWARD ALASKA
Country: USA
Vessel Name: LISAS WAY
Vessel Model: BAYLINER 4788
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,952
Quote:
Originally Posted by manyboats View Post
ksanders wrote;
"Everybody with a FD hull is going to say the only acceptable boat for any area is a FD hull. Thats just how people are."

Is that the reason passagemakers are all or almost all FD boats?

I think we people here on TF are a LOT more objective than your quote above says. FD is far better at sea but I suppose what I say is meaningless since I have a FD boat. Hmmm.
Eric

What you personally say is not meaningless. I spoke in generalities about people, and I stand behind my comments. People with FD hulls in general make comments that indicate their belief that you cannot cruise in the open ocean unless you have a FD hull. Those beliefs and those comments are factually incorrect.

To answer your question, passagemakers are almost all FD boats because of two reasons.

1. A FD boat has better fuel economy, and in general can carry the fuel necessary for crossing oceans.

2. A FD boat can in general withstand seas of a larger magnitude than a SD boat. This is necessary for passagemaking because our current technology only allows for an approx 72 hour firm weather forecast duration. Therefore a passagemaker must be able to operate in whatever sea state might happen.

We all need to remember and take note that cruising anywhere along a coastline, or between islands is not passagemaking. It does not require the fuel range or the seaworthiness that crossing open oceans requires. Therefore it does not require a FD boat, or a boat capable of crossing oceans.
__________________
Kevin Sanders
Bayliner 4788
Seward, Alaska
www.mvlisasway.com
ksanders is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2014, 12:37 PM   #24
Guru
 
psneeld's Avatar
 
City: Avalon, NJ
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Freedom
Vessel Model: Albin 40
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 15,864
I guess being one of the lesser objective people here on TF...

All one has to do is a quick perusal of general info to see as boats get larger..especially above the 65 range to see passage-making semi-displacement is not only more common but a desirable trait.

Pure numbers show that the smaller the vessel, the more of the total weight has to be reserved for fuel, food and water. In the constant trade off to keep the size small, room and weight attributed to the basics forces the boat further towards the pure displacement design.

But pure displacement has very little to do with absolute seaworthiness...just capacity. The more a boater is willing to forgo certain amenities the better the chance that a smaller hull could easily be a semi-displacement passagemaker.

Lot's of "record setters" have crossed in all kinds of vessels...it's just a matter of what you are willing to do without or how small you want to stay.
psneeld is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2014, 12:51 PM   #25
TF Site Team
 
ksanders's Avatar
 
City: SEWARD ALASKA
Country: USA
Vessel Name: LISAS WAY
Vessel Model: BAYLINER 4788
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,952
Quote:
Originally Posted by psneeld View Post
I guess being one of the lesser objective people here on TF...

All one has to do is a quick perusal of general info to see as boats get larger..especially above the 65 range to see passage-making semi-displacement is not only more common but a desirable trait.

Pure numbers show that the smaller the vessel, the more of the total weight has to be reserved for fuel, food and water. In the constant trade off to keep the size small, room and weight attributed to the basics forces the boat further towards the pure displacement design.

But pure displacement has very little to do with absolute seaworthiness...just capacity. The more a boater is willing to forgo certain amenities the better the chance that a smaller hull could easily be a semi-displacement passagemaker.

Lot's of "record setters" have crossed in all kinds of vessels...it's just a matter of what you are willing to do without or how small you want to stay.
I would further this discussion and your comments by saying that a Semi Displacement hull, coupled with engines of adequate size are often more desirable than a FD hull for island hopping and coastal cruising.

A SD hull and large engines means you can get somewhere much quicker. This can be a real advantage in island hopping and coastal cruising.

Just this last weekend we did a 40 mile open ocean crossing. At 14 knots we made that crossing in three hours. At 7 knots it would have been 6 hours.

The concept here is that you could make the argument either way for island hopping and coastal cruising.

The bigger point is that people need to realize that if they keep dreaming of the larger or more capable boat they might never actually leave port.

We could all trade working years for a larger or more capable boat. But how many years do we have to trade?
__________________
Kevin Sanders
Bayliner 4788
Seward, Alaska
www.mvlisasway.com
ksanders is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2014, 01:14 PM   #26
Guru
 
psneeld's Avatar
 
City: Avalon, NJ
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Freedom
Vessel Model: Albin 40
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 15,864
Quote:
Originally Posted by ksanders View Post
I would further this discussion and your comments by saying that a Semi Displacement hull, coupled with engines of adequate size are often more desirable than a FD hull for island hopping and coastal cruising.

A SD hull and large engines means you can get somewhere much quicker. This can be a real advantage in island hopping and coastal cruising.

Just this last weekend we did a 40 mile open ocean crossing. At 14 knots we made that crossing in three hours. At 7 knots it would have been 6 hours.
I was just addressing the myth of SD/FD and passage making.

My friend just came over from sail and bought a 49 Meridian.

He could have bought a Nordhavn or Fleming ...probably for cash and would have had plenty to cruise on. He's not going to Europe or even probably all the way down island in the Caribbean...wise choice for him...for a lot of reasons.

Certainly with the right features built in, and as long as they work as advertised, it really doesn't matter what hull form crosses an ocean...as long as the skipper/crew is up to it also.

But I'm not so na´ve to say for the typical 35-45 foot range many of us are in...FD is probably an easier choice to outfit for serious long range cruising ....beyond just coastal cruising.
psneeld is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2014, 01:39 PM   #27
Guru
 
Nomad Willy's Avatar
 
City: Concrete Washington State
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Willy
Vessel Model: Willard Nomad 30'
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,707
Ranger42c wrote
"I wonder if there's really that huge a difference between a stabilized full-displacement hull and a stabilized semi-displacement hull. Measurable? If so, how much delta is due to hull form, and how much due to the stabilization system?

If the system (active fin) is part of the design and called for a NA the system would be much more effective and/or smaller on the FD boat. Much less stabilization will take place on a low deadrise hard chine boat for a given size system. So yes to your question is there is a very noticeable difference and the difference will vary a lot because the differences in hulls and what people think a FD hull is. Our archives will show that is not clear.

Kevin I do agree w your post#23.
I could have crossed the Cascade Mountains w my ultralight. And I can ride a motor scooter on the freeway too. Dosn't mean either is a good idea. Many people have rowed a boat to SE AK. And paddled kayaks. Or run jet skis. None of these vehicles were meant to do those things but the risks vary more by whose doing it that the vehicles themselves .... As psneeld said or implied.
__________________
Eric

North Western Washington State USA
Nomad Willy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2014, 01:56 PM   #28
Guru
 
City: gulf coast
Country: pinellas
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 2,197
Good advice Kevin though most wont believe you.
bayview is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2014, 02:01 PM   #29
Guru
 
Capt.Bill11's Avatar
 
City: Sarasota/Ft. Lauderdale
Country: USA
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 5,422
Quote:
Originally Posted by manyboats View Post
Keep in mind that wide hard chine boats and/or just wide boats w little dead rise are hard to stabilize.
I'm not sure if agree with that. The majority of stabilized non-commercial boats are hard chine I'd say. And the stabilizers work just fine.

And considering the way a full displacement boat would behave roll wise in a beam sea you could say it would cause the stabilizers to work harder to dampen its rolls.

Where as a hard chined boat is stiffer and resist roll so the stabilizers may not work as hard at least initially.
Capt.Bill11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2014, 02:04 PM   #30
Guru
 
City: gulf coast
Country: pinellas
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 2,197
Yup everyone has to have a passage maker though they will never cross oceans.

IMO the best boat less than 100' for crossing oceans is a sailboat.
bayview is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2014, 02:15 PM   #31
Member
 
City: Little River, SC
Country: USA
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 6
In the OP initial post, he mentioned that, in the past there have been as many as 6 on board. If this is still the case, you may want to consider a larger boat. Also, you left out what you have budgeted for such a purchase, unfortunately, that is a VERY important consideration.

With such a large investment, you also want to consider the resale value and desire. In this arena, I have found that high(er) quality, full displacement vessels have done much better than any of the SD style vessels.

If it were me, I would keep an open mind and look at as many vessels as possible. Some on my own list are: Selene, Nordhavn, Cherubini, Krogen, Fleming, as well as some of the later DeFevers. Of course there are others out there but these are proven designs with great histories.

For the "Big U" you will have to consider being away from land for a fairly extended period of time, and when on the Land along the way, it may not offer the most modern of facilities for provisioning.

You will need a fair amount of space for provisions, minimum 600 GPD water maker, tankage, both water and fuel. Fuel Scrubber System, spare parts, etc.

If single engine, I would consider rigging the generator as a limp home engine.

If you feel that a Grand Banks will do the job for you, it opens up a few more boats that will do the job as well, or better than the GB's. Too many to consider in this category to attempt to list.

What ever you decide, HAVE FUN!
Steveyacht is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2014, 02:57 PM   #32
Guru
 
caltexflanc's Avatar
 
City: North Carolina for now
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Small Incentive
Vessel Model: Boston Whaler 130 Sport
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 3,783
Quote:
Originally Posted by Capt.Bill11 View Post
I'm not sure if agree with that. The majority of stabilized non-commercial boats are hard chine I'd say. And the stabilizers work just fine.

And considering the way a full displacement boat would behave roll wise in a beam sea you could say it would cause the stabilizers to work harder to dampen its rolls.

Where as a hard chined boat is stiffer and resist roll so the stabilizers may not work as hard at least initially.
Exactly Bill. You will be hard pressed to find, say, a non stabilized classic Hatteras motor yacht. They exist, but rare. Mine benefitted greatly from the stabs and the Naiads never seemed particularly stressed, partly because the initial stability is very good on these boats and doesn't require anything from the stabs, while FD is going to roll, gently, right away. Just watch the little needles on the Naiad display on each kind of boat in similar seas.

Even though there are small islands of somewhat useful information on this thread, in my opinion the OP would be better off just ignoring the whole thing. Pick up a copy of Gerr's "The Nature of Boats" for starters.

GBs are great boats by the way, and will take green water on the pilot house windows all day long, I can testify.
__________________
George

"There's the Right Way, the Wrong Way, and what some guy says he's gotten away with"
caltexflanc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2014, 03:03 PM   #33
Guru
 
Capt.Bill11's Avatar
 
City: Sarasota/Ft. Lauderdale
Country: USA
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 5,422
While GBs may not be everyone's first choice for a bluewater cruiser, they do get around.

Hair of the Dog | Yachting Magazine

http://www.grandbanks.com/images/dis...pray/v11n1.pdf
Capt.Bill11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2014, 03:24 PM   #34
TF Site Team
 
ksanders's Avatar
 
City: SEWARD ALASKA
Country: USA
Vessel Name: LISAS WAY
Vessel Model: BAYLINER 4788
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,952
Quote:
Originally Posted by bayview View Post
Good advice Kevin though most wont believe you.
Nope it's easier to dream of the boat you cannot buy because that gives you an excuse for not going.

For those that can afford them and actually cruise them the FD passagemakers make nice platforms for exploring.

For the rest of us the scenery is much nicer sitting on the boats we can afford to buy and actually cruise than it is sitting in our offices while saving for or paying for a dream boat.
__________________
Kevin Sanders
Bayliner 4788
Seward, Alaska
www.mvlisasway.com
ksanders is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2014, 03:36 PM   #35
Senior Member
 
Billyfeet's Avatar
 
City: Jupiter, FL
Country: USA
Vessel Name: JOHN D. MACDONALD
Vessel Model: FAIRCHILD SCOUT 30
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 179
Carleton Mitchell hit the Eastern Caribbean in a GB 42 back in the 60's called Sans Terre. He was a former winner of the Newport-Bermuda race with his sailboat Finnisterre. He had sailed the whole Caribbean chain in the 40's with a boat called Carib and then in Finisterre years later, documenting his voyages in National Geographic Magazine. I blame these articles for giving me the desire to spend my life afloat upon these waters. He sure had plenty of experience with the challenges and realities of cruising off shore. The sad truth is that in typical Caribbean Trade Wind passages the boat is going to be moving around quite a bit regardless of hull form or size. And while the chart looks like short "Island Hopping" is the order of the day in practice when the wind and seas funnel through the passages things get pretty lively. For me the order of importance is 1. STRONG 2. RELIABLE PROPULSION 3. RELIABLE PROPULSION WHEN THE OTHER ONE FAILS. 4. A CREW THAT IS READY FOR THE DISCOMFORT.
Billyfeet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2014, 03:55 PM   #36
Guru
 
ancora's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,489
We looked at a Nordhaven 40 before buying our Nova Sundeck. If we were going out in the Bering Sea I would pick the Nordhaven, but for southern California waters, the Nova is just fine, and a whole lot cheaper.
ancora is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2014, 05:06 PM   #37
Guru
 
ranger42c's Avatar
 
City: Maryland
Country: USA
Vessel Model: 42' Sportfish
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 3,156
Quote:
Originally Posted by ksanders View Post

To answer your question, passagemakers are almost all FD boats because of two reasons.

1. A FD boat has better fuel economy, and in general can carry the fuel necessary for crossing oceans.

2. A FD boat can in general withstand seas of a larger magnitude than a SD boat. This is necessary for passagemaking because our current technology only allows for an approx 72 hour firm weather forecast duration. Therefore a passagemaker must be able to operate in whatever sea state might happen.

We all need to remember and take note that cruising anywhere along a coastline, or between islands is not passagemaking. It does not require the fuel range or the seaworthiness that crossing open oceans requires. Therefore it does not require a FD boat, or a boat capable of crossing oceans.

I suspect there's a third (at least) reason, having to do with personal inclination and a wallet to back it up. Many who have the inclination for transoceanic passages and who actually intend to follow through with that aspiration... also have the money to buy a good tool for the job.

Others maybe just fall into deeper water during their "use what you've got" phase.

Good point that "cruising" doesn't necessarily require passagemaking in the transoceanic sense.

-Chris
__________________
South River, Chesapeake Bay
ranger42c is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2014, 05:12 PM   #38
Guru
 
Nomad Willy's Avatar
 
City: Concrete Washington State
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Willy
Vessel Model: Willard Nomad 30'
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,707
Quote:
Originally Posted by Capt.Bill11 View Post
I'm not sure if agree with that. The majority of stabilized non-commercial boats are hard chine I'd say. And the stabilizers work just fine.

And considering the way a full displacement boat would behave roll wise in a beam sea you could say it would cause the stabilizers to work harder to dampen its rolls.

Where as a hard chined boat is stiffer and resist roll so the stabilizers may not work as hard at least initially.

Capt.Bill11 and Caltex,
In waves when more water comes up under one side of a boat the extra lift on that side causes the boat to roll. The round bottomed boat I showed pics of will experience much less upward force on the wave side whereas the GB or Hat will strongly lift "right now" producing a snap roll that's very uncomfortable. The narrower and rounded FD hull will have much less force lifting causing the roll. BUT there is much less force counteracting the lift from the other side so the response can be slow and not much force to stop the roll so lots of slow rolling results. So a FD boat will roll deeper (more degrees) and if the wrong timing of wave encounters are present heavy rolling can result. But on a FD stabilized boat very small forces are needed to keep her from rolling or rolling too much.

And if a wide hard chine boat has stabilizers and they "work fine" I'm going to assume they're going to be big and powerful stabilizers.
__________________
Eric

North Western Washington State USA
Nomad Willy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2014, 05:23 PM   #39
Guru
 
ranger42c's Avatar
 
City: Maryland
Country: USA
Vessel Model: 42' Sportfish
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 3,156
Quote:
Originally Posted by manyboats View Post
R

anger42c wrote
"I wonder if there's really that huge a difference between a stabilized full-displacement hull and a stabilized semi-displacement hull. Measurable? If so, how much delta is due to hull form, and how much due to the stabilization system?

If the system (active fin) is part of the design and called for a NA the system would be much more effective and/or smaller on the FD boat. Much less stabilization will take place on a low deadrise hard chine boat for a given size system. So yes to your question is there is a very noticeable difference and the difference will vary a lot because the differences in hulls and what people think a FD hull is. Our archives will show that is not clear.

Maybe the amount of difference also varies a lot because of the differences in various owners' perception of roll, too. (Much like the local dock neighbors who sometimes come back in 5' seas... when the nearest buoy reports 2'.)

In any case, a shopper's possible follow-on question might also be "how much more is it worth" to choose one hull form over another. Let's say FD is 30% better, roll wise. (Just an example. 10% 20% whatever) Then how much more does a decent FD boat cost compared to an equally decent SD boat? 30% more? Less than 30%?

How often might that example 30% come into play? On one trip? A few times per year? Every trip? In any case, is the delta worth it?

IOW, how can a shopper measure (or at least get a feel for) the amount of difference he/she might find useful, and how much that difference is worth in $$.

Just thinking out loud, as it were...

-Chris
__________________
South River, Chesapeake Bay
ranger42c is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2014, 05:31 PM   #40
Guru
 
AusCan's Avatar
 
City: Adelaide
Country: Australia
Vessel Name: Kokanee
Vessel Model: Cuddles 30 Pilot House Motor Sailer
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,091
Keep an open mind when searching for the right boat for the task required. ...and look at what the local fisherman use. As has been said many times - all boats are a compromise.

I had no intention on buying a motorsailer, but it turned out to be the best boat available in my price range for handling the rough local conditions. Any boats with active stabilizers were out of my league. Paravanes are hard to find on smaller boats.

In the end - it got me on the water at a price I could afford, and I'm gaining more experience at how to deal with the weather, waves and other challenges. I'm happy!
__________________

AusCan is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:44 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2006 - 2012