Would you take a Bavaria 32 across the Atlantic

Another good reason that struck me yesterday for having lots of fuel on board, after hearing about Cheeki Rafiki (although I'm not suggesting anything about their situation), is that should you get holed or start to take-on water, then at least you can take the engine water intake off and put it in the bilge, and then by running the engine 24/7, you are not only using it as a pump, but you can also run the electric pump full-time, you are able to head straight to your nearest port at maximum speed, and you are keeping the batteries full. Also, by keeping the water level to its minimum, you are keeping your speed to its maximum.

Just a thought.
 
Bobc said:
Another good reason that struck me yesterday for having lots of fuel on board, after hearing about Cheeki Rafiki (although I'm not suggesting anything about their situation), is that should you get holed or start to take-on water, then at least you can take the engine water intake off and put it in the bilge, and then by running the engine 24/7, you are not only using it as a pump, but you can also run the electric pump full-time, you are able to head straight to your nearest port at maximum speed, and you are keeping the batteries full. Also, by keeping the water level to its minimum, you are keeping your speed to its maximum.

Just a thought.
Click to expand...

Interesting though. It might work for a short passage but with ocean sailing the distance between possible port is measured in thousands of miles. The amount of fuel you would need to carry would probably not fit on board. Better to be prepared to do some sailing.
 
inQUOTE=Simondjuk;4754916]TV? Radio? Internet? There'd be no time for any of that even if it were available.

16 waking hours. I'd use them in some variation based loosely around 2 of cooking, 2 of cleaning, 2 of boat maintenance, 2 of navigation/weather, 2 of driving/sail changing, 1 of log/diary keeping, 2 of fishing/sitting on the bow/watching the water/watching the sky, 1 of ablutions and 1 of reading. The remaining hour I think I'd use just to relax. :)[/QUOTE]

i couldn't have put it better myself. boredom with something i never considered in a 24 day crossing. It was beautiful just being out there alone in the sea and the sky and the stars. i plan to do it again.

i sailed a bav 32 in the solent once in a force 8. Upwind itself tacked and down wind itself tacked too! despite being much nicer inside than my rival 32 i don't think i could take 24 days of self tacking!
 
I took a Bavaria 390 both ways, through a proper November Biscay storm and some horrible Ocean weather 4 days from Azores. In good condition well prepared I'd consider most boats capable. You just have to know how to look after a boat whatever design/make it is.
 
zzyyxx said:
http://www.noonsite.com/General/Rou...-of-yacht-blue-pearl-rescued-from-a-life-raft

Doesn't say it there but the boat's a 50ft Beneteau.
Click to expand...

"Rorke said the yacht sank after the bulkhead broke up and the vessel began taking on water."" eight-metre waves and winds reaching about 65 kilometres per hour. "
Not very reassuring if one happens to own a Beneteau.
I've had worse on my Fulmar and much worse on a horrible Atlantic Clipper and nothing broke.
What should we conclude of these failiures?
 
30boat said:
"Rorke said the yacht sank after the bulkhead broke up and the vessel began taking on water."" eight-metre waves and winds reaching about 65 kilometres per hour. "
Not very reassuring if one happens to own a Beneteau.
I've had worse on my Fulmar and much worse on a horrible Atlantic Clipper and nothing broke.
What should we conclude of these failiures?
Click to expand...

Long time ago but I remember the Biscay disaster involving a Beneteau. As a consequence a Beneteau Oceanis 390 had its rating downgraded.
I'm sure there are examples from most brands.
The issue is more around owners inflated expectations of these boats.
(Ducks for incoming.)
 
Talulah said:
Long time ago but I remember the Biscay disaster involving a Beneteau. As a consequence a Beneteau Oceanis 390 had its rating downgraded.
I'm sure there are examples from most brands.
The issue is more around owners inflated expectations of these boats.
(Ducks for incoming.)
Click to expand...

The Biscay incident was due to a stability problem and a poor decision on the part of the skipper.What concerns me is the structural characteristics of the brand.Are the engineering solutions inferior ones?After all I'd expect a modern 50ft production yacht to survive storm conditions.I've always been very suspicious of Beneatau's use of a structural liner and it appears my worries are well founded.
 
In 2005 a crew member died when the keel fell off a Bavaria in the Adriatic. I seem to remember there was a court case.
I should have a good look at the joints in the mast. Most masts I've seen on new Bavarias seem to come with riveted joints rather than one piece. Maybe someone can comment on this.
I have spent many weeks sailing a fair number of Bavaria designs and never been too impressed. The 36/37 probably sails the best. I don't remember the 32 being much a windward performer.

Any modern lightweight boat is prone to structure failure in relatively light conditions. The hull designs are inherently unseaworthy in my view. (for ocean use)
Think about the design, a large following wave can easily flood the cockpit and get down below. Once you get water sloshing around they become even less sable.
Personally sailing a Bavaria 32 more than twenty or thirty miles from a safe haven is not something I would care to do. I would charter one in the Ionian and expect to have a great time but to sail one across open seas or oceans would need a braver man than me.
 
Old IC said:
In 2005 a crew member died when the keel fell off a Bavaria in the Adriatic. I seem to remember there was a court case.
I should have a good look at the joints in the mast. Most masts I've seen on new Bavarias seem to come with riveted joints rather than one piece. Maybe someone can comment on this.
I have spent many weeks sailing a fair number of Bavaria designs and never been too impressed. The 36/37 probably sails the best. I don't remember the 32 being much a windward performer.

Any modern lightweight boat is prone to structure failure in relatively light conditions. The hull designs are inherently unseaworthy in my view. (for ocean use)
Think about the design, a large following wave can easily flood the cockpit and get down below. Once you get water sloshing around they become even less sable.
Personally sailing a Bavaria 32 more than twenty or thirty miles from a safe haven is not something I would care to do. I would charter one in the Ionian and expect to have a great time but to sail one across open seas or oceans would need a braver man than me.
Click to expand...

You are talking about a Bavaria March 38, quite a different type of yacht
 
Old IC said:
Any modern lightweight boat is prone to structure failure in relatively light conditions. The hull designs are inherently unseaworthy in my view. .
Click to expand...

With your worldly knowledge of how lightweight boats are prone to structural failure can you name some failures please especially those in light conditions and educate us.

I am so inexperienced having only sailed for 16yrs and 25,000mls in lightweight boats. I would also point out that lightweight boats are almost the only ones used in the charter market where at a rough estimate for any year they do 100 times the mileage of the few more heavily built boats.
 
Sailfree said:
With your worldly knowledge of how lightweight boats are prone to structural failure can you name some failures please especially those in light conditions and educate us.

I am so inexperienced having only sailed for 16yrs and 25,000mls in lightweight boats. I would also point out that lightweight boats are almost the only ones used in the charter market where at a rough estimate for any year they do 100 times the mileage of the few more heavily built boats.
Click to expand...

Mileage isn't a factor.
An analogy. Ford Fiestas do many miles around the world. Not so many Land Cruisers. Both will get across the Sahara given the right conditions but which vehicle would you choose? Sooner or later they will break. But I know which one I would do the journey with.
 
Old IC said:
In 2005 a crew member died when the keel fell off a Bavaria in the Adriatic. I seem to remember there was a court case.
I should have a good look at the joints in the mast. Most masts I've seen on new Bavarias seem to come with riveted joints rather than one piece. Maybe someone can comment on this.
I have spent many weeks sailing a fair number of Bavaria designs and never been too impressed. The 36/37 probably sails the best. I don't remember the 32 being much a windward performer.

Any modern lightweight boat is prone to structure failure in relatively light conditions. The hull designs are inherently unseaworthy in my view. (for ocean use)
Think about the design, a large following wave can easily flood the cockpit and get down below. Once you get water sloshing around they become even less sable.
Personally sailing a Bavaria 32 more than twenty or thirty miles from a safe haven is not something I would care to do. I would charter one in the Ionian and expect to have a great time but to sail one across open seas or oceans would need a braver man than me.
Click to expand...

The Bavaria Match you mention had an inherent design flaw, which was indeed a cock up on Bavaria's part, but had also suffered a previous grounding. The cumulative effect of the two resulted in the loss of the keel. Sister ships were modified, as stated by another poster.

Believe it or not, Selden don't sell the off cuts of their spars to Bavaria who then tack them together. All makes of boats with rigs over a certain size may have joins in their masts as there is a maximum length to which the extrusions can be produced. There are plenty of boats made by Halberg Rassy, Najad and Oyster, by way of a few examples, sporting exactly the same joined sections.

On the subject of Halberg Rassys and the issue of lightweight boats, it might surprise you to know that if you take the ballast out of the equation, my boat, a Bavaria, and one of the similar sized HR (the HR has approaching 500kg more ballast, which whilst no bad thing, has no bearing over the lightweight structure issue), my boat is actually heavier foot for foot. I imagine the interior fit out in the HR weighs more than that in my boat, and the HR is generally fitted with a larger, heavier engine, so in terms of the hull and deck construction, which is the more lightweight boat?
 
Last edited:
Talulah said:
Mileage isn't a factor.
An analogy. Ford Fiestas do many miles around the world. Not so many Land Cruisers. Both will get across the Sahara given the right conditions but which vehicle would you choose? Sooner or later they will break. But I know which one I would do the journey with.
Click to expand...

But the poster is not talking about extreme conditions he specifically alludes to "failures in light conditions".

A centurion tank would be more robust in extreme conditions but in total mileage covered in any given year in normal conditions I expect the ford Fiesta you mention is more reliable!

I don't own a Bavaria but get fed up with the number of Bavaria bashers that give no allowance for the success of the Bavariai designs that complete millions of miles each year as charter boats. I would add that many that charter a boat will go out to get their moneys worth whatever the weather.
 
Last edited:
Sailfree said:
But the poster is not talking about extreme conditions he specifically alludes to "failures in light conditions".

A centurion tank would be more robust in extreme conditions but in total mileage covered in any given year in normal conditions I expect the ford Fiesta you mention is more reliable!
Click to expand...

Accepted. I can't see light condition failures being much different between different builders.
 
Simondjuk said:
The Bavaria Match you mention had an inherent design flaw, which was indeed a cock up on Bavaria's part, but had also suffered a previous grounding. The cumulative effect of the two resulted in the loss of the keel. Sister ships were modified, as stated by another poster.

Believe it or not, Selden don't sell the off cuts of their spars to Bavaria who then tack them together. All makes of boats with rigs over a certain size may have joins in their masts as there is a maximum length to which the extrusions can be produced. There are plenty of boats made by Halberg Rassy, Najad and Oyster, by way of a few examples, sporting exactly the same joined sections.

On the subject of Halberg Rassys and the issue of lightweight boats, it might surprise you to know that if you take the ballast out of the equation, my boat, a Bavaria, and one of the similar sized HR (the HR had 500kg more ballast, which whilst no bad thing had no bearing over the lightweight structure issue), my boat is actually heavier foot for foot. I imagine the interior fit out in the HR weighs more than that in my boat, and the HR is generally fitted with a larger, heavier engine, so in terms of the hull and deck construction, which is the more lightweight boat?
Click to expand...

Joints due to the length of anodising tanks not the actual extrusion.
longer lengths can be done in Germany than UK
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Other threads that may be of interest

geem
Atlantic crossing 2025
2
Replies
39
Views
2K
geem
geem
capnsensible
Worlds toughest row. Atlandic Edition.
2
Replies
27
Views
654
ridgy
R
W
Downsizing to your boat.
2
Replies
28
Views
718
Wansworth
W
Frogmogman
My next boat.
2 3
Replies
40
Views
1K
fredrussell
F
I
Sadler 32
3 4 5
Replies
93
Views
3K
Mark-1
Mark-1

Share this page

Top