Weight mystery

R

river251

New Member
Joined
2 Aug 2020
Messages
11
Visit site
Hello, I'm considering a Prout Snowgoose 37 and a PDQ 36. The beam is slightly wider on the PDQ. But they are very similar in dimensions. However I noticed that the Prout weights 12000 lbs, and the PDQ weighs 8000 lbs. I am very mystified.....where is the extra 4000 lbs on the Prout?

Thanks for any enlightenment.
 
river251 said:
Hello, I'm considering a Prout Snowgoose 37 and a PDQ 36. The beam is slightly wider on the PDQ. But they are very similar in dimensions. However I noticed that the Prout weights 12000 lbs, and the PDQ weighs 8000 lbs. I am very mystified.....where is the extra 4000 lbs on the Prout?

Thanks for any enlightenment.
Click to expand...
I dont know anything about the PDQ but we owned a pre-Elite Snowgoose 37 for 11 years and cruised it extensively including across the Atlantic and back. Our Snowgoose weighed 5300kg in cruising trim. She had a taller than standard rig with heavier standing rigging but we kept her light. We also had the single engine. I understand that the Elite model was about 1000kg heavier being a totally different hull
 
The PDQ is also way over 8000 pounds in cruising mode. Probably more like 10,250 pounds in what I would call light local cruising mode (full tanks, some toys, full galley, but not a month's groceries and full spares). Probably 10,750 pounds with bicycles and everything.

The PDQ is foam core above the waterline, with balsa in some bulkheads. The PDQ runs on twin yamaha 9.9 outboards in bridgedeck wells or inboard diesels, depending on the model. Both PDQ and Prout have excellent reputations for durability and seaworthiness. The PDQ is considerably faster and more weatherly.

(PDQ owner)
 
thinwater said:
The PDQ is also way over 8000 pounds in cruising mode. Probably more like 10,250 pounds in what I would call light local cruising mode (full tanks, some toys, full galley, but not a month's groceries and full spares). Probably 10,750 pounds with bicycles and everything.

The PDQ is foam core above the waterline, with balsa in some bulkheads. The PDQ runs on twin yamaha 9.9 outboards in bridgedeck wells or inboard diesels, depending on the model. Both PDQ and Prout have excellent reputations for durability and seaworthiness. The PDQ is considerably faster and more weatherly.

(PDQ owner)
Click to expand...
I am sure the PDQ is faster than the Prout. Whether it is more ‘weatherly’ is open to debate. Going back a few years, Prout were famous for more circumnavigations then any other multihull. They dont have a habit for capsizing even with their relatively narrow beam. They are simply constructed but robust. It seems that everywhere you go there is an old Prout still floating though not always in the best of condition.
We had two memorable experiences in our Prout. One was out in the Atlantic with winds >50kts. She handled it well even with waves breaking behind us and rolling over the back deck. The second more memorable moment was sailing between the Algarve and Madeira in very large seas circa 5m on the beam fully reefed with small working jib and fourth reef in the main. We got hit by a rogue wave, beam on, that was truly huge. We slid sideways down the face of the wave. The low aspect ratio keels allowed us to slip sideways preventing us from tripping over and capsizing. It was a very scary moment. The interior of the boat was a mess. Everything was strewn all over the floor. The angle we must have seen on the face of the wave felt very much like we were going over but we survived in tact. We later discovered we had sailed over a seamount that we think in those rough conditions created the rogue wave that was at least twice the height of any other wave we saw.
On balance I would say the Prout, kept very light is a very safe boat. The problem with any relatively small cat is they arent as safe a bigger cat. The bigger you go the safer they get
 
geem said:
I am sure the PDQ is faster than the Prout. Whether it is more ‘weatherly’ is open to debate. Going back a few years, Prout were famous for more circumnavigations then any other multihull. They dont have a habit for capsizing even with their relatively narrow beam. They are simply constructed but robust. It seems that everywhere you go there is an old Prout still floating though not always in the best of condition.
We had two memorable experiences in our Prout. One was out in the Atlantic with winds >50kts. She handled it well even with waves breaking behind us and rolling over the back deck. The second more memorable moment was sailing between the Algarve and Madeira in very large seas circa 5m on the beam fully reefed with small working jib and fourth reef in the main. We got hit by a rogue wave, beam on, that was truly huge. We slid sideways down the face of the wave. The low aspect ratio keels allowed us to slip sideways preventing us from tripping over and capsizing. It was a very scary moment. The interior of the boat was a mess. Everything was strewn all over the floor. The angle we must have seen on the face of the wave felt very much like we were going over but we survived in tact. We later discovered we had sailed over a seamount that we think in those rough conditions created the rogue wave that was at least twice the height of any other wave we saw.
On balance I would say the Prout, kept very light is a very safe boat. The problem with any relatively small cat is they arent as safe a bigger cat. The bigger you go the safer they get
Click to expand...

Weatherly refers to the ability to point to windward, not seaworthiness. I did not mean to imply that the Prout is not seaworthy. Far from it. Great reputation.

adjective
Sailing
adjective: weatherly
  1. (of a boat) able to sail close to the wind without drifting much to leeward.
 
thinwater said:
Weatherly refers to the ability to point to windward, not seaworthiness. I did not mean to imply that the Prout is not seaworthy. Far from it. Great reputation.

adjective
Sailing
adjective: weatherly
  1. (of a boat) able to sail close to the wind without drifting much to leeward.
Click to expand...
Ok, lost in translation?
Our Prout had a mast 8ft taller than standard and laminate sails. She pointed high in flat/gentle seas. In bumpy seas the motion as she crashed through seas was not fun. The solid bridge deck does not help this.
 
I don't think it is only the solid bridge deck - few cruising cats sail well hard on the wind in seas. In a monohull you can steer round waves, not so a cat as if one hull misses a wave the other hull is sure to catch a different rogue wave.

Weight is a movable feast - in full cruising mode we carry almost 1,000kg of liquids, fuel, water and alcohol - this obviously reduces but it is a significant part of weight. We would carry 3 months worth of consumables, food, - as where we go there are no supermarkets (though we do catch fish - and have a 25kg lobster pot). Not forgetting kayaks, bicycles, dinghy, outboard etc (plus crew).

Better to define what the weight involves - as I saw a Prout Snowgoose 37 for sale with a weight quoted of over 8t.

Lightwaves, 35 and 38 are, were, like PDQs - solid glass below the water line, foam and glass above (and a 22'6" beam, plus 1m bridge deck clearance and I think all were built with mini keels.

Jonathan
 
Thank you! I'm thrilled to get input from both a PDQ owner and a Prout owner. I did not know the Elite was a different hull and heavier. But with a wider beam I guess it has to be different.

I'm new to sailing, but, is it correct that the load capacity is a funtion of (unloaded I presume) weight? So that the Prout, according to Sailboat Data, at 12000 lbs, can carry 50% more than the PDQ 36, at 8000 lbs, before performance is affected? Thinwater if you are carrying 2750 lbs, that's 34% of the stock empty weight. What, if any, effect did you notice on performance at that weight?

Neevers you carried 2200 lbs of liquids, plus consumables and the toys. Did you notice any effect on sailing performance?

Well these are my big questions. I prefer the PDQ as far as performance with it's more modern sail plan and lighter weight, but I prefer the Prout for it's load capacity if I need provisions for an ocean crossing.

I should note I'm thinking about a solo trip across the Atlantic. I don't know how much provisions one person needs or how much weight I'll carry. But I'm assuming those numbers you guys mention would be enough for my solo needs.

Thanks very much......
 
Last edited:
No sailing conditions are ever the same - stronger, weaker wind, slight difference in apparent - so its subjective.

Bur we can get into high teens, 16/17 knots, surfing and we can average 10knots over 100nm having consumed some of that liquid (the water). Maybe if we were dry our averages under similar conditions would be 12 knots. The highest speed for a sister cat is 21 knots and it carried much less and had a crew of 5

But with 2 on board, one off watch, an average of 10knots means you need to be hitting 14 knots regularly and (maybe I'm a wimp) but that's fast enough :). Subjectively I'd say we sacrifice, more in terms of, acceleration rather than outright speed (top speeds maybe lower but its the acceleration I have actually noticed).

Weight is a compromise - we have a desalination unit - but it needs electricity (lots of it) so we carry as much water as possible - but we do expect 2 hot (navy) showers a day (its the 21st Century!). We have a big deep freeze built into the cabin sole (and will not think twice about a roast leg of lamb, or freezing the crayfish) and when we have full water tanks - run the washing machine., we have an investor and our house bank is 400a/hrs. (We've done the RORC blue water races - no need to go back there!)

We maybe sacrifice speed for creature comforts. Having run a racing yacht you can improve boat speed by a focus on good sails and concentrating on sail trim. The difference between a winning yacht and an also ran is the time spent chatting and the time spent on sail trim.

I've sailed, as crew, long distance on a couple of Schionnings a 43' and 50'. They were faster but sacrificed space for speed, you have to duck down to get down into the hulls, the bows are so fine the owners hated going to fuel up and the owners, same owners for both cats - never sailed without crew.

Though we carry all this kit we have downsized chain from 8mm to 6mm and only use aluminium anchors. We only carry what we, think we, need. Its not 1950s camping but enjoying the life aboard.

Jonathan
 
River 251.

We carry 500kg of water - you don't need that. You can wash in seawater, it need not be cold - with a black bag it will heat up in the sun. If you are sailing solo I'd not suggest you carry alcohol (with your dinner every night), you don't need a washing machine and you might buy the dinghy and outboard when you arrive, having crossed the Atlantic. There are lots of ways to save weight. I'd not get hung up over weight, given the reason you are buying the yacht.

You may find, if you decide company might be a good idea - the second person does not share frugal views.

But Geem chose to go with laminate sails - they will make a difference to performance, maybe more difference than not carrying that extra 100l of water.

My comment would be crossing oceans is not a holiday - its a serious undertaking but it does not need to be a SAS course - unless you choose that. It does not matter whether you cross the Atlantic in a PDQ or a Prout - in 30 years time I hope you don't remember how awful it was but it brings a smile to your face.

Keep asking the questions - and good luck, I wish you well

Jonathan
 
a. As Neeves says, you can trim a lot of weight. A crossing is short compared to a long cruise.

b. Slower. Also more bridge slap, depending on the boat. Both of these ride pretty low to start with. The PDQ 32 has much greater clearance; this was an intentional design change , as the 32 is a later development.

As for a solo crossing, there are a lot of variables, not the least of which is sailing a mutihull with sail up while you are asleep, which is bound to happen. Safety would require reefing down to nothing. As much as I love multihulls, I would chose a monohull for solo crossings.
 
thinwater said:
a. As Neeves says, you can trim a lot of weight. A crossing is short compared to a long cruise.

b. Slower. Also more bridge slap, depending on the boat. Both of these ride pretty low to start with. The PDQ 32 has much greater clearance; this was an intentional design change , as the 32 is a later development.

As for a solo crossing, there are a lot of variables, not the least of which is sailing a mutihull with sail up while you are asleep, which is bound to happen. Safety would require reefing down to nothing. As much as I love multihulls, I would chose a monohull for solo crossings.
Click to expand...
We went from a 37ft cat to a heavy 44ft monohull. By comparison the monohull is more comfortable on every point of sail except dead down wind when it is blowing some. The monohull is also faster when loaded up as a liveaboard as it carries weight far better. We have so much more gear onboard the monohull that we couldnt possible carry safely on the cat.
If you overload a cat it will become dangerous far more quickly than overloading a monohull. Lots of cats that get overloaded suffer structural problems. My advice to the OP is dont get a cat if you intend to do anything other than keep it light. We never saw another Prout Snowgoose as light as ours. They were all overloaded in my opinion. We used to work on the basis that the central nacelle should not touch the water at anchor. We would see many with the nacelle antifouled!
 
Yes.

I made a practice of cleaning every locker to the BOTTOM every year, and carting anything off that had not been used (other than a few spares). Even though I crused more than most, I could see that my transoms were typically 2 inches higher. That makes for speed AND reduced slamming.

Multihulls are not for peole that travel "heavy." I learned to pack light through years of backpacking, expedition climbing, and business travel. Less is more.
 
I don't know the Prout nor PDQ (we did look at the last Prout before they closed) but in the comparison its all about weight = how do the bridge deck clearances compare. Ours is 1m and for us its not an issue but I know other cats with less bridgedeck clearance, the neighbour on the next swing mooring to us has a 44 - from the same yard as the PDQ and he strongly complains of slap - but then he does have air-conditioning.

Jonathan
 
Neeves said:
I don't know the Prout nor PDQ (we did look at the last Prout before they closed) but in the comparison its all about weight = how do the bridge deck clearances compare. Ours is 1m and for us its not an issue but I know other cats with less bridgedeck clearance, the neighbour on the next swing mooring to us has a 44 - from the same yard as the PDQ and he strongly complains of slap - but then he does have air-conditioning.

Jonathan
Click to expand...
Agreed, weight is a constant battle on a small catamaran.
On our Prout we removed all loose ply such as bunk bases, saloon table, doors, etc and changed then for foam core panels. Every little helps on a cat.
We crossed the Atlantic with just two of us. We left the Canaries with both water tanks full but ran one tank to empty. We then made water on our very small 5l/hr watermaker keeping the port hull tank full.
We carried very little in the way of spares but we had done a full strip down of the boat before we left. This included an engine strip and rebuild, same for the drive leg, rudders, rigging and new batteries. They are very simple and durable boats so if you get the basics right there is little to go wrong
 
geem said:
Agreed, weight is a constant battle on a small catamaran.
On our Prout we removed all loose ply such as bunk bases, saloon table, doors, etc and changed then for foam core panels. Every little helps on a cat.
We crossed the Atlantic with just two of us. We left the Canaries with both water tanks full but ran one tank to empty. We then made water on our very small 5l/hr watermaker keeping the port hull tank full.
We carried very little in the way of spares but we had done a full strip down of the boat before we left. This included an engine strip and rebuild, same for the drive leg, rudders, rigging and new batteries. They are very simple and durable boats so if you get the basics right there is little to go wrong
Click to expand...

I'd agree with everything you say.

The focus on the weight of a cat, the statistic is important but its what you do, and what you might expect that is critical.

I have a weight fetish, hence the downsizing of chain, but we are also living on the boat independently with little opportunity to replenish - anything. We carry 2 x 9kg gas cylinders (we use the gas for cooking and heating water (those 2 showers a day). We have a full set of tools, including gear puller - but though we can achieve (what I think are decent averages for speed - its not a priority) - we live a comfortable life (not an expensive one) - but comfortable.

If we were to prioritise weight, or speed, we'ed do what we did when we were racing, ocean racing and round the cans, we would strip down (cut the toothbrushes in half, carry only half a tube of toothpaste, not carry climbing boots, ditch 2 of the anchors, not carry the electric bread maker :) and only take one iPad saving a computer and camera - etc etc.

To me the critical issue is not the weight, as such, but how comfortable are you with the integrity of the yacht - and some of that comes with sailing it.

Its easy for us - we have no schedule - but have faith in the yacht (55 knots on the beam) - yacht was fine, crew a bit frazzled.

So to the OP - which cat makes you feel 'comfortable', or (if you like) confident - then what can you sacrifice to reduce your passage time - if that is the priority.

Jonathan
 
Neeves said:
I'd agree with everything you say.

The focus on the weight of a cat, the statistic is important but its what you do, and what you might expect that is critical.

I have a weight fetish, hence the downsizing of chain, but we are also living on the boat independently with little opportunity to replenish - anything. We carry 2 x 9kg gas cylinders (we use the gas for cooking and heating water (those 2 showers a day). We have a full set of tools, including gear puller - but though we can achieve (what I think are decent averages for speed - its not a priority) - we live a comfortable life (not an expensive one) - but comfortable.

If we were to prioritise weight, or speed, we'ed do what we did when we were racing, ocean racing and round the cans, we would strip down (cut the toothbrushes in half, carry only half a tube of toothpaste, not carry climbing boots, ditch 2 of the anchors, not carry the electric bread maker :) and only take one iPad saving a computer and camera - etc etc.

To me the critical issue is not the weight, as such, but how comfortable are you with the integrity of the yacht - and some of that comes with sailing it.

Its easy for us - we have no schedule - but have faith in the yacht (55 knots on the beam) - yacht was fine, crew a bit frazzled.

So to the OP - which cat makes you feel 'comfortable', or (if you like) confident - then what can you sacrifice to reduce your passage time - if that is the priority.

Jonathan
Click to expand...
The issues of too much weight become self evident when you need to go to windward. If you are going through the waves instead of over them because the hull is overloaded then you really will know that that bread maker was the final straw?
 
Thank you guys so much. I couldn't get this info anywhere else.

I made up a list of things to see how much weight I might want to carry. I was shocked. I did not include full tools and spares, as I don't know that. The Honda Rukus and 1000w workstation probably could go, but weight-wise they are not heavy. Figuring out power I need to do, but the 1000w workstation, like I have at work, is probably too much demand.

What do you think?

WEIGHT 30 DAY VOYAGE
Guitar&Case
2​
30​
Amp
1​
30​
Clothes&shoes
1​
50​
Weather clothes
1​
20​
Macbook pro
2​
10​
Dell 5820q
1​
55​
iPad
2​
2​
dell 27 display
2​
20​
food 3lb/day
30​
90​
freezer 4.5 cf
1​
64​
spotzerowater
1​
150​
garmin radar
1​
15​
bicycle
1​
20​
weights
1​
200​
honda ruckus
1​
200​
drill sabresaw
2​
10​
batteries
4​
5​
fuel tank
35​
305​
water tank
75​
675​
dingy+outboard
1​
150​
TOTAL
2101​
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top