Buy cheap, buy twice

[ponapay]

thats the motto I was taught in my youth by my parents. I have tried to practice it to the full and as a result have never bought a Bav, Jen or Ben.

All the woes one hears from owners of such, allegedly, poorly constructed boats make me wonder how the company let alone the boats keep afloat.

The best policy seems to be buy the best you can or don't buy at all. Charter, and let the charter company deal with all the problems. You get to sail in all the best places and you can chose to take other holidays too, having saved all those berthing and repair bills.

Will the modern GRP boats last as well as the 1970s and earlier built boats, I doubt it and the older boats are often more stable, better fitted out, more reliable and much more capable of looking after their crews.

IMHO there are a few, a very few, well designed and built modern GRP boats and most seem to come from Sweden or Finland. Why can't we do the same in Britain - the answer seems to be that the cost base is too high, to the tune of 30% or more. We are just too greedy.



<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[[3889]]

Assuming you're itching for a row with a ben/bav/jen owner here it is...
"The best policy seems to be buy the best you can or don't buy at all."
If the "poorly constructed" boat is the best you can buy then you have complied with this meaningless statement. As someone said in a recent post this was the attitude to Jap Motorbikes and it took 30 years before the oil smeared "Brits are best" flat-earthers recognised Jap superiority. These boats are a compromise between comfort and performance but my experience is that >80% of all boats never go out in conditions above F4. I've been at sea in a full gale in my ben with no problems although I recognise its lower performance compared to a traditional design, but feel it is compensated for by value, accomodation and speed; of more use when cruising UK coastal within 10 hrs of refuge. If I planned a transAt crossing I would change my boat. No one disputes the economic arguments for chartering but personally, I want my own boat to use when and how I like and the ben suits me just fine. To try and generate divisions between groups who enjoy the same sport seems pointless. I did not buy my boat through ignorance but because it met my requirements and budget and I am very pleased with my choice.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Robin]

There is a great danger in generalising rather than investigating properly. Some of the modern offerings are perhaps better than you give them credit for and you are comparing them only to the oldies that have survived to now. There were plenty of mistakes made on the good old boats of yesteryear too though it is fair to say they were built like the proverbial brick thingy and got away with a lot.

Let me think back, I remember one builder who faced with a series engine fault had to dismantle the engines to get them out having been fitted before the deck. The archetypal example of perfection in all weathers oft quoted had to have bow sections reinforced. A major builder had serious problems with cracking skegs, another major with keel floors needing reinforcing.

So how about the modern 'quality' builders. Please do not believe ALL the hype that persuades you to part with double your money size for size. Bowman were the epitomy of quality British yet couldn't build a good Starlight 39 without delaminating double skins (and then they went bust leaving owners to sort it out). The Scandinavians have a few nice ones but wasn't that a not very old Nauticat (very pricey, very heavy build) I saw having full osmosis treatment?

Take each one on it's merits and you might just be surprised. I did and we have the best boat we have ever owned (OK OK so she is now 15 yrs old) but 2 yrs on it is still wall to wall grins and this from someone who is in print saying I would never exchange my heavy W33 Ketch for any French flimsy. Oh yes and I would not hesitate to take this one across oceans either, she is very definitely not just a marina caravan.





<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[jfkal]

Well I bought reasonable and once. Our Sunshine sailed all the way from Hamburg to Singapore and guess what, still in one piece after 18 years. BTW dunno how to spell OSMOSIS and hull to deck separation...........................


<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[steve_cronin]

Your guesstimates on price......

... are WAY out.

A Bavaria 44 is around £100,000 with comparable equipment to a Halberg Rassey 43 but the latter will cost you in excess of £350,000. You aren't likely to get anyone to rent you a newish HR.

The rest of your post about buy vs rent is a long standing item for discussion. Nothing new here.

Steve Cronin

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[richardandtracy]

I think that this is an arguement that couldn't possibly have any meaningful outcome.

Everyone wants a boat for a different purpose, and buys or builds a boat to suit that purpose. I'm very hot on extreme simplicity and repairability with onboard resources - to the extent that when [if?] I go on a long trip I'm going to move my metalworking lathe into one of the cabins. This, obviously, would not suit someone who likes to trickle around the med in great luxury.

The merits of X against Y should be qualified by saying under which circumstances each is better and then leaving it up to the user, reader or listener to decide what is important for them and apply their own weight to the various points.

It's the same with cars. One size does not fit all. I wouldn't be seen dead in a Ford KA - because it doesn't suit me (size, legroom, headroom, visibility, comfort, baggage space, passenger space, cost, engine size, engine accessibility, reliability etc). However there are those who love Ford KA's, good for them. There is room in this world for all tastes. Just don't mock my choice just because it's been chosen to a different set of priorities from yours.

Regards

Richard


<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[steve_cronin]

Ahh, but you see......

...that is the way with certain englishmen. It is a sport to deride others and to look down on people who turn up in a Ka and send them packing because there's "No Space Mate" The same individual on meeting the next car, a Bentley, removs the barrier and announces "Yes we have a space waiting here for you sir"

Sad but true of our race I'm afraid.

Steve Cronin

The Bavaria/ Janneau/Beneteau is the Ford Mondeo of the sailing world. The Halberg/Najad/Scanyacht is the Alvis. Which would you find it easier to live with & maintain?

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Mr Cassandra]

What a load of

What a load of old tosh! I have a 15year old Jenneau Sun Magic 44 It cost new £119000 = £5000 for teak decks in 1988. I have looked at boats from Finland and Sweden ,and cannot for the life of me see any reason to waste money on them.
With respect i don`t think you know what you are talking about .
cheers bob t. A very satified Jeanneau Sun Magic 44 and Sun Charm 39 owner

<hr width=100% size=1>boss1

 

[Robin]

Re: Ahh, but you see......

Now look here old chap, I could never own a mere Ford, has no status at all, I have a Honda. Thought a BMW or Merc was too 'obvious' don't you know, so I bought the Jeanneau, seriously understated class in all departments.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[robp]

You seem to have two arguments here. One that the French and Germans can't or won't build quality boats. And another that says we can but choose to be greedy. The fact is that we all (Brits, French Germans, Scans etc) can but the Brits don't seem to be able to make a business out of it. Not sailing anyway. I never have heard what, if anything, the CEO's of Sunseeker or Fairline have to say about it.

Ask yourself, why is it that Rolls Royce - the generic term for quality - has a new factory, built for it by the Germans? And that Bentley is also owned by Germans. That Jaguar and Aston Martin are owned by Americans?

Yes, it may have been management greed but it was more the pompous attitudes like this one, that caused them to watch and criticise for example, while Honda et al, wiped out our motorcycle business, as another poster said.

Meanwhile my Ben actually isn't showing any signs of falling apart. In fact, I think it is very well put together. Yes I'd like to indulge in little more quality here and there but it's built PROFESSIONALLY. That's what we seem not to be able to do in any quantity.




<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[StugeronSteve]

What a load of pompous tosh. My Ben is built nicely, sails beautifully and is a joy to own! Ok, she's only 12 months old but I'm more than pleased that I've got value for money and if she lasts like a friends 21yr old First it wont be bad for a cheap un! We live 200miles from the boat and want to spend time sailing, not renovating, we wanted a boat that offered good family accommodation and S. Coast / cross channel cruising potential, and I'm happy with my choice. Enjoy your own boat and leave others to enjoy theirs.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[nicho]

Wasn't there a batch of Nicholson's (32's??) built, that were so weak structurally they were deemed to be unseaworthy - something like 20 of them were constructed without stringers, or so one of the mags reported some months ago. Then there was the poor so and so's with the Starlights whose hulls delaminated, and are having to be repaired at the owners (massive) expense. For sure there's been some disasters built over the years, and there may be more in the future, but at least modern boats have the advantage of computer aided design to calculate hull stress levels etc, and the use of modern materials such as Kevlar. I'm happy with my Bav, and strangely so is every other owner I meet. The same, it seems, applies to Beneteau and Jeanneau owners that I come across. Seems the only ones who need to keep having a go at modern boats are those owners of so called "classics", many of which are not worth a second look. Personally they are not for me and my other half, but for those that want such boats, I'm happy for them. We're all on the water enjoying the same wonderful activity, so pls lets drop the "ancient v modern" theme once and for all (acknowledging that I've just extended the debate).

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Blue_Blazes]

Or to summarise the other replies in a more concise form. You're talking complete and utter bollox.

Bill.

<hr width=100% size=1>One of these days I'll have a boat that WORKS

 

[Robin]

I remember reading an account of a transatlantic delivery of a Nich 38 where the delivery crew constructed some kind of wooden tray type cockpit cover because the cockpit didn't self drain and the wheel shelter/cover was considered inadequate for bad weather. I had a 1275 Mini-Cooper S in my younger days and thought it was the bee's knees or the ant's pants, I tried one again a year or so back and by modern standards it is noisy, slow and downright uncomfortable - but it is still nonetheless a classic. Would I have one again, not bl...y likely!

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[ponapay]

Clearly Blue Blazes

modern boat is no good - he has a rider at the bottom of his posts 'one of these days I'll have a boat that works'

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[nicho]

Re: Clearly Blue Blazes

You Sir, are clearly trying to stir the poo, and I'll have no more of it. Goodbye!!

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[LeonF]

What I'd like clarified is: what are the pros and cons of yachts where the internal furniture is used to stiffen the hull as opposed to older boats where the stiffening came from floor grids, stringers etc. I was always under the impression that the latter was the only acceptable way to build a really strong boat and know that some yachts are still built this way, but is this true or a myth? Talked to someone who sails a Sigma and sells a French boat who said that the Sigmas could bang while racing without problems but the Frenchies broke the inside fittings. Note that may of you who responded have the older French boats--is it safe to say that the earlier models were better built? I drove a 2CV for 10 years and now own a Citroen Saxo-- comfort levels are greater- heaters, screen demisters etc, but the 2CV takes some beating. Older cars may have been strongly built but surely rust was more of a problem than with modern production cars-- perhaps the same situation exists with modern GRP- maybe the lay ups are not as thick but the quality is better. My Sigma has a new bottom and the surveyor said that even in the last 5 years materials have improved enormously with the advent of solvent free epoxies etc. Yachting Monthly always had a box which detailed construction methods and standards when reviewing new boats and this seems to have disappeared from current reviewing. Sailing Today gives very scant information about construction of boats they review. I'm considering swapping my Sig for a Frances 26- but am I crazy to do so?

<hr width=100% size=1>L.A.R.Ferguson

 

[nicho]

Leon, you are somewhat wide of the mark I think - I do not know of any boat, ancient or modern, where the internal furniture is used to strengthen the hull. There is however, some criticism of modern boat builders, who fit all the furniture before the deck is fitted into place, thus rendering it difficult for these components to be changed after build completion (though how often does that happen?) All modern boats that I know of, have a substantial maze of stringers that are bonded to the hull before the floor is fitted. This gives the hull immense strength. With regard to materials, modern boats use isophaltic resins in the gelcoat, which are far more resistant to osmosis than that previously used - it will be interesting to see the longer term results. I have a Bavaria 36, and the Bav range have layers of Kevlar in the hull laminate, which makes it far more resistant to holing in a collision. Kevlar is immensley puncture proof (bullet proof vest manufacturers use it).

I have heard of the existance of a Bavaria video (someone I was talking to last week, bought a Bavaria 44 on the strength of seeing it). Concerned that some journalists were sceptical of their hull integrity, Bavaria evidently gathered a group of them on a harbour breakwater, one of those made of huge concrete blocks. They then sailed a bavaria straight into it - the boat climbed up the ubstruction before sliding back into the water. Not content, they did it again, this time with the engine running flat out as well as the sails. Same thing, it slipped back into the water. Finally, on the third run, they slammed the helm hard over at the last minute and hit the breakwater broadside, the boat bounced off. It was then taken to a hoist and lifted out - much to the surprise of everyone, the hull damage was confined to gelcoat damage, but the hull was not close to being holed.

I would love to see the video, because according to the fellow who saw it, it was pretty impressive stuff. For sure older designs are heavier, with thicker laminates, and in most cases are supremely seaworthy, with a more seakindly motion, but modern production boats are aimed at a different sort of sailor. Each to his own, and you rarely see sailors of new boats slagging off the "old timers", so quite why the opposite happens, I'm not sure.

Don't know aything about your proposed purchase, so cannot advise.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[richardandtracy]

...the 2CV takes some beating.

Absolutely. The design philosophy behind the 2CV was different from most modern cars, and happens to match my requirements - which is why I still have mine and the only modern car I'm prepared to consider is the Daihatsu Move (it's like Postman Pat's van with windows!).

I think it's likely that the modern boats are lighter, but no weaker, than old designs. As time has progressed people learn how to use the materials more effectively. The thing we British are bad at is learning how to reduce costs in production at the same time as learning to design better. Consequently we end up producing stuff as good as ever, without price reductions & so go out of business.

The final problem we have is that the last 5% of quality costs 50% more, and the Rolls Royce tradition is deeply ingrained in British manufacturing. I've never worked at a place where the manufacturing side has produced shoddy gear - it's always looked superb next to our foreign competitors stuff. Pity it usually costs between 50% and 100% more.


Pro's and con's of fixed internal furniture:-
Pro:-
Stiffens & locally strengthens hull, meaning there is less local need for stringers or frames. It is fairly structurally efficient if the sizes are appropriate.
Comparitively easy to put in during manufacture
Old fashioned idea with most of the problems ironed out by experience (all the original ply boats did it this way).
Units bonded in use every last cubic inch of volume for storage.

Cons:-
Stffens hull locally & can cause hard points on the hull which attract load & fatigue more quickly. Also Heaven Help you if you need to change the interior - the hull is weakened.
Slower to fit at manufacture than externally assembled units (many smaller aircraft have 15 minute quick change interiors - so if it's possible there, it's possible in a boat).
Doesn't permit easy variations on a theme for a manufacturer. If loose, the units can be jumbled more easily into different positions with minimal design work. This can lead to dead spaces within the hull so that a unit will fit out of its nominally designed position.

Regards

Richard


<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[nicho]

I've just had it confirmed by Bavaria that the exercise of sailing one of their standard boats flat out into a rock built breakwater, no less than three times, once with engine assistace to enhance the impact did indeed take place as a PR exercise, and there is a video showing it happen. The boat was hauled out and only suffered relatively minor damage to the gelcoat. The kevlar layers in the hull prevented a hole being punctured through it. It's a pretty impressive show evidently.

That'll do for me thanks you very much!!

<hr width=100% size=1>