Poor man’s passagemaker

This crossed the Atlantic...

http://www.mayrik.com/HomeEnglP214.htm

 

....so did an 18 foot Hobie, but so what.......

....poor mans passagemaker or poor man ready to meet his maker?

 

True, it aint simple rocket science, it s much more complicated.

Clearly, one can NOT just remove the rig from a sailing boat and assume to have a seaworthy boat anylonger. If your claims about your experience would be true, you would know that!

Just as the former compliment:

returned unused.
I do not believe one single of your statements, being all completely wrong or even dangerous!
And you should not manipulate quotes! I said: "circumnavigated several times and sail almost year round".........not or


Thanks Tad and WestVan,

who would not know of similar examples. But do we call them "passagemakers" ? Capable boats for extended cruising? Really?

Regards
Richard

 

Clearly, one can build such a boat cheaply. One can also emulate the boat by simply taking an existing fiberglass sailboat and tossing the rig into a dumpster. Get rid of some or all of the ballast to make room for the half ton or so of fuel. Plenty of sailboats in the 30 to 40 foot range power near hull speed at fuel burn rates approaching 10 nautical miles per gallon.
This ain't rocket science. Any displacement performance model shows this to be easily obtainable.

I have a neighbor in Fl that did just that.With a "hurricane boat".

He did keep the mizzen , as a main mast , to use as a radar, antenna mast and to check the roll.

A good portion of the iron keel was removed , and a new 80HP John Deere installed.

No he doesn't run offshore voyages , but the great Loop was a snap , as is trips to Maine for the cooler summers.

The only improvement I would make would be a geared tabernakle (as used to raise flag poles) to allow passing under the many opening 18-24ft bridges.

Perhaps not a Cape Horn vessel, but a really practical way to get a comfortable displacement , cheap to run, cruiser.

FF

 

I don't think that will make any kind of "passagemaker" though it may make a powerboat.

Even at 10mpg, 2400 miles plus a 20% reserve is 300 usg, which is about a ton, or 40 cubic feet of fuel tank. That's a huge hollow keel for which the boat's structure was not designed, or a tank on the main cabin sole that's 6.5' by 5' by 15" high. It pretty much makes useless the interior of a standard production sailboat. Personally I'd want at least 400 gallons, plus a shortened rig, plus some ballast, plus a roll-reduction system (key to making a real passagemaker).

We don't see production sailboats made into powered passagemakers for two reasons.....1) They work just fine as sailing passagemakers as they are......and 2) It doesn't work......

 

Don't put words in my mouth.

It's something interesting...if you don't find it interesting or if what I post offends you-ignore it or don't reply.

 

True, but a custom made sailboat or perhaps a certain sailboat could be converted. One might fine one in a steel or aluminum boat that has structure to hold weight. But like you said why would anyone convert to power only, unless they just couldn't sail.

 

My point was not that "buy a sailboat and dump the rig" was the best way to go, but simply as an existence proof that:

1) Fuel efficiency of well over 5 nmpg, even as high as 10 nmpg, is VERY easy to obtain if one uses a sailboat hull form, displacement speeds, and modest diesel power. One still gets adequate accommodation and structure while still being much more seaworthy that most anything in "Voyaging Under Power" by Beebe.

2) Very, very few dollars could be expended to achieve this, IF one wanted to live with the inconveniences present in all sailboats, AND one was not embarrassed to power around in a sailboat without a mast.

Tad, I am sure that 400 gallons of fuel in tanks (2400 lbs) is substantially less structural load that lead hanging below. If the boat can support a keel and rig lads, it can handle fuel tanks. Might be a pain to fit them in, but one can get rid of the keel and put some there, no more need for sails, ... Does not seem a difficult issue.

Why are we talking about a "poor man's passagemaker" anyway? Its to explore ideas to do things on the cheap. This is not one of the "perfect passagemaker" threads. Its different, we are brainstorming different ways of doing things. Instead of "perfect" being the goal, "cheap" is the goal.

In my mind, getting rid of the rigging saves a LOT of money over any reasonable period of time. So keeping it a sailboat blows too many of the constraints on cost, safety, and area of operations.

Remember that Colin Archer lifeboats and sailboats had very similar ballasted displacement full keel hull forms.

 

Even to tackle Cape Horn, a sailboat without a rig is probably far safer than virtually any production powerboat.

 

All men, rich and poor, eventually die.

I think we want to consider ideas that maintain safety.

I think we can agree that life boats carried by commercial ships are both very safe and much, much smaller than the ship! And sea buoys are pretty short LOA too. Hence, size by itself does not directly correlate to safety.

Cost also is no guarantee of safety. Often, cost goes into unneeded complexity that can increase risk. Also, cost can lead the owner to make very poor decisions of trying to protect the boat, where it would have been far safer to leave the boat and fly to safety.

And finally, safety is far, far more correlated to the crew than the boat. More time using the boat, and less time working to pay for the boat, may well be a far safer strategy.

 

Avarege modern sailboat is not in a passagemaker even when that term is understood as widely as possible. It's just don't have displacement enought to be one. Surely they cross oceans but they do it with severe shortcomings.. counting every drop of water and fuel used.. filling more from places where you can count having them both with same fill, in the same tank.
Throwing the keel and rig of would create a poor power boat from a poor sail boat ("poor" meaning poor passagemaker)
You need some more displacement
Dave Gerr put this in a form of a formula in the book "the Nature of Boats" page 100..
So lets assume 5000nm range and only 2 crew. So.. the crew 150kg, personal "stuff" min 2x180kg, food and water 2x40days x 6.6kg, total around 1050kg.. It's means you need atleast a 10t boat..

 

"It's means you need at least a 10t boat."

At our FL dock sits a Beneteau First 32 , (1982) that came over on her own bottom.

17G fuel , 17 water , augmented with a 50gallon water bladder under a bunk for the trip.

The boat weighs about 8000lbs .

Perhaps too much motion and lack of comfort for geezers , but many similar $10,000 boats are out doing the world , with ease.

Passagemakers? Would seem so.

FF

 

"buy a sailboat and dump the rig" makes a dangerous boat! It is not only not seaworthy, in contrast to your assumption, it gets rolled over in every, but the lightest seastate.
So, forget about this idea. Anyway the thread was meant to discuss motorboats more or less similar to Beebes definition of "Passagemaker". A "sailboat hull form" would make a poor performer under motor.
(and the assumption that "Windhorse" has such hull is wrong!)

Regards
Richard

 

Calm down West! Neither did I put words in your mouth, nor did anything offend me. But when one posts pictures or data of a specific boat on such thread, it will be assumed he talks about a passagemaker, or not?
And did I name two posters or just you?

Regards
Richard

 

First 32 , 10 000$ :?::?::?::?::?::?::?:

See http://www.annoncesbateau.com/voilier/annonces-modele-beneteau-first 32.html

Average price 32 000€ = 43 000$. And most with 30 year old engines, sails and rigging. Absolutely unsuitable for even a single passage.