Are modern yachts designed wrong?

dancrane said:
You mean, handsome is as handsome does. It's a noble thought Ken, but I don't think for a moment that it's echoed by any aesthetic reasoning...

...although...if we stop to think what designers like Pininfarina did with boxy 'practical' hatchback shapes, I expect a bit of deft Italian design could do much for AWB aesthetics.
Click to expand...

See Grand Soleil, then.
 
pmagowan said:
Do you really think a long keeler is going to be all that much behind these modern things. I don't think people race from port to port, I think they cruise. This normally involves whatever is a comfortable speed either under sail or motor. I can get about 7 Knots in my 28' long keeler under engine (oversized beta 20hp) if I don't care about fuel consumption but even if I was to settle for 5 knots I can get everywhere I want in reasonable time. I don't think I am significantly slower than a comparable fin keeler except if we really are both at it racing to the mark.
Click to expand...
As an owner of both types of boat (an old long keeler and a modern boat) might I suggest that you really need to try a modern boat. They are designed like they are because they reflect the way people want to use their boats. If you want the old style experience it is best done in an old style boat with all the drawbacks. It can be really good - if that is what you want, but for today's families the drawbacks are too obvious.

The major benefits for me are the ease and comfort of cruising and achieving either shorter passage times, or longer passages than would be comfortable in an older style boat. It is nothing to do with the enjoyment of speed or to do with racing. Averaging 5 knots across the channel in fresh winds in my old long keeler is great fun and gives a sense of achievement but is tiring and uncomfortable. Achieving an average of over 6 knots (20%+ faster) with no effort at all and in great comfort in the AWB is a different experience altogether.

It is often the aesthetics of older designs that make them so desirable (as Dan Crane tells us so often) rather than their functional abilities, so for those who can afford it the benefits of that and modern hull design (particularly keels and rudders) are available from a whole range of designers and builders. There have been some attempts to bring this combination to the "affordable" end of the market, but the results tend to be praised by the critics, but ignored by those who are spending their own money!

Like you, I have always had the dream to build a new boat to an old design - the plans are sitting in my study, but the more I look at what is involved, not least the money, never mind the time and effort, the more I recognise the impracticality of the end product. If you want an old style boat, buy an old boat. If you want a new(ish) boat to use buy a newer design. Plenty of choice in the market for either type.
 
Twister_Ken said:
I've said in the past that my modern 34 footer is faster in almost all conditions than the heavier, longer keel and skeg Swan 411 I used to race aboard. The Arcona is usually sailed two-up, the Swan required at least four and was raced with a minimum of eight.
Click to expand...

IRC rating for an Arcona 340 1.012
IRC rating for a Swan 411 0.990

You can argue about aesthetics and comfort and row away factor till the cows come home.

But modern boats (especially proper cruiser racers like the Arcona) are simply MUCH faster than the equivalent cruiser racers of yesteryear. And that goes for all conditions - we used to race against a swan 411. The first time it was windy I was expecting the Swan to be right up there at the windward mark. Nope, even further back. And those guys weren't mugs.
 
flaming said:
IRC rating for an Arcona 340 1.012
IRC rating for a Swan 411 0.990

You can argue about aesthetics and comfort and row away factor till the cows come home.

But modern boats (especially proper cruiser racers like the Arcona) are simply MUCH faster than the equivalent cruiser racers of yesteryear. And that goes for all conditions - we used to race against a swan 411. The first time it was windy I was expecting the Swan to be right up there at the windward mark. Nope, even further back. And those guys weren't mugs.
Click to expand...

Didn't know they built a 311 - but if they did - shock horror! 34' boat faster than a 31'!
 
Victoria Sponge said:
I'd like to see more women design yachts, they'd be bigger heads
Click to expand...

Possibly a woman designed the head on our boat. There's a good basin with a huge expanse of "worktop" around it, plenty of room to get oily trousers etc down and sit down, and the perch itself is comfortable and secure in a seaway. However, as a bloke, it's bloody awkward to stand and use the loo, because the deckhead dips down to sitting height just at the crucial point. That's why I say it must have been designed by a woman (or a German) :)

Pete
 
I'm fully persuaded that people who buy new, voluminous, bland, square-windowed AWBs, do so knowing they might have bought a same-size 35 y/o teak-decked Swan instead.

Not much point arguing about appearances. Even if it isn't all in the eye of the beholder, the fact is that the modern, not-very-pretty style is the least-costly, best-performing one, which many builders' marketing departments find they can most effectively use to convince buyers that here is the present, so don't be charmed by the past...

...I regret it, but it is evidently the case. But I don't believe that the pig-ugly white sheds which fill marinas are in fact every buyer's dream. They just made the most sense.

Given the choice between the endless maintenance jobs required aboard an old Swan, and the wince-inducing appearance of the AWB, I honestly believe I'd swallow the Rocna.

pmagowan said:
My ridiculous plan is to design and build my own boat, around the 40 foot mark...I want to know what reason I have not thought about prevents the designs I like being put into one boat...I have just looked at the Rustlers and they are very close to what I like. I want a cruising boat that is strong and sturdy. I like tillers and long keels.
Click to expand...

Not a ridiculous plan, sir!

But, afraid to say, these qualities seem to represent a manufacturing/marketing cocktail of high cost and low sailing efficiency. Your taste (and mine) for traditional solidity, looks like a weakness to the AWB brigade and the salesmen who spur them; tough, sea-kindly old boats with less-than-enormous cabins are deemed the province of old men. Although, several small-output companies still seem to keep plenty of 'old men' interested in their lovely boats.

I reckon by far the most encouraging developments are those rare new yachts which either use non-standard thinking (or determinedly stuck-in-the-past proven designs) to create boats which perform well, seem very solid and aren't just another load of black & white floating GRP caravans. Like Ovni, Spirit, plus Rustlers etc.

Worth looking at American traditional yachts. Terrifying prices, but their designers seem to have stopped evolving at least forty years ago. Much nicer-looking boats in consequence.
 
This is what I would like. Great performance to windward. Flatish sailing. Solid seafaring. No rolly, side to side nonsense. No slamming. Accomodation and bathroom facilities (with hot water) a wife and two daughters will tolerate. Ability to prepare and cook great food and keep the bubbly at the right temperature.

Able to take the ground. The looks of a classic 1930's yacht (Spirit yacht look), and beds which are dry and have proper mattresses. Oh and everything has to work all of the time........and I have £5k!!!!!

I suspect yacht design is all about compromise, designing things that are safe and which appeal to most of the people most of the time or appeal to a niche market. Perceived needs also need to be meet if you are going to be successful selling something. Now if we were all the same and all had the same needs........
 
Victoria Sponge said:
I'd like to see more women design yachts, they'd be bigger heads and they'd come in better colours (the yachts not the heads).
Click to expand...

Might be interesting to have more imaginatively coloured heads!

So the general consensus seems to be that speed is King! Since my boat is a 28' wooden long keeler I cruise at 5knots, sail well at 6-6.5 and motor at 7 when I am in a hurry. I suspect that I would notice a bigger difference with hull length than with keel type. If I build a 40' boat it will be for the experience and not for the practicality. If I simply want a bigger boat I would buy a second hand wooden one at a fraction of the price it would cost to build.

I am keen to look at merging the benefits of old and new. For instance the hull construction I am researching is a cold molding technique of 3 layers of differently angled veneer epoxied over a cedar strip hull and then glass fibred inside and out. This can give relatively light weight when compared to old fashioned techniques along with incredible strength. The long keel is just something I like. I like not worrying too much about running aground, ropes etc and I like the firm feel of a long keeler over the 'skittishness' of fin keelers. I do want to make the boat 'fatter' than is traditional to get more space across the beam but I still wish to maintain the bow and stern that give that classic look.

I still suspect that most cruisers do not really get the benefit of the modern racing features of their boats but do have to suffer the drawbacks. I am not convinced that the speed is that different in reality, in cruising conditions. I think other things limit people's speeds that are independent of the keel design but then maybe everyone on this forum scrapes every last ounce of speed out of their cruisers. Thanks everyone for a lot of food for thought.
 
pmagowan said:
Just a thought I was having as pondering how I would design a 40 foot sloop. The modern designs seem to be based on racing related innovations when, in fact, most people are cruisers. You have the modern keels which are aggressive designs but which are vulnerable to rope snagging, impact and are poor at taking the ground. The same goes for rudders which can get jammed by rope etc. Then you have cockpits taken up with double wheels. With the ability to have bow thrusters why are there not more long keelers being built. They offer stability and strength while being almost impervious to the problems above. Also why don't more boats have some form of doghouse to get out of the weather. I think the marginal improvements in racing performance that modern designs allow may be outweighed by the fact that very few people race their boats and actually want comfort (even if they don't know it). Do people simply like a racey boat even if they never see the benefit of it? What does the panel think
Click to expand...

http://www.morganscloud.com/2013/10/10/adventure-40-an-overview/
http://www.morganscloud.com/2014/05...ntureCruising+(Attainable+Adventure+Cruising)
 
Last edited:
pmagowan said:
Might be interesting to have more imaginatively coloured heads!
Click to expand...

I believe they tried that in the 70s. Looks vomit-inducingly awful nowadays.

Ours is white laminate on the bulkheads, white GRP for the basin, worktop, lower locker front and related mouldings, and a bit of varnished cherry trim around the upper locker and mirror.

Pete
 
Sailfree said:
Could start a new thread in the lounge.
Click to expand...
You naughty man. One of the 3 new Community moderators will be along to smack your wrists.

pmagowan said:
that very few people race their boats and actually want comfort (even if they don't know it). Do people simply like a racey boat even if they never see the benefit of it? What does the panel think
Click to expand...
Rather like cars. In reality most people are conned into thinking they want (or need) the performance version of their car. They are told all the time how much better the GTI/Turbo/M series/Blah/Blah models are.

I doubt that manufacturers would build a modern-day Rover 90 with squishy seats, but most people would rather like it, I suspect.
 
prv said:
I believe they tried that in the 70s. Looks vomit-inducingly awful nowadays.

Ours is white laminate on the bulkheads, white GRP for the basin, worktop, lower locker front and related mouldings, and a bit of varnished cherry trim around the upper locker and mirror.

Pete
Click to expand...

I have come to the conclusion with the heads that you buy a cheap Jabsco thing and if it gives problems throw it overboard and buy a new one! They really are not worth the hassle. That brings me to another point, however, as my boat has no holding tank and I suppose if I build a new one this would be required. I don't like these things at all and I don't see the need (but maybe I am odd). If in port you use the land based facilities and if at sea it matters not. The idea of collecting waste seems like a disaster waiting to happen.

Some of the boats others have posted on here have quite good features which I would like to incorporate but the closest so far is the Rustler. Nice lines, sturdy keel and good protection. Now I will cause more uproar and state that I WILL be having teak decks! :)
 
pmagowan said:
Some of the boats others have posted on here have quite good features which I would like to incorporate but the closest so far is the Rustler. Nice lines, sturdy keel and good protection. Now I will cause more uproar and state that I WILL be having teak decks! :)
Click to expand...

Well, you have missed your chance. The original Rustler 42 was cold moulded wood similar to the way you described. It lay unfinished for years waiting for somebody to buy it and finish it off. Not sure anybody took up the challenge.

BTW if constructed and installed properly, holding tanks can be trouble free. Easily done in a new build, not so easy in a retrofit. As with many things it is the bodges and cheapskate examples that give them a bad press. Plus spend a bit more than Jabsco money and install a Lavac.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top