dunedin
Well-known member
Have you got any evidence to support that assertion? The hard statistics from boats doing the southern ocean suggest that the opposite could be true.
A fun bluewater boat around 40'?
- Thread starter papaver19
- Start date
Wansworth
Well-known member
Won’t sell many boat mentioning those nasty bitsNow that the type of boat seems to be reasonably settled upon (excellent choice though there are obvious alternatives) can I chip in with my thoughts.
I think that the term 'Blue Water' boat is in itself a misnomer. Most long distance folk would I think agree that the 'Blue' bit is normally the easiest, and that the 'Brown' bits at either end (if they exist) are the hard miles.
So, in theory, any boat capable of doing the Brown bits in heavy weather, white water, overfalls etc. should be more than capable of doing the downwind blue bits in-between.
This is where I agree with the posters who say (in terms) that a 'comfortable ride' is paramount.
Most crews, most skippers, and virtually all boats are capable of 'hanging on' for a gentle downwind, warm weather sleigh ride. Similarly, most boats, skippers and crews are capable of toughing it out against the wind for 48/72 hours to get off the continental shelf, navigate outbound rivers, estuaries, shipping lanes etc to reach 'Blue'.
But it is what matters at the other end that counts, three weeks of chilled downwind sailing with 5pm 'sundowners' is not great preparation for an unexpected bad weather entry to the inbound continental shelf, tidal calculations in 6m tides having left a 0.5m tide area, sandbanks and bars etc.
A pure 'Blue water' boat would be a poor boat just as a 'Blue water' crew would be a poor crew. A blue water boat should be a capable shitty weather brown water boat first, then be a gentle blue water boat to give its crew some relief, then be well ready to look after its crew when back in the brown water, lee shore, hailstone conditions that the crew were not expecting.
A blue water boat has to be a capable brown water boat first. Think AZAB for example - which part of the journey is the bit when you most need the boat to look after you?
In my humble opinion.
papaver19
Member
Sure. It's a boat that will be capable and calm when the shit hits the fan, whether that be at the beginning, middle or end of the passage, and able to deliver its crew in a state that they can deal with late-passage challenges.. The 'bluewater' bit really meaning when one is beyond the reliable forecast window, thus not able to choose one's conditions, as coastal sailors can. Or when ugly conditions go on for days. I can take pretty much anything daysailing, but 5 days out, I am getting quite fed up. As per my original post.
Interested to hear about your "obvious alternatives"
Interested to hear about your "obvious alternatives"
Last edited:
Tranona
Well-known member
Yes, the "article" you referred to is largely rubbish - advertising copy that is full of holes. They are selling a boat that needs differentiation so clutch at straws - for example they misquote what Maurice Griffiths says (and he did write the piece from which that sentence was taken nearly 100 years ago), one of their sources last design was a copy of Colin Archer hull and took years to find a buyer, another is a snap quote from a somewhat jaundiced journalist. Why talk about extreme boats like Open 60s which little or no relevance to the type of boat they are promoting? This is not to say that it is a "bad" boat, or that they don't have some interesting ideas and it will be interesting to see if they actually make any progress in the market.
However as usual you are missing the boat. There is little dispute about the different characteristics of different designs, nor that some people prefer particular types. Your difficulty seems to be that you are unable to recognise that others make different choices from you - see post# 154 which shows that at least 170 members of the group you hold up as those that know about these thing consciously chose modern production boats for 2bluewater" cruising - just like many others who don't belong to the club. How can they all be wrong?
Fr J Hackett
Well-known member
Boats and skippers / crew that bear no resemblance to production fat arsed boats and their skipper and crew often just a couple in late mid life.
ashtead
Well-known member
On basis bowman is front runner and they are certainly solid boats I just wonder if they might be rather sluggish and somewhat of a handful to park ? These might not be of concern but my impressions are they are hardly manoverable and need a blow to get going . In that regard much like an island packet. There was a lovely bowman 40 for years at Haslar and the owners dogs had shoes to protect the decks I seem to recall so maybe they have aging teak issues? If the op is crossing oceans just wonder why 40ft limit though as surely a 47 /48 foot boat has more space for all the kit etc? Also aren’t bowman rather long in tooth and hence needing new rigging,furlers etc etc?
Fr J Hackett
Well-known member
They are not sluggish and will perform reasonably well in winds around 10kts, manoeuvrable ability in a harbour is very low down on a long term cruisers list as they will more than likely be anchoring and then there are bow thrusters, stern thrusters and even marina work boats to help if need be. Some had teak decks some didn't so much like the rigging and sails that will come with the boat they may need replacing just as they would on any boat.
Why 40 foot? It's what the OP considers the right size, that may be because of budget or simply that's what he considers it's what he can comfortably handle. There are as many reasons as there are boats and skippers, it's a personal choice.
I say this having sailed not a Bowman 40 but a Victoria 38 which was not to dissimilar.
There was a Lady forum member many years ago that bought one and set of to the Med with another Lady forum member Carol.... and Goosewing if I remember correctly. She did have a bit of early trouble and a bent pulpit or pushpin parking in Mayflower marina again if I remember correctly and don't do her a disservice.
Last edited:
Wansworth
Well-known member
With heavy cruising boats a lot can be achieved by no doing anything and incisive use of prop walk
Major_Clanger
Well-known member
They're certainly not a light airs demon, but I think you'd be pleasantly surprised. In terms of handiness they're fine and very predictable - nobody actually needs a bow/stern thruster. Sure, they're long in the tooth but the consequences of that would apply to any boat.
Marceline
Active member
could one of the Southerly lifting keel boats be an option for the above ?Now that the type of boat seems to be reasonably settled upon (excellent choice though there are obvious alternatives) can I chip in with my thoughts.
I think that the term 'Blue Water' boat is in itself a misnomer. Most long distance folk would I think agree that the 'Blue' bit is normally the easiest, and that the 'Brown' bits at either end (if they exist) are the hard miles.
So, in theory, any boat capable of doing the Brown bits in heavy weather, white water, overfalls etc. should be more than capable of doing the downwind blue bits in-between.
This is where I agree with the posters who say (in terms) that a 'comfortable ride' is paramount.
Most crews, most skippers, and virtually all boats are capable of 'hanging on' for a gentle downwind, warm weather sleigh ride. Similarly, most boats, skippers and crews are capable of toughing it out against the wind for 48/72 hours to get off the continental shelf, navigate outbound rivers, estuaries, shipping lanes etc to reach 'Blue'.
But it is what matters at the other end that counts, three weeks of chilled downwind sailing with 5pm 'sundowners' is not great preparation for an unexpected bad weather entry to the inbound continental shelf, tidal calculations in 6m tides having left a 0.5m tide area, sandbanks and bars etc.
A pure 'Blue water' boat would be a poor boat just as a 'Blue water' crew would be a poor crew. A blue water boat should be a capable shitty weather brown water boat first, then be a gentle blue water boat to give its crew some relief, then be well ready to look after its crew when back in the brown water, lee shore, hailstone conditions that the crew were not expecting.
A blue water boat has to be a capable brown water boat first. Think AZAB for example - which part of the journey is the bit when you most need the boat to look after you?
In my humble opinion.
Fr J Hackett
Well-known member
Nearest to the OPs length would be a 38 of about 13 years old and above his budget and not really having the sea keeping qualities of a "Bluewater" yacht although no doubt some will disagree on that.
Goldie
Well-known member
I think with ANY pre-owned boat, you need to look at the merits or de-merits of the individual boat. In the case of the 2 Bowman 40s on the market (that I’m aware of) and reading the online details, neither has or had teak decks so no issues there, both have been re-rigged (2019 & 2024) and both have been re-engined - one only this year. You could look at a 10 or 12 year old boat that hadn’t been as well cared for and find that it needed a lot more work doing.
papaver19
Member
Totally true. Both the Bowmans look like they need new sails, solar, bimini (one has those two, but they are a joke), electronic update, batteries too. So not ready to rumble, but do-able in one winter. Red Ensign tell me that theirs has just gone under offer, boo, so just missed that one - shame, as that was my preference of the two, twin Schaeffer furlers and Sole engine. Oh well.
papaver19
Member
See earlier post about the 42RST in Biscay. Fail on big windows and flat slappy sterns too.
Chiara’s slave
Well-known member
Those big ticket items are clearly a good thing, but on an older boat there might be any number of things with a similar price tag. We replaced all of the standing and running rigging on our mere 30 footer when we bought her. She had an almost brand new engine. The standing rigging was a couple of grand, the running rigging would have been over 5k if bought new. Then there’s seacocks, upholstry, brightwork, sails, all sorts, the cost could dwarf the new engine.
RunAgroundHard
Well-known member
You have to separate needs from wants when looking at an older boat and costing it. Confuse a want with a need and all of a sudden the costs are up there with a newer boat. Even worse if you get them back to front!
Major_Clanger
Well-known member
There's a cutter-rigged one for sale in Lisbon that looks fairly well sorted and looked after. Good layout below, solar panels, steering vane, decent Perkins-based engine. She's got Teak decks which look okay in the pics - Bowman decks of the period were as good as anything else, and better than many (excepting a proper laid deck of course).
Last edited:
Chiara’s slave
Well-known member
We’ve just bitten the bullet and made her as new as possible. But with the price of used ones, that makes sense to us. We’d take an appropriate course, I hope, if we ever decided to sell up and sail. Everyone’s idea of what is needed/wanted will of course be as different as the boats they choose to lavish their money and time on.
Fr J Hackett
Well-known member
My last boat was a neglected green on the outside filthy on the inside labour of love over many years despite being less than 10 years old when I bought her. The first 3 things that were replaced were the cooker, a rusted mass covered in the remains of the last fry up. The toilet which looked as though it still had the desiccated remains of its last use in the bowl and the anchor chain which required a lump hammer to remove from the anchor locker. Over many years I worked my way through the ever increasing list, new boom, sails, and associated hardware ( battcars etc) new engine, rigging standing and running, instruments below deck autopilot, the list was endless and major by the time I sold her the last and only things left were upholstery and to scrape and revarnish the interiorniether of which I had no appetite for so never got done.
Even now I dare not, don't want to work out the cost but with the purchase price it would not be far away from a decent new boat, but where's the fun in that
Last edited:
RunAgroundHard
Well-known member
... Even now I dare not, don't want to work out the cost but with the purchase price it would not be far away from a decent new boat, but where's the fun in that
Tell me about it, my good lady does the books for the house, so she knows what I spend and there is never any debate on house upgrades. Fo rme it has always been sin now, repent later. Actually, she is great with it all.
Definitely those that justify the cost of a new boat are correct when they say it is cost effective compared to a low cost second hand boat and refurbishment. Of course there is more to it than that, available readies, time, expectations and sailing time v yard time, which is why second hand boats still get bought and done up to various degrees.
