cruising costs, maintenance and price of the boat (sailboats versus motorboats)

Regarding sailboats, I will take a look at the available Pilot-house/Deck-saloon that comes inside the 350 000 euros budget:

There is the Regina de Vindo 38, a nice boat with a very good interior, truly adapted to cruising and living aboard. It’s a very seaworthy boat, designed by Carl Beyer, displaces 9500kg and carries 75m2 of sail. The tanks can hold 800L water and 250L fuel. The engine is a 56hp Yanmar.

The boat can sail at about 6.5/7.5K and motorcruise at 7.5k.

This boat costs 340 000 euros (Vat included) and has all the comfort and quality I want.

It only falls short on speed. Fact is that, if this boat can motor one knot faster than my actual sailboat, with week and medium winds, it will be a slower sailboat
.
Of course, this is a passagemaker and a much more stiff boat, but I would not like to trade speed for that.

http://www.reginayachts.com/

 

Other boats that I have considered are the Nauticat 385 and the Nordship 40.

The Nauticat 385 has a smaller interior, but with a good galley, two heads, a comfortable main cabin and an overall very good quality, the space is OK.

With these characteristics : LOA-11,65 m; Beam:3.6 m; Draft-1.9m; Displacement-8.7T; Sails-75 m²; Fresh water capacity-440 l;Fuel capacity-335 L, an excellent stability curve (without negative stability which is very rare) and a good interior with an adequate storage space, this boat will be an option.

The 300 000 euros price is also inside the 350 000 budget.

This boat is a little bit faster than the Regina de Vindo and would be a good all around sailboat. But I want a fast sail boat and this one is just average (but nonetheless much better than previous Nauticats). Motoring cruising speed is about 7.5K, with the standard 54hp yanmar.

http://www.nauticatuk.co.uk/Nauticatpdf/385ENG.pdf

http://www.nauticat.com/Default.aspx?Id=436827&BoatId=16

At the limit of the budget, the Nordship 40 is another option. This one has (in my opinion) the best interior of all the 40ft cruising sailboats. The quality is impressive everywhere and the space treatment is perfect and this statement, coming for a guy that has a kind of obsession with perfection, is not a small compliment to the designer, who is also the builder (Lars Buchwald).

With the following characteristics : LOA-12.9 m; Beam:3.9 m; Draft-18/2.0m; Displacement-10.5T; Sails-78m²; Fresh water capacity-800 l;Fuel capacity-400L, a good stability curve and a very good interior that has, besides two heads a separate shower cabin and a small library, a large main cabin and a very large saloon, this boat is a very good cruising sailboat.

With the standard motirisation (55hp volvo-Penta), the cruising speed is a little bit over 7k and its sailing performance (even if considered good for this kind of boats) compared with my boat is a slower one, except in strong winds.

http://www.nordship.dk/index.php?id=351&main=Yachts&menu=Nordship DS40&menuid=344

It is a pity. I guess that the Nauticat is a little bit faster than this one, but not enough.

Besides I have to confess that I do not find these boats beautiful and I want a beautiful boat. Okay, they are beautiful inside, but outside, even if they are not ugly, they are not gorgeous. Of corse, the reason is that it is almost impossible (if not impossible) to make a true deck-saloon in a boat smaller than 42ft, and manage to have a very good looking boat.

Perhaps the Southerly 42 has approached the best possible compromise between outside looks and deck-saloon interior space (that’s my wife’s preferred sailboat) but that one, at over 400 000 euros, is out of budget.

http://www.northshore.co.uk/index.php?p=southerly42rs/exterior2

Cheers

 

But I will not accept an ugly boat, or a boat slower than my actual sailboat. If I can not find a deck saloon that I find beautiful and fast, I will have a more traditional cruising sailboat, providing it is fast and good looking.

I have been looking for these kind of boats also, and from these I particularly like 4 boats : The Tartan 4100, the Najad 405, the Halberg-Rassy 40 and the Malo 40, all good looking boats, with a particular emphasis on the Tartan and the Malo.

The Tartan 4100 is certainly a good looking boat and has the advantage of costing a lot less than the budget. With the 350 000 euros I could probably buy the new Tartan 43, but I really dislike the big sprayhood with the integrated traveler. That’s in fact a good idea, and the Malo yachts have mastered it long time ago, but in the Tartan it is just too ugly.

The 4100 has a displacement of 8.6T, a Loa of 12.6M, a 4.1M Beam, a draft of 2.1M and has tanks for 378 L of water and 190L of fuel.
It carries 84.2 m2 of sail and a 56 hp engine.
It has also what looks like a good finished interior (I have never seen the interior of one).

http://www.tartanyachts.com/model/m...a91&MUID=2dfa6c71-e233-4175-ae7b-a61eae41d7de


The new Najad has a displacement of 12.2T a Loa of 12.2M, a 3.85 Beam, a 2.1 Draft and has tanks for 550L of water and 230L of fuel.
It carries 85 m2 of sail and has a 55hp engine.
It has one of the best quality interiors. Not only quality, but good taste and high quality Nordic design. The Najad is barely inside the Budget.

http://www.najad.com/

The Hallberg-Rassy 40 has a displacement of 10T a Loa of 12.4M, a 3.82 Beam, a 2.0 Draft and has tanks for 460L of water and 445L of fuel.
It carries 80.8 m2 of sail and has a 54hp engine.
The quality of the interior is very good.
This one at 345 000 euros reaches also the top of the Budget.

http://www.hallberg-rassy.se/

The Malo 40 Classic has a displacement of 8.6T a Loa of 12.7M, a 3.83 Beam, a 1.9 Draft and has tanks for 455L of water and 260L of fuel.
It carries 87.0 m2 of sail and has a 56hp engine.
The quality of the interior is perfect and the boat features a unique saloon table that can modify its size in a very particular way.
The Malo costs about 340 000 euros.

http://www.maloyachts.se/Default.aspx?tabid=114
Of course, all these boats are solid and well built, with a very good stability and they are seaworthy boats.

About those, even if all have their special charm, the only one that is fast enough for me is the Malo. The Hallberg-Rassy is surprisingly fast, considering the lineage, but only the Malo can sail easily between 7 and 8 knots at 15k of wind.

I like this boat so much that if I can not find a faster one, or a nice one with a deck saloon, it will be probably my choice.

 

Well, these boats are not slow boats, and they are good cruising boats, but if I chose a sailing boat instead of a motor boat, it would be also for the pleasure of sailing. So, can I have a faster cruising boat, a boat even more enjoyable to sail than the Malo and as beautiful and well built as this one?

I don’t know about beauty, the Malo is really difficult to beat, but in another sort of register I find the Luffe 43ds and the Cigale 14 beautiful boats, and both are faster and (even) more enjoyable to sail than the Malo 40.

The Luffe 43 Ds is a Danish boat, built and designed by Oluf Jorgensen. It is a small production boat, made in a small but modern boatyard. The boat shares the same high technology and quality of construction of other Danish boats, the X-yachts. Like these ones, the boat has a steel frame molded to the hull where the keel bolts are tightened to. The frame absorbs also the strains from the mast. It is a light boat with a hull made of a sandwich of E-glass and Duoaxial-glass with a core of 20mm Divinycel.

This will provide a very strong and stiff boat, but a boat with a hull that will not offer the same resistance to impact damage as the previous boats (massive laminate hull).

The Luffe 43 ds has the same hull and rig than the 43 MKII and this one is a fast cruiser-racer, a winner of races. This year a private Luffe 43 had got good results at some IMS races of the World Championship.

It is a narrow boat and it should be a very comfortable and fast boat going to windward.
I was not completely satisfied with the stability curve, regarding cruising (taking into account that this is the boat for my retirement, and that I intend to sail till I can). I want a stiffer boat, a boat that will not need so many reefing (the boat needs to be reefed at 16k of wind).

So, because you can not find this boat at Boat shows, and I am really interested in it, I traveled to Denmark where I visited the shipyard, talked with Mr Oluf, saw the 43ds and sailed the new 40ft (the 43ds was being finished). And I was very impressed with everything:

The Shipyard is impeccable, the boat has very good quality interiors and you can see the care (and pride) they put in all construction phases.
Mr Oluf understood why I wanted a stiffer boat and has proposed three solutions: a bigger draft, a smaller mast or 200kgs more in the bulb. If I choose to have this boat, I will opt for the last solution, because the boat has already a considerable draft and more, will limit much the ports and marinas where the boat can go.
Finally, while sailing, I have found the 40ft very fast and well balanced. It was Oluf’s personal boat, one that he uses to race. The boat was equipped with racing sails and it was really a blast.

This boat is a deck-saloon, with an interesting interior and with some limited view forward, but I guess that with the waves, it will be enough to steer the boat from the interior, in open water.

The Luffe 43Ds has a displacement of 8.0T a Loa of 13.0M, a 3.70 Beam, a 2.1 Draft and has tanks for 300L of water and 120L of fuel (more tankage can be fitted if desired).
It carries 86.0 m2 of sail and has a 40hp engine.

This boat costs about 300 000 euros.

http://www.luffe.com/

 

Hi to all friends who share their opinion here (especially to Vega),

I am (m38 mechanical engineer) live in istanbul-Turkey and new at forum but have followed what you wrote here for a long time. I am trying to buy a boat almost last 5 years but I can not achive yet

Because there are 2 impasse;

1. If you buy a sailing boat, you can not go anywhere because of 6-7 knots avarage speed(except retired and unemployed people) Catamaran is almost the same, only a little more speedy.

2. If you buy a motorboat, she is speedy but again you can not go anywhere because of fuel consumption this time

I think that there is a little kind of motor- or sailing-boat which I didnt examine before. And now I decided to buy something because of incredable fuel consumption-speed relation and perfect lifespace.

5.6 lph@7 knots, 1000 miles range (43l/100 km.)
26 lph@16 knots, 490 mile range (88l/100 km.)
42 lph@20 knots, 380 miles range (114l/100 km.)

She has enough usage-space almost like 42' monohull sport cruiser or more than Oceanis 40.(3 double berth except convertible sofa in saloon plus 8 m2wide flying bridge, plus 9 m2 wide cockpit, plus 12 m2 wide fordeck....)

You can cruise easily at least 8 person without touching eachother.

Price is 225.000 € with double 110 hp volvo common-rail diesel engine.

Marina cost is 2300 € annual.

She is the one that I am waiting for five years

Fountaine Pajot Higland 35 power catamaran with double 110 Hp Volvo common-rail diesel engine.

Layouts:
http://www.fountainepajot.com.au/highland35-catamaran-layouts.htm

photos:
http://www.fountainepajot.com.au/highland35-catamaran-gallery.htm

Fuel consumption:
http://www.fountaine-pajot.com/article699-en.html
http://www.fountainepajot.com.au/highland35-catamaran-specifications.htm

I will buy her next week.
If you have any negative advice about her or more optimal choice, please tell me now or else hold your silence forever

 

Hello there!

I have said, somewhere in this thread, that motorcats make a lot of sense, if you are lucky to live in a place with inexpensive marinas and have ports and marinas where you can find places for them.

Regarding what you have said about boats, distance speed and time, I agree with you. But in my case I am looking for a boat that is going to be used when I am going to have time, but a lot less money (semi-retirement), so the choices and problems will not be the same.

Regarding the Highland 35 I like the concept, but not so much the boat.
I have read a recent test about it and they say the boat is not very good with waves.
The space between the two hulls is very low and has not a hydrodynamic profile, so I guess, it is going to slap a lot.

I like the new Excite 1010 a lot more. I find it more appealing and this one has a different treatment in the space between the hulls. This is a new boat, it was presented one moth ago in the Barcelona boat show, but the smaller boat (810) has been around for sometime. It has got prizes from everywhere, and in the boat tests, one of its strong points is seaworthiness. The 1010 costs a little bit less than the Highland 35.

Perhaps you should have a look at it too .

Regards

http://www.excitecat.com/galeria_ficha.php?idModelo=13

http://www.soundcats.com/Excitecat1010.htm

http://www.excitecat.com/modelos.php?editMod=13

http://www.soundcats.com/NewsExcitecat3.htm

http://www.soundcats.com/EXCITECAT810Multihulls.pdf

 

Vega, many thanks for your interest, here are my opinions;

Higland35; 10.35 m. x 4.40 m. = 45.5 m2,
Oceanis40; 11.87 m. x 3.96 m. = 47 m2,
so marina cost is cheaper than Oceanis40

I respect your opinion but waste of time on the road is also big money for me for the present.. I am planning to buy 45-50' Catana after retired, again not monohull.

I will be happy if you give the link of this review but if I even read review, I dont think to believe them. Because this is not firts or second experiment of Fountaine Pajot on motor catamaran. They come here with making model smaller and lighter for acceptable fuel consumption without any concession from lifesapace, speed and stability. Thats the reason why they designed hull distance closer than before. The distance between two hull was longer in Earlier model of Highland (called Maryland) but worse in fuel consumption. Earliest was worst.

And if Highland's hulls has not hydrodnamic profile, then this would cause increasing in fuel consumption but she is still cruising just sniffing deliberately

And I think that you can not define the enough space between two hulls without defining wavelenght.. spaces is never enough. But you can talk about center of gravity. Powered catamaran's is lower than sailing ones because of pole ans sails. So you can make the hull closer.

Thanks for advice, I looked at this boat but; they use 2x 310 hp engine to achieve 20 knots, this means at least double fuel consumption. Highland35 achieves the same speed with 2x110 hp engine. I also dont like the fordect design and there is no sunbathing area at flybridge.

And also in Turkey there are lots of boat builder smiliar excitecat..Brand name and manufacturing experience in multihull is also important for me.

again;
If you have any negative advice about her or more optimal choice, please tell me now or else hold your silence forever

 

It is not like that, at least in the Atlantic Marinas and most of the Med. Normally they use double berths, and the width of the berths is proportional to the length, so with a beam of 4.4m you only fit alongside a 50ft boat. But is even worst, most marinas don’t care about that, they just put you on a double 30/40 berth and charge you both places. If you look at the price lists of most marinas they say cats will be charged 2x the price of a similar length mono.

You have misunderstood me, I am not talking of the distance between the two hulls, but of the small height from the lower deck to the water, between the hulls.

When I speak of hydrodynamic profile I am not talking about the two hulls, but about the space between them. If you look at the Excite photos and the ones from the Pajot, you are going to see what I mean.

This seems to be a shortcoming on the Pajots. Read what they say about it regarding a much bigger Pajot, with the same problem. Of course the height to the water in the 35ft is a lot smaller than in the 42ft, and the problem would be a lot worse. They do that to maximize interior space.

“These cats in general have a lot more motion than a monohull. Also, as designers create more interior volume in the saloon, they lose wing clearance, or bridgedeck freeboard, between the hulls. This can result in a great deal of pounding and slamming underneath”

http://boatdesign.net/forums/showthread.php?t=13511&page=17

The test I am talking about was published in the 2005 November edition of the French magazine Bateaux and believe me, for the French to say something bad about a French boat, it is because there is something that is not working very well.

Do you believe in miracles? In my opinion you are not reading the consumption data correctly. What counts is the fast cruising speed, and that is for the Highland 35 with 2 x110hp 16K. For the Excitecat 1010 you need for the same cruising speed 2x160hp.

I agree that the Highland will have a slightly lower consumption, but we have seen in this thread that small differences are pretty irrelevant comparing with the initial price of the boats, and the Excitecat is less expensive, so you have to take that also into account.

They are very different: the Highland will have more interior space and it will be all right without waves and better at the marina, but the Excitecat will be more seaworthy and a lot better in not so good weather. For Christ’s sake, the Highlander doesn’t even have an interior pilot station. In bad weather you would have to pilot the boat from the flybribge, and with bad weather that’s no place to be.

Regards

 

In Turkey, marinas calculate the cost like that and still Highland's cost is cheaper then Oceanis40.

Heath also recalled a crossing from Lucaya to Vero Beach in Florida in confused seas. The 7 foot swells were from the northeast; a 2- to 3-foot chop from the southeast. “Didn’t even make the coffee cups slide, while we saw several trawlers rolling their way to West Palm,” Heath said.

http://www.bayacht.com/aaa/nl-artic/Passage-Trawler.htm
http://lists.samurai.com/pipermail/power-catamaran/2005-July/000255.html

 

Hey mamo, I don’t have nothing against powercats, except the cost at the the Marina, and that in your country seems not to be a problem. It would only be a problem if you decide to travel extensively on the Med, and that is not the case.

I only have said that I would also have a look at the Excite 1010. See what that American Fontain Pajot dealer (the link you have posted) says about its little brother, the 880:

"Other news from Europe? While in Spain I ran out of time to see the new
Excite 26, an intriguing new, broad-beamed powercat from a Spanish yard.
I don't represent this cat, but I've been very impressed by the articles
I've read about it. I believe there will be one at the Newport, R boat
show in September. I believe that Sound Catamarans in Connecticut is
importing this new pocket cruiser to the North American market".

I would not buy a boat without a test sail, and if I had two suitable boats, I would sail test both, but that's me.

Good luck with your new boat

 

Vega,
You confused my mine. I also dont wanna buy a boat without test but I have no change for this. I requested time from suplier to think over again
What about Lagoon 440?
Regards

 

About the 440 I don't know, but the talk of the moment is the new 42 diesel-electric. I have seen the boat in Paris and the interest was huge. Lots of boats sold.
That one wastes about half of the fuel of a traditional model. It should be a lot more expensive, because the technology is more expensive than a traditional diesel engine, but it is not.
That's what I call a miracle
I think they are having less profit on this one just to have the advantage of a head start on the diesel-electric market.
If the Marina places here were not so expensive (and rare) for cats, I would seriously consider that boat for me.
My wife loves it .

http://www.catamarans.com/lagoon/420/
http://www.bareboatsbvi.com/catamaran_lagoon_420.html
http://www.yachting-greece.com/Sailing-Yachts/Catamaran/Lagoon_420_Hybrid.html
http://www.cata-lagoon.com/420_pres_uk.php?type=i
Regards

 

Vega,
This is not new technology, they use one diesel electrical jenerator for producing elektrik and two electrical motor for driving the boat. This is used in big ship usually. So, this is cheap..but good technics..

What about their sail performance? Logoon 440 or 420?

 

Just a small side note: It is not more expensive and burn less fuel because it is a very very tiny power.

The genset is 13 Kw (Around 18 hp). The electric engines are 2 * 10 Kw (around 2 * 13.5 hp).

You can run 2 hours on the battery bank. Meaning 2 * 13 hp for propulsion. Once the batteries are exhausted (2 hours without genset, may 4-5 hours with it), you are only on the genset that will give you 18 hp grand total for both engines. Who would have bough a 12 ton boat with two yanmar 1GM10 for propulsion ? (or a single 2GM20).

The lagoon 440 non hybrid had 2 * 40 hp for propulsion. (With options for 2 * 56 or 2 * 75 hp)

There is no miracle.

 

Probably the 440 would be a little faster, but not much. If you want a really fast cat you would have to look to other type of boats. And you would have lighter boats, without a so good interior, and not so seaworthy, or should I, say easy boat?

This technology is not new on ships, but this is the first production yacht that offers it as a standard system. It is a new thing on small boats.

Of course, there are no miracle, only a better technology .

Both motorizations have a similar power at cruising speed. The electrical engine can deliver a constant and huge torque all the way. It is a much more efficient engine and therefore, for an equivalent “work” they say that this motorization is similar to the diesel one.

Fcfc, probably you would like to discuss it more, and I think it is an interesting matter, but please continue it at the sailboat diesel-electric thread. It makes more sense, and I will reply there. I am interested in this subject.

Regards