Lifting Keels/Shallow Draft Boats: Advantages and Disadvantages - Your Experiences

[Grehan]

Merely to set the record straight, Charles, both the 'outside' route and the 'canals' route are scenic . . .

 

[charles_reed]

Merely to set the record straight, Charles, both the 'outside' route and the 'canals' route are scenic . . .

Point taken.

 

[Seren]

It is very difficult, when one is entrenched in a viewpoint, to admit you may be wrong and therefore a fool.

Now whilst I have sympathy with those who reckon a lift keel in the Med is a waste of time - I've found mine of considerable value 3 times in the Med and another 5 getting there.
If I were setting out to go to the Med now, with what I know (and using the scenic route not the canals) I'd probably not spend the considerable extra sum needed for a lift keeler.
As for those who try and justify their point of view by denigrating lift keel boats (and exposing their considerable lack of knowledge, possibly because of the catch-all nature of the nomenclature) I find them exasperating and somewhat pitiable.
It could be said that ALL shallow-draft boats and most fixed keelers sail less well than a sailboat with a counterweight keel however they all have a places and most underwater configurations are equal downwind.
Let's just hope everyone enjoys their choice of boat, stay safe in all their sailing and continue to enjoy life afloat and ashore.

+1 I choose an Ovni 395 firstly for the quality of the boat and secondly because it had a lift keel. Invaluable in tidal France and UK, fantastic in the French canals and now an excellent cruising yacht in the Med - and like you have frequently benefitted from that adaptability. Each to their own.

 

[Ric]

Charles - lift keel and centreboard boats certainly have there advantages. My ideal round the world boat would be an Allures 39.9. It has lightly ballasted centreboard and twin rudders - very stable the trades and in following seas. Can be beached intentionally or unintentionally without damage. The centreboard is deep and profiled so can sail at a decent upwind angle. However, sail area to displacement is inevitably lower than a fin Keeler of the same LOA because it is mainly internally ballasted so it will never sail as well in light winds. This is not an issue in long distance cruising.

If I sailed in UK, I would like a Southerly because draft is an issue in UK waters. Although some ballast is internal, and some is in the lift keel, the ballast ratio is still not as good as a fin Keeler, hence it will still suffer a bit in light winds. however, this is less important than draft in UK waters in my opinion.

I would also consider a Sirius, which has all ballast in a lift keel, and so has sail area to displacement approaching that of fin Keeler, so it should have excellent performance. However, I would be very cautious about long term reliability of the mechanism to lift a fully ballasted keel on a 30ft plus boat, and would be nervous about sailing one long distance.

however, I sail in the Med so my priorities are light wind performance and upwind performance. I have no significant draft restrictions. Hence a fin Keeler is my choice at the moment.

Every boat is a compromise - you just need to work out your own priorities and sailing programme and understand what sort of boat is the best compromise for your programme and budget.

I am not "wrong" and I am not a fool - just happen to studied a fair amount of yacht design.

 

[Grehan]

The 'ballast' in a Southerly comprises the large and very heavy cast-iron grounding plate bolted to the underside of the hull (in a recess). The keel itself is also extremely heavy. The boat is almost as stable keel-up as down (although the leeway is somewhat different . . . ). Whilst not a greyhound, she is a labrador and I like labradors

 

[charles_reed]

Charles - lift keel and centreboard boats certainly have there advantages. My ideal round the world boat would be an Allures 39.9. It has lightly ballasted centreboard and twin rudders - very stable the trades and in following seas. Can be beached intentionally or unintentionally without damage. The centreboard is deep and profiled so can sail at a decent upwind angle. However, sail area to displacement is inevitably lower than a fin Keeler of the same LOA because it is mainly internally ballasted so it will never sail as well in light winds. This is not an issue in long distance cruising.

If I sailed in UK, I would like a Southerly because draft is an issue in UK waters. Although some ballast is internal, and some is in the lift keel, the ballast ratio is still not as good as a fin Keeler, hence it will still suffer a bit in light winds. however, this is less important than draft in UK waters in my opinion.

I would also consider a Sirius, which has all ballast in a lift keel, and so has sail area to displacement approaching that of fin Keeler, so it should have excellent performance. However, I would be very cautious about long term reliability of the mechanism to lift a fully ballasted keel on a 30ft plus boat, and would be nervous about sailing one long distance.

however, I sail in the Med so my priorities are light wind performance and upwind performance. I have no significant draft restrictions. Hence a fin Keeler is my choice at the moment.

Every boat is a compromise - you just need to work out your own priorities and sailing programme and understand what sort of boat is the best compromise for your programme and budget.

I am not "wrong" and I am not a fool - just happen to studied a fair amount of yacht design.

My boat is over 30', has a lifting keel which has been perfectly usable for the 22 years I've had the boat.

It also has a current sail area which is considerably more than 98% of boats of a similar loa and displacement.
Let us agree that you're not wrong, just mistaken into thinking you know it all.

 

[Barbican]

. Whilst not a greyhound, she is a labrador and I like labradors

Southerly seem to be Lab - Greyhound cross these days!

http://www.northshore.co.uk/news/southerly-38-wins-3rd-in-class-and-7th-overall-in-arc.html

 

[Mino]

Thanks to everyone who replied. It's been a great help.

 

[Ric]

Charles, what kind of boat is it? If you will provide the make I can look up the ballast ratio, displacement, and sail area, and compare it to a fin Keeler of the same loa. Maybe we could put the figures into a spreadsheet, or into a simple calculator like this one and so get a performance comparison.

http://www.image-ination.com/sailcalc.html

If you have a 22 year old lifting keel boat that can outperform a fin modern Keeler in light airs, can go upwind as well as a modern fin Keeler, and can still stand up to a modest breeze then please let us know what it is as I would also like to buy one.

 

[Rossynant]

[...]If you have a 22 year old lifting keel boat that can outperform a fin modern Keeler in light airs, can go upwind as well as a modern fin Keeler, and can still stand up to a modest breeze then please let us know what it is as I would also like to buy one.

http://sailboatdata.com/viewrecord.asp?class_id=4059 IIRC or look at http://sailboatdata.com/viewrecord.asp?class_id=5474

Ric, come to Poland, racing lift-keelers are local specialty here naturally mostly on order.
Or Delphia, for instance, offers liftkeel as well as finkeel on boat in range up to 47 feet.

like: http://en.delphiayachts.eu/yacht/delphia-31/technical-data

 

[Ric]

As I mentioned earlier in the thread, the Parker boats do indeed have a good sail area / displacement ratio, as they hold all the ballast in the keel rather than internally. However, even boats like the Parker will suffer in light winds due to interference drag from the unfaired intersection between the keel and hull. If you were to build a fixed keel version of the Parker, with all other design aspects of the boat identical to the lift keel Parker with the keel down, then the fixed keel version would be faster in light winds because you could properly fair the hull keel joint, and you could dispense with the weight of the keel case and lifting mechanism.

Rossynant = yes I do know of the Delphia range of yachts. I am sure they are a good choice for sailing in places like the Baltic and North Sea. However, like most lifting keel boats, they are not common in the Med because most owners see no compelling reason in the Med to pay extra for the complexity, weight and hydrodynamic compromise of a lifting keel.

 

[Seajet]

Charles, what kind of boat is it? If you will provide the make I can look up the ballast ratio, displacement, and sail area, and compare it to a fin Keeler of the same loa. Maybe we could put the figures into a spreadsheet, or into a simple calculator like this one and so get a performance comparison.

http://www.image-ination.com/sailcalc.html

If you have a 22 year old lifting keel boat that can outperform a fin modern Keeler in light airs, can go upwind as well as a modern fin Keeler, and can still stand up to a modest breeze then please let us know what it is as I would also like to buy one.

Ric,

the ' modest breeze ' bit is possibly the most significant, I for one like a boat which can handle a bit more than that !

I agree with your comments re. lift keels in the Med', but getting there from the UK via the canals courtesy of shallow draught then being seaworthy at the Southern end may be rather useful.

 

[Rossynant]

However, even boats like the Parker will suffer in light winds due to interference drag from the unfaired intersection between the keel and hull. If you were to build a fixed keel version of the Parker, with all other design aspects of the boat identical to the lift keel Parker with the keel down, then the fixed keel version would be faster in light winds because you could properly fair the hull keel joint, and you could dispense with the weight of the keel case and lifting mechanism.

Granted, there often is extra weight, but not necessarily much if well constructed. Extra price too.

I sailed a few boats of Andrzej Skrzat design where the lift keel versions were actually lighter
Keel box is used in lieu of mast pillar, bottom mount stiffening and main bulkhead, this in fact saves weight. Raising mechanism not so heavy either.
As the fairing of Hull/keel transition - daggerboard kind (vertical) is as good fairness as any, as it seals the opening completely. This extra drag only happens with centerboards, and even then only on such that leave the hole opened, which is not necessary, many have it sealed. It's in barrier layer of flow anyway, not so much infuence. So once again - depend on construction. Imagine a fixed keel that needs to be wider at the mount then possible with lifting kind, then it will present more drag at hull.

The fact is many lift-keelers are made as afterthought, modification of normal boat - those I guess may be inferior. But a boat designed from beginning as lift keel, basic concept meant for this, then no reason to be worse than fixed keel. All is a question of how well the boat is designed, anyway.

After all, centreboard kind of yacht was popular racing design in USA, for a century or so, mostly because it was faster IOR formula got them out by penalties, but they still are faster...

 

[Seajet]

Granted, there often is extra weight, but not necessarily much if well constructed. Extra price too.

I sailed a few boats of Andrzej Skrzat design where the lift keel versions were actually lighter
Keel box is used in lieu of mast pillar, bottom mount stiffening and main bulkhead, this in fact saves weight. Raising mechanism not so heavy either.
As the fairing of Hull/keel transition - daggerboard kind (vertical) is as good fairness as any, as it seals the opening completely. This extra drag only happens with centerboards, and even then only on such that leave the hole opened, which is not necessary, many have it sealed. It's in barrier layer of flow anyway, not so much infuence. So once again - depend on construction. Imagine a fixed keel that needs to be wider at the mount then possible with lifting kind, then it will present more drag at hull.

The fact is many lift-keelers are made as afterthought, modification of normal boat - those I guess may be inferior. But a boat designed from beginning as lift keel, basic concept meant for this, then no reason to be worse than fixed keel. All is a question of how well the boat is designed, anyway.

After all, centreboard kind of yacht was popular racing design in USA, for a century or so, mostly because it was faster IOR formula got them out by penalties, but they still are faster...

Rossynant,

+1, spot on.

I'm not a huge fan of centreboards as the pivot pin is often inaccessible for maintainance and the part raised keel alters the boats' centre of lateral resistance ( which of course is why high performance dinghies usually have daggerboards ) but the keelcase and slot on my vertical lift keel boat is quite slim and pretty low drag, if I put on too much paint the keel is tricky to raise !

To be fair, the two Anderson 22's which were made with fixed fin keels ( same shape and weight as the lift keels ) gained a reputation racing in the Clyde as very fast boats, of course handicap ratings answer for a lot of things.

If I was really bothered about a fraction of a knot - and wanted to risk the agro' of the keel or something tangling with it - I could fit a slot gasket strip as used on racing dinghies.

 

[Ric]

Rossynant - I've nothing against lifting keels - they have their advantages. However, I cannot agree with the assertion by some on here that they perform just as well as fin keelers. Some well designed boats get very close, but ultimately will still be a performance and weight compromise which will be felt most significantly in light airs.

Perhaps worth distinguishing between lifting keels (like Parker, Alliage) and pivoting keels (Sirius, Southerly). Lifting keels generally will outperform a pivot keel because more weight can be lower and the aspect ratio higher, and as you say the keel hull joint can be better streamlined. But one aspect of a lifting keel that always concerns me is running aground with the keel down - I suspect that could cause some very serious damage to the keel box. Fin keelers can take some serious clonks and bounce off - well mine does anyway! Pivot keel boats can usually just ride over, as long as the locking pin is out.

One aspect of a ballasted pivot keel arrangement that attracts me is the variable underwater geometry. Going down wind you can partially lift the keel to move the underwater centre of pressure further back to increase longitudinal stability, or even lift it completely. This feature (and the ability to crash them without too much damage!) makes aluminium centreboarders very popular with French TDMists. My "lottery boat" would possibly be an Allures, which has a very deep high aspect ratio, ballasted and NACA profiled centreboard which is pretty efficient at going upwind, but can be lifted entirely for downwind. Also, there is enough internal ballast in the hull that even if the centreboard falls out the boat can still be sailed.

 

[Seajet]

Ric,

" fin keelers can take some serious clonks and bounce off "

Well that's news to me as ex owner of a fin keeler ( no I didn't do the clonking aground ), and I suspect most Surveyors !

I think you'll find hard impact damage at the upper trailing end of a fin keel is one of the first things to look for.

The lift keel Anderson 22 has a ' crash-pad ' of tufnol at the aft edge of the keelcase as a precaution when running aground ( also a chart, depthsounder and brain all going flat out ) and I'm sure other boats take similar measures.

 

[Rossynant]

Yes, daggerboard type keels are quite resistant to grounding. Simply the keel box is a very strong arrangement, compared to some fins on bolts. All depends on good construction naturally and how much of keel is inside.

There was a popular racer/cruiser boat of this kind, "Sportina" (also Skrzat's design) on lakes, sailed few models but more often I raced against them on my centerboard (heavy plate) which had been less draft (and could be adjusted up) so I took advantage of it... You should have seen them bouncing on shoals in full speed, crews flying over
No damage done to them. Other than to the pride.

 

[GrahamM376]

Mino,

Firstly, I hope your recovery is speedy and you get back to a normal life soon.

Your Guadiana question - clearance under the bridge is between 19 & 21 meters, depending on who you speak to! Our air draft is around 17.5 meters and we have plenty of clearance. Thing to remember there for best clearance is not to wait for the flow to turn north, that happens about 2 hours after LW.

You mention steel boats. We have a lot in the yard around us, maybe 30 at a guess and all have rust streaks to greater or lesser extent. To keep them tidy needs constant touching up of any chips whereas a scratch in grp doesn't often show. They do of course have strength benefits.

I have avoided swing or lift keels just because I see them as an extra maintainance item and (after having two bilge keelers) went for the Scheel keel option. Our 38ft boat draws only 4'6" and there's no noticeable difference in performance to the deeper 5'6" version under normal sailing conditions. Going the outside route south, a lift keel certainly isn't needed.

 

[Ional]

Our Ovni 395 has been around Spain and back through the canal du Midi. We love her as she is a very comfortable home, and a strong seaworthy boat. She sails brilliantly above a force 4, though below this agree she is not fast, so we motorsail if in a hurry. However she sits flat on a beach, we have dropped the keel right out, its easy. All controls are accessible through the table top, and after 7 years the pivot pin was as good as new.

In all these posts it depends what you want. If its a racer, forget an Ovni. However Jimmy Cornne of ARC fame has sailed around the world, and in the Arctic in one for years. There must be something good about them!l

 

[Seren]

Ional - totally agree about the Ovni 395.
Have sent you a PM ref. dropping the keel for maintenance