MAB V AWB

I have a MOB - modernised old boat. My Fulmar is 43 years old and can still attract a lot of attention from sailors and non-sailors alike. However compared to most other yachts of a similar age, Concerto seems to sparkle.
I’ve got to say the Fulmar is just an AWB, albeit quite an old one. No different to a Jeanneau of the era
 
Triy sailing all over the place down the River Crouch, The Orwell, or the Black Deep when the wind is up the chuff.:rolleyes:
Is the "Holman Roll" likely to manifest itself in such circumstances?

And if it did, the short time you would have to endure it, hardly seems to justify refusing to own one of Holman's designs.
 
Last edited:
Is the "Holman Roll" likely to manifest itself in such circumstances?

And if it did, the short time you would have to endure it, hardly seems to justify refusing to own one of Holman's designs.
Nothing to do with refusing to have a Holman design. You are miss quoting. The statement was made that older designs were more stable down wind than modern AWBs. I would suggest that is a fallacy & present examples to back up my opinion.

I rolled my Stella in & out of the Crouch for 10 years & I rolled the Bowman in & out a few times as well. As for the UFO 34, I crewed for 5-6 years , that was almost every EAORA race & week club racing. I hardly ever recall tacking down wind. It was too much hassle twin pole gybing the kite anyway.

The Bowman was an expensive boat. At the time the owner told me that his boat cost him £80,000. It was done as a commercial enterprise, where he financed the moulds & leased them to the builder per boat built. That made his cost less than it should be to other owners. At the time that was the equivalent as much later Oysters, HRs etc. would be, speaking in relative terms.
 
Last edited:
What you have there is a very smart MAB!

The test is to see it though the eyes of the putative detractor. Polish it all you like, but it's never going to make it an AWB. (Thank goodness!)

Hang on to it long enough, and it becomes a classic, but still a MAB!
I do not want an AWB as I dislike the design of the hull shape and building methods. I am saying this not due to lack of funds as I could have bought a brand new fully equipped 32ft AWB when I bought my Fulmar. I chose what I felt what I felt was right for me and have then changed and improved things to get it right for me to sail singlehanded. She is almost back to a new condition and has cost only a third of what a new AWB would have cost.

The Fulmar is certainly a classic yacht. A few other classics with a racing pedigree could include the Twister, Contessa 32, S&S 34 and Sigma 33. Others yachts I feel could be included are Hustler 30, UFO 34 and Hustler 35.
 
Sigma 33 is clearly an AWB on hull volume alone, albeit a transition case as the interior layout is stodgily old fashioned.
Last year I had a sailor on board who had recently sold a Sigma 33. He was surprised at the greater interior volume the Fulmar had compared to his old Sigma, but on a slightly shorter hull.
 
One boat-- the cost (relatively) 3 times the price. Marvelous comparison. :rolleyes:
I cant see how price relates to the motion of a boat at sea. Surely that is purely a function of design?
I imagine there will be both cheap and expensive seakindly boats and both cheap and expensive boats that are are horrible in a seaway.
 
The suggestion was that one could solve rolling by doing a zig zag course:rolleyes:
I was just pointing out - by example- that was not always possible. Try & keep up
And the suggestion I made was that where that was not practicable because one was in a narrow channel, any rolling that did occur would not have to be put up with for very long.
 
I’ve got to say the Fulmar is just an AWB, albeit quite an old one. No different to a Jeanneau of the era
You are the first to say that, but I am not sure I agree. There is just no exact definition as to when AWB started or what features makes them one. Yacht design has been evolving since the late 1950's. The long keel narrow beam yachts with a 50% ballast ratio have changed to: separate keel and rudder, increased beam and reduced ballast radio. Also the change was partially due to the change from RORC to IOR racing rule, which also changed the position of the mast and reduced the genoa size and increased the very short foot of the mainsail. The next major change was the change of how boats were constructed in mass production factories and then the introduction of EU Recreational Craft Directive. So what defines an AWB?
 
Last edited:
A few extra inches of freeboard and a roomier coachroof, plus arguably more considered layout of joinery. It doesn't take much.
Last year I had a sailor on board who had recently sold a Sigma 33. He was surprised at the greater interior volume the Fulmar had compared to his old Sigma, but on a slightly shorter hull.
 
A few extra inches of freeboard and a roomier coachroof, plus arguably more considered layout of joinery. It doesn't take much.
I do not believe there is any difference in freeboard height. There is about 4 inches of extra beam and the transom is slightly wider.
SIGMA 33 OOD - sailboatdata
FULMAR 32 (WESTERLY) - sailboatdata

This photo shows a Sigma 33 and my Fulmar and there does not look to be any difference in freeboard height.

IMG_5262 cropped.jpg
 
That wasn't me. That was a yacht designer and participant in the 1979 race. Read the post again.
Th big Hanse that had catastrophic steering failure a couple of years ago on the ARC, their crew were picked up by an Oyster 55. They commented on how great the Oyster felt compared to the Hanse in rough weather.
I wasn’t aware that Matt Sheehan. Was a yacht designer. I thought he was a sailing journalist. What boats has he designed?

The weird thing about this AWB/ MAB debate is that if you just read this forum you’d assume that you could make a fortune from designing and building “traditional looking” cruising boats. As clearly there must be a massive market just fed up of the AWBs. But in fact just about everyone who tries it goes bust.
 
You are the first to say that, but I am not sure I agree. There is just no exact definition as to when AWB started or what features makes them one. Yacht design has been evolving since the late 1950's. The long keel narrow beam yachts with a 50% ballast ratio have changed to: separate keel and rudder, increased beam and reduced ballast radio. Also the change was partially due to the change from RORC to IOR racing rule, which also changed the position of the mast and reduced the genoa size and increased the very short foot of the mainsail. The next major change was the change of how boats were constructed in mass production factories and then the introduction of EU Recreational Craft Directive. So what defines an AWB?
I'd say that the Fulmar was an AWB in its day. No question.

It was a production boat from a high volume manufacturer.
 
Top