New design Bavaria 32 - an above average AWB?

[BurnitBlue]

When I first saw the specs for this boat I was surprised at how heavy she was. She is a lot heavier than the Contessa 32 and the same weight as a Moody 346. Both are around 11,200 pounds. In fact if the weight of the ballast keels were discounted the "build material" in the Bavaria 32 is 10% heavier than the Moody 346.

IMO it is the relative displacement of a boat that points to the quality of the materials and thickness of the lay-up. Maybe not always but I use it as a guide. So this Bavaria is worth watching.

 

[Tranona]

When I first saw the specs for this boat I was surprised at how heavy she was. She is a lot heavier than the Contessa 32 and the same weight as a Moody 346. Both are around 11,200 pounds. In fact if the weight of the ballast keels were discounted the "build material" in the Bavaria 32 is 10% heavier than the Moody 346.

IMO it is the relative displacement of a boat that points to the quality of the materials and thickness of the lay-up. Maybe not always but I use it as a guide. So this Bavaria is worth watching.

Thee main reason the weight is similar is because the Bavaria is a vastly "bigger" boat - particularly than the CO 32. 6' longer on the waterline, nearly 3' wider and full at both ends. So have used similar amounts of materials but in a different way to give more space for people. The Moody is somewhere in between.

To Keirah

Ballast ratios have always been misleading when taken in isolation. Many of the high ballast ratios of earlier boats did not lead to high stability as this was penalised by the rating rules. So much of the weight was actually high up. Compare the keel shape of the typical IOR influenced 1970's/80's boat and the Bavaria, which carries all its weight low down. However its keel is high aspect ratio, narrow chord which is efficient over a narrower range of conditions.

The Bavaria, like many similar modern boats is optimised for light to medium conditions, so carries a lot of sail for its ballast ratio. That is because most peoples' sailing is in those conditions and easy ways of reducing sail areas allows them to make reasonable progress in heavier weather. However, if your sailing is predominately in heavy weather perhaps it is not for you.

The benefits of the underlying design philosophy are good accommodation, flat(ter) sailing, speed in light airs, particularly off wind, good lounging space and excellent performance under power and in harbour.

 

[Koeketiene]

The Bavaria, like many similar modern boats is optimised for light to medium conditions, so carries a lot of sail for its ballast ratio.

That is called 'being over-canvassed'

That is because most peoples' sailing is in those conditions and easy ways of reducing sail areas allows them to make reasonable progress in heavier weather. However, if your sailing is predominately in heavy weather perhaps it is not for you.

Rather nonsensical argument IMO. You don't always get to pick your weather.
Car analogy: this car is great - just don't drive it in the rain or snow.
How many people would find that acceptable, or indeed buy such a car?

The benefits of the underlying design philosophy are good accommodation, flat(ter) sailing, speed in light airs, particularly off wind, good lounging space and excellent performance under power and in harbour.

More car analogy: this car parks really well and it's great for sitting in.
This is not what cars are built for and neither are boats.

 

[prv]

That is called 'being over-canvassed'

A boat can't be inherently over-canvassed. It can be over-canvassed at a particular point in time, if the crew have chosen to keep too much sail up, but there's no such thing as having too much available to set. Look at how much area old sailing fishing and cargo boats had, which had no engines so needed to really sail in light airs.

The nearest you can get to "over-canvassed" in design, as opposed to operation, is to have inadequate reefing facilities to reduce the area down when required. I make no comment on the Bavaria from that point of view.

More car analogy: this car parks really well and it's great for sitting in.
This is not what cars are built for and neither are boats.

The thing is, quite a lot of boats these days are built for sitting in. It's not what you or I want in a boat, but it is what a lot of them get used for, especially in the vast swarms of charter boats motoring around a windless Mediterranean as a kind of mobile swimming float and dormitory.

Pete

 

[Rivers & creeks]

I agree with the first two, but a boat isn't like a car that is just a means of transport, it's a home that floats. We spent six weeks cruising this summer hols but only about 50 hours a week travelling. The Bav 32 is a superb coastal/channel cruiser, in those journeys you can pretty much pick your weather window.

 

[Koeketiene]

The thing is, quite a lot of boats these days are built for sitting in.

Oh, I agree.
But unlike Tranona I don't applaud the evolution.

 

[Bobc]

I think perhaps your car analogy is a bit lame.

Perhaps a better one would be to use something like a Toyota Land Cruiser. If you want to drive across Africa, up sand dunes and rocky hills, through river, etc. Then it's what you need.

However most people only drive on roads and want something that is modern and looks good, is comfortable, convenient, is nice to drive, doesn't need much maintenance, etc.

I think that's probably a fairer analogy.

 

[Tranona]

Oh, I agree.
But unlike Tranona I don't applaud the evolution.

What makes you think I am applauding it. People buy boats that suit them - not what people like YOU think they should buy.

Once you understand that you can stop constantly denigrating other peoples' choices - just because they are not the same as yours.

 

[Tranona]

I think perhaps your car analogy is a bit lame.

Perhaps a better one would be to use something like a Toyota Land Cruiser. If you want to drive across Africa, up sand dunes and rocky hills, through river, etc. Then it's what you need.

However most people only drive on roads and want something that is modern and looks good, is comfortable, convenient, is nice to drive, doesn't need much maintenance, etc.

I think that's probably a fairer analogy.

Well said, but completely wasted on people with closed minds!

 

[Koeketiene]

What makes you think I am applauding it. People buy boats that suit them - not what people like YOU think they should buy.

Once you understand that you can stop constantly denigrating other peoples' choices - just because they are not the same as yours.

Pot - kettle?

 

[awol]

Car analogy: this car is great - just don't drive it in the rain or snow.
How many people would find that acceptable, or indeed buy such a car?

From the number of BMWs on the road, a fair number. Without snow tyres most are a liability in the snow.

With a certain trepidation I raise my head above the parapet again on this thread. So far the discriminators that separate the BAV 32 from the common herd of AWBs appear to be a fixed mainsheet, a lighter keel with a heavier hull, an absence of fiddles and like all the other AWBs, it's not a Contessa 32. So is it above average and the others are less worthy? Does it rate better under IRC or PH, are insurance rates less, are there any objective comparators to a Hanse or Beneteau/Jeanneau?

 

[Tranona]

Pot - kettle?

Not at all. Suggest you read what I say instead of making up your own version.

People buy what they want to buy. I respect that - don't agree with all the choices but respect them.

It is this constant superior attitude that gets up my nose like your last little gem of suggesting (if I get your string of words right) that people are not capable of making their own decisions.

Your basic proposition (if I understand it correctly) that modern boats are not capable of doing what people want them to do is just not supported by the evidence. But guess evidence has a hard time against bigotry - twas ever thus!

 

[Scheel]

New 33

I think the all new bavaria 33 cruiser looks better than the previous series. There was something with the square windows I did not like. The new series are much nicer http://www.bavaria-yachtbau.com/en/sailing-yachts/cruiser-33.html

 

[1bobt]

Fin w/bulb & spade rudder Rig Type: Fractional Sloop
LOA: 32.78' / 9.99m LWL: 29.04' / 8.85m
Beam: 11.22' / 3.42m Listed SA: 494 ft2 / 45.89 m2
Draft (max.) 6.40' / 1.95m Draft (min.)
Disp. 11464 lbs./ 5200 kgs. Ballast: 2866 lbs. / 1300 kgs.
SA/Disp.: 15.60 Bal./Disp.: 25.00% Disp./Len.: 208.98
Designer: Bruce Farr
Builder: Bavaria Yachts
Construct.: FG Bal. type: Iron
First Built: 2011 Last Built: # Built:
AUXILIARY POWER (orig. equip.)
Make: Volvo Penta Model: D1-20
Type: Diesel HP: 18
TANKS
Water: 40 gals. / 151 ltrs. Fuel: 40 gals. / 151 ltrs.
RIG DIMENSIONS KEY
I: 40.48' / 12.34m J: 11.48' / 3.50m
P: 38.68' / 11.79m E: 13.52' / 4.12m
PY: EY:
SPL: ISP:
SA(Fore.): 232.36 ft2 / 21.59 m2 SA(Main): 261.48 ft2 / 24.29 m2
Total(calc.)SA: 493.83 ft2 / 45.88 m2 DL ratio: 208.98
SA/Disp: 15.59 Est. Forestay Len.: 42.08' / 12.82m
Mast Height from DWL: 48.56' / 14.80m
BUILDERS (past & present)
More about & boats built by: Bavaria Yachts (GER)
DESIGNER
More about & boats designed by: Bruce Farr
NOTES

S/A ratio below 16 seems okay as a cruiser, which it was designed to be.

 

[rotrax]

As a bit of " Fred Drift " First Mate and I had a Gibsea 96-the three cabin version. At our then level of sailing it was perfect. We are aquainted with a serious dude in the Yachting sales business, an agent for one of the top Scandanavian marques. He owns a Gibsea 96-the two cabin "Master" version. He told us that it compared very well with more modern offerings and was a good compromise between sailing ability, space and cost. That is exactly what we found. I compared our Gibsea to an older Bavaria recently and it held up very well-especialy on build quality.