Tacking optional

[jonjo]

The latest issue of YM has finally convinced me to treat boat reviews in British magazines with a large pinch of salt.

Apparently the inability of a yacht to tack reliably is excusable providing the design has a reputation for nice solid interior furniture and has been in production at British yards for a decade or two.

Just imagine how these same journalists would sharpen their quills with malicious intent and salivate over synonyms for derogatory adjectives in a thesaurus, if they had the opportunity to review a Bavaria or Beneteau that needed to be motor sailed through a tack?

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Aardee]

Glad I'm not the only one to notice that /forums/images/icons/wink.gif

<hr width=100% size=1>"I am a bear of very little brain and long words bother me" - A A Milne.

 

[Neraida]

In my world, and that of quite a few other forum members, of IT, it is well known that the company that provides the best lunch receives the best review of their hardware/software.

Not that I would suggest that the staff of any IPC publication would be so corruptable. The only thing to do I guess is look in last/next months PBO and find out what they thought.

I tend to look in the boaty mags for boats that look like the kind of thing I'm interested in, and make a mental note (which i later forget) to have a sniff round at the nearest boatshow.

As for the Ben/Bav issue, yeah, you're right. Just listen to Clarkson about the latest Ford/Vauxhall/Mercedes/non-aston....

My advice is treat all reviews of anything with a kilo or two of salt, stick to hard facts/figures and your own experience.

Also remember "Gentlemen don't sail to windward"

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[dralex]

Clarkson actually endorsed a Vauxhall lat night on Top Gear. He is also fairly positive about new Fords- I think the difference is the same for boats and cars- there are ones we can reallistically just afford and the ones we just dream about- I think the reviewers have a duty to be accurate, but most is just personal opinion. The only way to choose a boat is tho sail it/ drive it. It would also be nice to live on one for a week, but this is only really possible with volume production charter boats.

<hr width=100% size=1>Life's too short- do it now.

 

[PIGLETSDREAM]

In the same issue, there was much play overe a "test " that included an overnight stay!! wow, of course no mention of how the occupants coped with cooking either in Port or on the move, what they did with all the gear and where the wet gear went whist they slept or ate, or how many actually where on board. You are right, they are not test's just artistic licence to keep the advertisers happy.

<hr width=100% size=1>Must go, Matron is coming

 

[extravert]

I have not seen it yet. What boat is it?

<hr width=100% size=1>One day, I want to be a real sailor. In the mean time I'll just keep tri-ing.

 

[DJE]

Vancouver 27. Heavy and narrow beam. I can't see how they had trouble tacking that.

<hr width=100% size=1>Better to keep one's mouth shut and be considered a fool than open it and remove all possible doubt.

 

[Robin]

Years ago when skippering a Rival 41 chartered by my then company's SC I had the same problem and had to resort to the engine to put in a tack off Beaulieu. The wind was SW F8 - 9 with gusts to over 50kts but this was in the relatively protected Solent and the wind had not been blowing for hours to build a sea. Once tacked she was OK but we were passed to windward going upwind by a quarter tonner (with a tilted up outboard on the back, gives an idea of the size of the boat). OK said small boat was having a much wetter and bouncier ride than us but still!. On entering Lymington the crew going below to make tea found the bilges flooded over the floorboards because both loos had syphoned back. We carried a treble reefed main and half rolled genoa, in hindsight we should have used the hank on staysail instead, but we were only going from Cowes to Lymington to return the boat after the weekend's charter.

Sometimes the perception differs from the reality.



<hr width=100% size=1><font size=1>Sermons from my pulpit are with tongue firmly in cheek and come with no warranty!</font size=1>

 

[billmacfarlane]

Yeah I thought that. For the life of me I couldn't see what was so marvellous using the boat for coastal work. She's a brute in a tight marina, and can't tack reliably. Imagine trying to short tack up Chi harbour with engine failure. You're right about the bias. If that review was in PBO, that magazine that looks down it's nose from a lofty height at AWB's, they'd call it a "proper" yacht. I'd call it something else if I couldn't short tack it !!!!!

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Peppermint]

Re: I think

it's OK for a boat to resist tacking. It's often a sign of good directional stability which is useful on long passages. It's a bit tiresome for a daysail in the Solent though.

To give James of this parish his due he does mention that some of the resistance was down to a bit to much headsail. Cutters require a bit of careful balancing. Well some of them do.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[nicho]

But, I thought these heavy, long keeled things were perfect for heavy weather!! I get more confused every day.........somebody please explain!

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[kds]

Weeeelll - you will be sailing well below 50 degrees to the wind with an over full headsail (particularly furling type !) so when you try to tack you will have to go through well over 100 degrees - which you can't do because the bag of sail flapping on the forestay will catch wind and pull you off again on the same tack.
I think it should be taken as read that reviewers will sail the boat for review purposes with the correct sail set for the conditions. Only then can we get a true impression of what it can do. Part of being a professional ?
As for the long keel etc. Yes it does give directional stability, but the extra inertia also helps it through the tack - IMHO
Ken

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Robin]

Sometimes they believe their own publicity!

The Rival 41 is an excellent long distance cruising boat but upwind performance is definitely not it's strong point whatever the weather. If you look at the shape underwater it is not difficult to see why, most of the draft is from a deep body, the keel itself though a long fin (not a full long keel) is very wide but not very high and will provide little lateral resistance especially when heeled. The long deep body of the hull and long fin will combine to give good tracking ability but will also make it resist turning, as in a tack. I have to say I was very disappointed in the performance of the Rival 41 as we found it, at that time I owned an Elizabethan 30 a 1970s cruiser/racer and the Rival was seen as an object of desire for dreams of 'going off'. Generally speaking though long distance cruisers will plan to avoid upwind routes and especially in heavy weather in which case it matters not, paradoxically weekenders sometimes cannot!

<hr width=100% size=1><font size=1>Sermons from my pulpit are with tongue firmly in cheek and come with no warranty!</font size=1>

 

[Robin]

In the Rival, we could not get up enough momentum despite the weight to take us through the short sharp Solent chop and tack and after 3 failed attempts when we couldn't get close enough to head to wind to back the jib for assistance round, we had to start the engine or run up the beach! This particular boat had a non standard staysail which set on an inner forestay (but which had no runners to support it) and probably would have tacked with this rigged instead of the part rolled genoa, but we were not expecting quite as much wind as we found and were just going a short distance so chose the easier option of the roller reefing headsail. Parking it back in it's marina berth with gusts on the beam up to 45kts even in the marina was another interesting excercise!

<hr width=100% size=1><font size=1>Sermons from my pulpit are with tongue firmly in cheek and come with no warranty!</font size=1>

 

[jonjo]

YM deserves a pat on the back for this perusing this new concept of a 2 day test but I agree the final report did not appear to have been enhanced by the test crew's live aboard experiences.

We can only live in hope that UK sailing magazine will discover they won't fall off the end of the world if they sail past Hurst Castle, then perhaps we will get some interesting reports on sailing characteristics.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[jonjo]

Re: I think

> To give James of this parish his due he does mention that
> some of the resistance was down to a bit to much headsail.

That's a cop out so that JJ did not have to make a serious criticism of his mates boat. The majority of reviews of the Vancouver 27 I have read over the past 5 years allude that something is not quite right with the balance of the sail plan.

The Vancouver is almost a great boat but is let down by a poorly designed rig.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Robin]

As a comment on boat tests, my pet hate is something similar to ''we probably should have taken in a reef, but wanted to see how she would handle without'' or ''the boat supplied for the test came with a non-standard something or other''. The result is a less than informative test, no more than a taster to decide if it is worth a trial sail if the boat is a potential buy.

Yachting World just tested 2 Bennys of different sizes, slated the sailing of the bigger whilst praising the smaller yet vice versa when it came to interior home comforts. The rigging on the big one was set up badly apparently, lots of forestay sag so very short sighted of the dealer to supply a test boat like that IMO but otherwise it just goes to prove my oft repeated comment that each separate design should be treated on it's own merits, ie don't judge a Ford Focus on the performance or interior of a Ford Focus.

<hr width=100% size=1><font size=1>Sermons from my pulpit are with tongue firmly in cheek and come with no warranty!</font size=1>

 

[Peppermint]

Re: The cop out

is more likely he didn't want a trip to the foredeck to change headsails during a short sail.

<hr width=100% size=1>