Birdseye
Well-known member
Base price 67k 3 years ago - 80k with vat. 120+ is one hell of a price increase.
Current design trends
- Thread starter DoubleEnder
- Start date
Tranona
Well-known member
Read the link more carefully. Base price £67k, on the water price £89k BOTH EX VAT. so typical VAT paid price of well equipped boat 3 years ago £107k - likely nearer 120 now!
To put it into perspective, the final price of my Bav 33 in mid 2015 fully specced except for the Coppercoat and a couple of other toys delivered to Hamble was just over £100k. Last year at Southampton the latest version - essentially the same except twin wheels fancy sails, sound system, bimini and posh upholstery was £190k. New boats are expensive hence my comment that reducing transport costs by about £1k is neither here nor there
To put it into perspective, the final price of my Bav 33 in mid 2015 fully specced except for the Coppercoat and a couple of other toys delivered to Hamble was just over £100k. Last year at Southampton the latest version - essentially the same except twin wheels fancy sails, sound system, bimini and posh upholstery was £190k. New boats are expensive hence my comment that reducing transport costs by about £1k is neither here nor there
doug748
Well-known member
"But the ballast ratio! It really seems low, no? Some good magazine reviews hmmm."
Also bear in mind that stability is also a performance issue. This is not the sort of boat to add things to the topsides without careful consideration. Radar, aft arches, solar panels, wind gens, heavy mooring gear or in mast furling would all have an inordinate effect on those light ship figures.
.
Also bear in mind that stability is also a performance issue. This is not the sort of boat to add things to the topsides without careful consideration. Radar, aft arches, solar panels, wind gens, heavy mooring gear or in mast furling would all have an inordinate effect on those light ship figures.
.
Daydream believer
Well-known member
Can you have in mast furling with a rotating mast and a square head mainsail?
DoubleEnder
Well-known member
I think that this is probably a very good boat, designed to fit a popular market segment. Limited cruising and light use. I reckon this covers a very large percentage of boat ownership and an even larger percentage of new boat ownership. I think it’s sold well since introduction. I was just really surprised, as an old geezer, by how much things have changed in boat design and specifically how low the ballast ratio is. But I do believe that Beneteau, their designers and builders know what they’re doing. I’d quite like to have a sail in one.
dunedin
Well-known member
That applies to any smallish boat - and bigger ones too. Deep keel with lead bulb has effective righting lever which will still be more effective than a shallow iron keel, even with added top hamper. But yes few buy modern (or older) 30 footers for liveaboards these days. For 99.9% of buyers cockpit arches and wind generators (so last century) are not needed. Nor even radar I suspect.
And in mast furling would strangle a boat like that - and again completely unnecessary for most buyers at that size - buying a Big asymmetric for fun is more likely.
doug748
Well-known member
You used to be so keen on facts now you tell us how they don't really matter. What the op has asked for are considerations, not a sales pitch
The fact is, taken from the website, a modest half ton of cruising gear, stowed normally, could well take this boat into Cat C and another 400 lbs into Cat D
.
Supertramp
Well-known member
And me. It's too easy to judge from a distance. Similar configured boats have raced and cruised in open waters, and Patrick Laine's videos give some insight.
It depends really on how you sail and what you enjoy in a boat. All the go faster features can start to evaporate once you are offshore in less than perfect weather. But off the wind would be fun.
My old, long keeled boat has 30% ballast, encapsulated, and 1.5m draft. Probably much less righting moment than a modern deep fin, but offset by a conservative rig and very different hull form. She steered herself with lashed helm for 12 hours to windward in 25-30knts 2 weeks ago - I value that sort of security.
dunedin
Well-known member
The Categorisation process causes many weird impacts amongst small end boats. Haven’t looked at the registration, but with the market for a boat like this have they chosen to optimise for more people (at circa 100kg a pop) rather than weight baggage?
I was responding to the suggestion that couldn’t cope with weight added high up - which I pointed out would be an issue also for another boat with heavier/shallower keel also. But older boats weren’t CE rated. And as one experienced designer pointed out, many who added furling mainsails and furling genoas to older boats not designed for these may have compromised the designed in stability.
But people buying a boat like this won’t be wanting to add cockpit arches or wind generators. More likely an extra large asymmetric. And a cockpit barbecue. Target market probably younger couples who work, and hence can afford a new boat, but therefore only use at weekends and occasional longer period in summer. Optimised for people who want to buy such new boats. Seems fair
Chiara’s slave
Well-known member
You might have a point there
Rotating masts and what they do for you, for those who’ve never sailed a small catamaran…. They give the best lead in aerodynamically on that fat top fully battened main. They make a huge difference on the right boat, but it’s another racy adjustable thing, and some of you cap wearing yellow wellie types might not like it.
Birdseye
Well-known member
Boat tests sometimes give the AVS which is the angle of vanishing stability and a number which takes into account hull shape as well as where the ballast is an how much there is of it. In essence it is the angle to the horizontal at which there is neither any self righting moment nor any moment to invert. Unfortunately, the French mass manufacturers stopped providing this information. I dont know whether any other makers still do.
Boats are designed for a type of use. The typical floating caravan / flotilla boat isnt designed for the southern ocean because it wont be going there. Instead its designed for comfort and accommodation volume and cheapness because thats what flotillas need,
Boats are designed for a type of use. The typical floating caravan / flotilla boat isnt designed for the southern ocean because it wont be going there. Instead its designed for comfort and accommodation volume and cheapness because thats what flotillas need,
B27
Well-known member
AVS is like any other single number, pretty useless without context.
A log with a nail in it can have 179.9degrees of AVS, but no useful stability.
There are other 'clever' measures of 'stability', but mostly they theorise about flat water.
I reckon some of these 'modern' designs 'only intended for coastal sailing' will handle strong weather and choppy water better than a lot of old designs.
Chiara’s slave
Well-known member
Agreed. Clearly I sail one of these modern designs pursued right to it’s logical limit. My AVS is less than 90 degrees, o% of my boat is ballast. we have a vast square top main, and a jib that barely overlaps. We looked at a Pogo, and realised they hadn’t taken the concept far enough. In weather at both ends of the spectrum we make excellent speed though, and, surprisingly, good comfort. The limited sailing we have done on modern wide beam monos has shown them to do similar things, with a slightly different slant. Deep, heavy boats have their adherents too, but they’re virtually an endangered species these days. Not just for commercial reasons, nor fashion. There really are new ways to make boats fast and safe.
Supertramp
Well-known member
I think you are right that many modern designs will equal or better the overall performance of older designs, especially when sailed by those that understand them. As with any design you need an adequate level of material strength and build quality (which many production boats will achieve). What may be harder is to adapt the behaviour of those used to sailing one sort of design to another. And the feel and speed in a range of conditions will be very different.
I would relish the opportunity to sail a passage on a multihull or wide beam monohull so I could see beyond my own sailing experience, which tends to involve going through the sea rather than over it!
I would relish the opportunity to sail a passage on a multihull or wide beam monohull so I could see beyond my own sailing experience, which tends to involve going through the sea rather than over it!
Birdseye
Well-known member
Yes and no. AVS is way more use than ballast ratio but it obviously doesnt pay any regard to such issues as freeboard and under bridgedeck area which are critical with multihulls. That said and given that survival can often depend on self righting ability, AVS is a decent guide number.
It might take some stupidity as well as bad weather to invert Chiara's tri but once inverted its stability is near as great as it is right way up. AVS is likely something approaching 45deg.
As for "
that really depends on how you define stability
Tranona
Well-known member
Also worth noting that AVS is a key discriminator for RCD categorisation.
Chiara’s slave
Well-known member
How does that work with multis then?
dunedin
Well-known member
AVS seems to be inordinately influenced by high coach roofs and deck saloons- which would be fine if built like an RNLI lifeboat with bulletproof windows and watertight doors always kept shot at sea. But yachts are not built like that
Chiara’s slave
Well-known member
Derek Kelsall had a formula that might be more relevant to form stable monos, as well as multis. It was about the energy required to force the boat beyond the AVS. It seemed to work in practise, accounting for wave action as well as wind.
Shuggy
Well-known member
I’m fairly sure that ‘rotating mast’ has been lost in translation and actually means folding mast. I may be wrong but that’s what the brochure suggests.
