HALLBERG RASSY - why good?

[TimBennet]

I never understand how a company that claims to build yachts for long distance cruisers, can fit them with sail drives.

It's quite common to go two years between haul-outs and I don't like the idea of an aluminium casting sitting in tropical water that long.

I know people say they're no trouble, but in a boat that expensive, the fitting of proper stern gear doesn't seem an unreasonable expectation.

 

[Talulah]

It doesn't solve the issue that brass fitting should have never been specified in the first place.

"Apparently the CE Standard was rewritten in 1998 to require that fittings need only be corrosion resistant for five years. Some boatbuilders quickly began using common brass instead of DZR brass, silicon bronze, stainless steel or composites for skin fittings and valves."

http://www.sail-world.com/Australia/When-skinny-fittings-arent-worth-a-brass-razoo/97048

 

[macd]

"Apparently the CE Standard was rewritten in 1998 to require that fittings need only be corrosion resistant for five years. Some boatbuilders quickly began using common brass instead of DZR brass, silicon bronze, stainless steel or composites for skin fittings and valves."

Yes, and such good timing. A year later Random Harvest almost went down when a 25mm Tonval (brass) skin fitting failed. The fitting "did not meet the requirements of the international standard for metallic seacocks and through-hull fittings on small craft, ISO 9093-1:1994. But it did evidently meet the revised CE standard.

The whole issue has been done to death, and they're far from the only culprits, but shame on HR. For their prices you'd expect something a little more galvanically inert. Like maybe gold.

 

[Bosun Higgs]

Heavier weather is taken in her stride with no slamming,and lying hove -to in Biscay in a F9,forereaching at about 1/2 to 1 knot,triple reefed main and storm staysail was a revelation! My previous crossing in a Bene 40 CC was distictly different,even though the weather was benign.

Posters are confusing two different issues here. One is the shapes of the hull/overall design and the other is the quality of construction. As for the hull shape there are lots of makes of boats with a similar or better shape to the HR just as there are lots of boats with ''charter market'' hull shapes designed to maximise accommodation as opposed to sailing performance. For example, my own starlight has just one rear cabin and not a big one at that, similar to what swedish aft cockpit boats offer. It has a relatively low feeboard and a keel sump with a lead bulb attached. As a result it genuiney is a good seaboat for the very rare occasion I have beencaught out in 30 to 40 kn. In short, the issues of comfort at sea, heavy weather capability etc really arent boat brand issues but the results of hull design and target market.

What it doesnt have is the glorious internal woodwork of a swede though it isnt benny/hanse production level. You could argue in that sense that it isnt as good a quality boat. Certainly it doesnt have the same cachet and therefore resale prices that defy logic.

What I'm getting at is that there is no absolute definiton of quality. Not only that but some boats, and this must include HR, have a halo reputation that isnt quite technical reality, just as others (bav?) have a rep they dont deserve. But as long as this HR halo is reflected in resale values then who cares. Certainly not the HRowner.

 

[Lucky Duck]

"Apparently the CE Standard was rewritten in 1998 to require that fittings need only be corrosion resistant for five years. Some boatbuilders quickly began using common brass instead of DZR brass, silicon bronze, stainless steel or composites for skin fittings and valves."

http://www.sail-world.com/Australia/When-skinny-fittings-arent-worth-a-brass-razoo/97048

I don't doubt for one moment that brass complies with all the relevant leglisation, codes of practice, however it doesn't make it the right thing to do.

 

[halcyon]

I don't doubt for one moment that brass complies with all the relevant leglisation, codes of practice, however it doesn't make it the right thing to do.

Interesting explanation of brasses and bronze, click .... Dezincification


Brian

 

[macd]

I don't doubt for one moment that brass complies with all the relevant leglisation, codes of practice, however it doesn't make it the right thing to do.

I'm not sure Talulah was suggesting as much, rather the opposite.

 

[Bosun Higgs]

I never understand how a company that claims to build yachts for long distance cruisers, can fit them with sail drives.

It's quite common to go two years between haul-outs and I don't like the idea of an aluminium casting sitting in tropical water that long.

I know people say they're no trouble, but in a boat that expensive, the fitting of proper stern gear doesn't seem an unreasonable expectation.

you have it the wrong way round. With everything you should adhere to the manufacturers recommended service intervals. Either they say two year lift outs are Ok or they say twelve months and thats what you do. I dont condemn a manufacturer because their product requires more regular servicing than my typical habit.

That said I would not dream od two years for my shaft driven boat in the uk. Far too long

 

[vyv_cox]

Interesting explanation of brasses and bronze, click .... Dezincification


Brian

Link doesn't open. Clickies no longer work, full address is needed.

 

[VO5]

My point is back in the 80's /90's when I supplied Westerly, going on board boats in build, the big Westerly finish and material were about the same as the HR , when looked over at the boat show. Yet we always grouped Westerly with the Jan/Bav/Ben range, not the HR build standard, the result was Westerly failed to sell against one group as to dear, the other as they were the wrong product group. We have this thing as a Nation of build status, like German cars we will pay 50% for a car because of the image, not that it's 50% better than a British built one, which we no longer have.

In this thread it's HR, Bav, Jan, Ben, no British boats.

Brian

I totally agree with you. I think Westerly underestimated themselves on the larger builds and they grouped more LOA as a criterion rather than against build quality.
I have a friend who has a HR 38. I have a Westerly Sealord 39 (LOA 38'6") and boat for boat I think they are very similar. Both have excellent seakeeping qualities
though size for size, the HR is heavier. I think on balance my Sealord is faster. All seacocks on the Sealord are Phosphor Bronze.

 

[VO5]

Many reasons why Westerly never managed to establish themselves in the premium end of the market, despite producing well designed boats. That sector of the market buys into the package and HR managed to establish themselves with a strong home market, a clearly defined concept and secure business practices. Westerly tried to move from a mass market philosophy without developing a coherent model strategy. Not helped by failing to build an international following and then going through a series of failures and reconstructions during which many people lost lots of money. Buyers in this market value the security of a product that is always in demand and has a ready secondhand market.

Does not mean that British builders can't do the same sort of thing - witness the success of Oyster, Sunseeker, Princess and Fairline which all seem to have established a strong following. You could perhaps also add Rustler and until recently Southerly to that list. However, recent events show how difficult it is to survive even when you have carved what seems to be a secure place in the market.

Not wising to create thread drift but I must comment.
Westerly lost their way when they built the Oceanlord.
They made the blunder of designing in house, and what was gained in LWL was lost internally because of the sugar scoop.
Its predecessor, the Sealord is an Ed Dubois design. Only 42 were ever built.
They don't come on the market often. Obviously owners tend to hang on to them.
Like the HR 38, they like strong wind, and begin to come into their own, just like the HRs when it starts to blow above 6.
The internal space is cavernous.
All the fittings (except the fridge) are of very high quality and I wonder what one of these beasts could cost to build to that standard today.

 

[lotusman]

What I'm getting at is that there is no absolute definiton of quality. Not only that but some boats, and this must include HR, have a halo reputation that isnt quite technical reality, just as others (bav?) have a rep they dont deserve. But as long as this HR halo is reflected in resale values then who cares. Certainly not the HRowner.

Agree wholeheartedly

The best definition of 'quality' in my view is 'fitness for purpose'. My HR38 fits my purpose admirably. Needs a bit of wind to get going, but is no slouch.

 

[halcyon]

Not wising to create thread drift but I must comment.
Westerly lost their way when they built the Oceanlord.
They made the blunder of designing in house, and what was gained in LWL was lost internally because of the sugar scoop.
Its predecessor, the Sealord is an Ed Dubois design. Only 42 were ever built.
They don't come on the market often. Obviously owners tend to hang on to them.
Like the HR 38, they like strong wind, and begin to come into their own, just like the HRs when it starts to blow above 6.
The internal space is cavernous.
All the fittings (except the fridge) are of very high quality and I wonder what one of these beasts could cost to build to that standard today.

Only reading about the OceanLord the other day, it was the SeaLord hull with 15 inches added to the mould, plus the sugar scoop stern, this allowed a master stateroom aft, and better main cabin layout.

What killed Westerly was the MD who went into motor boats, did not like the man, forget his name.

Brian

 

[VO5]

Only reading about the OceanLord the other day, it was the SeaLord hull with 15 inches added to the mould, plus the sugar scoop stern, this allowed a master stateroom aft, and better main cabin layout.

What killed Westerly was the MD who went into motor boats, did not like the man, forget his name.

Brian

I completely disagree with what you have read.
It is not correct and part of the marketing strategy of Westerly at the time to promote the Oceanlord.
The facts are what Ed Dubois, who coincidentally was my neighbour when I lived in London recounted to me personally and I had corroborated by Westerly staff at the time.
Ed Dubois designed the Sealord 39.
42 of these were built. But sales began to lag for a combination of reasons in the market.
Westerly decided to build a new boat.
Ed offered to design it for them. They refused his offer and decided to save the fees by doing it themselves in house.
They took the existing plug for the Sealord and inserted a 2 foot extension. This extension was placed near the forward engine bulkhead (of the Sealord model), thereby extending the LOA to exactly 40' 6" (from the Sealord LOA of exactly 38'6") That is why Westerly named the new boat the Oceanlord 41, as promoted in their brochures, etc.,
But what was gained in LOA was lost internally because the new hull incorporated a sugar scoop.
It made the aft cabin cramped by comparison, tiny, no headroom, and a sharply sloping deck underfoot.
Also the keel had to be deepened, the rig redone, the engine room moved aft, and an extra locker added.
The consequence is that the new boat was longer in terms of LOA but of less usable internal volume.
The main cabin layout in the Sealord is more roomy and the berths are full 6 ft.
The master stateroom aft in the Sealord has three full bunks (a double and a single) and full headroom.
The Sealord has 10 berths.
The Oceanlord has less.
About motorboats I have no knowledge.
What I do know is he ran up a bill for advertising of £2 million and the owner was so disgusted he put Westerly into liquidation.
I was told that by the auditors.

 

[prv]

you have it the wrong way round. With everything you should adhere to the manufacturers recommended service intervals. Either they say two year lift outs are Ok or they say twelve months and thats what you do. I dont condemn a manufacturer because their product requires more regular servicing than my typical habit.

But if they demand service intervals that are not feasible for a certain kind of use (what happens when that time comes round and you're anchored off the Bongo Bongo Islands?) then it's fair to say that the kit is not best suited to that use. Apparently HR claim that their boats are suited to long distance cruising...

Pete

 

[laika]

It made the aft cabin cramped by comparison, tiny, no headroom, and a sharply sloping deck underfoot.
[...]
The main cabin layout in the Sealord is more roomy and the berths are full 6 ft.
The master stateroom aft in the Sealord has three full bunks (a double and a single) and full headroom.
The Sealord has 10 berths.
The Oceanlord has less.

Westerly sold considerably more oceanlords than sealords so they can't have been completely rubbish. Not sure 10 people sleeping on a sealord would be much fun (the most we've had is 4 on our oceanlord (we're quite anti-social)) so the 10 berths vs 8 not such a big deal. And isn't that aft single (like they have in the HRs) mainly for when you're on starboard tack (no bad thing...)? Having just taken a tape measure to my (Oceanlord) bunks, the main cabin berths are 1.95m (just under 6'5" for the crumblies) and the aft cabin berth is 2m30 on the short side, 2m40 on the long. At 1m90 I can stand up anywhere in the saloon, and when I'm in the aft cabin I'm mostly horizontal anyway. We're all agreed the fridges are rubbish but after advice from a fellow oceanlord owning forumite I now have that in my sights.

Yes. Thread drift indeed. But if it goes much further the Sealord could become the new Anderson 22

 

[halcyon]

I completely disagree with what you have read.

Have a read of this then http://www.westerly-owners.co.uk/guides_13.php they sold a 100 Oceanlords.

Brian

 

[Tranona]

Just comparing developments from one model to another only illustrates the basic issue. They failed to establish a coherent model policy, forever adapting and "freshening up" existing models rather than getting new designs. Not helped by changes in ownership, diversions into buying property rather than investing in new models etc etc.

As already noted they got squeezed (like Moodys) between Bav/Ben/Jen bringing in boats that were more attuned to customers requirements and 30-40% cheaper and well established builders at the other end of the spectrum - all not helped by a strong £ which killed export markets.

It is worth noting that a generation earlier they drove a whole range of other builders out of business when they first moved into volume production of 25-32ft boats which sold in the 00's and then created whole new sectors in the mid 30's size. Just never made it successfully into the next growth sector.

 

[VO5]

Have a read of this then http://www.westerly-owners.co.uk/guides_13.php they sold a 100 Oceanlords.

Brian

I have. And it is not correct.

 

[VO5]

Westerly sold considerably more oceanlords than sealords so they can't have been completely rubbish. Not sure 10 people sleeping on a sealord would be much fun (the most we've had is 4 on our oceanlord (we're quite anti-social)) so the 10 berths vs 8 not such a big deal. And isn't that aft single (like they have in the HRs) mainly for when you're on starboard tack (no bad thing...)? Having just taken a tape measure to my (Oceanlord) bunks, the main cabin berths are 1.95m (just under 6'5" for the crumblies) and the aft cabin berth is 2m30 on the short side, 2m40 on the long. At 1m90 I can stand up anywhere in the saloon, and when I'm in the aft cabin I'm mostly horizontal anyway. We're all agreed the fridges are rubbish but after advice from a fellow oceanlord owning forumite I now have that in my sights.

Yes. Thread drift indeed. But if it goes much further the Sealord could become the new Anderson 22

We are not going to get into silly circular argument over this, and I am not going to be accused of drifting this thread.
The aft cabin of the Sealord has three full bunks, one double and one single.

The aft cabin of the Oceanlord has a double, a vanity unit and a bucket seat.

The cubic capacity of the SD aft cabin is greater than that of the OL.
Additionally there is much more storage capacity in it, and underfloor and underbunks.
That is why one has ten berths and the other eight.

Additionally I can turn my Sealord 360 degrees in a circle of a diameter of 40 feet thereabouts, which is slightly longer than its own length, and without a bow thruster in light airs or calm. When a breeze blows it gets more complex.
Some of it is skill but a lot has to do with the boat itself.