How easy is it to roll a Contessa 32

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yes, but how many boats are recorded as remaining inverted (ignoring those who've lost their keels)?

[/ QUOTE ]

Loads. At least, for long enough to cause serious problems for the air breathing people crewing them. Which is after all the most important issue.
I refer you to the books "fastnet force 10" and "fatal storm" (about the 98 Sydney-Hobart.

[/ QUOTE ]

Once it's upside down the avs is more or less the opposite of the right way up. So of it's 140 normally, it'll be 40 when flipped, so you only need a small wave to create the righting action.

Unless you forgot the washboards...
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yes, but how many boats are recorded as remaining inverted (ignoring those who've lost their keels)?

[/ QUOTE ]

Loads. At least, for long enough to cause serious problems for the air breathing people crewing them. Which is after all the most important issue.
I refer you to the books "fastnet force 10" and "fatal storm" (about the 98 Sydney-Hobart.

[/ QUOTE ]

Once it's upside down the avs is more or less the opposite of the right way up. So of it's 140 normally, it'll be 40 when flipped, so you only need a small wave to create the righting action.
Unless you forgot the washboards...

[/ QUOTE ]

That's sort of where I was coming from. Lets face it, its unlikely any summer coastal cruiser will ever face breaking waves big enough to roll .. unless foolhardy in approaching a reef etc and if you are in these conditions you'll just be as ikely to be rolled anyway .. only difference might be comfort. However I sort of think that the lightr faster modern boat is more likely to get to harbour before the crap really winds up. Therefore IMHO much too much is made of AVS really.
 
Unfortunately it's not as simple as that - but you knew that anway?

There's a huge difference between 'lighter modern' boats, and it's debatable whether they are faster than the CO32 anyway.

If the 'modern' boat has a decent avs it's because the builder spent a bit more - lead keel as opposed to iron for example. The avs of the majority of modern boats is either lamentable or fudged. (Including the 'benefit' of a large volume coachroof in the case of one quality lift keel boat I won't name). If the ballast ratio is less than 40% I wouldn't want to be coaxing it to windward.

I've a lot more to add, but it's better done in the morning.
 
"Lets face it, its unlikely any summer coastal cruiser will ever face breaking waves "

However - some of us sail offshore ( and well off shore at that ) in spring , autumn and winter....

and some don't.....

CO 32 for me !!!!
 
[ QUOTE ]
There's a huge difference between 'lighter modern' boats, and it's debatable whether they are faster than the CO32 anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]

No debate needed because there are plenty of quicker boats than a Co32 and there were even plenty back in the 1970s too.

The whole question too of AVS/Stix numbers etc is not for the armchair critic with a vested interest one way or another, they are simply mathematical formulae figures and boats sail on water not on graph paper. Co32s are good boats, very pretty too but like the Titanic they are not bullet proof despite the contentions of their owners.

Like you I could add a whole lot more in the morning, but the whole discussion has gone on so many times before and I doubt very many posters of whatever inclination will have shifted their views one little bit.
 
One or two further thoughts: first, boats that rely on the volume of a high coachroof to improve their AVS - consider what happens when the coachroof is flooded when upside down. Logically this ought to annul much of the advantage on AVS of a high volume coachroof? So it seems to me better, if you're going to be upside down, better to be relying on lead in the keel rather than air in the coachroof, unless you're the type who has hermetically sealed washboards and deck vents...?

In terms of speed the argument that Contessas are slower and therefore you'll get home before the wind blows in a lightweight is spurious as it only applies in light winds. The Contessa leaves lightweight modern cruising boats of a similar size trailing far behind in its wake when beating against a strong wind. And it is probably going to be in the stronger winds that you need to get back to port in a hurry. Witness eg. I seem to remember that two or three years ago a Contessa won the two handed Fastnet, cos it was a breezy one?
 
Simon, thanks for picking up on my coachroof volume cheat point.

I was the better part of a bottle of red down and thought I should stop.

I know racing is not something widely approved of in this forum, but if you take a moderately racey boat like the Benetau 31.7, you'll find that they are normally beaten in a breeze by the CO but in the light stuff they do better, as Simon also points out.

Where good (expensive) racey boats are much better (in the context of rolling) is that their light weight but high ballast ratio makes them much better when it comes to a broach. They don't sink the toerail under and so slide sideways and helps reduce the apparent wind, whereas it all get's a bit more dramatic on a Contessa type as it stays pinned down where it is until someone lets go of the right string.

But none of that applies to the awb, which is not particularly light and is underballasted by comparison. Great for normal use, but not when the chips are really down and you have to sail upwind in an F8 or more.
 
I actually used to race on a Co 32, as you say hammering to windward in a breeze they'll take on anybody. However off the wind I'd knock spots off it in my Bennie 331. If you are getting beaten when off the wind in a 31.7 by a Co32 you're definitely doing something wrong
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top