Rustler, Vancouver, Tradewind

U

Uisteach

Well-Known Member
Joined
16 Sep 2004
Messages
117
Visit site
After endless research and reflection now have a shortlist of three boats to go blue water crusing: Rustler 36, Tradewind 35, Vancouver 34. Any owner feedback on any of these yachts on anything liked or disliked, or recommendations about spec/equipment (what works and what doesn't work) would be greatly appreciated.

Look forward to anything you have to say. Thanks.

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
I wouldn't by a Northshore boat after wife and I received snooty attitude from senior salesman for 3 consecutive boat shows. The attitude came across as 'I don't know if we want to sell to you.' We ended up buying a Najad instead and never regretted it. I also think Vancouvers are harder to resell IMHO.

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
I visited a Locwind 57 at the PBS. They contacted me later by phone and when they found out that I had a Feeling they hung up....

John

PS I didn't like the Locwind anyway...

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
I can't comment on the Tradewind.

I've sailed for a few weeks on the Rustler 36, and my main impressions were that there's precious little interior space for the size of boat, and that you should avoid the heavy, unresponsive wheel steering like the plague. It's designed for a tiller, and the conversion is a disaster.

I've not sailed on the Vancouver, but I'm impressed with the design, which seems well suited to blue water cruising for one or two. I especially like the fact that it's designed with a masthead cutter rig - very solid and easy to handle. However, I've heard rumours that it's not very fast compared to its peers.

Hope that helps,

Rich

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
I'd post this on the Liveaboard Forum and get the opinion of the people do actually do it, not the ones who just talk about it, like me.

I think all the boat's you've short listed are a little small and slow. I'm not now sure of the whereabouts of Cheyenne but I understand she's for sale and would be the ideal fast passage maker!

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Personally I'd buy a Rival but I can tell you if you visit the Northshore site and see Alan & Rhoda Cawthorne's account of their trip round the UK you'll like the boat. They are in their 80s - had a V27 before - enormously competent - done the Atlantic Circuit, up the inland waterways to Canada, Denmark (to quote them - 3 times) I think. Plainly the V34 PH is a super boat - and quite frankly if I knew as much about cruising as them I'd be very pleased.

I should add they popped across the channel with their 4 boys in a Drascombe a decade or 3 or 4 ago. So I think they know a bit !

<hr width=100% size=1>a pragmatist is an optimist with a boat in the UK - but serious about not being in the UK !
 
These boats have in common high price/small space/slow./old fashioned. Its a bit like saying you are going to do the Paris Dakar in a Land Rover. Sure you'll make it, but will you enjoy the experience? Will others in more modern tackle enjoy it more?

Long distance boating involves living on the boat, often at anchorage as well as at sea. You need a reasonable amount of room, and a good sailing performance. You need reliability and good aftersales service - even in the middle of nowhere.

Not suggesting you set off in a First, but I'm sure there are more modern practical choices available. I suspect there are also better built boats available. They are, after all, "small numbers built" boats and British to boot.

<hr width=100% size=1>this post is a personal opinion, and you should not base your actions on it.
 
Having sailed all 3 I would suggest the Tradewind fulfills the liveaboard brief best. All have their plus and minus points but overall IMHO the Tradewind wins.

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Shhh!

I've always fancied them; I was rather hoping the proponents of Frogspwan would drive the price down a bit!

<hr width=100% size=1>Que scais-je?
 
The comments about small, slow, old fashioned boats are interesting because we all know that any boat is actually a compromise around what can be afforded. how big a boat a couple can sail (always have to consider injury and the boat being sailed by one person for perhaps long distances), and what you want to do with it. If blue water cruising comes into play then a boat that can stand an ocean storm is a requirement, as is one that is sea kindly (comfortable). The kind of boats that provide these characteristics are well known (see Nigel Calder's articles on "Choosing the ideal boat" in recent issues of YM), it's about displacement, LWL/Beam, AVS etc. Looking to maximise on these research gives Rustler's, Vancouver's, Pacific Seacraft's, Channel Cutters etc. The laws of physics can't be denied. There are ocean race boats that provide other solutions, but I don't think they are a practical option for me and my partner. The following web site might be useful, you can play around with different specs:

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

So, that brings it to the matter of size. We all want bigger boats but they cost more. A heavy displacement 35 footer costs more than a light weight popular type, increase the size and the cost grow alarmingly. The ideal, for us, would be a Rustler 42, but at £250k plus this isn't an option we would consider.

And finally there's the issue of insurance. Not easy for any boat for blue water cruising, but they are very unlikely to insure anything other than a boat of the above type for a couple going beyond Panama. I'm researching this now, and the first response stated that "we would rather see you crossing in a 15 year old Halberg Rassy than say a [new] E.., L.., or B.. ."

Of course people have crossed oceans in all kinds of boats, and will continue to do so, but if there's a choice then it seems, to me at least, that the answers to safety and comfort (sea kindliness) are found with traditional designs, hence my shortlist.


<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Of the 3 boats, the shape of the Tradewind 35 is what I love: the relatively high bow keeps the sea away (mostly) and the stern is rather beautiful. The foredeck is .. just very safe. With the weight of rigging holding the mast up .. it’s solid.

However …. These boats are all finished by others. Blondecell in Southampton build the hull and deck and then it gets shipped off to a shipwright, yard or other. Therefore, the interior does vary (as will the quality) and you may see one you don’t like but another you might. The interiors are cramped compared with a modern boat. And, as a general observation, these boats are very comfortable for two.

Some have a bowsprit and slightly taller mast, others do not. All have a cutter rig and the relatively small yankee (or jib) is easy to handle. The staysail adds half a knot and is useful in severe weather when staysail alone + triple reefed main will get you home. She does require at least 10 kn wind to get her moving but in 20+ kn she is delightful and will more than hold her own against more modern boats in these conditions. One factor with these long keeled boats (although the Vancouver 34 is not a long keel) is to keep the underwater hull clean. Bad fouling will cost a knot.

Under power, a TW35 with Yanmar 3GM will trundle along at 5kn, reasonably economically. Engine access is good. All TW35’s that I have seen have decent sized fuel and water tanks.

Self-steering is a boon and TW35’s seem to favour Hydrovane whereas the others (I think both of them have transom hung rudders?) opt for systems which drive the rudder. I happen to think that the Hydrovane is a system which doesn’t clutter the stern up.

The TW35 has a waterline length of 25.8’, the Rustler 26.9’ and the Vancouver 27.5’. The respective displacements (lbs) are 19,426, 16,771 and 14,036. All other things being equal, the TW35 will be fundamentally the slower. All passage plans that I do assume an average of 5 knots.

The Rustler has, I think, a slightly roomier interior.

I never seriously looked at a Vancouver 34 because I thought they were overpriced (and overhyped).

I don’t think I’ve come across an unhappy Tradewind 35 owner … I’m one!



<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Hi Uisteach!

I have only sailed the Rival and Vancouver 34, and only the latter on a decent passage (Gibraltar- Canaries) so can only really comment on the latter.

As a sailing boat it rather surprised me. Whilst not speedy, it tracked well, maintained a steady 6 knot(ish) and was surprisingly easy to handle in close quarters (marina) situations. For long term cruising though I wouldn't consider it. Leaving alone the over-pricing, the build quality of the one I sailed (only one year old) left a bit to be desired. In particular, although specified by the owner for long term ocean cruising, Northshore fitted a PAR heads. That failed three times and had to be replaced. Worse was the foredeck cleat that was pulled out of the deck when moored in a marina in Gib. before I joined the boat.

The owner (a friend) told me that there was no backing pad or washers behind the cleat which had been simply through bolted. People were sent to Gib from the UK to carry out repairs and provide backing pads to all the cleats. This may, of course, been a 'Friday' boat, but it makes you think doesn't it?

Far, far worse as far as I'm concerned is the utterly dreadful ergonomics of the cockpit, which is, without doubt, the worst I have used in 33 years of offshore sailing. The twin backstay arrangement ensures that you cannot settle back into the aft cockpit corners without catching your head on one or the other. The mainsheet track position ensures that you can't sit facing aft without perching on the top of the track itself, the teak covered helm 'hump' is extremely uncomfortable and ..............!

We were not impressed with the interior particularly, though this is, of course, largely a personal matter.
If you do decide to purchase one, do ensure (as I'm sure anyone spending that sort of money will) you spend at least a full weekend on board. The 'dislikes' noted above are cureable, but IMHO shouldn't be necessary in the first place.

Cheers

Jerry



<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Hi Jerry, Thanks for the feedback. Hearing of first hand experience like this is priceless. The closer it gets (we want to leave next spring) the less it's an academic exercise and the more it's real money and commitment! I like Rivals, but we don't want a DIY project otherwise we'll spend next year working on a boat rather than sailing - when the time comes I think you just have to bite the bullet and go.

Just come across Garcia's. Cat 1, aluminium, lifting keel, I wish ... .

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Vancouver 34 Pilot House

Have you thought about the V34P. One huge advantage (apart from the obvious pilot house benefits in inclement weather) is that there is a cabin admidhsip (i.e comfortable at sea) which is separate from the main working areas, so relative peace and quiet for the off-watch body. It's on the starboard side, ahead of the pilot house, with the lower half of the double bunk extending back under the pilot house sole. It's always struck me as an excellent arrangement.

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.writeforweb.com/twister1>Let's Twist Again</A>
 
Hi PH, Thanks for the feedback on the TW. The fact that they are built/finished by different yards is something that can cause problems, and it's something we can't ignore. It's difficult anyway tracking down a good boat and that just adds another problem dimension. (Unfortunately people aren't alwaya honest about their boat, and that can lead to much wasted time and money - esp. if you don't live in the south of England.) Tradewind Yachts oversee building now, but because of their high displacement newer boats are more expensive than either of the other two (so far as I've been able to tell).

Cheers.

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Re: Vancouver 34 Pilot House

Hi Twister, After Jerry's comments it might be that Vancouver's have just dropped of the list! But, yes, we've thought about the pilot version but the pilot house is strangely designed - little if any storage space and no full length berths on port and starboard for bunks while at sea. And the galley is also less favourable at sea from a practical/safety aspect than a traditional u-shape. And then there's the chart table that has restricted access. Great idea, being in out of the weather (we initially looked at the Nauticat 321 and Nordship 35 for the same reason), but at sea I don't think (for us at least) they work as well as a traditional layout.


Cheers and thanks.

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top