Legend 356 - no stability curve

[simonjinks]

Re: Forwarding my post to Hunter

My absence is due to being at sea all weekend, examining potential Yachtmaster candidates in the Solent and on a fishing boat in Sussex.

Boats have to satisfy many critics. If we were to beat to windward in a lumpy seaway we'd prob'ly opt for a Rustler 36, if out for a reach across lyme bay with a few crew in good conditions - something a little more sporty X-33 or Dehler 36 whereas 6 days waiting for the weather to break in Cherbourg would require a lot more interior volume and comfort.

The absence of the stability data allows the reader to come to their own decisions - potential buyers may like to ask the makers themselves or at least sail the boats first.

Boats are always a compromise - construction/finish and basic design should not be.

 

[Dallas]

I don't think it proves my statement untrue as I see it but you obviousely have a different slant on the discussion. This is good, this is what this forum is for and I for one welcome ALL comments, good or bad. However all my post realy said was that build quality is significantly better now than it was some 15 years or more ago.

Dallas

 

[vyv_cox]

Build quality may be better in Hunters - I really don't know. I can't agree that it it better generally. A very recent thread commented on the finish of boats at LIBS, which apparently left a lot to be desired. I have personally received a deep GRP splinter from the inside of a Moody locker at a boat show a couple of years ago.

Contrast that with my 1985 Sadler 34, not a top-price vessel. The finish and build quality are superb - not a glass splinter anywhere, even where you can't reach. After 17 tough years, raced extensively by the first owner and cruised hard in the Irish Sea by the next two, the boat is almost unblemished. Will today's thin, lightweight boats do so well? I have my doubts.

There is a good argument that boats like Sadler, Westerly, Rival, were underpriced, contributing to their downfall. But they were very well built.

 

[Guest]

Funny your comment about Moodys it was because of a similar 'acccident' with a Sadler 29 that started me looking at Moody's in 86!!!

 

[billmacfarlane]

I bought a new Sadler 29 in 1986. I was easily the worst built boat I ever owned. That and the company's attitude put me off British boat's for life.

 

[Dallas]

We would all love to own the Swan's and Westerlies etc. But when it comes down to it it's all about price and what we percieve to be the best boat for the amount we have to spend. I have read so many times in this thread (and this whole board for that matter) that buying a boat is a compromise between what you want and what you can afford. It is with me anyhow ...

Dallas

 

[Eudorajab]

Having owned an assorment of boats (british and foreign), new and old, it is quite amusing to say the least to read some of the recent posts here. I tend to recall that whatever boat I have ever owned, was for me at the time of owning and more importantly sailing in all conditions, by far and away the best boat ever built. Sailing as with anything in life is very subjective in that one mans (or it seems to me more recently many mens) gale is another mans breeze. Far more important than the "make" and age of the boat is its build quality, what you intend to use it for and many other factors that will affect all of us differently.

Take a look at the hunter web site in the US if you really want to find out what legends are all about is my suggestion as most of the information there is posted by people who actually sail them as opposed to hopping onto one at a boatshow or taking one out for a spin for an hour or two to supposedly "test" them. It has never failed to amaze me how objective conclusions can be drawn about any boat in any way in a matter of hours.

I have for some time now and currently own a legend 35.5 which IMHO is probably the best all round sailing boat ever designed. This includes performance, ease of sailing, comfort and reliability. The boat has safely,effeiently and reliably seen me through the whole spectrum of sailing condidtions safely and comfortably both on long and short passages as have many of her siter boats in the US, many of which have experienced far more severe weather conditions than any UK sailor would ever encounter. (When last were you caught in a hurricane in your Westerlies and Contessas ??)

One last small point of order, In the land of the mega lawsuits, I do not recall hunter ever having being sued for their product. (How many british yards can boast the same).

So for anyone thinking of buying a Legend, my advice would be to try and get a slightly older one the only reason being that subjectively I dont like the new cockpit layout.

Happy sailing whatever the weather

 

[Dallas]

I dont know if my posts have been misunderstood but I like Hunter boats - especially the Legend 466.

I did visit Hunters US website and did read reviews direct from the owners but for the most part they sailed in calm waters and on lakes. I know the lakes get extremely rough on occasions (Edmund Fitzgerald etc.) and create some demanding conditions.

I have owned 3 boats in the past and agree with you 100% that the one you currently own is the best you have ever owned.

I dont know if you have read this thread from where I got involved but if not then it all started because of Hunters refusal/reluctance to publish the AVS. This started me asking questions as I was less than 6 weeks from placing a deposit on the 466 and had already made contact with Opal Marine who are the dealers in the UK. This stability business concerned me as I intended to use the boat for extended crusing and to live-aboard.

I have now come to the conclusion that I probably will buy the boat but will leave it a few months and do some more research. I would like to see Hunters reaction to this thread and to the original magazine article/review.

Dallas

 

[Eudorajab]

I have read most of the posts in this thread and would say that if the 466 is anything like the 460 with a capsize screen of 1.866 then theres not an awfull lot to worry about IMHO. If you look at the range of boats for which there are perfomance stats you will clearly see that most are more than adequate. I cant see the new hull designs varying so much on the later models that would indicate that they would be anything other than comparable if not better. (advances in technology and all that).

Good luck with your potential purchase whatever you decide and for what its worth I wouldnt change my 35.5 for anything.

 

[Eudorajab]

Oh and one last thing, check out the hunters at sea secion. Some really interesting observations here

 

[PeteMcK]

No excuse intended!!

Of course they should include the coachroof. My point is that we don't know whether we are comparing like with like, and my understanding is that more often than not, the beneficial effect of the coachroof (substantial in most cases) is ignored. If this is so, then the use of the Contessa curve as a benchmark is spurious. I don't agree with Kingfisher that the calcs are trivial: in pre-computer days, their iterative nature made the generation of a curve extremely laborious (to add analysis of the progressive immersion of the coachroof would have made it at least doubly so). I do agree with Ken that there is absolutely no reason to avoid full analysis today, since the boats are invariably drawn using 3-D CAD, and using this, specialist naval architecture packages can generate the curve in seconds. My faith in the laws of physics is partial but adequate: I'm prepared to be convinced by a comprehensive set of stability calculations. Rollover tests are for those of a more agnostic tendency. On the other hand, buoyancy is dead simple and well defined by comparison with the hugely complex non-linear mechanics involved in vehicle crash deformations: that's why we still have to do crash tests.

 

[brian_neale]

Re: No excuse intended!!

The stability curve is all about static stability, but there seems to be a good case for also considering dynamic stability - the resistance to rolling when hit by a wave - and this is related to the roll moment of inertia. The Legend with its light weight and (at least in some models) well-stayed but light section mast is towards one extreme with good-ish static stability but relatively low dynamic stability; the traditional long-keeler with deep lead keel and heavy wooden mast has lower static stability but higher dynamic stability. Which is best? Search me. I am choosing the latter for my next boat, but stability figures played no part in that; I just like gaffers. I tend to favour the "strength through sheer mass" argument but there are plenty of others who say that their lighter weight flyers will get them home ahead of the gale.

Not sure if I shall be able to get stability figures/curves out of my boat builder, although I would be interested to see them, but he builds like they have always done in that part of the world and not many of them seem to fall over. The arguments that I have read here to date on the Legends seem to say the same - there are plenty of them out there and whatever the figures, it seems to work for them.

I just don't like boats that bend when you walk on them!

 

[Guest]

Maybe it would be worth asking the Royal Ocean Racing Club for the SSS (safety and stability) number of any rated Legends out there. It would be a good guide to how seaworthy the boat is. These numbers are issued when a boat is rated under IRC and it allows race organisers to admit only boats that are "up to the expected conditions".
As a guide, a 25 ft MG Spring has an SSS of 21(coastal races only) , while a Contessa 32 has an SSS of 39 (Fastnet).

 

[PeteMcK]

Dynamic v. Static

Absolutely correct - assuming a reasonable AVS, the main thing about the static curve is that it gives you some idea of your chances of popping back up once you've been rolled. It's the much neglected roll moment of inertia that protects you from being inverted by a breaker in the first place. To harp on about it, I think many people are too hooked into the Contessa's curve as though it signifies the ultimate in protection from capsize. Contessas DID suffer from "B2 Knockdowns" - inversions - in the 79 Fastnet: but unlike some other boats, they self-righted rapidly. It's all in Marchaj's Seaworthiness book. It's the breaking wave that's the killer: a big boat is better than a small one; heavy is better than light; lose your mast and you lose a huge proportion of your moment of inertia.

 

[Guest]

RE: Yachting Monthly 356 Test

As the manufacturer of the Legend 356, we were quite surprised by the presentation of our position on stability curves featured in the current issue's review of the 356.

While it is true that we declined to provide a GZ stability curve to Yachting Monthly, we did provide Yachting Monthly with concise reasoning behind our position. Yachting Monthly informed us that our statement would be printed. In fact, YM paraphrased the statement, which unfortunately misrepresents our position. For anyone who is interested, the statement we sent them is below.

Further, we are happy to speak with any potential customers of our products about any concerns.

Sincerely,

Luhrs Marine Ltd - UK Manufacturer of Hunter and Legend Yachts
http://www.luhrsmarine.co.uk
info@luhrsmarine.co.uk


Stability Curves

The use of stability curves is a worrying trend as consumers are making assessments and comparisons as to a boat’s safety and seaworthiness by a cursory review of the theoretical curve supplied by a boat designer.

While a stability curve contains useful information, it also is based on a lack of real-life conditions such as wave patterns, wind force applied to the vessel, and other loading factors such as crew/gear size and placement, plus the amount of fluids in water, fuel and holding tanks. Numerous factors affect the actual center of gravity, metacenter, and center of buoyancy and can significantly change the shape of this stability curve. Moments of inertia are additionally affected by rig size and weight, wind force, keel size and shape, etc. These factors are not sufficiently weighted into the stability curve analysis.

The CE certification process now utilizes the ISO standard 12217 to produce a complex formula called STIX (stability index), which is summarized by a numerical rating used in the determination of the design category. STIX reaches far deeper in the stability assessment and may be a more useful indicator of a boat’s true stability. This number, however, is not yet understood by the sailing public, hence its value is limited and its meaning may well be misinterpreted.

At Hunter, we work hard to maximize stability though hull and deck forms, which strongly contribute to stability throughout its range, as well as maximizing the positive range of stability. Our bulb/wing lead keels keep the center of gravity low in combination with our strategy of using heavy laminates below the waterline, and lighter, cored laminates in the topsides. We also concentrate on fore and aft stability and directional stability through hull, keel, and rudder sizing and shaping. All of these factors contribute to a boat that has efficient, controllable and comfortable characteristics.

Luhrs Marine Limited

 

[webcraft]

I can't see any difference between YM's paraphrase of your statement and your actual statement. apart from length.

Your statement in its full form has done absolutely nothing to change my suspicion that the GZ curve for this boat must be less than flattering, or worse, worrying.

Of course a GZ curve is only a starting point. How people distribute stores, fuel, spares and crew is up to them - they can undoubtably influence the stability of a vessel for the better or the worse. Similarly, they can choose whether or not to fit gear that is definitely detrimental to the stability of the vessel - eg radar, in-mast furling, etc. What they cannot do is alter the 'as delivered' GZ curve of the vessel. The curve itself provides a known starting point - to refuse to issue one is in no way helpful.