beneteau & Bavaria quality issues?

[Norman_E]

Don't rule out Jeanneau boats. My 1998 boat is well built with nice joinery and well matched veneers inside and good and substantial deck fittings outside. Quality of Jeanneau boats seemed to suffer a bit after Beneteau took them over, and there was a period where a foil was used on interior joinery instead of decent veneer, but quality has recovered since. Between Beneteau and Jeanneau you have a choice of the former generally having a very broad transom and the latter a less extreme shape, which I think makes for a better all round sailing ability with less risk of broaching. The modern Beneteau hull shape is more downwind oriented than the Jeanneau. Bavaria went through a period of installing rather smaller deck fittings than I would like, particularly such things as cleats. In the Med you will moor stern to, and in marinas you will most likely have a lazy line to the bow. It is very nice to have bow fairleads well ahead of the cleats so that you can sweat the bow line.

 

[geem]

Yes, I've read some stories of shabby aftersales service with Lagoons, but equally there are loads of owners who love them.

I guess if you don't set expect much from them you could be happy. We see a huge amount of them here. They dont sail well except well off the wind. Most motor-sail or motor to windward.
The plus point, and we have been on a few, is they are huge. The attraction must be the space and accommodation they provide. We meet many people who have such boats and most freely admit they are not really in to sailing. They would rather have lots of space like a house and engine about when the weather is nice. If you dont expect much and use it within its limits then it can work. It doesnt change the fact that they are nicely presented but poorly built

 

[lpdsn]

Hello,

I have been reading a bit ons Beneteaus and Bavarias, and they seem to be on the poorer / lower standards of quality.

What kind of problems could I expect if I were to buy a 2000(ish), 40ft from one of these brands?
The plan is to sail the med for a few months, not cross oceans.

I heard a lot of complains about furniture: drawers coming appart, doors falling, etc. What else?

Also it seems to me that boats from around 2000 were better build than newer boats. As of when did the quality declined?

Thanks
G

Bavs and Bennies are good enough. Yes they are built to a price but the cost savings come not just from a reduction in quality but from mass-production efficiencies too, so they're not as below par as the price might indicate. As a poster above pointed out, you could've spent your lottery winnings on an Oyster and still have the keel drop off.

Beneteaus are nicknamed Bendy Toys in racing circles, but that has to be put into context: if you're cranking on the backstay till your eyes bulge to flatten the main and avoid reefing then you're putting far more stress on the hull than a cruising sailor ever would. Even the typical over-built British boats of the 70s and 80s have been known to suffer in similar circumstances.

And the Beneteaus and Bavarias are far better designed for living aboard in the Med than many of the heavier built boats.

I have to admit I really dislike the typical post-recession light-coloured fit-outs and I'm sure the IKEA-style veneers will suffer far more than older teak or mahogany fit-outs over the years, but it is really a matter of personal taste. I think it has been pointed out by a well-known Bavaria fan on the forums that Bavarias of the last decade or so have heavier hulls that their predecessors.

 

[geem]

And the Beneteaus and Bavarias are far better designed for living aboard in the Med than many of the heavier built boats.
I think thats the market they are aimed at. Their glamorous fit out down below must be the attraction for many a would be sailor. By comparison our 80s dutch boat is dark with small windows and acres of solid teak. When you step down into our boat its more like heading for the dungeons. The flip side is its a great sailing boat. Comfy at sea, comfy at anchor with a lovely protected cockpit. Not something you really need for Med sailing but here in the Caribbean its a little more rufty toughty. Seas are bigger, winds are stronger and marinas are few and far between. Horses for courses. A boat can be optimised for one kind of use but rarely for all kinds of use. If you want a tough go anywhere boat you dont look to mass produced cheap French production boats.

 

[asteven221]

Personally I have never really understood the huge price difference between the Scandinavian boats and the AWB's of this world. I can see differences in some components and some aspect of finish, so I can see that they should be a bit more expensive but simply cannot see any logical reason for the big price differences. I conclude that it's a mixture of snobbery (most of us are a wee bit guilty of that), the satisfaction and pleasure of owning an expensive brand name over a mass market brand, or maybe it's the fact that perhaps the Scandinavian boats are built a lot more by hand which is expensive whereas AWB's are built for the most part by machines. For me, I would prefer the accuracy of a computer controlled machine over a human any day when it comes to cutting and drilling. I appreciate others will disagree.

FWIW my experiences of Ben/Bav are that some time ago around 2007 we wanted a new to us boat and bought a 2004 Ben 423. It was like brand new. Like an earlier poster we found varnish blistering, whilst we noticed that the worktop in the galley was cracking. Despite being the second owners, Beneteau sent folk across from France and completely resprayed the interior and replaced the whole galley FOC under warranty. Since then I have been a fan of Beneteau as that was service beyond anything I have come across before, so hat's off to Beneteau. That said, I did wonder how the boat would stand up to the test of time. For us it was fine, but it was quite new. I always felt that the way the doors were made i.e. a sort of softwood core with a high gloss veneer, made them a bit light. They marked very easily. The screws for the hinges were thin and quite short so I wonder how they would have lasted. Other than that relatively minor issue the rest of the boat appeared very well made, nicely finished and we had nothing to complain about and enjoyed ownership.

Moving to more recent times, last year we were looking for a yacht that we could sail for a good few years and spend more time on. We found a 45 foot Dufour which was I recall 2006 and had a great spec i.e electric winches etc.... We made what we thought was good offer, but it was rejected in the end. Thank goodness it was rejected, as we ended up with a 2003 Bavaria 44 at about £45k less! Looking at it logically what was the Dufour going to give us for the £45k extra spend. Well other than electric winches, nothing that I could see. So, we decided we would just go for the Bavaria and have not regretted it, even for a second. I honestly reckon they are the boating bargain of the century, for people that can see the value and quality where some others somehow don't want to see nor accept. I am well aware of Ben/Bav/Jen bashing etc...... and have been around boats to remember all these Bavs when they were new, including the reviews from magazines. All of them banged on about them being built down to a price and the quality being not quite what the "proper" builders provided, however my 16 year old boat has stood up to it's years of use very well indeed. Nothing is broken. The furniture is proper wood, the doors are thick, solid and open and close the same way as when it was built. The varnish is all glossy with only a few marks, which being proper wood can be fixed. None of the GRP is badly weathered, nor is there any areas of cracking in the GRP, so all in all it is in pretty damn good condition and would easily match any premium brand yacht of the same age, in terms of standing the test of time. In fact it is hard to find anything wrong with the boat internally or externally. Thinking about it, all the other Bavs I see appear to be just fine with nothing noticeable that would suggest they are failing cosmetically or have poor build quality. For me that's all the evidence I need. These are built to a decent standard and given the numbers sold and sailing about the world, surely only a fool would suggest that these boats are not built well enough.

 

[Airscrew]

I am with the others here.
For a family holiday boat, I wouldnt hesitate with those brands.
Usual buying inspections etcetc.

The charter companies (I know one owner quite well) do not buy cheap.
They buy reliable. And they demand fast service when something does need fixing.

Despite Ben and Jan being very good brands and boats, my personal choice is German.
Bavaria or Hanse.
The French as a nation have a very proud sailing and racing tradition. They make good boats.
But German buyers are just not tolerant of imperfections. Either as builders or buyers.
And if quality and strength matters to you, Bavaria are Lloyds(GL) certified, and as I understand it, the French are not.

 

[Skylark]

Reading through the thread proves what we all already know; sailing is a broad church.

I’ve owned 2 Beneteaus including my present a boat, an Oceanis 41 which I bought new in 2013. I’m very happy to be called a would-be sailor because I love the comforts given by my boat. She is a very capable coastal cruiser and I’m unlikely to become an ocean liveaboarder anytime soon.

I’ve experienced quite a few different boats and the BenJenBavHan etc brands stand up to muster, imho.

I once crossed Biscay in an HR49 and, as objectively as possible, was not impressed. Below deck, the soles were at different levels and became a trip hazard while night sailing. Cabin doors were designed to remove skin from hands. Cupboards were placed to take scalps. If this is a “quality” brand, I’m happy to keep my BendyToy. Ergonomically, far ahead.
I have a pal who is/was a joiner. He was so impressed by the fit-out of my Beneteau that he bought one.

 

[FlyingGoose]

I prefer my boats to be able to sail and take a good strong beating when I cross oceans , not the venner or the door handles . sorry peeps
My 40 year old Moody is still going strong built like a tank and full of solid wood and is rather heavy. Just like my women
But I would still go for a Hallberg if crossing an Ocean if I didn't have my Moody

 

[Bobc]

I prefer my boats to be able to sail and take a good strong beating when I cross oceans , not the venner or the door handles . sorry peeps
My 40 year old Moody is still going strong built like a tank and full of solid wood and is rather heavy. Just like my women
But I would still go for a Hallberg if crossing an Ocean if I didn't have my Moody

Yes, but the OP is not looking for a boat to "bash across oceans" in, is he.

 

[wully1]

I’ve owned 2 Bennies (1984 & 1986 )and would buy another, but not a recent one as quality has plummeted- based on the shocking state of the show models at BOOT a couple of years back. The Jeanneaus were even worse.
The Bavaria boats were in a different league, much nicer finished and shown. Still wouldn’t consider buying anything like a new one as they just feel to flimsy, boxy and cheap but as strongly built as most of us will ever need.
Oh, and I hate twin wheels... utterly stupid on a cruising boat and only there to fill in the space left over from the fat arsed shape....

 

[ashtead]

They might not suit the OPs proposed usage but the Ocean variants of Bavaria always seemed well finished if you can live with centre cockpit in mast reefing and single stern cabin. As an ex Bav owner 34 with 10 plus years from new the only area I would check if looking to buy one now would be rudder osmosis which is of course repairable but seems common in many brands from the early 2000s . Otherwise apart from the usual maintenance ours easily outsailed HR of similar length provided you reefed or down tracked main and was much easier to back into berths etc . Many parts e.g. Winches, mast and boom ,diesel engine much the same and by now the sub standard elstrom sails should have been replaced with quality vectron or such like. Clearly if your budget stretches to a Malo or a bowman lovely boats etc but the challenge faced is much the same as we faced when looking for a new boat at say 40ft as the price of many Nordic versions was around twice the amount we paid . It often comes down to whether you want say a 10 year old Arcona or a new one by one of the German or French yards and I suspect it's down to time and or budget for maintenance .Draw up the list of key features and age etc and the choice in a certain size is actually quite limited in budget

 

[Achosenman]

FWIW I've found that a lot of "opinion is just repeated anecdotes.
When you hear someone talking about "in the old days, GRP was an inch thick" therefor it was better. Nothing could be further from the truth. The early glass weave was very basic, Polyester resin was and remains relatively weak when compared to Vinylester and Epoxy. Modern weaves require less than half the thickness to achieve the same strength as the old stuff. Modern boat builders are not stupid. A single incidence of a poor hull can destroy a company. Class A is class A...period.

Most cruisers cruise to a destination, then use the boat as a caravan while they explore. They don't spend their time beating across oceans. Time on passage is kept as short as possible.

There are an inordinate amount of AWB cruising every part of the planet, from the Arctic, to the Antarctic. I don't think they are the best at the extremes, but they are what most sailors can afford. Everything else is a pipe pipe dream that only a lucky few can afford.

My advice is get the best you can afford, do your own research and trust your judgement.

ATB

 

[geem]

FWIW I've found that a lot of "opinion is just repeated anecdotes.
When you hear someone talking about "in the old days, GRP was an inch thick" therefor it was better. Nothing could be further from the truth. The early glass weave was very basic, Polyester resin was and remains relatively weak when compared to Vinylester and Epoxy. Modern weaves require less than half the thickness to achieve the same strength as the old stuff. Modern boat builders are not stupid. A single incidence of a poor hull can destroy a company. Class A is class A...period.

Most cruisers cruise to a destination, then use the boat as a caravan while they explore. They don't spend their time beating across oceans. Time on passage is kept as short as possible.

There are an inordinate amount of AWB cruising every part of the planet, from the Arctic, to the Antarctic. I don't think they are the best at the extremes, but they are what most sailors can afford. Everything else is a pipe pipe dream that only a lucky few can afford.

My advice is get the best you can afford, do your own research and trust your judgement.

ATB

Who mentioned glass gull thickness or weave? Didnt spot that one. The well respected current crop of Outremers are polyester construction. If you want to cruise the world in a budget boat, expect to do more maintenance. Things like plastic bushes in spade rudders, more frequent rig changes due to lighter rigged masts, replacement deck fittings due to undersizing, hull to deck leak repairs, keel leaks. You can cruise the world in an AWB, we have met people that have done it. Nobody is saying its not possible, it just isnt the best choice. If you want a caravan in the Med you move around to explore then the offers from Jen, Bav, Ben fit the bill but dont kid yourself that they are the optimium choice for sailing around the world

 

[Skylark]

If you want to cruise the world in a budget boat, expect to do more maintenance.

Who mentioned crusing the world on a budget, I didn’t spot that one

I suspect that the vast majority of PBO forum users are not world cruisers, nor do they desire to be so.

I’d also hazard a guess that the majority of anti BenJavBen comments are from people who have never owned one but have plenty of anecdotal evidence of their poor standing.

The vast majority of positive comments seem to have been made by owners, past and present.

 

[Achosenman]

Hull thickness is a common point whenever this subject comes up, not just on this forum. You miss the point, most sailors don’t have a bottomless bank account. Are they best, no certainly not, but they are affordable and capable of cruising.

I looked at HR, Moody and Amel before I gave up. They were twice the price, and just as in need of “ fixing” at vast expense as an AWB. One got as far as a survey that exposed a deck full of water. Sometimes the choice is don’t cruise, adjust your budget or compromise.

 

[Sailfree]

I have a jeanneau 43DS and very happy with it. Built 2005.

The one commissioned before mine hit the cill at Hythe marina at a fair speed.

Sea ventures immediately lifted it out in front of the embarrassed Finish owner who had been going too fast. No damage to keel only couple of painfull broken ribs for seaventures commissioning manager where he hit the winch when boat came to a full stop.

Look on these boats as the Fords of boats not Aston Martin's. They do their job. Judge by weight per length and they are lighter using less materials. Less materials combined with production line techniques enable them to be cheaper.

Experience, improved construction techniques and better quality control has resulted in boats getting lighter and faster.

Heavier Sweedish boats do need more wind to get going.

Been caught out in bad weather in ours and no problem when reefed down. I did order a 3rd reading point.

Conclusion good value for money engines and equipment is the same on more expensive boats.

Trust this helps.

 

[dom]

The usual naysayers here appear unable to shake off a dose of post-purchase rationalisation of whatever old vessel they happen to own.

Yet since their heyday, the niche cottage industries of the 1970s-1990s have given way to a small number of well capitalised business with the ability to invest in, design and construct quality boats, fitted out with generic third party equipment, and targeted to specific price and usage points. A bit like Skoda, VW, Audi, Porsche, and Lamborghini, all of which are owned by the VW group

Since the 1970s/80s, much progress has been made from resins, rigs, sails, electronic equipment, foil design, rudder bearings, load structures, hull shape, running rigging, etc. What's left is the woodwork, where old techniques still reign supreme for those wising to pay for it.

Same applies to expensive watches, probably why many on here will own both say a Rolex and Casio in full knowledge that the Casio tells the time better.

 

[Resolution]

I have a jeanneau 43DS and very happy with it. Built 2005.

The one commissioned before mine hit the cill at Hythe marina at a fair speed.

Sea ventures immediately lifted it out in front of the embarrassed Finish owner who had been going too fast. No damage to keel only couple of painfull broken ribs for seaventures commissioning manager where he hit the winch when boat came to a full stop.

Look on these boats as the Fords of boats not Aston Martin's. They do their job. Judge by weight per length and they are lighter using less materials. Less materials combined with production line techniques enable them to be cheaper.

Experience, improved construction techniques and better quality control has resulted in boats getting lighter and faster.

Heavier Sweedish boats do need more wind to get going.

Been caught out in bad weather in ours and no problem when reefed down. I did order a 3rd reading point.

Conclusion good value for money engines and equipment is the same on more expensive boats.

Trust this helps.

Roger
I know we had differences over the commissioning of your 43Ds back in 2005 but I am quietly pleased that the boat is still giving you value for money. With a lot of charter usage as well.

How can I ever forget the overladen Finish 43 and the incident of the Hythe cill! During the handover process, with the commissioning crew and the new owner all on board. New owner at the helm, but who was skipper and who actually owned the boat at that precise moment?
Peter

 

[pvb]

Look on these boats as the Fords of boats not Aston Martin's. They do their job. Judge by weight per length and they are lighter using less materials. Less materials combined with production line techniques enable them to be cheaper.

Experience, improved construction techniques and better quality control has resulted in boats getting lighter and faster.

Heavier Sweedish boats do need more wind to get going.

Over and over again we see people posting erroneous information about "lightweight" AWBs and the "heavier" Scandinavian boats. The facts simply don't support this folklore.

I have a Bavaria Cruiser 37. It's 11.30m long, 10.22m waterline, 3.67m beam. It weighs 7000kg including 2080kg ballast, so the hull itself weighs 4920kg.

Before buying, I also looked at the Hallberg-Rassy 372. That's 11.35m long, 10.25m waterline, 3.60m beam. So very nearly the same size. It weighs 7500kg including 2900kg ballast, so the hull weighs 4600kg - less than the Bavaria.

 

[johnalison]

They might not suit the OPs proposed usage but the Ocean variants of Bavaria always seemed well finished if you can live with centre cockpit in mast reefing and single stern cabin. As an ex Bav owner 34 with 10 plus years from new the only area I would check if looking to buy one now would be rudder osmosis which is of course repairable but seems common in many brands from the early 2000s . Otherwise apart from the usual maintenance ours easily outsailed HR of similar length provided you reefed or down tracked main and was much easier to back into berths etc . Many parts e.g. Winches, mast and boom ,diesel engine much the same and by now the sub standard elstrom sails should have been replaced with quality vectron or such like. Clearly if your budget stretches to a Malo or a bowman lovely boats etc but the challenge faced is much the same as we faced when looking for a new boat at say 40ft as the price of many Nordic versions was around twice the amount we paid . It often comes down to whether you want say a 10 year old Arcona or a new one by one of the German or French yards and I suspect it's down to time and or budget for maintenance .Draw up the list of key features and age etc and the choice in a certain size is actually quite limited in budget

I agree that some of the older Bavs are decent boats, though with less freeboard than post EU directive ones. I would not agree that they necessarily will outsail an eqivalent HR. A friend had a Bav 34 and we sailed in company in my HR34 quite a lot for a few years. The Bav is nearly 35ft whereas my HR is only 33.5, and the difference in waterline is reflected in the speed downwind, but we could outsail the Bav upwind. More importantly, we didn't need to reef until there was over 20 knots true wind sailing to windward while the Bav reefed at about 15. They are both reasonable boats of their type, but with different benefits.