I would love to know what you guys consider coastal cruiser, is 100 miles of shore still coastal? Coming from sailing I would trust so many of you that a single engine boat with no wing engine can still be a safe way to cruise. Of course we all make maintenance a priority, but I still have to wrap my head around this. I love the helmsman so far and hope to pull the trigger soon on a new boat.
Agree 100 miles is a generally accepted definition.
And yeah, in looking at safety in the waters YOU intend to cruise can be different than me. And yeah, analytically one has to break things down into component parts, but at the end of all paths one has to pull it back into a view of the total package.
I have been aboard boats with twins I would not feel safe on. And aboard boats with singles that I would.
No question that a boat built for blue water passages with redundant everything and hardened for serious conditions is more safe. Your call as to how much is enough, and how much is overkill for YOU and YOUR conditions.
We recently had a long thread on charts, and whether carrying paper charts and a compass was necessary. Many thought that simple and cheap redundancy was not important. My only point with that is that views on how much redundancy is enough is an opinion that varies so very broadly.
One way to deal with the question is a simple A vs B analysis, looking at the total boat. You say you are looking at a Helmsman, so compare that to others you may have on your short list, in your price range. Total package, Helmsman vs Boat B in terms of total safety. Because yeah, its possible to find safer alternatives like one of the big Nordhavn's, but is that realistically an alternative for you? Its your boat, your dollar, your call.