A choice between ........

S

Spud 7

Member
Joined
10 Sep 2010
Messages
39
Visit site
A Twister and a Cutlass 27
Anyone got any observations or constructive advice?
This is as a first boat of my own, and want to be able to cross an Ocean or two at some time in the future, quite possibly single handed.
Thanks for any input .....
 
Spud 7 said:
A Twister and a Cutlass 27
Anyone got any observations or constructive advice?
This is as a first boat of my own, and want to be able to cross an Ocean or two at some time in the future, quite possibly single handed.
Thanks for any input .....
Click to expand...

Both are excellent boats, and very similar in basic design. The Twister is though longer, beamier, deeper draught, and substantially heavier than the Cutlass, also maybe a trace faster, though there may not be that much in it in most conditions.

You can probably get a good Cutlass for much less than a good all-GRP Twister. If you are looking at serious ocean passages in the future, I'd avoid the Twisters with wooden coachroofs: although these are good boats too and significantly cheaper there are maintenance issues and the increased possibility of structural damage in a knockdown/roll situation. In the days before all-GRP boats were the norm damage to deckhouse/coachroof structures was surprisingly common in ocean passage boats, possibly also because of lack of met/comms information and slow passage times in small boats.
 
the Cutlass cockpit has a big 'smile' where the tiller moves, and that is a potential weakness to admit green water below. Otherwise I am impressed by a friend's C27.
 
Naturally, I'd say a Twister.

I'd also say an all GRP one, not because I've ever heard of damage to a wooden-top in a knock-down, but because leaks from the wood/grp joint are commonplace.

Other thoughts:
For long distance sailing, which has the better stowage for gear and stores?
How secure is the rig? The Twister looks pretty bullet-proof, not sure about the Cutlass.
Support - The Twister has a good and active owners' association, again not sure about the Cutlass.
http://www.twister.org.uk*
Deck space - if you want to mount a wind genny, solar panels, self-steering, life raft, is one better than the other?

If you have any specific Twister questions, feel free to ask. I still remember mine fondly.

*also a good place to look for Twisters for sale.
 
As said above both are very similar in shape displacement and design although the Twister has a much prettier transom. For serious sailing the Twisters would be better, being more heavily built and generally they feel far more substantial on the water. Twisters are more expensive, but worth the difference imo. Composite are cheaper than all GRP, and while composite may do have a potential trouble area on deck to coachroof join, not all are problematical, just take care when purchasing..
 
The one I've been looking at is Composite, though has a surveyors report stating that the deck to roof seal has been re done to a "high" standard, also has had epoxy treatment, still under warranty from the yard.
Someone has painted the deck at some time and the paint is cracking around the chain plates, though having a "poke" from below and above there doesn't appear to be any stress cracking in the actual hull (no mention of anything untoward in that respect in the survey from 2009 either)
I've sailed both, though not to any great extent, and have to be honest, loved the way the Twister sailed. Bit looking at prices and long term ownership experiences I wanted some other opinions....
 
Well I had a composite Twister for 5 years and never had structural issues with the superstructure/deck joint. I preferred composite because it gave the best of both worlds a GRP hull and deck to make maintenance easier and the timber superstructure to give character and warmth .
 
Spud 7 said:
Someone has painted the deck at some time and the paint is cracking around the chain plates, though having a "poke" from below and above there doesn't appear to be any stress cracking in the actual hull (no mention of anything untoward in that respect in the survey from 2009 either)
Click to expand...

On mine (all GRP) I pulled the chainplates (actually, just sophisticated U-bolts) to reseal them. There was a slight leak around a couple of them. Nothing structural, but it in your case it might be indicative of a bit of moisture getting under the deck paint and beginning to lift it. Hardly a show-stopper.
 
Eyore said:
Well I had a composite Twister for 5 years and never had structural issues with the superstructure/deck joint. I preferred composite because it gave the best of both worlds a GRP hull and deck to make maintenance easier and the timber superstructure to give character and warmth .
Click to expand...
Yes - in all "ordinary" sailing a properly built wooden coachroof is strong enough, but there are many, many cases of serious damage to wooden (and even some GRP) coachroofs in extreme conditions - just to quote a few well known boats - "Jester", "Tzu Hang" (entire coachroof gone), "Vertue XXXV" etc. The OP did talk about ocean passages.
 
jwilson said:
Yes - in all "ordinary" sailing a properly built wooden coachroof is strong enough, but there are many, many cases of serious damage to wooden (and even some GRP) coachroofs in extreme conditions - just to quote a few well known boats - "Jester", "Tzu Hang" (entire coachroof gone), "Vertue XXXV" etc. The OP did talk about ocean passages.
Click to expand...

I think you have just illustrated the extreme end of the spectrum where a bit of plastic will do nothing for your safety. If its that bad, it wont matter what material the boat is built from. For every Tzu Hang and VertueXXXV there are tens of thousands of non doomsday voyages.
 
No question the glass Twister is superior to the Cutlass.
For similar money you can get Twisters big sister the Rustler 31, which is far more suitable for blue water use.

Plank
 
Eyore said:
I think you have just illustrated the extreme end of the spectrum where a bit of plastic will do nothing for your safety. If its that bad, it wont matter what material the boat is built from. For every Tzu Hang and VertueXXXV there are tens of thousands of non doomsday voyages.
Click to expand...
Absolutely, but a joint between a glass hull/deck and wooden coachroof is an inherent slightly weak point on composite Twisters that can be eliminated by buying an all-GRP one. The OP is talking about maybe crossing "an ocean or two", and the last thing I at least want to be doing in a sunny anchorage in the tropics is revarnishing or repainting a timber coachroof. I've had several woodentops, including in the tropics, where varnish does not last long.

If the OP wants a long-keel transom-rudder boat (lots of advantages for low-budget distance sailing) the choice is not confined just to Twister/Cutlass - look at Halcyon 27s, Invictas, Contessa 26s, Folksongs, Bowman and Nicholson 26s and lots of other Folkboat derivatives. A Nic 26 is pretty bulletproof in hull construction, and a boat that would take you (slowly) anywhere. The Albin Vega has a slightly non-Folkboaty hullform, but a very good pedigree for sailing distances on a budget.
 
I've no experience of a Twister, but have owned a Cutlass for 20 years now! Never done any "blue water" stuff but they are tough as old boots. I like the encapsulated keel. it's laid up incredibly thick and, of course, there are no keel bolts to worry about. The "smiley mouth" someone referred to isn't that big a problem. There's a bulkhead across it so if you DID get water in there, the worst that would happen is you'd fill the lazarette. Mine has a hole through for the exhaust hose, so it would drain into the bilge sump after a while. If anything securing the lazarette lid against that much green water might be a bigger problem - it just rests in place on ours (with a lanyard on the bottom of it, to tie it to the rudder shaft). Also (in terms of green water in the cockpit) the cockpit drains aren't up to much. they're just ordinary bath plug holes glassed into the bottom corners. I've never had a "big greenie" in the cockpit (the rear quarters are more buoyant than they look!) but I imagine it would take a LONG time to empty!

The mast is deck-stepped. There's a nasty plywood stiffener under it running fore-aft which is likely to rot when (not "if!) water gets down the mast shoe bolt holes. Also a (mild steel) crossmember running along the top of the main bulkhead to help support it. That can sometimes delaminate.

What I CAN say, is that the Cutlass sails beautifully and we've always "chickened-out" LONG before the boat has. There's very little space down below and, like many a a long-keeler, never goes astern under power the same way twice! Warping-off from a midships cleat is a nice idea but with a long keel, limited engine power and only 7'6" beam, not really feasible in a fresh on-pontoon wind (or tide). The only other weakness is the big cast bottom rudder pivot which, on the original design, I think only had one or maybe two bolts holding it through the fibreglass and if you dry out with the back of the rudder on a rock, it can pull the bolt through the fibreglass. (Don't ask how I know this)! If you need to get the prop shaft out, you have to dig a very deep hole under the rudder! Avocet's rudder shaft has a bolted joint in it so that's not a problem any more.

Waterline length is only 20' so we tend to passage plan at only 4 knots, and very rarely see a (genuine!) 6 for any length of time. They're not as wet as the shape would suggest. I think Folkboats and Invictas (possibly even Contessas) had a reputation for being wet in a chop? Also, when drying out, they have an annoying tendency to fall on their noses, but the samson post on the foredeck is plenty strong enough to hang the boat from. As you'd expect from the form, they're initially tender but stiffen up after about 30 degrees and rarely go much beyond 45. Even then, you can usually helm with your little finger. The slot in the lazarette bulkhead for the tiller makes fitting an autopilot a bit tricky. Ours is just inside the lazarette (which is a nice, sheltered position). I think early ones had higher saloon floors, later ones had (almost!) 6' headroom under the hatch. never had a minute's bother with the stumpy, masthead rig (or chain plates or anything like that). All really tough stuff.
 
I grew up sailing a wooden Twister. As her builder, George Cardnell, said at her launching:" you may have a bigger boat but you'll never have a better one".
My parents sold on in 1970 but I still have the fondest memories, and I have never sailed a boat that gave me greater confidence in her abilities.
 
The one in Devon has been for sale for quite a while I seem to recall. Looking at the pictures, perhaps someone stripped it to start a refurb, but then for whatever reason decided not to (or couldn't)
It's a shame, but having no sails with it, no interior to speak of, no engine etc etc, it does make you question the financial appeal of buying it, even at a small price. Surely the costs of putting her straight would soon be getting near the mark of buying one already "sorted"
Thanks for all the posts, they're really appreciated (and as someone else mentioned, rustler 31's are rather lovely but that's another story!)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Other threads that may be of interest

Halo
Cuuting a 115mm hole for Wema tank hatch
Replies
9
Views
368
pete
pete
mogmog2
Maxwell windlass 10 VW looks interesting (to a windlass noob)
2 3
Replies
59
Views
1K
mogmog2
mogmog2

Share this page

Top