sailing luddites

toad_oftoadhall said:
I don't think that's a fair representation of the terms of the debate. The disagreement is not "which design is best". People aren't stupid, everyone is well aware that every design is a compromise. The disagreement is whether or not one design (the design that's been overwhelmingly most common for 20 years or more) is actually structually dangerous.
Click to expand...

I don't think dangerous comes into it at all. So far the discussion has mostly revolved around performance and comfort, with a bit about relative maintenance thrown in. No one is saying that AWB's are dangerous and MAB's are safe or vice versa.
 
wotayottie said:
Brought on by the long keel thread, it's always puzzled me why there are so many luddites in yachting.Car enthusiasts may like an old classic car but rarely in my experience do they believe the old car is better than the cars made today. Same thing applies in motorbikes, and indeed in every other hobby I can think of bar antique collection.

Yet a fair proportion of sailors seem to believe stongly that old long keel narrow gutted heavy old gaff rigged boats are way better than what is made these days. Single handed sailors whizz round the world in high tech tea trays yet many yotties believe that anything more modern than the mid 50s is unsafe new fangled rubbish. And yet most of them do no more than an occasional cross channel jaunt.

OK I'm exagerrating a bit but you get the idea. Why is it that sailing has so many luddites?
Click to expand...

Singlehanded yachties whizz (wow, triple error on spell check!) around in tea trays with a shore based support team, at the limits of their design and with the knowledge that if a component should break it will be replaced, or they lose the race and have to limp back to some port (not quite that clear cut, I know, but essentially it's true). It's a sport I have the utmost respect for too.

That said, us amateurs don't have the luxury of support, or the finances to cope with a boat with a limited shelf life. Open 60's certainly do have a short life. For big adventures we need solid boats, and that means well laid up hard boats. A thing little keel might be fast, but it's not strong, and if your life is contained in a boat (many global venturers are liveaboards) then it must be the better option to go for longevity and strength than for speed?

Also, through literary experience only I must confess, a long keel seems to be better at dealing with very adverse weather.

Every person is different though. If you want to sail coastal then bilge or a fast fin keeler has got to be a better option. But for "bluewater" sailing, to my limited knowledge, a long keel is the way to go.
 
I suppose I must be a 'luddite of all trades', as I am (generally) very happy sailing in pretty much all types of vessels (including mutihulls!).

I have been on passage to Lisbon on a 19 tonne(!) ferro-cement 39' Colin Archer gaff ketch tramping along down channel on a close (for her) reach in a F 6, and we were all sitting around the saloon table having supper very comfortably, and nothing was flying about.

Various passages and regattas on Stormy Weather, a lovely old (built in 1931) 54' 24 tonne S & S yawl. Beautifully balanced on all points of sail, she has a lovely sheerline with low freeboard aft, and a high bow - but the cockpit was full of water most of the time when sailing hard (OK, in a F 8+ in the Fastnet) and she could probably have rivalled the Contessa 32 for being wet......

And lots of passages on our 5 tonne GRP Challenger 35' (long keel, with a cut-away fore-foot) who is a bit more lively, but still tracks well and has a comfortable motion.

And an Atlantic passage on an S & S 34 which was also an absolute dream to sail on (all S & S designs are) - she had a Monitor wind vane self steering (which never had to work very hard), but on my watches I invariably dis-connected it, as it was so much fun helming her.

And finally, various passages and cruises on a Bavaria and a Jeanneau, both of which had lovely ergonomic accommodation and went like a train on rails, so long as they were kept fairly upright. Ok they slam / slap a bit when going to windward, but the aft quarter cabins are far enough back to ensure that you dont get levitated out of your bunk when she falls off a wave.

And they were / are all lovely boats to sail on.
 
KellysEye said:
>Maybe, the ideal is a modern (water proof and efficient) boat to a traditional design that is prooven to perform, with a few extra luxuries.

Ah, Spirit yachts. They are truly pretty and truly expensive.

Also, you are right, houses are more relevant to yachts than road transport.
Click to expand...

No he isn't. Houses don't move - well at least modern ones dont! They arent machines. Boats and bikes and cars are moving machines so how well they move and how easily they are maintained are key.

The point I was raising was now "why do some people like old boat designs" because some people simply do like old things. You have to be a bit romantic and maybe even obsessed to like running, for example, an old wooden gaffer. The people that really puzzle me are those who believe that older is better, that we make no progress in boat design even if we do so in every other field. Long keels for example - a structure which came about because of the limitations of what you could then make in timber but some people think is the only way to go despite the skill and design know how that goes into modern boats.
 
webcraft said:
.
Show me where I can buy a proven ocean going design brand new for under £20k and I will agree with you . . .

- W
Click to expand...

At just 20k for an "Ocean going boat" you are into old banger territory like it or not. But you wouldnt try to convince yourself that an old Austin Ambassador is better than a new BMW so why do the same with boats? The Ambassador is simply what you can afford not whats best.
 
Luddites were workers who deliberately smashed up new machinery in order to try to preserve their old jobs. What is the connection with a preference for old boats?
Not even the maddest old gaffer fan believes that its preservation will be aided by destroying a plastic boat.
 
cliffordpope said:
Luddites were workers who deliberately smashed up new machinery in order to try to preserve their old jobs. What is the connection with a preference for old boats?
Not even the maddest old gaffer fan believes that its preservation will be aided by destroying a plastic boat.
Click to expand...

There also seem to be far more owners of modern plastic soapdishes willing to decry older designs as worthless than the other way round.

Not, I suspect, that more than a very small proportion on either side take such extreme views.
 
Woodlouse said:
Either way it's folly to say that one type is safer than the other as there are deathtraps in both camps.
Click to expand...

Interesting use of termonology.

With one or two exceptions, show me a fatal accident where design and type of boat was a major factor. Only ones that spring to mind are keels falling off racing boats and two modern designs being overwhelmed by conditions. (Read the MAIB reports for all the details).
 
I ' suspect' that there is a strong correlation between cheap 'n nasty modern sailing boxes and new build cheaply thrown up housing units.

It does seem as though so many new boats try to hide the sailing bits as much as possible and favour lots of sleeping areas. So its a platform with a view, really innit.

So, are luddites favourites better really or just fulfilling ( still) their different criteria ?

if you have to ask.......
 
Bosun Higgs said:
At just 20k for an "Ocean going boat" you are into old banger territory like it or not. But you wouldnt try to convince yourself that an old Austin Ambassador is better than a new BMW so why do the same with boats? The Ambassador is simply what you can afford not whats best.
Click to expand...

The 'old banger' set off for a 6,000 mile cruise with new marblehead sails, new Beta inboard, was bone dry and always made 100+ miles a day. She was comfortable to live on and fun to sail. The 20k included purchase plus all the new gear, windvane, instruments etc. Not really very similar to an Austin Ambassador . . . or not as I remember them anyway.

I would say that in any price range you will always get a better boat by buying a good older design second-hand and refitting it to your own specifications.

- W
 
>More detail please!

Woodlouse saved me typing a response. He said and it's my experience too that:

'' I'm afraid it would seem like some have had some very bad experiences of sailing old boats. Certainly in light airs a modern boat should have the legs on a classic. But at the same time, many an AWB would be surprised at how slippery a MAB can be.

Water seldom makes it into the cockpit on classics. The lee deck might be half underwater but only when you're pushing things. I'd actually expect to stay drier in the cockpit of an old wooden boat. For one thing you're lower down, the cockpit will generally be deeper and there will be less spray coming over the bow.

Going upwind I think will always be more comfortable in a boat with a long keel and a bit of weight. AWB's will slam, and aren't very buoyant in the bows, so the sharp end tends to be a very wet place. A classic design will generally be light and buoyant in the ends so will lift to the waves far more readily making for a gentler motion, less spray and no slamming.

I've never sailed a classic that could be considered a submarine going upwind. If the classic is taking water over the bow, then an AWB will be taking far more, and having a far worst time of it.

My final point is indeed pointing. A modern boat will point higher. But not much more than 5 degrees, which isn't much unless you're racing. And when the wind starts getting stronger, modern AWB's start going sideways, where as your MAB will be going where she's pointed''.
 
webcraft said:
I would say that in any price range you will always get a better boat by buying a good older design second-hand and refitting it to your own specifications.

- W
Click to expand...

That is a sweeping statement! New bits for, say a 35 footer cost the same whether it is an old or newer boat. A new engine is £6k, sails £3k, re rigging £1k, Hydrovane £3.5k and so on. It is not difficult as others have noted, to spend £10k+ on preparing a boat for extended use.

Of course you can make savings by buying a boat that has most of the gear already, using secondhand bits, doing all the work yourself etc. However, old boats often come on the market because the owners want something better and it is uneconomic for them to upgrade their existing boat. There are of,course, exceptions and when I sell my Bavaria in the next couple of years it will be in that unusual category of all the "extras" being relatively new. at least I hope that is the case as I shall be asking top dollar. (This reflects my experience of looking at older boats of similar size - almost all needed £10-20k to bring them up to the same standard!)

Think it is also true that heavy expenditure on upgrading an old boat adds little to its value. £10k spent on a £20k boat is unlikely to add more than £2-3k to sale value.
 
Tranona said:
..... Think it is also true that heavy expenditure on upgrading an old boat adds little to its value. £10k spent on a £20k boat is unlikely to add more than £2-3k to sale value.
Click to expand...

I would agree to this. As a dedicated MAB fan (but not intolerable to AWB) I have found that many MABs that have had upgrades and priced accordingly sit around for a long time on the Brokers lists. However, this also supports webcraft's proposal that you can pick up a good MAB for a decent price as sooner or later the owner sells at the price that the market will support.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top