Boat Weight

Flapjack

Flapjack

Well-Known Member
Joined
15 Apr 2008
Messages
408
Location
Chichester Harbour
Visit site
We had the boat taken out the water last week and the very nice man at the marina weighed it for us and she came in at just under 6 ton is this quite heavy for a 34’ boat or not, I’ve only ever had 2 boats and both were 40 year old GRP, the other was a 25' long keel so I don’t really have anything to compare against. No great technical reason for asking just curious how this compares to modern craft
 
Was it lifted at EYH ?
If so , ours weighed in at 6 tons without mast/rigging/sails/most of the gear ... which seemed about right - this was on the yellow crane ...
 
Flapjack said:
We had the boat taken out the water last week and the very nice man at the marina weighed it for us and she came in at just under 6 ton is this quite heavy for a 34’ boat or not, I’ve only ever had 2 boats and both were 40 year old GRP, the other was a 25' long keel so I don’t really have anything to compare against. No great technical reason for asking just curious how this compares to modern craft
Click to expand...

Not a modern AWB, but our Rival 34 weighed 6,5 T with all her cruising gear aboard and tanks nearly full. That is about 1000 kg more than the designed weight. It always amazes me how much you can stow aboard,
 
I have just bought a 1979 Colvic Atlanta Mullion 32 (Aft Cabin) and the spec states 7 Tons for her 32ft! I wonder if Suffolk Yacht Harbour have a weight guage on their launching device?
 
I'm sure you have allowed for all the cranes contribution to the weight ie chain, shackles, etc.

Crane driver gave me the total lift weight (5.5tonnes) and suggested I lose well over half a tonne for all of those bits.

Edit: Centurion 32
 
The layup on an AWB would not be as thick but as they are wider, with higher freeboard the weight difference is not as great as you would imagine, simply because there is more hull.

I dread to think what ours would weigh.
 
Wasn't done on a crane, it was done on this so should be correct

Flapjaclk22.jpg
 
Not super heavy. A Bavaria 34 is dry about 4.2 tons. My 37 is 5.4. Typically fuel, water nad cruising kit add around 1-1.5 tons. My fuel and water alone if full is .4 tons.
 
Thanks for that guys, not that much difference really between the old and the new, as wklein says you get more hull for your length these days and that must account for a bit, but in a crash I think I’d still rather be in my old girl :D:D:D
 
Never understand why some boat owners obsess about the heavyness of their boats as if weight alone were something of merit. As Uffa Fox allegedly said, weight is only of merit in a steam roller.

In boats, increased weight reduces sailing performance and arguably makes a boat more vulnerable to damage through increased inertia in the face of wave impacts. My 35 footer weighed 7.7 tonnes empty at launch and I would be much happier if that had been 4 tonnes thanks to high tech epoxy / carbon fibre sandwich construction.

To put it another way, a 36 ft Bav weighs in at 7 tonnes whilst a 42 ft Swan comes in at 7.2 tonnes. Clearly the Swan is a lighter boat for its size. Anyone here think the Bav is superior because of its weight? In truth, its cheaper to build crude and heavy than light and strong. And thats what happened in the old days when grp was new and people knew no better.
 
Last edited:
Bosun Higgs said:
Never understand why some boat owners obsess about the heavyness of their boats as if weight alone were something of merit. As Uffa Fox allegedly said, weight is only of merit in a steam roller.

In boats, increased weight reduces sailing performance and arguably makes a boat more vulnerable to damage through increased inertia in the face of wave impacts. My 35 footer weighed 7.7 tonnes empty at launch and I would be much happier if that had been 4 tonnes thanks to high tech epoxy / carbon fibre sandwich construction.

To put it another way, a 36 ft Bav weighs in at 7 tonnes whilst a 42 ft Swan comes in at 7.2 tonnes. Clearly the Swan is a lighter boat for its size. Anyone here think the Bav is superior because of its weight? In truth, its cheaper to build crude and heavy than light and strong. And thats what happened in the old days when grp was new and people knew no better.
Click to expand...

Well the carbon boat would certainly not last as long as the heavy built equivalent. I got beat to **** in a 45' steel boat that weighed 20T instead of 12T so weight in itself is certainly not a virtue. However if the gear matches the weight its certainly more seaworthy and comfortable.

Design is as important as weight when performance is concerned.

I also suspect the Bavaria is laid up with a CSM gun so strength is not equivalent to equivalent well laid up boat. (only legend as far as i have seen advertise CSM guns in the brochure)
 
34 feet and 13 tonnes :o how's that for a weight to length ratio?

Uffa Fox was a great sailor and some of his designs were nice but some were just bonkers. Clearly weight can be jolly useful, like in a keel for example, so maybe not just in steam rollers :rolleyes:

The characteristics of our heavyweight yacht suit us with a large and young family. It allows for a vast internal volume, a comfortable and predictable motion, dry sailing and the tough construction is reassuring. You can get vast and tough for a lot less weight but you'd pay a lot more money for it. It's not better or worse, just different.
 
Last edited:
Bosun Higgs said:
Never understand why some boat owners obsess about the heavyness of their boats as if weight alone were something of merit. As Uffa Fox allegedly said, weight is only of merit in a steam roller.

In boats, increased weight reduces sailing performance and arguably makes a boat more vulnerable to damage through increased inertia in the face of wave impacts. My 35 footer weighed 7.7 tonnes empty at launch and I would be much happier if that had been 4 tonnes thanks to high tech epoxy / carbon fibre sandwich construction.

To put it another way, a 36 ft Bav weighs in at 7 tonnes whilst a 42 ft Swan comes in at 7.2 tonnes. Clearly the Swan is a lighter boat for its size. Anyone here think the Bav is superior because of its weight? In truth, its cheaper to build crude and heavy than light and strong. And thats what happened in the old days when grp was new and people knew no better.
Click to expand...

does the Bav have a lead keel as the Swan does, IE weight where it helps, not just o/all weight
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top