When did Bavaria Yachts change?

[NealB]

Nostadamus's thread about German V French 'bashing' got me thinking.

Now, I may well be wrong, but I seem to recall that, when they were first introduced, Bavarias were held in very high regard, ie great designs, top quality German engineering.

Over the years, that reputation, rightly or wrongly, seems to have been lost.

I don't want to get into Bavaria bashing (please), but I wonder whether my perception is widely accepted (ie they used to be considered highly desirable; nowadays they're considered cheap, built down to a target cost)?

If others do share my perception, when did things change, and what caused the change?

Were the older models 'better'?

(Reason for asking ...... we think we've got someone who wants to buy our catamaran, so Bavarias could be on our 'must see' list).

 

[30boat]

Much better.A friend of mine used to own a "92 Bavaria 31 .The thing was built like a brick house with quality mouldings and deck gear.The interior was also very good with great joinery,The only problem was the floors becoming detached from the bottom but that was due to a mistake in building not design.Somebody thought it would be a good idea to cut circular recesses for the the keelbolt washers in the fiberglass tabbing that bonded the floors to the bottom.That made the washers rest on the bottom and eventually it came apart from the grid.We took the washers off,relaminated with epoxy and rovings and reffited everything.Problem sorted.

 

[macd]

Much better. A friend of mine used to own a "92 Bavaria 31...

A friend has a Bav 35 of the same vintage which sounds very similar (except for the keel grid issue). Strong, well-built, sails well and has lasted well.

 

[Tranona]

The key dates are late 1990s and 2007/8. Earlier boats were indeed considered at the upper end of the market - think Moody. Around 1998 they started to ramp up volume by moving to J&J for designs and introducing mass production. The early J&J designs were lower volume production, such as Ocean range and the Holiday/Exclusive named boats, with the former aimed at the charter market. in the early 2000s the construction was simplified, but continued the style of the earlier boats. For example, my 2001 37 is superficially the same as the earlier 35, but side by side you can see where the economies have been made. Increased efficiencies, simpler construction and the strong value of £ led to a near 30% reduction in UK prices over that period - hence the popularity.

The theme through the 2000's was even slicker production and increases in hull volume for a given length. Some would argue that not all these changes were improvements and some were definite backwards step, particularly in the quality of fitout in some models. However, this was the period of maximum sales volume so can't be all wrong!

The next big change was the introduction of the Farr/BMW designed boats starting with the 32 and 55, and now covering the whole range. The emphasis on these new designs is on sharper performance and "modern", minimalist interiors - following the fashion started by some of their competitors.

Appearances are deceptive. Generally the boats stand up well to hard use as you will see from their success in the charter market. Most of the equipment used is from major manufacturers. The design and construction is simple and they are mostly easy to maintain. Not everybody is happy with the gloomy interiors of the earlier models, but based on my experience of owning one since new and giving it a hard life chartering it can still look good.

So, if you are looking for a simple, uncomplicated boat for family cruising, put it on your list. If you want sharp sailing performance or high quality hand finish, give it a miss.

 

[markhomer]

disagree , ive a b38 2003 , sails extremely well ,very sensitive on the wheel , if sailed properly(pull the sails in ! ) , certainly no slouch my bud was very impressed , racing in 30 knots and that she didnt round up badly in gusts .

 

[Woodlouse]

They lost their reputation round about 2004 when the Match 42 series started jettisoning their keels unexpectedly.

About four years ago they stopped trying to be the lowest denominator and they started to build boats with a bit of substance to them again. I still wouldn't be comfortable running aground in one though.

 

[markhomer]

not only boats to loose keels , jeanneau sunfast 37s did before modified , lots of other makes with bonded in keel matrices pop them off on running aground , you would be suprised at boats considered built like brick sh8t houses that this happens too .

im never comfortable running aground , dont think its something you should be comfortable about

 

[AndrewB]

Bavaria took to mass production-line methods sometime in the early-mid 90's. I recall a review in YM about that time by a clearly gobsmacked reporter who had taken a look. He was alarmed by the lightness of build, hulls held rigid by stapled furniture was how he put it.

Whether you like this sort of thing depends on what kind of sailing you do. I've chartered Bavarias a few times. They are OK, good in fact in sheltered waters and light winds. But recently I was a bit held up getting back to base to return the yacht at the end of the charter, so on the last day took on a 40 mile open water upwind bash in a F6. Expected it to be a bit uncomfortable, but I've done this sort of thing many times in my own boat. The behaviour of the newish Bavaria 33 frankly scared me. It slammed like crazy in the swell, the hull wrung, leaks appeared, screws popped out, even bulkheads seemed to be coming loose. This is not a yacht I would ever want to own.

Afterwards I did feel a bit guilty at what we had done to that yacht, as I knew it was privately owned. But really, it wasn't my fault it was unseaworthy.

 

[Baggywrinkle]

Mine's a 99MY Bav 36 Holiday and it's had a very, very hard life but is still hanging in there. Anyone who has been aboard can't believe she's had 12 years in charter.

As already stated, all the gear, engine (Volvo 2030C + saildrive), rigging (selden), winches (harken) is from respected sources. It's built to LLoyds certification and a dream to tinker with - everything is easily serviceable. I can get to the engine, batteries, bilges, tanks, steering, calorifier, log/depth sounder, electrics, keel bolts etc. very easily. Interior is perhaps a bit dark for northern climes but in the Med you don't notice, the joinery is very solid - everything is teak capped and all the doors and drawer fronts are solid teak. I think it's got a proper boat feel to it.

In the beginning I was in two minds, buy a new AWB or buy second hand and see how a few years with my own boat went before taking the plunge and investing large sums of money. A much older boat was out of the question because of the unknowns in terms of maintenance and the unsuitability of the layout for a large family intending to loaf around in the Adriatic - it had to be a 3 cabin AWB with reasonable saloon, seperate heads/shower, chart table and sugar-scoop.

I looked at all AWBs in the 100k - 130k price bracket and to be honest, wasn't that taken by any of them. This was 2008-2010. The Oceanis 393 would have been a contender but was no longer available, I liked the one we chartered in 2008 but for some reason it seemed all the AWB manufacturers went cost-down mad and it showed - mostly in the interior joinery and finish. I also wasn't comfortable with the demise of the chart table.

I spent 2010 doing the boat shows and re-evaluating and in 2011 decided to go for a cheap ex-charter boat, unhappy to invest so much in a new AWB.

So I looked at Bavs, Jens, Bennys, Elans, Dufours and anything else that looked viable, build year from 1995-2003 - the budget €35-50K. The lighter interiors of the french boats hadn't faired well in the med, looking washed out and characterless - they just didn't feel right. It also became apparent that I wasn't going to be easy get the space I wanted for the budget.

After much deliberation, I was sold on a 2002 Bav34 - sensible layout, enough berths and not too old. I found a bargain for €29K which turned out to be a neglected basket case, but on my travels came across a Bav36 which seemed to offer ooodles more space for a similar price. One weeks test sail was organised and afterwards I signed on the dotted line for a '99 Bav 36 for the princely sum of €34,200.

Then it got wrecked during the season so I was offered another identical boat from their fleet - so we ended up with McKelvie.

In terms of hull integrity or build strength I'd not want to run any boat aground or into a ship or container, it's just not good seamanship - All the AWBs from the major players have been tested to destruction by errant charter customers over the years so a considerate owner should have no problems with rig, hull or engine. The major difference is the interior joinery IMHO and if I were to be critical I'd say that 2005-2010 was not especially good for AWBs as a whole. The newer Bavs that don't look like armoured personnel carriers are definately more heavily built and I would now consider a new one.

EDIT: I've been caught out a couple of times and ended up bashing into F6 with sea state to match. Nothing has come adrift and the kids have sat below playing nintendos like there was nothing amiss - only when they could see water out of the saloon windows did they come up to see what was going on. So AFAIK 1999 was OK for Bavs.

 

[Simondjuk]

Our 1999 Bav has a 36% ballast ratio, a similar sized Rassy a few percent more. Take the keeks off, and our boat weighs more foot for foot than the Rassy, which can only mean that our boat has a heavier construction of the hull, deck and interior.

The deck gear is Harken, Selden and Rutgerson. The interior has solid wood mouldings and barely a mark or sign of wear on it at 13 years old. We out sail most remotely comparable boats we encounter. The whole shebang was built to satisfy Germanischer Lloyd GL-100 A5 standards. It was very affordable.

Don't know how much or when things changed, but there's not much not to like about ours.

 

[Bosun Higgs]

Nostadamus's thread about German V French 'bashing' got me thinking.

Now, I may well be wrong, but I seem to recall that, when they were first introduced, Bavarias were held in very high regard, ie great designs, top quality German engineering.

Over the years, that reputation, rightly or wrongly, seems to have been lost.

I don't want to get into Bavaria bashing (please), but I wonder whether my perception is widely accepted (ie they used to be considered highly desirable; nowadays they're considered cheap, built down to a target cost)?


).

very wrong. when introduced they were half the price of a decent boat and ver down market. if anything', they are better now

 

[Sailfree]

Most comments on here are factual from actual owners but the bad reputation came IMHO from owners of MAB's that needed to justify their decision to have a permanent dark money sink requiring frequent repairs. The keel failure of one type of performance Bavaria model was a gift to the critics. The sensible posts by experienced sailors like Robin mentioning a number of serious faults with British build boats were conveniently ignored by the prejudiced BAv basher.

I have chartered Bavaria's and found them OK. I have bought 3 new boats for the charter market and bought 2 Dufours and a Jeanneau all because they suited my taste better than the Bavaria.

All production boats are built with a simplified economical build method and without bulkheads glassed into the hull they will not be as rigid as say a Najad or HR or Swedish boat however they are adequate to meet the sailing requirements of 99% and at a fraction of the cost.

They are the equivalent of the Ford or Vauxhall car but in the sailing world. If I could justify spending more I would buy an Arcona or HR but I can't however just cause I cannot afford the more expensive boat does not make me want to knock the mass produced boats.

A second factor is hull design and a few like long keels. Few buy new long keel boats as they are expensive and narrow for any given length. However the sailing qualities of a long keel boat are superior when beating in a sea. They are not as fast in lighter to medium winds. The flatter wide beam modern boat is then faster in most conditions that the majority of us choose to sail in.

By all means extoll the virtues of your choice of boat that suits your unique set of requirements/circumstances but don't wrongly criticise others choices due to budget limitations or new boat envy.

Currently my 43' has done 8 yrs on the charter market and I am looking forward to the day when I use it 100% and give it some TLC. I will look at alternatives but the spaciousness and my own prejudice against hulls formed on an outer shell and an inner "egg crate" inner hull glued to it to give it strength and form the ribs and stringers will probably preclude me from buying a new replacement "production" boat unless it was an Arcona or X boat but thats my preferences!

 

[Tranona]

very wrong. when introduced they were half the price of a decent boat and ver down market. if anything', they are better now

Sweeping generalisation - short on facts, and the one statement that resembles a fact is incorrect.

 

[maby]

They were well thought-of boats till the late 90s/early 2000s but build quality seems to have taken a dip around then. As I understand it, the criticisms were not particularly handling or performance - it was simply the quality of the finish. There was a well publicised episode when one dropped its keel with fatal consequences but that was a very specific design issue with one model and none of the mass production Bavs seemed to suffer from it. They have put in a lot of effort over the last few years and I get the impression that they have made up most of the lost ground and are comparable with all the other AWB brands now.

When we were looking for our first relatively new boat, a surveyor friend told us to look seriously at Bavs from the mid 90s 'cos he had never inspected a bad one, but avoid Bavs from the mid 2000s 'cos he was not confident about their life expectancy.

 

[Neil_Y]

Pre 94 models such as 350, 390, 410 were very different in design and construction to later models. These models are comparable with yachts such as Sweden and HR of similar vintage. I believe the 96 models were similar but don't know them as well.
I owned a 390 and knew a family with a 350, mine sailed over 10,000nm in one year so plenty of time to spot any weaknesses, a very nice comfortable boat that sailed well in all weathers. It would make sense for me to knock them as that would keep the prices down. I'm very likely to get another 390 sometime.

 

[jordanbasset]

Mine was a Bavaria 38, 2003 model, we did end up in big seas and very strong winds on several occasions, although I always preferred to sail in small seas and no
more than a Force 5, but the weather gods sometimes let me down.
In the big seas and Force 7+ she did used to slam a little, but we never once felt unsafe. The boat did not fall apart and we arrived in port/anchorage in the same condition as we left the previous port.
Yes if you are going to be looking to sail in Force 7-8 on a regular basis bashing to windward, then another boat may be better, or perhaps a hair shirt But for most of us these will be the exceptions and a Bavaria is perfectly capable of dealing with it.

 

[Bosun Higgs]

Sweeping generalisation - short on facts, and the one statement that resembles a fact is incorrect.

you disagree - not surprising from a bav owner. but the one fact in my comment was quite correct. the first bavs were half theprice length for length of decent boats from, fo example, sweden. At the time we were looking for a new boat with an eye towards long term cruising. The bav owner / salesman on the bav boat we looked at at sbs advised against buying a bav for that use - I was amazed at the time. Personally I would happily buy a new bav nowadays but for the high volume high topside designs they offer. Current construction standards wouldnt worry me.

 

[Tranona]

you disagree - not surprising from a bav owner. but the one fact in my comment was quite correct. the first bavs were half theprice length for length of decent boats from, fo example, sweden. At the time we were looking for a new boat with an eye towards long term cruising. The bav owner / salesman on the bav boat we looked at at sbs advised against buying a bav for that use - I was amazed at the time. Personally I would happily buy a new bav nowadays but for the high volume high topside designs they offer. Current construction standards wouldnt worry me.

Well, as you will see from thee many posts here Bavarias of all ages are used for long term liveaboards very successfully. Yes, of course you can spend twice as much money on a similar size boat, but there are/were plenty of "decent" boats at much less than twice the price. Not surprisingly, many of the builders are no longer in business, partly because they failed to provide good value.

Not sure what you mean by the "first" Bavs - as the older ones as is pointed out above were very expensive boats, comparable with Swedish boats at the time. If you read my potted history, you will see that the big price advantage came about in the 1997- 2003 period when they switched to mass production, going from 500 boats a year to 3000. You only had to compare what was on offer at the time to see that the price advantage was only part of the reason for the success. They were simply better value boats. Again you will see several posts here and elsewhere (including mine) that shows they do not "fall apart" and stand up very well to hard use. Mine was launched in 2001, delivered to Corfu, went straight to work and did average 25 weeks a year for 7 years as a charter boat and never once failed to meet its commitments. You perhaps made a mistake by not buying one.

You are welcome to look at my 13 year old boat anytime. You won't find anything broken and no structural faults. No leaks, keel still on, interior furniture still immaculate, teak cockpit sound, all the electrics work etc etc. The only things major that have gone wrong are Volvo saildrive and Lofrans windlass - both exactly the same items as fitted to Swedish boats twice the price!

 

[doug748]

Most comments on here are factual from actual owners but the bad reputation came IMHO from owners of MAB's that needed to justify their decision to have a permanent dark money sink requiring frequent repairs. The keel failure of one type of performance Bavaria model was a gift to the critics. The sensible posts by experienced sailors like Robin mentioning a number of serious faults with British build boats were conveniently ignored by the prejudiced BAv basher......
QUOTE]



I think I have detected silly billies, prone to generalisation, in both camps.

 

[NealB]

Thanks for all the replies, which, with one exception, seem to confirm my own perceptions.

Lots of very useful nuggets of information in there.

My only real hands on experience with a 'Bav', was when we chartered a brand new 42 from Sardinia, about 6 years ago. There were 4 adults on board (Joscelyn and myself, plus a couple of non-sailing friends along for a bit of fun in the sun).

I was impressed with the accommodation (though, as we owned an old, 36 foot, wooden gaff cutter at the time, I was, perhaps, easily impressed in that respect). I also liked the ease with which she could be chucked around, under power, in marinas, turning on a sixpence.

On the last day, we had a seriously strong Westerly breeze (I won't give Beaufort, 'cos you'll think I'm exaggerating!) for the final trip back from Maddalena to Portisco. We had a fast, exhilerating run/ reach back, under rolled genoa only, in reasonably sheltered waters.

The only thing I didn't like was the horrible white, plastic faux leather upholstery. I was sliding around all over the rather too large navigator's seat.

Anyway, if we do change boats, it'll be one of the older models we'll be looking for. I quite like the look of the 390 Caribic.

Thanks again.