Suggestions - Lifting keeler, approx 28ft, sub £15K

Simondjuk said:
We can agree to differ in our tastes, but what I can't agree to is misinformed and unsubstantiated opinion potentially putting someone off considering owning an excellent boat such as the Evolution 25.

As I said, I don't know why you think they're likely to fall apart or are only a light wind boat. From experience, I feel that you're wrong on both counts, but if you'd care to elaborate with some valid explanation on how you reached those conclusions, I'd be interested to hear it.

Incidentally, there's no need to kneel at the chart table. You just sit on the settee with your knees pointing forward and inboard. A bit more twist form the waist upwards, and you're facing the chart table square on. It's not quite like sitting at a full blown chart table with a dedicated seat, but perfectly adequate and comfortable. When dropped, the table comes beyond the lateral part of the settee to the aft end of the keel box, so your knees are underneath it to some extent. I don't think I have a photo of the table in the lowered position.



Our Evo crossed the Channel plenty of times and I've seen other 25s and 26s in both France and the Channel Islands. Not in numbers like you see Moodys and Westerlys, but then a minute number of Evolutions were ever built in comparison. The fact of the matter is, the Evos could have been and gone before the rest arrive. :)
Click to expand...

http://www.easternyachts.com/calypso/images/brochure.pdf

I had mine 7 years (number 119) and CLive of Sirenia has had his for 9 years. Only the BMW engine was poxy, and they will all have long since been replaced.
 
Seajet said:
NickC,

' your partner in this purchase ' ?

I'd have thought your boat sharing days would be well and truly over after your experiences !
...
Click to expand...

I can see your concerns but maybe we shouldn’t tar everyone with the same brush. Would be a shame to allow one bad situation to affect our overall view of the sailing community. After all it was only one out of the _original_ four partners who turned out to be a narcissistic nutter.

New potential partner is someone I have known for maybe twenty years, we have at times worked together and he has even been known to come down the local for a pint, so credentials look ok. :encouragement:
 
Last edited:
TSB240,

the Evolution 25 I looked over was at Rye in around 1988ish.

Seeing as I helped the initial build on my boat then lots of details since and have worked on plenty of boats ( and other things ) since 1970 I knew what I saw and was not impressed to say the least.

I'm willing to accept that may have been a poor example but my comments are not unsubstantiated and I do know what I'm talking about.

One only has to look at the design compared with an Anderson 26 to see which to be on in stiff weather; BTW do they capsize & fill up through the keelcase like that other Everitt design the E-boat ?
 
Seajet said:
TSB240,

the Evolution 25 I looked over was at Rye in around 1988ish.

Seeing as I helped the initial build on my boat then lots of details since and have worked on plenty of boats ( and other things ) since 1970 I knew what I saw and was not impressed to say the least.

I'm willing to accept that may have been a poor example but my comments are not unsubstantiated and I do know what I'm talking about.

One only has to look at the design compared with an Anderson 26 to see which to be on in stiff weather; BTW do they capsize & fill up through the keelcase like that other Everitt design the E-boat ?
Click to expand...

WTF has this to do with my last post.

Regular forum users all appreciate that the Long dead Anderson Brand will be better in your view than any other lifter.

Some of us with real world experience of living and sailing other brands have formed very different views.......

Is this better than taking advice from a user than a chum who had one, a guy I met in the pub who had one or a lone salesman for a dated 70s design?

I think the op requested some alternative views rather than the oft repeated Anderson fables..
 
Seajet said:
TSB240,

the Evolution 25 I looked over was at Rye in around 1988ish.

Seeing as I helped the initial build on my boat then lots of details since and have worked on plenty of boats ( and other things ) since 1970 I knew what I saw and was not impressed to say the least.

I'm willing to accept that may have been a poor example but my comments are not unsubstantiated and I do know what I'm talking about.

One only has to look at the design compared with an Anderson 26 to see which to be on in stiff weather; BTW do they capsize & fill up through the keelcase like that other Everitt design the E-boat ?
Click to expand...
The Anderson 26 was not well liked, and certainly not well purchased. I have never heard of one being sunk the way you describe, and I had mine broached flat in the water many times during racing. BTW, in CHS at the time I got an SSS of 22, which at the time was Offshore up to 250 miles.
I would happily be in port several hours in front of the Anderson 26, showered and in the bar enjoying my second or third pint. What on earth makes you think the Anderson is a witch upwind? It isn't.
 
Seajet said:
TSB240,

the Evolution 25 I looked over was at Rye in around 1988ish.

Seeing as I helped the initial build on my boat then lots of details since and have worked on plenty of boats ( and other things ) since 1970 I knew what I saw and was not impressed to say the least.

I'm willing to accept that may have been a poor example but my comments are not unsubstantiated and I do know what I'm talking about.

One only has to look at the design compared with an Anderson 26 to see which to be on in stiff weather; BTW do they capsize & fill up through the keelcase like that other Everitt design the E-boat ?
Click to expand...

I assume this was in reply to me, not TSB240, so shall respond.

I'm afraid that simply saying 'I knew what I saw and was not impressed top say the least' for a second time does leave your comments entirely unsubstantiated. So I will ask again, what did you see which in your considerable experience indicated that Evolutions would fall apart and were only suitable for light winds?

I've never heard of an Evolution capsizing and flooding. Even at their least stable with the keel fully raised, they will recover from 90 degrees of heel, have a 45% ballast ratio and lots of form stability. Whilst sharing some principles, the fact that Evolution 25 is an entirely different proposition to the E-Boat should be glaringly obvious to any knowledgeable observer who has taken more than a cursory look at both.
 
My comments are just as substantiated as yours and less biased as I've never owned or wanted an Evolution or Anderson 26.

Incidentally in answer to another poster the sole reason the A26 only sold 16 or so is that Andersons, being a high quality boatbuilder, went bust when they lost their MOD contract; I'd say Evolutions are equally ' long dead '.

E-Boats are well known to have a problem flooding through the keelcase, ( and a mod' owners can do ) which doesn't strike me as the hallmark of a super safe designer.

Talk of the A26 being slow is utter nonsense, a bit slower than an Everitt thing in light - medium airs certainly but it was designed and built to be a fast seaworthy cruiser, which it is.

Then you think bouncing a boat drying on hard sand moorings is a seamanlike idea so no point trying to discuss sense.

If the OP has any sense, experience & is interested in either boat I hope he sees both - he will be able to tell at a glance what I'm talking about.
 
Well I'm a knowledgable observer and have taken a lot more than a cursory look at both.

My views are less biased as I've never owned or wanted an Evolution or A26, but I know both.

Talk of the A26 being slow is nonsense, I have sailed several; a bit slower than a n Everitt thing in light-medium airs I imagine, but it was designed and built to take people through heavy weather.

The only reason only 16 were sold is that Andersons were a traditional high quality firm making launches for the RN; loss of the MOD contract meant they folded.

I seem to remember Evolutions went about the same time along with many other boatbuilders.

Then some people think bouncing a boat on a drying hard sand mooring is seamanlike, so I shouldn't expect sense from them.

If the OP is interested I hope he looks at both boats...:)
 
I'm not sure which of your rather confused posts to respond to as they seem to overlap somewhat, so I'll address the points in order, omitting the duplicates.

I'm not the one making the assertions, you are, and your comments here are entirely unsubstantiated because, guess what?, you have offered no evidence or support for them other than 'I didn't like what I saw', which in the absence of any foundation is nothing more than baseless opinion. It's rather like me saying, 'If it looks right, it generally is and Anderson 22s are pug ugly, so must be terrible boats.' I'm not saying that and nor would I other than by way of making an example, but it is precisely what you're doing. So, basically, Evolution 25s and 26s are all likely to fall apart and are only any use in light winds just because you say they are, and there's no need for you to provide any examples why you say so, we can just take is as a fact because you've been fiddling with boats and some other stuff since the 70s. Well jolly good, that's that cleared up - you say it, so that's how it is.

You say you know Evolution 25s and that you have a chum with an E-Boat. If this were the case you'd not have assumed them to be comparable, yet you did. Either there's a contradiction here or you really don't know what the important factors you're looking at are when you observe a boat.

Ah, the old 'slow means seaworthy' myth. If the Anderson 26 had been well designed, it could have been faster and more seaworthy than an Evo 25. Likewise boats could and have been built which are both faster and more seaworthy than the Evo 25. Of the two boats in question here however, the A26 is certainly slower than the Evo 25 but it's debatable as to whether it's more seaworthy. So it loses out on one count as a matter of record and it's impossible to establish whether it's any better or worse on the other. That's that cleared up as well, the Evo is fast and has no reputation for being unseaworthy. By comparison, the A26 is slow and has no reputation for being unseaworthy.

I'm not sure what or who you're referring to when you mention bouncing a boat around by drying it our on sand, but I can say that I've dried out on sand many times with no bouncing of any concern, many times having slept right through both the drying out and refloating. If it doesn't wake me up, it's nothing to worry about. In her previous ownership, our Evo spent 30 years dying out onto a gravel creek bed at every low water - the sum of the damage, a couple of little fingernail size indentations in the bottom of the hull. Provided you're not running in through breakers, dying out onto a firm surface on a weather shore really is not the issue you imagine and I'd suggest you try it some time so that you know this rather than merely hypothesising about it, but of course an A22 will fall on its side if dried out on a firm surface, so perhaps not. This problem of course also precludes Anderson 22s from making use of cheap drying pontoon berths with a bottom of unknown softness when visiting marinas, lest the keel not sink in and the boat tip over, perhaps onto the pontoon.

What would probably be useful for the OP would be for you to offer some actual reasons as to why you're telling him certain boats he might consider will surely fall apart so that whilst taking his glance at them he will spot the horrors you saw when taking yours. Instead you offer, 'It's bad, I'm not explaining why I say it's bad but I say it's bad, so it is bad.'

Finally, for you to say that your opinion on anything relating to Andersons or Oliver Lee is unbiased is laughable.
 
Simondjuk said:
Finally, for you to say that your opinion on anything relating to Andersons or Oliver Lee is unbiased is laughable.
Click to expand...
But that is the whole of the Seajet reputation in these forums. More reliable than a Golf is the fact that Seajet will always hold that an Anderson of whatever hue is the epitome of yacht design.

By the way the Beneteau First 25 of late 80s used to give good account of itself as a lift keeler.
 
Actually if you displayed any sense at all you would know I freely mention my ideas re the faults of the Anderson 26, and the fewer but still present ones of the A22.

Strange I feel confident to do this as I have faith in the designs & builds among their peers, especially the 22, while I hear nothing but ' oh my Evo was really perfect '.

Yes, they had really nice big stripes - all you could apparently wish for...:rolleyes:
 
Seajet said:
Actually if you displayed any sense at all you would know I freely mention my ideas re the faults of the Anderson 26, and the fewer but still present ones of the A22.

Strange I feel confident to do this as I have faith in the designs & builds among their peers, especially the 22, while I hear nothing but ' oh my Evo was really perfect '.

Yes, they had really nice big stripes - all you could apparently wish for...:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Stranger still if you actually recommended anything other than an Anderson! You have built your entire career on your espousal of the Anderson creed.
And you have the nerve to criticise when a couple of ex owners provide some well needed balance to your perpetual diatribes!!!

Note: I am no longer an Evo 25 owner. I got over it.
I am not an evangelical Jeanneau owner now. I expect I will get over it.

Wait until I get the Galion 22.
 
I have not said that the Evo was perfect. Like every boat, it had its flaws and compromises as well as its good points. You on the other hand have said that they will fall apart and are not suitable for use in heavy conditions but will not (or just as likely cannot without opening yourself up to ridicule from the knowledgeable ex-Evo owners here) offer any valid reasons as to why you think this to be so.

Since it's completely apparent that you are incapable of seeing how worthless this lack of corroboration makes the opinion (which you cannot discern from information) that you have offered, there's no point continuing on the subject.

I'm not sure what your obsessive aversion to stripes is about either. It keeps surfacing. It was the late 70s/early 80s and everything had big stripes - boats, cars, outboard engines, curtains and even underpants. Get over it, they don't make a good boat a bad boat... unless of course you say that it is so.

For the record however, you're wrong again. Mine left the factory with quite subtle twin stripes just below the toerail and was identical in all respects to the one in the full page image of the 25 on the second page of this document - http://www.easternyachts.com/calypso/images/brochure.pdf . I do quite like the twin foot wide stripes as well however but can't find the other brochure depicting a 25 with these. Instead of a rather dowdy looking mum putting a toddler to bed, the 'big stripe' brochure has a distinctly less dowdy looking specimen wearing nothing but a bikini draped over the forepeak berth. This can mean only one thing - those big stripes were doing it for 80s chicks! That's not a problem to me.
 
Glad we agree, the best thing about Evo's was the 1980's big stripes.

Now let's all of us shut up and let the OP get back to designs which originally stated were bigger anyway, we could argue all year about who mentioned Evo or A26 first but I'm happy as the respondant on that score. :)

On a serious note, lift keels become problematic above about 25', hence designs like the Seal 850 /28 and indeed Anderson 26 having the less than ideal format of long ballast stub with keel going through it; ballast higher than desirable and hard mouthed handling.

Or Evo etc format of completely retracting keel so better handling but the hull horribly exposed to even a pointy stone when drying out.

Sensible lift keels become difficult to engineer affordably above about 24-25'.
 
Seajet said:
Glad we agree, the best thing about Evo's was the 1980's big stripes.

Now let's all of us shut up and let the OP get back to designs which originally stated were bigger anyway, we could argue all year about who mentioned Evo or A26 first but I'm happy as the respondant on that score. :)

On a serious note, lift keels become problematic above about 25', hence designs like the Seal 850 /28 and indeed Anderson 26 having the less than ideal format of long ballast stub with keel going through it; ballast higher than desirable and hard mouthed handling.

Or Evo etc format of completely retracting keel so better handling but the hull horribly exposed to even a pointy stone when drying out.

Sensible lift keels become difficult to engineer affordably above about 24-25'.
Click to expand...
Better not tell Ovni or Southerly that, or they might try and produce huge boats with inappropriate engineering.

Oh, and Mirabella V too, better give them a call to warn them in case they try something like this.
22.png
 
NealB said:
I'm interested, Andy.

What was it about the build of the Evolution that was so bad? What was that you saw?
Click to expand...

Neal,

the boat was shabby and falling apart, and I mean bulkheads, all of the interior seemed very lightly built and likely to squeak if prodded !

The chart table was a very strange affair, a sort of knee high platform in place of a quarter berth.

The coachroof and decks had a lot of star cracks; maybe it had been through a dozen transats & Fastnets without maintainence, but let's say I was underwhelmed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top