Are Bavaria owners wusses when their keels fall off?

Simondjuk said:
The dark ages are behind us after all and the world has moved on.
Click to expand...

You are right Simon; the world has moved on, but..............................................................................
...............................................................................................a few on these forums got left behind.
 
OR4751 said:
Wuss.

Real men wouldn't allow any lip from their wives.
Click to expand...

I dunno,his SWMBO not daft... even with LJ in December, he's got about 10 mins immersed before he's effectively DOA, so LJ makes sure the meat is picked up, and since SWMBO knows where the insurance policies are, saves the seven year wait if the body is not washed ashore:cool:

Sinceah the DAAAAAWN OF TIIIME........Wives have twisted even Emperor's and Absolute Rulers around their little fingers or other anatomical portions, PD as unlikely as any other husband to get his own way.
 
Simondjuk said:
I assume you class Hallberg Rassys as mass produced AWB caravans then? Ones of a similar vintage to my very cheap mass produced AWB caravan have a similar ballast ratio, similar hull form, a rudder that's mounted on a skeg so small as to offer almost no protection, and have a build of a similar weight.

I also have seven very useable sea berths by virtue of lee cloths and a galley I can brace myself firmly into.

Granted, I don't have a long keel or full skeg rudder, but then neither do the majority of the boats clocking up serious mileage around the world. I don't have a trailing log, use a leadline by routine or communicate by Aldis lamp either. The dark ages are behind us afterall and the world has moved on.
Click to expand...

You assume wroingly, HRs were never cheap or mass produced and I would never class them as caravans. You describe your "caravan" as having lee cloths and a safe sea going galley which is a hell of a lot better than many with a long linear galley with no way of bracing oneself and a horseshoe settee around the table, too short for lee cloths. By the sound of it you don't have what I would class as a floating caravan, neither do I.

Mine's not the ultimate in design or performsnce but at least it's a strong safe design and ocean capable under coding rules unlike some more modern boats whose makers con people by quoting RCD criteria.
 
GrahamM376 said:
You assume wroingly, HRs were never cheap or mass produced and I would never class them as caravans. You describe your "caravan" as having lee cloths and a safe sea going galley which is a hell of a lot better than many with a long linear galley with no way of bracing oneself and a horseshoe settee around the table, too short for lee cloths. By the sound of it you don't have what I would class as a floating caravan, neither do I.

Mine's not the ultimate in design or performsnce but at least it's a strong safe design and ocean capable under coding rules unlike some more modern boats whose makers con people by quoting RCD criteria.
Click to expand...

Nonetheless, based on the criteria you mentioned in your previous post, some HRs offer no more than my Bavaria, which is allegedly about as caravan as it gets. Consequently, I'm at a loss to see what, aside from incidentals such as a considerably nicer interior and more teak on deck, sets them apart in the sense in question, that being sailing capability.

My boat has a linear galley, but it has a seat back inboard of it against which one can brace. There is also a good crash bar and galley strap, the latter of which I've not even found need of as yet due to the bracing opportunities. She also has a horseshoe settee, but it's long enough for me at six feet with room to spare, and makes for a very comfortable sea berth within view and talking range of the helm.

I can't imagine that a 1999 Bav 38 really does much except typify your perception of a floating caravan, but perhaps that's more to do with, and I don't mean this with any offence, your perhaps rather entrenched and erroneous opinion of such boats.

If I may ask, what level of MCA coding does your boat comply with out of the box and as supplied by the manufacturer, and what is it?
 
Simondjuk said:
If I may ask, what level of MCA coding does your boat comply with out of the box and as supplied by the manufacturer, and what is it?
Click to expand...

1988 Moody 376. Copied from survey - ....a cruising design from the board of Bill Dixon. She is of fin and skeg hull form and of moderate displacement, with a double spreader sloop rig. This has proved to be a popular class of yacht, and with her SA/D (sail area/displacement ratio) of 16.22 and an almost 40% ballast ratio is very suitable for blue water use.
 
Simondjuk said:
If I may ask, what level of MCA coding does your boat comply with out of the box and as supplied by the manufacturer, and what is it?
Click to expand...

Ironically IIRC it's an AWB - a Moody - *very* similar design and construction to the cruising Bavs.

I notice GrahamM376 hasn't made claims about any specific aspect of design or construction of Bavaria's with regard to the keel (in spite of being asked to). That speaks volumes.
 
Last edited:
GrahamM376 said:
1988 Moody 376. Copied from survey - ....a cruising design from the board of Bill Dixon. She is of fin and skeg hull form and of moderate displacement, with a double spreader sloop rig. This has proved to be a popular class of yacht, and with her SA/D (sail area/displacement ratio) of 16.22 and an almost 40% ballast ratio is very suitable for blue water use.
Click to expand...

I'm failing to see why it any more meets MCA coding requirements out of the box than the vast majority other production boats. Cat 2 and Cat 1 are in the main equipment related, so both your boat and my own mostly just need a load of gear bolting on and a coding survey carrying out, and Cat 0 requires watertight bulkheads and the suchlike, which neither have. Since Cat 0 is pretty much a non-starter for cruising boats, only Cat 1 and 2 are relevant and I'm curious as to which RCD A boats can't be made to meet those and why.

There's not too much in it between your Moody and my Bav. You carry a slightly higher ballast ratio, but due to my deeper keel and bulb, I carry the bulk of mine lower which probably adds up to similar righting moment. The rest of the figures are pretty similar. You're a little smaller and heavier, but I'd expect a lot of that extra weight to come from a significant difference in engine weight, a slightly more wood rich interior and a rather overkill 80's layup in places.

Here are the numbers:

The Moody: http://sailboatdata.com/viewrecord.asp?class_id=2055

The Bav: http://sailboatdata.com/viewrecord.asp?class_id=6860

Actually, there's a number wrong on the Bav page. They've only given the capacity of one water tank, not both.
 
Last edited:
GrahamM376 said:
1988 Moody 376. Copied from survey - ....a cruising design from the board of Bill Dixon. She is of fin and skeg hull form and of moderate displacement, with a double spreader sloop rig. This has proved to be a popular class of yacht, and with her SA/D (sail area/displacement ratio) of 16.22 and an almost 40% ballast ratio is very suitable for blue water use.
Click to expand...

Your boat would probably get into category A just like Simons and my Bavaria. However you would find it very difficult to get it coded to MCA Ocean. Do not be deceived by ballast ratios as an indicator of stability. It is only one factor in the calculations.

This not to say that your boat is not capable, but I would hazard a guess that more Bavarias have safely crossed the Atlantic than Moodys if only because more have been built. Just have a look at the participants in the ARC. Have all those people who have chosen AWBs got it wrong?

I am not sure why you continually run down boats that you have never owned nor seem to have direct experience of sailing.
 
There's also the fact that I only gave £53k for my boat in immaculate condition, with recent sails, new windlass, seacocks and skin fittings just replaced, lots of other recent replacements and upgrades, and equipped to Cat 2 standards. In short, a lot of boat for sensible money and not a thing broke during our first year of ownership in which we covered over 3000 miles in all conditions it'd be responsible to go out in. I'd venture that she'd also show the Moody a clean pair of heels. :)
 
toad_oftoadhall said:
Ironically IIRC it's an AWB - a Moody - *very* similar design and construction to the cruising Bavs.

I notice GrahamM376 hasn't made claims about any specific aspect of design or construction of Bavaria's with regard to the keel (in spite of being asked to). That speaks volumes.
Click to expand...

Toad, I think you need to look again, there are very few similarities between the Bav 38 and the 376. Underwater shape is totally different and the Moody has a greater wetted area particularly the forefoot. One has a spade rudder and saildrive, the other doesn't. Keels are totally different, not sure how the Bavaria keels are attached (or not:) but the Moody's are bolted on to a very thick hull. Interior layouts are also totally different with (in our case) 3 sea berths and standing headroom in a double aft cabin.

View attachment 39629 View attachment 39630

As far as Bavaria keel failures are concerned, I have no technical knowledge about what fails so don't intend to guess. I just know I see some being removed for serious repairs.
 
You do realise that given the almost identical beam in both boats... Your will be rolled as easily as the bavaria??
 
I preffered the Bav. I don't really like the smaller centre cockpits... They are both good solid cruisers. I could understand if graham was talking about the 2002 onwards 38'.... But that late 90's machine is a solid boat.

I do think that the weakness in all the modern boats is the spade rudder... But other than this odvious potential failure point, there is very little in em...
 
GrahamM376 said:
Maybe, maybe not. Don't know what the Bavaria SA/D is but it does have a deeper keel which will help it to roll. Not realy bothered anyway.
Click to expand...


Well then you need to look at what causes inversions, Any boat will roll if struck by a breaking wave equal to its beam... It's the negative stability that's important to recovery.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top