Halberg Rassey 31

[PabloPicasso]

I sold my 1980ish 26 footer and bought a 30ft 21st century sailing boat. All for many similar reasons.

upgrade,you're unlikely to regret it.

 

[stav]

Personally as a single handler I value a boat that doesn’t broach easily and feel I push her more than I would a tipy boat. Also dig into the construction, rudder, keel, chain plates. As I am also getting older motion at sea is important to me so my vote would be for the Vancover 32. The only real test is to go and sail on them in a breeze. There are more modern people responding here and old farts like me! The attachement is HR 310, HR31 and V28 Good luck, happy hunting!

 

[Linksfahrer]

I've recently taken a fancy to the idea of selling my very solid but rather bijou Vancouver 27 (which I've had for almost two decades, know inside out, sail largely single-handed, and would keep me safe and sane as I progress through looming pensioner-hood) and buying a much more 'racier' HR 31.

Differences would be:

• younger boat conceived to a more modern design philosophy
• loads more beam as well as more length, so a radical increase in room below (this is good)
• longer legs and higher pointing ability (this is good)
• able to better ride through a Channel chop (also good)
• fractional sloop rig compared to masthead cutter (a big reduction in the amount of standing rigging, and one less sail to fiddle with)

I'd have to get used to sailing with a deeper fin keel and sail-drive compared to a shallower long one with protected shaft that can sit down almost anywhere, a rig that is tweakable but less bullet-proof, and a vessel that would broach if over-pressed whereas the Vanc would just dig her shoulder in and wash down the side-decks, etc.

I'd always wished to cruise further afield than just the Channel etc but a lot of life and work got in the way over the last decade or so, and I'd always assumed that if I upsized I'd stay within brand and go for a Vancouver 32 (would fit my existing pontoon mooring) or V34 (would need a bigger one) but these are big heavy boats which seem less aligned with my needs now, while older examples would need extensive upgrade work which I can't be doing with.

I could just continue to just keep my current (and only boat) which I know so very well, rather than take on a whole new set of unknowns and risk regretting the decision.

So... sell me a HR31 or talk me down from my fancy! What are the arguments either way? What else might I look at?

I've recently taken a fancy to the idea of selling my very solid but rather bijou Vancouver 27 (which I've had for almost two decades, know inside out, sail largely single-handed, and would keep me safe and sane as I progress through looming pensioner-hood) and buying a much more 'racier' HR 31.

Differences would be:

• younger boat conceived to a more modern design philosophy
• loads more beam as well as more length, so a radical increase in room below (this is good)
• longer legs and higher pointing ability (this is good)
• able to better ride through a Channel chop (also good)
• fractional sloop rig compared to masthead cutter (a big reduction in the amount of standing rigging, and one less sail to fiddle with)

I'd have to get used to sailing with a deeper fin keel and sail-drive compared to a shallower long one with protected shaft that can sit down almost anywhere, a rig that is tweakable but less bullet-proof, and a vessel that would broach if over-pressed whereas the Vanc would just dig her shoulder in and wash down the side-decks, etc.

I'd always wished to cruise further afield than just the Channel etc but a lot of life and work got in the way over the last decade or so, and I'd always assumed that if I upsized I'd stay within brand and go for a Vancouver 32 (would fit my existing pontoon mooring) or V34 (would need a bigger one) but these are big heavy boats which seem less aligned with my needs now, while older examples would need extensive upgrade work which I can't be doing with.

I could just continue to just keep my current (and only boat) which I know so very well, rather than take on a whole new set of unknowns and risk regretting the decision.

So... sell me a HR31 or talk me down from my fancy! What are the arguments either way? What else might I look at?

I've recently taken a fancy to the idea of selling my very solid but rather bijou Vancouver 27 (which I've had for almost two decades, know inside out, sail largely single-handed, and would keep me safe and sane as I progress through looming pensioner-hood) and buying a much more 'racier' HR 31.

Differences would be:

• younger boat conceived to a more modern design philosophy
• loads more beam as well as more length, so a radical increase in room below (this is good)
• longer legs and higher pointing ability (this is good)
• able to better ride through a Channel chop (also good)
• fractional sloop rig compared to masthead cutter (a big reduction in the amount of standing rigging, and one less sail to fiddle with)

I'd have to get used to sailing with a deeper fin keel and sail-drive compared to a shallower long one with protected shaft that can sit down almost anywhere, a rig that is tweakable but less bullet-proof, and a vessel that would broach if over-pressed whereas the Vanc would just dig her shoulder in and wash down the side-decks, etc.

I'd always wished to cruise further afield than just the Channel etc but a lot of life and work got in the way over the last decade or so, and I'd always assumed that if I upsized I'd stay within brand and go for a Vancouver 32 (would fit my existing pontoon mooring) or V34 (would need a bigger one) but these are big heavy boats which seem less aligned with my needs now, while older examples would need extensive upgrade work which I can't be doing with.

I could just continue to just keep my current (and only boat) which I know so very well, rather than take on a whole new set of unknowns and risk regretting the decision.

So... sell me a HR31 or talk me down from my fancy! What are the arguments either way? What else might I look at?

Any boat ownership choice is always a reconciliation of financial considerations and personal preference, personally I’d rather have a slightly older but slightly larger boat with an engine that will make it go at least 7 knts to get me out of trouble in tidal estuaries, and cruising speed of 5-6 knots, under sail or engine. For this I need a vessel with a 7-7.5 knot hull speed. Typically that will mean a 33-36 footer. If you want a marina berth check out the charges first before you decide on the boat as a couple of inches might make a thousand a year difference. Consider a larger bilge keel if you have a chance of a drying swing mooring , these are cheaper. I have a fairly pedestrian HR 352 that pampers my need for stability and comfort.However If I drop behind others in the race for the best evening berthing, I just put the engine on and have been known to exceed hull speed for last orders. Others have mentioned the need for good auto-steering, +1 from me if you are short handed or sailing alone this is a safety asset, add a large battery bank / solar/ wind / alternator for sleeping on longer trips.

 

[dansaskip]

Maybe you should get some experience of at least sailing - if not owning boats like the HR 31

Bit cheeky of you to assume you know about my sailing experience.
I have sailed in AWBs in , fin keeled sloops and with fractional rigs.
Yes I know I am in a minority in my tastes and preferences but that does not make my comments irrational.
Actually I have quite a high regard in general for Halberg Rassyes although not that particular model the the OP mentioned in his post

 

[Tranona]

Bit cheeky of you to assume you know about my sailing experience.
I have sailed in AWBs in , fin keeled sloops and with fractional rigs.
Yes I know I am in a minority in my tastes and preferences but that does not make my comments irrational.
Actually I have quite a high regard in general for Halberg Rassyes although not that particular model the the OP mentioned in his post

OK although the HR is not an AWB nor does it have a typical AWB keel and a ballast ratio of 44% - higher than a Vancouver!, The OP has 25 years of owning a V27 so knows exactly what such a boat is like, and very clearly articulates why he wants to change, listing the things he is looking for, none of which can be met by his current boat, but can by the HR31. The only other HRs that would suit are are the older 312 and possibly the 29, although a bit small, neither of which I suspect will be on your list of preferred HRs.

No your comments are not irrational, but they are your own preferences and of little use to the OP or anyone else thinking along similar lines.

 

[johnalison]

OK although the HR is not an AWB nor does it have a typical AWB keel and a ballast ratio of 44% - higher than a Vancouver!, The OP has 25 years of owning a V27 so knows exactly what such a boat is like, and very clearly articulates why he wants to change, listing the things he is looking for, none of which can be met by his current boat, but can by the HR31. The only other HRs that would suit are are the older 312 and possibly the 29, although a bit small, neither of which I suspect will be on your list of preferred HRs.

No your comments are not irrational, but they are your own preferences and of little use to the OP or anyone else thinking along similar lines.

The HR 31 is a much nicer boat than the 312 or 29, though those are decent in their own way. The 31 and my 34 have little form stability but a lot of ballast as you say, which means that they may heel initially but will stand more sail than most designs and have a low wetted surface. I don’t know about the 31 but with working sail my 34 doesn’t need a reef going to windward in sheltered water until the apparent wind is 24 knots. The 31 being a bit smaller, probably a bit less, though many AWBs seem to start reefing at anything much over 15. This is one reason why HRs are relaxing to own.

 

[doug748]

Personally as a single handler I value a boat that doesn’t broach easily and feel I push her more than I would a tipy boat. Also dig into the construction, rudder, keel, chain plates. As I am also getting older motion at sea is important to me so my vote would be for the Vancover 32. The only real test is to go and sail on them in a breeze. There are more modern people responding here and old farts like me! The attachement is HR 310, HR31 and V28 Good luck, happy hunting!

Very true. The often seen and probably dumbest advice is to buy a boat because; 'everybody else has one'.

The OP would be wise to do some sailing in the type before committing. As Joni Mitchell says:

........ you don't know what you've got
Till it's gone.

.

 

[Fr J Hackett]

The OP basically wants a quicker boat that will point higher. Perhaps with a simpler rig and is going to be spending upwards of £60K for a mid 90s yacht and more once he goes into late 90s. He didn't mention budget but a 25 year old yacht even an HR is going to show signs of wear and need some work on it.
The 31 is a nice enough looking yacht, I have never been on one let alone sailed on one and I am sure it would satisfy his requirements but is it worth spending £40 K over what his current boat will fetch for what really are marginal improvements , maybe a couple of hours difference in a 100 mile cross channel passage and once you get into passages of more than a day it really doesn't make that much difference if you have the time ( he's retired).
Personally and I did make the change from a V27 for one of the reasons the OP mentions but I was time poor at the time so increased speed was important, I would go for a larger boat 34 or 36 foot or more if the wallet could stand it. Something like a Dehler 36 or 35 CWS.

 

[johnalison]

The OP basically wants a quicker boat that will point higher. Perhaps with a simpler rig and is going to be spending upwards of £60K for a mid 90s yacht and more once he goes into late 90s. He didn't mention budget but a 25 year old yacht even an HR is going to show signs of wear and need some work on it.
The 31 is a nice enough looking yacht, I have never been on one let alone sailed on one and I am sure it would satisfy his requirements but is it worth spending £40 K over what his current boat will fetch for what really are marginal improvements , maybe a couple of hours difference in a 100 mile cross channel passage and once you get into passages of more than a day it really doesn't make that much difference if you have the time ( he's retired).
Personally and I did make the change from a V27 for one of the reasons the OP mentions but I was time poor at the time so increased speed was important, I would go for a larger boat 34 or 36 foot or more if the wallet could stand it. Something like a Dehler 36 or 35 CWS.

Not everyone wants a boat as big as that, as they bring their own disadvantages in terms of berthing charges and maintenance effort. We made a jump from a Sadler 29 to our HR 34 and, much as we enjoyed the Sadler for twelve years, the greater comfort of the HR as well as its ‘longer legs’ made to considerable cost seem worthwhile. If you are going to spend much time aboard, the ambience inside any of the quality boats is something that some of us also value. The only criticism I would have of the HR 31 is the absence of proper scuppers compared to others from that source, but this would not be a deal breaker.

 

[Tranona]

Reading through this thread highlights a number of common issues in many "what boat" threads, although this one is very specific in that the OP has not only stated his "from" and "to" but has listed his reasons for wanting to change and his constraints. Both boats in question are very well known with plenty of information help others comment.

Yet many of the replies ignore the constraints (size in particular) tell him he should not change, express their own preferences (which are usually different from his) or perhaps surprisingly demonstrate a lack of knowledge of the "new" boat. The last means that some comments are just nonsense - like dashing to the foredeck to change sails or fear of broaching.

Helpful therefore to read Bob Perry's review that I linked to in post#18, particularly his observations on the fractional rig, or the extensive material on the HR site covering the design including design data such as polars and stability curves (the boat is comfortably CAT A - unusual for a 31' boat) Hallberg-Rassy 31 Mk I If still not convinced about the qualities of boats designed by Frers for HR especially their ability to handle lively weather watch this youtube.com/live/qtsr6_GYV1w which features the HR 29 which is a slightly earlier and smaller boat but with fractional rig and similar basic performance data (SA/Disp. Ballast ratio)

 

[Fr J Hackett]

Reading through this thread highlights a number of common issues in many "what boat" threads, although this one is very specific in that the OP has not only stated his "from" and "to" but has listed his reasons for wanting to change and his constraints. Both boats in question are very well known with plenty of information help others comment.

Yet many of the replies ignore the constraints (size in particular) tell him he should not change, express their own preferences (which are usually different from his) or perhaps surprisingly demonstrate a lack of knowledge of the "new" boat. The last means that some comments are just nonsense - like dashing to the foredeck to change sails or fear of broaching.

Helpful therefore to read Bob Perry's review that I linked to in post#18, particularly his observations on the fractional rig, or the extensive material on the HR site covering the design including design data such as polars and stability curves (the boat is comfortably CAT A - unusual for a 31' boat) Hallberg-Rassy 31 Mk I If still not convinced about the qualities of boats designed by Frers for HR especially their ability to handle lively weather watch this youtube.com/live/qtsr6_GYV1w which features the HR 29 which is a slightly earlier and smaller boat but with fractional rig and similar basic performance data (SA/Disp. Ballast ratio)

Taken from the OP

"So... sell me a HR31 or talk me down from my fancy! What are the arguments either way? What else might I look at?"

 

[ashtead]

The good thing about an HR31 is if you don’t overpay day 1 it’s likely you might sell for same amount when your time comes to move on etc. The real question for me when contemplating a Hallberg at a larger size was the age and work potentially required on an old HR compared to a newer other brand where replacement of items was not so imminent.

 

[John_Silver]

The HR's do hold their value. That HR310, which @Tranona linked to, on with De Valk, is a year younger than mine and asking, near enough, what mine was new. Be interesting to see how fast (or not) she sells. I know Transworld sold one, the same age, with a similar asking price, last autumn.

 

[Babylon]

This morning was re-reading the range of helpful comments, and eyeballing one or two remaining skittles...

The HR 31 will be equally good for single handing. The key as ever is a bullet proof autopilot, good sail controls ideally led aft - and preferably easy and predictable manoeuvring under engine. And the HR is probably heavier and steadier in a sea than a 27 footer.

If the 31 is anything like my 34, the motion should be comfortable for a boat if its size, and with little tendency to slam. It is not the sort of boat where you can leave the helm and go and make a cup of tea and come back to find it doing the same course, but the helm should be light and steady and take to an autopilot readily.

I'm sure the moderately heavy HR31 would be comparable to my V27 in a seaway, and I'd hope slamming would be minimal. The Vanc will pitch like any other small boat in a short chop but never slams as such.

What I have long enjoyed for coastal and offshore passages is rock-solid windvane steering (the ST2000 deals with shorter busier inshore sailing and motoring), but the Rassy looks like it'd only ever be an autopilot job.

 

[Tranona]

Taken from the OP

"So... sell me a HR31 or talk me down from my fancy! What are the arguments either way? What else might I look at?"

Fine, but your alternative suggestions were way out of line with his requirements (particularly the size limitation)

 

[johnalison]

What I have long enjoyed for coastal and offshore passages is rock-solid windvane steering (the ST2000 deals with shorter busier inshore sailing and motoring), but the Rassy looks like it'd only ever be an autopilot job.

I don’t know much about wind vanes, but Daydreambeliever used one on his Hanse 31, apparently successfully, so I see no reason why the HR should be any different, if anything probably steadier on the helm.

 

[Fr J Hackett]

Fine, but your alternative suggestions were way out of line with his requirements (particularly the size limitation)

He didn't mention a size limitation except to say if he got a V34 he would need a bigger berth.

 

[Babylon]

So spent a couple of hours crawling over a 31 yesterday. I like it. Safe cockpit obviously with plenty enough room for other crew, serious beam and acres of deck all round compared to the V27. I held the tiller and reached for the throttle lever, trying to imagine what it would be like to come alongside or spring off short-handed... one would quickly learn!

Odd that the design has an adjustable backstay for mains'l flattening but no traveller, just a single attachment point in the cockpit sole, but I'm sure it all works fine for cruising. (There was apparently an option for a short traveller on a bridge fixed low down between locker inside faces, but that'd hardly be worth it.)

Very nice and light interior with good headroom right down the saloon, proper chart table and seat to stbd, heads aft of that (a good position for it, if slightly cramped inside), decent galley to port, reasonable aft and forepeak cabins (latter with lots of sail stowage under). Did find the saloon berths a bit short (I'm 5'10") but one can un-velcro the end seat-backs for extra clearance. (I guess that was the compromise Frers had to make to fit it all in; the 310 overcomes this by swapping the galley to stbd, having no chart table at all, and moving the heads forward, etc.)

Engine well insulated and reasonably accessible from front and from aft cabin. Original gas cooker has no grill... epic fail by the Swedes! S/S water tank under port berth (with heaps of room elsewhere to stow extra jerrycans of drinking water), fuel tank accessible via stbd cockpit locker (not huge but can always carry an emergency extra jerry if need be) holding tank also via that locker.

Lots to mull over, lots to allow extra costs for on the example I looked at (up-front replacements and changes, down-the-line big-ticket items, etc) but that'd always be the case on a used boat of its age.

 

[Babylon]

I don’t know much about wind vanes, but Daydreambeliever used one on his Hanse 31, apparently successfully, so I see no reason why the HR should be any different, if anything probably steadier on the helm.

It might be configurable on the HR31 (which has a short fixed external bathing platform in the way) but I wouldn't go to the trouble to fit one I don't think for my intended cruising use.

 

[Babylon]

Helpful therefore to read Bob Perry's review that I linked to in post#18, particularly his observations on the fractional rig, or the extensive material on the HR site covering the design including design data such as polars and stability curves (the boat is comfortably CAT A - unusual for a 31' boat) Hallberg-Rassy 31 Mk I If still not convinced about the qualities of boats designed by Frers for HR especially their ability to handle lively weather watch this youtube.com/live/qtsr6_GYV1w which features the HR 29 which is a slightly earlier and smaller boat but with fractional rig and similar basic performance data (SA/Disp. Ballast ratio)

Both helpful links, thanks. I'd seen that YT video before: the motion of the HR29 appears to be very similar to my V27; I've sailed on plenty enough modern production AWB types to know that active work of that sort isn't for me; and I think it was a little unfair to choose a trad long-keeler with a tiny wheel for comparison - a tiller steered example would have been a better choice for the 'test'.