SAWDOC
Well-Known Member
Thanks for the useful links!
CO32, Sadler 32, then what??
- Thread starter SAWDOC
- Start date
Thanks for the useful links!
KellysEye
Well-Known Member
>S&S 34 - twice non-stop singlehanded round the world (South of the main Capes)...can you imagine doing that in a Benny or a Jeanny, eerh don´t think so.
Just for the record when the crewed round the world race was amateur the French Post Office team did it in a Beneteau. Understandably they beefed up the structure.
Just for the record when the crewed round the world race was amateur the French Post Office team did it in a Beneteau. Understandably they beefed up the structure.
SAWDOC
Well-Known Member
Searched for this title without success.
Mike Popock on amazon seems more concerned with religous matters than with sailing. You sure this reference is correct?
Robin
Well-Known Member
Sorry but the Co32 and the S&S 34 would be beaten upwind by most modern cruiser racers and that includes the Benny First range. Also as you say 'with a bit of breeze' - in lighter winds lots of boats will leave them both for dead and especially off the wind.
I used to sail and race an Elizabethan 30, same LWL as the Co32 incidentally and would beat the Co32s no problem. I sold the Liz30 and bought a Westerly 33 Ketch and still beat the Co32s (and Liz 30s) upwind. Now you might find that difficult to believe but you have to remember that displacement speed is limited by waterline length and the LWL of the W33 is 28'10" from memory versus the 24' of the Co32 and Liz30. The W33 does not point as close as the others but makes up for it by more speed and the VMG is actually better. In terms of pointing ability both the Co32 and the Liz30 and others of a similar age are nowt compared to later designs. Bigger I know but our (Jenny) Sun Legende 41 now ex would go much closer to the wind than either of those and most others as well.
Fact is that like it or not our memories of the old faithfuls are often better than the realities. Bit like when I got to try a Mini-Cooper S some 20 years after I rallied one and found it noisy, slow and not as good road holding as a then family saloon.
gardenshed
Well-Known Member
Sorry, got the bok name wrong:
Inshore Offshore by Mike Pocock
Product details
* Hardcover: 256 pages
* Publisher: Adlard Coles Nautical; First Edition edition (15 May 1986)
* Language English
* ISBN-10: 0851773893
* ISBN-13: 978-0851773896
if you use the corrsct title (helps if you are told it) you'll find that there are used copies available on Amazon.
MIKE POCOCK
Mike Pocock was the original author of The Pacific Crossing Guide, revised in this edition by Ros Hogbin. He has been an occasional contributor to various yachting magazines over a number of years and in 1986 wrote a book, Inshore Offshore, which was largely drawn from previously published articles. Following a successful period as a racing skipper, winning RORC Class Championships in 1974 and 1976, Mike turned to cruising in 1987. He and his wife Pat cruised continuously for seven years spending three and a half years in the Pacific. They have cruised since to the Eastern seaboard of the USA on two occasions. Mike was awarded the RCC Challenge Cup in 1991 and he was Commodore of the Ocean Cruising Club from 1998 - 2002.
Inshore Offshore by Mike Pocock
Product details
* Hardcover: 256 pages
* Publisher: Adlard Coles Nautical; First Edition edition (15 May 1986)
* Language English
* ISBN-10: 0851773893
* ISBN-13: 978-0851773896
if you use the corrsct title (helps if you are told it) you'll find that there are used copies available on Amazon.
MIKE POCOCK
Mike Pocock was the original author of The Pacific Crossing Guide, revised in this edition by Ros Hogbin. He has been an occasional contributor to various yachting magazines over a number of years and in 1986 wrote a book, Inshore Offshore, which was largely drawn from previously published articles. Following a successful period as a racing skipper, winning RORC Class Championships in 1974 and 1976, Mike turned to cruising in 1987. He and his wife Pat cruised continuously for seven years spending three and a half years in the Pacific. They have cruised since to the Eastern seaboard of the USA on two occasions. Mike was awarded the RCC Challenge Cup in 1991 and he was Commodore of the Ocean Cruising Club from 1998 - 2002.
Last edited:
SAWDOC
Well-Known Member
Thanks - that's great!
narcer
Well-Known Member
Robin
Totally agree. You can´t compare a modern Benny or such like boat for boat when your sailing around the buoys. But I think the origonal point was a boat with a more rugged character that just keeps going when the going gets tough. Imagine taking a Benny First 31 or 33 down the Southern Ocean, (I know the French will float around in any sort of thing...look at Dr Bombard for eg) it just wouldn´t do it - stability just wouldn´t be enough and it´s not big enough to out-surf dangerous breaking waves. Used to crew on a Sunfast 36, and also a JOD 35 for a while and got it surfing more than a few times upto 14.5 - 15 knts with the kite up in 32 knts of wind. An S&S 34 would never get anywhere near that speed but I know which boat I´d prefer to be in when it´s kicking up, you´re short handed and you´re beating off a lee-shore. As for round the buoys stuff in the end you can´t beat W.L. lengh, hence your Westerely 33 ketch beating the Co 32.
Seem to recall Fastnet race 1979 small boat class winner was a Co 32 sailed by the owners son and a couple of his mates about 18yrs old. This wasn´t over reported at the time for understandable reasons...but that speaks for itself ?
...one other boat that springs to mind not mentioned above is the UFO 34 - very good performer in heavy winds.
Totally agree. You can´t compare a modern Benny or such like boat for boat when your sailing around the buoys. But I think the origonal point was a boat with a more rugged character that just keeps going when the going gets tough. Imagine taking a Benny First 31 or 33 down the Southern Ocean, (I know the French will float around in any sort of thing...look at Dr Bombard for eg) it just wouldn´t do it - stability just wouldn´t be enough and it´s not big enough to out-surf dangerous breaking waves. Used to crew on a Sunfast 36, and also a JOD 35 for a while and got it surfing more than a few times upto 14.5 - 15 knts with the kite up in 32 knts of wind. An S&S 34 would never get anywhere near that speed but I know which boat I´d prefer to be in when it´s kicking up, you´re short handed and you´re beating off a lee-shore. As for round the buoys stuff in the end you can´t beat W.L. lengh, hence your Westerely 33 ketch beating the Co 32.
Seem to recall Fastnet race 1979 small boat class winner was a Co 32 sailed by the owners son and a couple of his mates about 18yrs old. This wasn´t over reported at the time for understandable reasons...but that speaks for itself ?
...one other boat that springs to mind not mentioned above is the UFO 34 - very good performer in heavy winds.
BurnitBlue
Well-Known Member
Wasn't Clare Francis' Gollywog a S&S 34? Came second in a transatlantic race Observer single-handed if I recall.
dratsea
Well-Known Member
Crealock 37 (Bill Crealock was a British designer working in Seattle, and boats were built by Pacific Seacraft) has best ever stability for big (Pacific) swell. Kind on the eye is a bonus. Big sister (Crealock 44) goes like a bomb. But I might be a bit biased.
doug748
Well-Known Member
The Portsmouth Yardstick scheme collects data on these things in order for different boats to race each other:
http://www.byronsoftware.org.uk/bycn/index.htm
Robin
Well-Known Member
Yep, but I was talking purely boat against boat, not handicap racing. A W33 has a longer waterline length and greater hull speed, so in a simple beam reach situation is quite simply faster. Hull speed on a Co32 is 6.6kts, hull speed of a W33 is 7.2kts, 9.1% faster. Not fair really as the W33 is a much bigger boat than a Co32, not just a foot longer overall. LOA is not a good comparison of size.
Portsmouth handicap system is not a measurement system but is based on results on local racing and depends heavily on the numbers of race results submitted for any real accuracy. Some boats like the Co32 are raced in large numbers regularly, like having their own class in the Round The Island Race. The W33 is rarely seen on the race course and if it is will like as not have a family crew. The Liz30 may be more racy but again there are fewer about and fewer raced. So a badly sailed W33 when few as a group are sent in for handicapping to be adjusted will look slow (because that boat is) but a Co32 where there is regular class racing and very competitive with hot crews will look very fast by comparison.
Robin
Well-Known Member
If you mean Robertson's Golly I think that was an Ohlsen 38.
Ted Heath's boat the first Morning Cloud was an S&S34 and won the Sydney Hobart Race.
Quandary
Well-Known Member
The Portsmouth yardstick is perhaps inexact but there are very few production yachts that have not been physically measured for either IOR IRC or the Channel handicap that nearly every club in the UK and France used to use. These measured ratings were taken into account when trying to establish a fair handicap in most serious racing fleets. In Scotland where even 'slow' cruisers are raced occasionaly at events like WHYW, we have a system called CYCA which is not officially 'measured' in the way IRC etc. is but defined by a very experienced committee who seem to be able to get it right nearly all the time. They require info. on hull dimensions, displacement, lwl, rig type, size and aspect and rudder and keel shape. You get allowances for prop type, furlers etc. I have no doubt they use similar boats to set your initial position. Our boat when rated was the first of its type in Scotland but the rating came out almost identical to an X yacht of almost identical dimensions and style. So if you want to compare likely performance of ordinary production cruisers look at the CYCa tcfs. You will find nearly every boat you can think of there.
fishermantwo
Well-Known Member
Jessica Watson is sailing around the world in an SS34. Survived several knockdowns a few days ago, one fully inverted. SS34's have been used by several solo sailers. Quite a common yacht in Australia since Edward Heath won the Sydney Hobart race. Roughly 200 built here.
doug748
Well-Known Member
Perhaps you should ask yourself why?
I actually have no interest in who has the fastest boat. Fractions of knots here or there, or wether boat A is quicker than boat B.
However we have to confront reality. Which boat is the crusier racer that mopped up at Cowes week, and which is the family cruising Westerly?
Robin
Well-Known Member
That sounds rather contradictory to me because you say you are not interested in which boat is the faster but then talk about which boat mopped up at Cowes Week!
I merely quoted facts about comparative boat speeds which by and large are entirely related to hull speed and therefore the LWL. I'm sorry if that is taken as knocking the Co32 because that is not intended, because for one thing I rather like them. However that is not to say that I will be fooled by a very pretty design into accepting they are faster than they are. They are like old sports cars, like the Morgans and MGs, very good and full of character but now there are some very ordinary looking boats that are not only more spacious and comfortable but are actually quicker as well, just like a modern Ford Mondeo is better than an old MGB.
BTW it was a long time ago but the last time we raced our W33 was upwind in light weather on a PYRA (measured) handicap that was very close to that of the Sigmas 33s. We won. Although quite what that has to do with the price of beans I know not.
Oh and several W33s and Discus 33s (same hull, different layout) have done the RTW circuit and one W33 is documented as having survived a full ocean F11. Family cruiser maybe.
The Co32 in the 1979 Fastnet was called Assent.
I like the UFO34 too and was looking for one when we ended up with the W33. We missed one superb UFO34 baut couldn't find another we liked anywhere. Black Arrow was the RAF UFO34 that won her class in the 1979 Fasnet.
doug748
Well-Known Member
Robin, I have no interest in boat speeds (who has apart from racers) but to twist historical record is nutty.
Quandry, could you point me towards the CYCa numbers? I have searched but drawn a blank, thanks.
Quandry, could you point me towards the CYCa numbers? I have searched but drawn a blank, thanks.
Quandary
Well-Known Member
The website is www.cyca-online.org.uk (should have posted this because it is not an obvious one) If you search under 'classes by name' you will get all the production boats, more obscure ones are listed in another larger index of all the individual boats. If you want to compare how yachts performed on longer passage races to this system you can look at the Clyde Cruising Club or West Highland Yachting Week archives on their websites. There are very few proper offshore races now though the Ziguener? trophy to Bangor can be testing but only the 'racers' tend to do this these days.
What happened? We used to all set off to race round the Isle of Man or Aisa Craig and back on Friday night in Ruffian 23s and E boats, navigating by dead reckoning plus the dreaded RDF, now when it happens at all, it is in daylight, and has to be at least a J 120.
Robin
Well-Known Member
Pardon me? I haven't a clue what you think I have said that twists historical record unless you mean the Portsmouth Yardstick numbers for Co32s versus W33s etc?
The PY scheme is very good but relies on a significant number of 'returns' from clubs using it for it to work properly. It is based on adjusting race results submitted by each member club over time rather than a measurement scheme and so has crew skill included as a significant factor. Where there are reasonable numbers of race results returned the results can be fairly accurate because the hotshot crews and the numpties sort of average out. Where very few are returned, one crew of hotshots or one crew of numpties can skew the results considerably. In this case the Co32s are out there racing in large numbers, even to one design rules and the fleets are very competitive and much nearer to the hotshots end of the spectrum. Trust me these boats don't generally go out with full cruising gear on board and full tanks! The family cruisers that race occasionally are a different matter, far fewer results submitted and far greater variation in skills, not to mention sail quality, types and so on. Our W33 was hotter than average because I don't like going slow, so we had fully battened main and mizzen, rigid gas kicker, high quality radial cut sails and so on, not a baggy bit of original Westerly mattress cover or an in-mast conversion.
In our local (Poole) handicap system the W33 'family cruiser' rating (TCF or time correction factor) came out the same pretty much as a Sigma 33 'cruiser/racer' which on the face of it made it very hard on the W33. In fact, as long as the course was fairly evenly spread over upwind and offwind legs it was fair. This is because whilst upwind the Sigma will beat the W33, once the sheets are eased the extra waterline length of the W33 gives more speed than does the shorter LWL on the Sigma.
Anyway the only true comparison is between identical boats or strict one-design racing. Anything else brings far too many variables into play like light or strong winds, making or not making a tide gate, new sails every year versus a 20 year old set and more.
This is why I said that the important comparison is straight boat for boat speed (no handicapping) and then the most significant factor will always be waterline length because that is what limits hull speed, that is a mathematical incontrovertible fact.
However I will admit to being nutty.
Twister_Ken
Well-Known Member
"This is why I said that the important comparison is straight boat for boat speed (no handicapping) and then the most significant factor will always be waterline length because that is what limits hull speed, that is a mathematical incontrovertible fact"
Only true if the boat is plumb upright. When she heels it is immersed waterline length which counts, which why boats like mine (28' loa, 21' lwl) sail faster than they theoretically can. When she heels it adds at least 4 feet to the waterline length, whereas heeling a modern plumb-bow/cut-off transom boat leaves the LWL virtually unaffected.
Only true if the boat is plumb upright. When she heels it is immersed waterline length which counts, which why boats like mine (28' loa, 21' lwl) sail faster than they theoretically can. When she heels it adds at least 4 feet to the waterline length, whereas heeling a modern plumb-bow/cut-off transom boat leaves the LWL virtually unaffected.
