sadler 32 bilge keel pros and cons please

[niccapotamus]

Hi

Due to circumstances beyond our control there is a good chance that we'll be looking for a new boat and are thinking about a Sadler 32 for the two of us, plus the two dogs.

any cons, known vices, issues. I believe that they are a good sea boat and fast-ish well performing cruiser, even in bilge keel form, easily handled by two slightly aging deskbound people.

ta

 

[johnalison]

I had a 29 and cruised in company with a couple of 32 fins for many years. The 32 is good in medium to strong winds but is under-canvassed by today's standards, so handiness with a spinnaker would be useful. It is a decent boat for living on and I think has few vices.

 

[eddystone]

Are you asking about pros/cons of the Sadler 32 generally or the bilge keel version specifically? There is an article somewhere I think on the Lucas Yachting website comparing the 3 keels (deep fin, shallow fin and bilge keel, although not the lift keel version). I think your main problem is the likelihood of one coming up for sale as the vast majority of the 300 or so built were deep or shallow fin.

Cons:
- narrow side decks around cockpit mean if you like to "hike out" on the coaming dinghy style have to hook arms round guardwires to stay in place.
- berths in forecabin are barely 6ft
- if i sleep in the quarter berth tend to hit my head on lid of chart table - maybe i'm just clumsy
- not the best in reverse, not the worst either.
- have to stand on my head to reach the fuel cut off under the tank.

My dog refuses to go near any boat so i can't give you her opinion.
I think the pros are pretty well documented.

 

[niccapotamus]

Are you asking about pros/cons of the Sadler 32 generally or the bilge keel version specifically? There is an article somewhere I think on the Lucas Yachting website comparing the 3 keels (deep fin, shallow fin and bilge keel, although not the lift keel version). I think your main problem is the likelihood of one coming up for sale as the vast majority of the 300 or so built were deep or shallow fin.

Cons:
- narrow side decks around cockpit mean if you like to "hike out" on the coaming dinghy style have to hook arms round guardwires to stay in place.
- berths in forecabin are barely 6ft
- if i sleep in the quarter berth tend to hit my head on lid of chart table - maybe i'm just clumsy
- not the best in reverse, not the worst either.
- have to stand on my head to reach the fuel cut off under the tank.

My dog refuses to go near any boat so i can't give you her opinion.
I think the pros are pretty well documented.

thanks! i've seen the comparison between the keel options and bilge fares reasonably well . I was after the trials and tribulations of living with one! stuff like a 6ft forecabin is relevant as I'm 6ft and "the boss" likes a lot of room.

we may (prefer) need a 34 but that means much more money

 

[Champagne Murphy]

We have a 32 deep fin. Ideal for the two of us plus any visitors/returned offspring. I'm 6'1" and I manage OK. I agree the bedding arrangements aren't perfect but then there aren't many boats of that era where they are. She's always been really solid in a sea, as for under canvassed she's as capable of broaching as any boat . We renewed our sails last year and that has improved handling. I suspect the previous comment has more to do with the hull shape which, again, is typical of the era. More up to date hull forms tend to be a bit faster but really get thrown around in heavy weather.
Engine has easy access with the cockpit floor opening and the build seems quite robust compared with more recent boats

 

[Tranona]

This month's PBO has a review of exactly this size/age of boat. There is a big choice, although more limited if you want twin keels. Many of the designs of the era had twin keel options, but the numbers actually built tended to decline with the growth in marina berths making the fin keel more attractive to many buyers.

Sadler 32 is at the bottom end of the price range reflecting its age, and limitations of space and practicality. At the top of the price range >£30k you can get a wider range of more modern and newer boats, although most without twin keels.

 

[eddystone]

I think you may have a long wait for a 32 or a 34 to come up for sale with bilge keels. I vaguely keep an eye on Sadlers coming up for sale and only seen one 32 BK in 3 years and no 34s. If it's drying out you need someone on this forum has fitted beaching legs to a 34.
Seems there are far more Westerleys with bilge keels. 32 may be space challenged by current standards but it's a lot better in that department than a Contessa 32.

 

[Concerto]

The Westerly Fulmar should be on your list and plenty were made with bilge keels. They are slightly broader aft, but more room on the side decks around the cockpit. Internal height is OK for a 6 footer.

 

[Hydrozoan]

We have a 32 deep fin. Ideal for the two of us plus any visitors/returned offspring. I'm 6'1" and I manage OK. I agree the bedding arrangements aren't perfect but then there aren't many boats of that era where they are. She's always been really solid in a sea, as for under canvassed she's as capable of broaching as any boat . We renewed our sails last year and that has improved handling. I suspect the previous comment has more to do with the hull shape which, again, is typical of the era. More up to date hull forms tend to be a bit faster but really get thrown around in heavy weather.
Engine has easy access with the cockpit floor opening and the build seems quite robust compared with more recent boats

I broadly agree with that. Some folk don’t like the full-width heads/wet locker area but it gives good space adjacent to the forepeak. Engine access is very good, fore and aft. It’s easy to put an upholstered ‘backrest’ to the quarterberth on the end of the chart table (we’ve done so). Our fuel cut-off is in the engine bay, but that’s perhaps not a standard Sadler arrangement (but it’s surely not that difficult to arrange).

 

[seumask]

The Westerly Fulmar should be on your list and plenty were made with bilge keels. They are slightly broader aft, but more room on the side decks around the cockpit. Internal height is OK for a 6 footer.

Echo that, biased owner here , however if your budget will stretch far enough comfortably beats the sadler 32 on performance and space and nearly meets the 34 on space. All IMHO!

 

[Hydrozoan]

Yes, agree. We looked at a Fulmar before we got the Sadler (the saloon was then stripped out completely, which made it look a deal larger!). But with older boats, condition is all important and we got a 'good 'un' and have been very pleased with our choice nonetheless. It’s looked after us since we were ‘two slightly aging deskbound people’ to the pensioners we are now. Good luck to the OP’s search.

 

[doris]

Its a long time since I sailed a S32 or a Fulmar but IIRC the Fulmar has better space and much better performance. The S32 was/is excruciatingly slow!

 

[Concerto]

I suggested the Fulmar beause I am biased as well as I own one.

Doris is right about Sadlers being slower. Check the ratings of both of them out on this web site http://www.byronsoftware.org.uk/bycn/byboat.htm. Also right about being more spacious. The Fulmar is becoming a classic boat, something I doubt the Sadler 32 will achieve, so will hold its value better.

 

[Hydrozoan]

Its a long time since I sailed a S32 or a Fulmar but IIRC the Fulmar has better space and much better performance. The S32 was/is excruciatingly slow!

Yes the space is a bit bigger as I implied, and the performance somewhat better I grant. I'm no racer and have nothing to compare - and sail condition etc. matters a lot I imagine. The Portsmouth yardstick recorded numbers here http://www.benfleetyachtclub.org/files/Portsmouth_HC/2007_Handicap_List.pdf
are 1025 (S32) and 1016 (Fulmar), if that helps the OP.

PS As to 'classic' status, I imagine I'll be dead by then in either case. I'm not knocking the Fulmar at all - but repeat my assertion that for me at any rate, condition of older boats is crucial unless you want work.

 

[vyv_cox]

The biggest drawback I see with the 32 is the narrow transom. Even on our 34, which is much wider although still narrow by modern standards, the space for hanging outboard, horseshoe buoys, solar panels, throwing line, etc is quite limited. We would like to stow our Fortress on the pushpit but there is no space for it, much less on the 32. In the Med it is quite difficult to berth stern-to with one because of this (possibly of no interest to the OP.)

 

[johnalison]

I have something of an affection for Sadlers, having owned one and sailed and raced against several. I have always thought of the 32 as a "lads boat" though I have known them sailed with young families. There is less headroom forward than the 29 and I think the Fulmar would be lighter to handle, but I don't find the Fulmar saloon very relaxing, and in a blow I would probably be as happy in a 32 as almost any boat.

 

[Hydrozoan]

I have something of an affection for Sadlers, having owned one and sailed and raced against several. I have always thought of the 32 as a "lads boat" though I have known them sailed with young families. There is less headroom forward than the 29 and I think the Fulmar would be lighter to handle, but I don't find the Fulmar saloon very relaxing, and in a blow I would probably be as happy in a 32 as almost any boat.

I cannot compare the headroom with the 29 - all I can remember is that their galleys seemed much of a muchness. But I will let Mrs H know that she's an honorary lad!

As late (post-50) sailors, all I can say is that Mrs H admits that the boat has 'looked after us' - translation: when I was too gung-ho. As the Fulmar saloon we saw was stripped out, it's difficult for me to comment - but the S32 saloon is certainly not a bad size for the boat's length, type and age.

We have a life sling, an outboard and a horseshoe on the pushpit, but I wouldn't claim that the transom is wide ( 'pert' is the best I can offer ). But the quarterberth is luxurious for one - though the S34 has an aft cabin (if not an especially large one by more modern standards).

 

[Tomaret]

I think you may have a long wait for a 32 or a 34 to come up for sale with bilge keels. I vaguely keep an eye on Sadlers coming up for sale and only seen one 32 BK in 3 years and no 34s. If it's drying out you need someone on this forum has fitted beaching legs to a 34.
Seems there are far more Westerleys with bilge keels. 32 may be space challenged by current standards but it's a lot better in that department than a Contessa 32.

Bilge keel 34 for sale here

http://yachts.apolloduck.co.uk/feature.phtml?id=457634

Mark

 

[eddystone]

I have something of an affection for Sadlers, having owned one and sailed and raced against several. I have always thought of the 32 as a "lads boat" though I have known them sailed with young families. There is less headroom forward than the 29 and I think the Fulmar would be lighter to handle, but I don't find the Fulmar saloon very relaxing, and in a blow I would probably be as happy in a 32 as almost any boat.

S32 a lads boat? surely you must be thinking of a Sigma 33!

 

[James_Calvert]

The 29's galley is buried a bit under the bridgedeck. Overall although we'd originally looking at the 29 we decided on a 32 for us. Just seemed that the 29 had compromised a bit for the sake of a shorter length.

Will comment again on the main question but just to respond to a few points....

The Fulmar is a fine boat, but I'd disagree with previous posters on a couple of points. Its wider transom means it will round up if overpressed. Can't stop it with the tiller, need to dump the main. Whereas the Sadler is a bit better balanced, the tiller loads up a lot but there is still control.

And on speed. We did the RTI for the first time in 2012 and did comparatively well, despite ripping the main on the starting line and being forced to keep two reefs in all the way round. We didn't fly a kite downwind either. Whilst we had one of the better results for a Sadler 32, which I was also chuffed about because we have a shallow keel, there weren't that many cruisers of similar length which beat us on uncorrected time. And you couldn't differentiate much between other Sadler 32s 34s Westerlys, Moodys etc. More to do with the way they were sailed and crewed than the boats themselves I guess. As to the AWBs, they had to be 36 foot or so to be generally quicker. The shorter ones overtook us downwind (when as I explained we were undercanvassed) but we saw them all off again on the final beat.

I'll admit the Contessa 32s put in a better uncorrected time on average. I put that down to that fleet, like Sigma 33s, being more worked up for racing.