pvb
Well-known member
If you look at Tranona's post (#65) he says that's a previous model, and he quotes figures from the brochure for the 2007 Bavaria 37. So the link isn't wrong, it just relates to an earlier boat.
Moody 376 vs bavaria 37
- Thread starter gasdave
- Start date
If you look at Tranona's post (#65) he says that's a previous model, and he quotes figures from the brochure for the 2007 Bavaria 37. So the link isn't wrong, it just relates to an earlier boat.
jimi
Well-known member
So Bavaria added 1.5 tonnes to the new model of the same length, most of which was not ballast? Is that really the case?
pvb
Well-known member
I have no idea. But I'm not sure where we'd find displacement figures other than those quoted by makers.
jimi
Well-known member
Looking at Beneteau 372 7800/2500 = 5300 makes the Bav 37 6900/2000 = 4900 look like being in the right ballpark.
Mind you on the Moody owners website my boat is quoted as total weight 8650 Ballast 8822 leaving a non ballast weight of minus 168 .. there's a thing;-)
Last edited:
Tranona
Well-known member
Spotted the error quickly because I have the earlier 37, which is a completely different boat from the 2007 one under discussion. The data quoted is from Bavaria for both of them. The later boat is indeed a much bigger boat - greater beam much longer waterline length (over 1m longer) greater freeboard, more ballast which will all account for greater weight. "My" 37 is in fact a slightly stretched 35, but I think the displacement is rather understated in the catalogue - but as pvb says it is difficult to get data other than that provided by the builder.
A better comparison with the Moody is the Bavaria 38 of the late 1990's early 2000's. That had dimensions closer to the Moody, comparable accommodation, either as an aft or centre cockpit boat and displaced 7300kg - virtually the same.
As has been noted many times the lower prices (when new) of Bavaria has more to do with simplifying construction, automated build and economies of scale - being built in the middle of a field in the middle of Germany rather than on old cramped waterside facilities also helps!
I bought my boat right at the time when the big price differential made itself felt and Moody withdrew from the market as they realised they could no longer compete. I faced exactly the choice under discussion here. I was looking at 12-15 year old Moodys and Westerlys for taking to the Med. Asking prices were very similar to a new Bavaria and having looked a lot of boats decided on the Bavaria. As I noted earlier, the value of the boats now is much the same, although the Moodys vary enormously reflecting the wide variation in condition of near 30 year old boats.
Sound a bit like a broken record, but my boat did 7 years as a successful charter boat and then brought back to UK. I know the complete history and can say that it has lived up to its reputation as a no nonsense, well built, reliable boat.
GrahamM376
New member
Friend's Bavaria quoted as 38 ft (but no other details known) and Moody 376 sheel keel version. Quite a difference in underwater profile.
View attachment 43625 View attachment 43626
View attachment 43625 View attachment 43626
GrahamM376
New member
Nice one, why didn't I think of that?:encouragement:
dom
Well-known member
Actually I think the owners of both are irredeemable numnuts! (see my post counter to explain this nastiness!)
Seriously though, classifying boats by brand alone is surely a mistake. I once sailed a Moody 376 out of Brighton (think they had a sales office down there years ago) and it motored out of the marina into a F6 with no issues at all, but sailed like a pig to windward into the messy short sea. A few years later I sailed a Bav 38 (shallow keel) in a F5 in the Solent and it gripped up to windward if pushed even a smidge too hard.
About 10 years ago I sailed a Bav 37 from Alderney to Dartmouth in a SW F7/8. I explained to may friend the owner that we'd have a go, but that the lightweight, accommodation focus, yada, yada, yada, meant that we'd probably bust out to Poole, and even that could become hairy.
Well that little boat had the last laugh! All it asked was not too be pushed too hard and we enjoyed a wonderful and pleasantly fast sail all the way back to Dartmouth; I still remember sticking on a chicken to roast as we entered Lyme Bay - I considered reefing to make sure the damn thing had time to cook!
So is this whole Brand X vs. Brand Y thing not way too crude? I'd personally investigate both and buy the better boat.
Seriously though, classifying boats by brand alone is surely a mistake. I once sailed a Moody 376 out of Brighton (think they had a sales office down there years ago) and it motored out of the marina into a F6 with no issues at all, but sailed like a pig to windward into the messy short sea. A few years later I sailed a Bav 38 (shallow keel) in a F5 in the Solent and it gripped up to windward if pushed even a smidge too hard.
About 10 years ago I sailed a Bav 37 from Alderney to Dartmouth in a SW F7/8. I explained to may friend the owner that we'd have a go, but that the lightweight, accommodation focus, yada, yada, yada, meant that we'd probably bust out to Poole, and even that could become hairy.
Well that little boat had the last laugh! All it asked was not too be pushed too hard and we enjoyed a wonderful and pleasantly fast sail all the way back to Dartmouth; I still remember sticking on a chicken to roast as we entered Lyme Bay - I considered reefing to make sure the damn thing had time to cook!
So is this whole Brand X vs. Brand Y thing not way too crude? I'd personally investigate both and buy the better boat.
Last edited:
pvb
Well-known member
I thought we were discussing weight, not shape?
causeway
Member
I would be more interested in a comparison of the boats, unladen. I read that all the builders weigh the boats differently, ie barebones versus cruising weight etc etc.
I'd go for the Bavaria every time unless the moody was very well sorted already.
I'd go for the Bavaria every time unless the moody was very well sorted already.
Tranona
Well-known member
There is now an ISO that is used to satisfy the RCD, but pre 1998 there was no common standard - and indeed many builders had only a hazy idea of what their boats weighed anyway!
Happened to check the handbook and certificate of conformity for my boat today and displacement is given as 5360kg bare boat and 6850kg equipped and crewed. Not difficult to see where the difference comes from when you fuel capacity of 150l and water of 300l - that is 450kg already.
Would suspect that today quoted bare boat figures are much more accurate representative and comparable than in the past.
Hypocacculus
New member
I was lead to believe that boatbuilders tend to have their boats measured in the most favourable configuration - ie, the stability measurements will be taken from the option with the deep lead keel and slab reefing, rather than the steel keel with the inmast furling and the dinghy hanging in the davits etc etc.
Lies, damned lies and statistics.
Go and have a look at them; ideally try and get to sail them; your preference will crystallise pretty quickly. Don't buy a boat you haven't fallen in love with.
Lies, damned lies and statistics.
Go and have a look at them; ideally try and get to sail them; your preference will crystallise pretty quickly. Don't buy a boat you haven't fallen in love with.
markhomer
Member
We had very similar predicament , after looking for a new boat for 1 1/2 years , got over my bavaria snobbishness after eventually going aboard a 38 under duress , only to be very pleasantly suprised , after treading the decks of 20 to 30 year old boats to one sub 10 it was a no brainer !
3 rd season in , honeymoon long gone , still loving it , excells in every respect , high spec hardware , ease of use , performance under sail and motor , space .
Im a racer of 40 yrs plus , still race catamarans and god forbid a snotter even dare i say a 40.7 ,
We cruise the b38 every weekend and every holiday , white sail race , worst result 3rd .
Thank god for predjudice otherwise we could never have afforded such a boat .
Folks are slowly cottoning on , certainly with early 2000 38s 37& 36 s which are building good reputations .
Another reason we bought was , how impressed the local boat reparer of high repute was with the b38 after repairing many boats after the storms up here 3 years ago .
Moodys were on our list too , but for similar money would have had to steal noahs boat .
3 rd season in , honeymoon long gone , still loving it , excells in every respect , high spec hardware , ease of use , performance under sail and motor , space .
Im a racer of 40 yrs plus , still race catamarans and god forbid a snotter even dare i say a 40.7 ,
We cruise the b38 every weekend and every holiday , white sail race , worst result 3rd .
Thank god for predjudice otherwise we could never have afforded such a boat .
Folks are slowly cottoning on , certainly with early 2000 38s 37& 36 s which are building good reputations .
Another reason we bought was , how impressed the local boat reparer of high repute was with the b38 after repairing many boats after the storms up here 3 years ago .
Moodys were on our list too , but for similar money would have had to steal noahs boat .
dom
Well-known member
Bavs have a reputation for sailing poorly to windward. Others seem to think the opposite. I've experienced both!
Could it be that some keel designs are pretty good for windward work, whereas others are firmly on the iffy side on the wind, but perhaps great for shallow areas? For all I know the same might apply to Moody.
Re build quality I have an oldish Bav moored next to me; looked pretty tired last November to be honest. It's just come back looking brand spanking new!
GrahamM376
New member
The 376 comes in 2 fixed keel versions, a few were also produced with lifting keels. We have a scheel keel version 4'6" draught and sailed in company with a deeper version 5'6" from Wales down the west coast of France and then from northern Portugal back. No noticeable difference in performance under cruising conditions but maybe if pressed hard under racing canvass then there would be. Comments from friends with Bavarias indicate there is quite a difference in pointing performance between the different keel options.
dom
Well-known member
Interesting, I wish I could remember the keel options of the various Bavs I've sailed. In fact the more I think of it this whole "Brand X" vs. "Brand Y" argument is too superficial to provide a suitable basis for choice. .
GrahamM376
New member
Just looked up the paperwork Marine Projects passed to MOA - 376 = 11.53m o/all, 9.53m waterline, 3.81 beam, 1.37 draught, 7820kgs (assume unladen?) 2950kgs ballast.
AndrewfromFal
Active member
Having read through the thread, there seems to be a theme here I noticed on an earlier thread, namely people conflating 'Displacement' and 'weight'. From my rudimentary knowledge of Naval Architecture, Displacement is an indication of volume, rather than an indication of the weight of an object (and pertinently to this thread the weight of worked materials used in the construction of said object).
This is particularly noticeable on larger yachts where clever trickery in relation to Hullforms is used to bring the displacement down so they do not have to conform to a higher standard of regulation, but the actual weight of the vessel is significantly above this.
My point being that I'm not sure all those people who are quoting 'Displacement - Ballast = Construction weight' aren't barking up the wrong tree.
jordanbasset
Well-known member
My 2003 Bavaria 38 had a lead keel, 2 metre draught, probably helped with its performance.
pvb
Well-known member
Moody Owners website quotes weight as 7373kg. Almost every used Moody 376 seems to be listed at 16250 lbs, which is about 7370kg. So I'd assume your 7820kgs figure is laden.
