what is the best sailing bilge keeler

[muyuu]

Sorry I don't get it? What are you comparing?

I was just pointing out that many 80s designs have been only marginally improved if at all. I don't think RMs are any better than many designs 20 years older, they have just taken a markedly different trade-off.

Faster, yes.
A lot more expensive, yes (well, they are new after all).
Better? not IMO. If Parker still made boats I'd pay a premium over a similar sized RM.

 

[Theshipscat]

I was just pointing out that many 80s designs have been only marginally improved if at all. I don't think RMs are any better than many designs 20 years older, they have just taken a markedly different trade-off.

Faster, yes.
A lot more expensive, yes (well, they are new after all).
Better? not IMO. If Parker still made boats I'd pay a premium over a similar sized RM.

I see. I can't comment, I know theyre light but from what I'd read I believed them to be stable.

 

[muyuu]

I see. I can't comment, I know theyre light but from what I'd read I believed them to be stable.

They are, up to a degree of inclination. Then they are stable again but upside down.

http://koti.kapsi.fi/hvartial/stab/stab.htm#XX3

It just doesn't feel right to me that a monohull won't come back up. Then you lose at everything to a multihull, except price, obviously.

 

[rwoofer]

I was just pointing out that many 80s designs have been only marginally improved if at all. I don't think RMs are any better than many designs 20 years older, they have just taken a markedly different trade-off.

Faster, yes.
A lot more expensive, yes (well, they are new after all).
Better? not IMO. If Parker still made boats I'd pay a premium over a similar sized RM.

The big difference between wide boats of the 80s and now is that modern boats have much more freeboard, which significantly contributes to righting stability. I think my RM880 had an AVS of 127 degrees which is pretty reasonable for a modern 28 footer.

Modern boats also tend to have more weight in the bulbs of keels, which along with form shape makes them stiffer to sail for less overall weight. They can be successfully designed that way due to the evolution of modern sails/ materials that convert more of the power into foward motion (ie less drag).

Having sailed my RM880 against a parker 275, I can say that the RM is considerably faster. That shouldn't really be a surprise just by looking at the designs. My money would and did go the opposite way to you.

 

[muyuu]

Having sailed my RM880 against a parker 275, I can say that the RM is considerably faster. That shouldn't really be a surprise just by looking at the designs. My money would and did go the opposite way to you.

Yep, in my post I did say that the RMs are faster than pure displacement boats. However the parker 275 does come up even from total turtling. Yours wouldn't. Trust me and don't do the experiment

There's nothing new to discover in pure displacement boats. Semi-displacement hulls are a different story, and yes your boat is really fast.

 

[rwoofer]

Yep, in my post I did say that the RMs are faster than pure displacement boats. However the parker 275 does come up even from total turtling. Yours wouldn't. Trust me and don't do the experiment

There's nothing new to discover in pure displacement boats. Semi-displacement hulls are a different story, and yes your boat is really fast.

I did misread your post. I was referring to the fact that modern boats are quite a lot faster therefore design has moved on from the 80s. You could make an 80s boat with different trade-offs (such as width) and it still wouldn't be the same as a modern boat because of all the other factors.

I still don't understand how you came make the claim that a Parker 275 does come up from total turtling. I don't know of any boats other than lifeboats that can make that claim. The AVS gives you a rough indication of likelyness to come back from a rollover, but no more than that.

I bit academic really as both are good boats for their purpose and not designed to be ocean crossers, so never likely to be tested.

 

[muyuu]

I did misread your post. I was referring to the fact that modern boats are quite a lot faster therefore design has moved on from the 80s. You could make an 80s boat with different trade-offs (such as width) and it still wouldn't be the same as a modern boat because of all the other factors.

What I challenge is that claim in bold. In the 80s, planing mechanics were already well known but they simply thought they didn't belong in a yacht when righting moment at high angles is a necessary trade-off, which still is and always will be. They also thought 27 footers could be Cat.A and go offshore. There is extensive bibliography on planing hulls as far back as the 60s. They knew perfectly well how to do it, they - or the market - just had a different set of priorities.

Modern displacement boats are not quite a lot faster than (good) displacement boats from the 80s. They are marginally faster at best. Or, in other words, there are very modern designs from 30 years ago - which is nothing in the long history of displacement hulls, really.

You are comparing a semi-displacement boat to a displacement boat. Apples to oranges. Cruisers to racers. Unless cruising is now considered obsolete.

There are many hulls from the 80s and 90s that are pretty much pareto-optimal.

 

[JimC]

You misunderstand me. Hunters are now built to order by Lauren Marine - not talking about 20 years ago when they were regular production boats available as kits or complete.

FWIW even when Hunters were in their original Rochford factory (which was until 2004 not 20 years ago) they were built to order, British cruising yacht manufacturers have rarely built for stock. Even the mighty Hunter Marine of Florida, compared to which British Hunter is a cottage industry, build their cruising yachts to order or so I have read. Yachts built by the US Hunter firm are marketed in the UK as Legends to avoid confusion of names and they are available as twin-keelers http://www.marinesalesuk.co.uk/legend-yachts-history . Other current manufacturers of twin-keeled yachts include the RMs, the Bi-Loup range from Wrighton Yachts, and of course British Hunter, links here: www.wrightonyachts.com www.rm-yachts.com www.britishhunter.co.uk

The OP headed his post "what is the best sailing bilge-keeler?". I don't know. Some twin keelers that I consider to sail well from my own limited experience or observation are as follows: Westerly Griffon, Merlin & Fulmar. Hunter Horizon 21, 23 & 27 and Channel 31 & 32. Sadler 26. Moody 31, also the Moody 336 has been praised by a previous poster and the S31 should also be good as it is like a scaled-down 336. I'm sure there must be more.

 

[Theshipscat]

FWIW even when Hunters were in their original Rochford factory (which was until 2004 not 20 years ago) they were built to order, British cruising yacht manufacturers have rarely built for stock. Even the mighty Hunter Marine of Florida, compared to which British Hunter is a cottage industry, build their cruising yachts to order or so I have read. Yachts built by the US Hunter firm are marketed in the UK as Legends to avoid confusion of names and they are available as twin-keelers http://www.marinesalesuk.co.uk/legend-yachts-history . Other current manufacturers of twin-keeled yachts include the RMs, the Bi-Loup range from Wrighton Yachts, and of course British Hunter, links here: www.wrightonyachts.com www.rm-yachts.com www.britishhunter.co.uk

The OP headed his post "what is the best sailing bilge-keeler?". I don't know. Some twin keelers that I consider to sail well from my own limited experience or observation are as


follows: Westerly Griffon, Merlin & Fulmar. Hunter Horizon 21, 23 & 27 and Channel 31 & 32. Sadler 26. Moody 31, also the Moody 336 has been praised by a previous poster and the S31 should also be good as it is like a scaled-down 336. I'm sure there must be more.

Just out of interest how many of those boats have actually sailed on?

 

[JimC]

Horizon 23, Channel 31, Moody 31, Sailed in company with Sadler 26, Horizon 27, Merlin, Seen Griffon & Fulmar TKs going well.

 

[Tranona]

FWIW even when Hunters were in their original Rochford factory (which was until 2004 not 20 years ago) they were built to order, British cruising yacht manufacturers have rarely built for stock. Even the mighty Hunter Marine of Florida, compared to which British Hunter is a cottage industry, build their cruising yachts to order or so I have read. Yachts built by the US Hunter firm are marketed in the UK as Legends to avoid confusion of names and they are available as twin-keelers

Just about all boat builders try to match their production to orders. My Bavaria was ordered in October one year and built in February the next. However, the distinction I was making was between having boats in continuous production as (UK) Hunters did for many years - even thouigh they always tried to presell them all, and the cuurent situation with many obsolete British boats where the moulds are sitting in a yard and nothing will be done until the builder gets a signed order and deposit.

That is what makes them so expensive (and unsaleable) because everything is a one-off with no economies of scale.

 

[theoldplucker]

I once owned a Pandora International twin keeler which sailed very well to windard. Now have a Westerly Merlin twin keel which is a good compromise between comfort and sailing ability. Don't race myself, but notice another Merlin twin keel sometimes wins races - can't be that bad ?

 

[georgeo]

Yep, in my post I did say that the RMs are faster than pure displacement boats. However the parker 275 does come up even from total turtling. Yours wouldn't. Trust me and don't do the experiment

There's nothing new to discover in pure displacement boats. Semi-displacement hulls are a different story, and yes your boat is really fast.

there has been debate on the stability of RMs, as well as other French boats, such as Pogos etc, on the RM association website. In French, but here is the reference
http://www.rm-asso.org/forums/viewtopic.php?id=847
There is also a picture of a 1050 that dried out in the wrong place!
Not my image, so i cannot embed it, but here is the link:
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/833/img7607n.jpg/
There was no water ingress and the boat floated off fine when the tide came in! I believe rb_stretch posted a similar picture of his 880 a while ago, not so dramatic, but again no untoward events subsequently.
As regards stability, I have just been reading the 'crash test dummy' account of inversion, did not the authors point out how remarkably stable their 'victim' (fin keeled) was when totally inverted? Does this not apply to all yachts?

 

[Theshipscat]

None of these points relate to the original post.
Mr hatter what is your reason for posting?

 

[georgeo]

None of these points relate to the original post.
Mr hatter what is your reason for posting?

+1

 

[muyuu]

I once owned a Pandora International twin keeler which sailed very well to windard. Now have a Westerly Merlin twin keel which is a good compromise between comfort and sailing ability. Don't race myself, but notice another Merlin twin keel sometimes wins races - can't be that bad ?

I've never sailed a Merlin but I guess it must be really good, judging from other Ed Dubois designs.

http://www.duboisyachts.com/Design/Yachts/under-24m/

The late crop of bilge keelers from the 80s and 90s are so good at what they do, they simply killed their own market. These boats will last a long time and satisfy the demand for bilge keelers in the UK and Netherlands, where they are needed. There's basically no way to outperform them significantly at what they do without a massive price compromise

Related: http://www.ybw.com/forums/showthread.php?t=245596

 

[Sybarite]

this is a serious question ?
I have read all sorts of comments about them and their qualities ( or lack of ), also that there seems to be two main types : bilge plates and encapsulated .
Opinions seem to be a loss of speed between fin/drop keel and BKs
What do the panel think ?

Coming back to the OP's question about the best sailing bilge keeler I would suggest the Surprise designed by Joubert-Nivelt.

http://www.voilesetvoiliers.com/bateaux/voir/3867/Surprise-biquille

Incidentally Joubert's personal boat is a 53' bilge keeler.

 

[Madhatter]

None of these points relate to the original post.
Mr hatter what is your reason for posting?

I am very interested in what design works :-
fin shape,angle ,splay (if any),depth,bulb or plate on tip
hull shape/beam.

Why some work well and others are "pants".

I hear a lot about them making a good design with a fin but the bilge version lacks sailing ability or at least a reduction in speed and handling, question is by how much ? And many more questions

Thank you all for your participation in this thread .

 

[Monique]

Humm.. how to be tactful here...

Twin keels do not sail well... NOT sail well.

Fin keel is better. See??? I was tactful!!!

 

[Tranona]

I am very interested in what design works :-
fin shape,angle ,splay (if any),depth,bulb or plate on tip
hull shape/beam.

Why some work well and others are "pants".

I hear a lot about them making a good design with a fin but the bilge version lacks sailing ability or at least a reduction in speed and handling, question is by how much ? And many more questions

Thank you all for your participation in this thread .

Actually, it is pretty obvious. Look at the boats that are regularly mentioned as being good "for a bilge keeler" - Sadler 29, 290, Fulmar, Seawolf, Moody 336, various David Thomas Hunters etc - they all have aerofoil keels of reasonable depth, splayed out and often toed in.

All of these were designed in the latter years of twin keels being fashionable, so one would expect them to be superior to earlier designs.

As to how much difference, as already suggested look at the PY ratings, and do a bit of digging and find the comparative tests (notably on Sadlers) that were published at the time they were fashionable.