Minimum cruising cat-size & cost

This has been a most excellent thread.

Re. Folding cats c. 7 to 9 metre there have been a few different goes at this. This is the one (Ezifold) I've seen most recently which was just posted on our NZMYC website. Anyone know anything about them? (Note: the 8.5 design referred to is not the pod-cabin boat shown in the graphic)

http://www.multihull.org.nz/image-gallery/gallery-1005.htm

Catsketcher, do you plan on re-visiting the 7 metre cat you were developing? I seem to recall there was a prototype being constructed - was it finished?

 

And in the flesh here. http://www.mainproject.info/index.php

In ply the 9.1 Simpson Woodwind 9.1 is a simple design a little lighter disp. Its solid wingdeck open cockpit gives potential to add bridgedeck shelter if required. http://boatcraft.com.au/Shop/index.php?main_page=popup_image&pID=53

There are a number of ply build options. Waller 31 might be worth a look. Turner CC29? If you can go a little smaller Woods Gypsy/saturn maybe.......Bernd Kohler has a nice 9 metre with bridgedeck berth and open cockpit etc etc. And his KD 860 has already been stretched to 9.1 m IIRC.

 

Amazing the room in a 9 meter cat. Built a little heavy though. check out the build WL and the launched and sailing WL especially at the stern, in the two photos. Thanks for the link Jamez.

 

Wharram talks about following sea's as safer with the canoe stern - anything in that ? Use as lazarette and or extra sealed bouyancy? Is that all there is to the difference? What about water flow - surely a "pointy" stern has better flow/less turbulence? Resale doesn't seem to be an issue, as it seems no-one wants basic cats anyway - but this is also part of the issue - i want a cat that can multi-purpose and hopefully keep a long time. The next issue, which is irrelevant to sailing but oh-so important to sailors - visual appeal..... we buy boats we like and not only as a practical consideration? Some of those pics look very "chunky".... Also not sure of asymetric cats - seems to be some negativity about it on this site? As to length - i wouldn't mind going shorter - say 8m?
Savings can also be made in interiors and gadgets etc etc - go really simple?

 

If you read my website you'll see that my first Atlantic crossing was on Wharram's own catamaran. Since there I have made another 3 crossings on transom sterned catamarans.

I have never felt unsafe with a transom stern. A canoe stern doesn't have much buoyancy, which is nice to have in following waves.

A slight aside. Canoe sterns started on ship lifeboats and were therefore thought to be there for safety reasons. But in fact, a wood ships lifeboat, that is never going to be used(!), built traditionally was very prone to rot and leaks from planks swelling. A transom stern was harder to keep from rotting/leaking. Hence canoe sterns. You don't want to get in a lifeboat only to have it sink under you!

But you don't always sail in survival winds. Furthermore you have to get on board your boat to begin with. A canoe stern makes it much much harder to board.

And canoe stern boats do pitch more, no argument there. Also no argument that a canoe stern results in much less accommodation. If you are limited to a certain length I would recommend a transom stern boat.

Compare the space in say a Gypsy 28 with a Tiki 30. In practise I have found then to be about the same speed.

I am not convinced about the cheap building that some designers claim. A sheet of ply and gallon of epoxy cost the same whoever designed the boat. And you should think of resale values as well.

I no longer want to cruise on an open deck boat.Too uncomfortable, too exposed. And especially so in a rough water sailing area like S Africa.

Hope this helps the discussion

Richard Woods on board his Romany in the Bahamas

www.sailingcatamarans.com

 

A quick thought.

Suppose you put the same original question on the MONOHULL page. What answers do you think you will get? Might be worth finding out for two reasons.

1 I believe the AVERAGE size new monohull cruiser sold these days is 47ft
2 In the late 1960's people thought no one could sensibly singlehand a boat over 40ft (and lets face it many ocean cruisers are single handed even if there are crew on board)

Slocum's boat was 32 ft, as was Knox Johnstons. Moitessier had a "big" boat at 40ft. The Hiscocks sailed round the world twice in a 30fter (which is still going strong) whereas their 40+fter was too much for them

Yet I bet few monohull cruisers would say "get a 30fter"

Just a thought

Richard Woods in a bitterly cold and windy Bahamas - definitely not a day to be on an open decked boat - even at anchor

www.sailingcatamarans.com

 

I'd have to do some digging to be sure, but it's also my impression that the average D/L ratio has gone down significantly since the late '60s when anything over 40' was considered a pretty huge boat. That is to say, today's 47-footer might actually be about the same weight as 1960's 40-foot cruiser. Power everything is at least partly responsible for larger cruising boats, but changing to hull forms that are longer for the same weight may also be a factor.

We've certainly come to expect more luxuries and more space, these days. And there have been changes in design philosophy over the last few decades. But trends don't make a good boat- design for the intended purpose makes a good boat.

An aside on the monohull analogy- the Contessa 26 (7.77 m LOA, 2.5 tonnes) is often regarded as a good bluewater boat, while the Macgregor 26 (7.85 m LOA, 1.2 tonnes) is often regarded as a lake/coatal boat that shouldn't go offshore. The LOA alone tells very little about either boat, apart from how much its dock will cost. Length, beam, displacement and the various ratios (SA/D, SA/WS, etc.) all have to be considered to make a useful comparison.

 

exactly, and in some ways the length is even less relevant to multihull stability than it is for monohulls

And you are right , many people want more comfort these days (however many hulls they choose)

So bottom line - what comfort level do you accept?? Which is why in my first post I said it was comfort that was important

BTW have you looked at my Elf 26, a very successful coastal cruiser in S Africa 20 years ago, despite no cuddy. And Legacy Yachts had a nice Sagitta for sale last year. One of the few that was not owner ruined (see my notes on S African cats on my website)

Richard Woods of Woods Designs

www.sailingcatamarans.com

 

Not all 9.3metre cats have to look boxy either. Schionning 9.3 tropical version
Cheers Al

 

There is an elf for sale - but have you seen the bridgedeck that was added?!!! - King Kong could stand upright in it! And very boxy - windage MUST be terrible. The other cat available is a fixer-upper...
It was also your comments on SA woods boat that worried me.
There is a Wharram pahi at a reasonable price but am not crazy about it- open deck with odd layout. Same with tiki21/26 - small interiors?

 

jamez This has been a most excellent thread.

Re. Folding cats c. 7 to 9 metre there have been a few different goes at this. This is the one (Ezifold) I've seen most recently which was just posted on our NZMYC website. Anyone know anything about them? (Note: the 8.5 design referred to is not the pod-cabin boat shown in the graphic)

http://www.multihull.org.nz/image-ga...llery-1005.htm
Hi Jamez
We did the Ezifold you mention.
If you would like further information to questions unanswered feel free to email me ezifold@vodafone.net.nz
You are correct the 8.5 depicted is to comply with the NZMHYC 8.5 rule and will fold but excludes a bridge deck, solid deck aft or tramp as options.
We are presently undertaking study for an 8.5 bridge deck version for an Australian client.

 

Like that approach, that’s what I was talking about.

Well, even the multihullers are human.

If I was building a cat for myself, I would leave ends empty and divide them from accommodation with a watertight bulkheads. They would provide flotation in the case of flooding and / or capsizing. Survival compartments in emergencies.

That Outremer 40 light which I posted is very close to what I like in cats. I would only make deck house considerably lower, just sitting headroom. (I live in a windy country, concerned about windage, would like to have some control in the blow).

Yes, I’m afraid you are right about commercial success. There is no market for large series, but maybe there is for a smaller series, semi-custom. It seems that few French low volume builders manage to survive.
http://www.au-senegal.com/pages/acv.php

I sailed very little on the traditional Dutch yachts, more on ex-cargo sailing ships - coastal barges, as well as offshore vessels. (My focus before was on the normal, contemporary yachts).

Barges indeed share dependence on a form stability with multihulls but they are very different in most other aspects, even opposite – they are built to carry cargo, lots of it.

http://www.zeilklippers.nl/GBsite/schepen.php?trip=day

Dutch traditional sail charter fleet is large and diverse. About five hundred vessels with commercial licences and many non-commercial in private ownership or various non-profit organizations.

Majority are flat-bottom barges but there are quite a few ocean going ships, sailing world-wide.

http://www.sailing-jantje.nl/
http://www.barkeuropa.com/
http://www.oosterschelde.nl
http://www.zeilbrik.org/en/
http://www.stadamsterdam.nl/content/home/index.xml
http://www.bbz-charter.nl/index.php?lang=en

All these vessels, coastal and ocean going, are very physical to sail. Everything on them is massive, heavy, brutally strong and very simple. Sailing them is really working. Everything have to be muscled, no power winch in site, despite main sails of over 100 square meters, 15 m long solid wooden booms, solid gaffs, miles of thick ropes, heavy anchors, (all chain) e.c.t.

Size is relative. After sailing on a ship for a while, normal yacht feels as a toy and her equipment as vulnerable jewellery. (Often priced as jewellery, too).

I find looking at the yachting world from working boat perspective very refreshing - more ways to skin the cat. - These days, we tend to throw money at the problems, overcomplicate, trust on high-teach and qyzmos, depend on specialized tradesmen for repairs and maintenance.

Commercial sailors of yesterday were always on the cheap, had nobody to trust on but themselves, so they built and equipped their boats accordingly – still quite wise attitude for modern cruising sailor I thinks. Especially if intention is to visit remote places and/or finances are limited.

My personal minimum for offshore is what you can expect in conventional monohull of around 9 meter length. With some additional space for stuff – spares and tools, preferably away from the accommodation.

Alex, sorry for rumbling, didn’t want to highjack your thread, but got carried away a little…

But I also have a link to share that maybe could be interesting for you:

http://www.thecoastalpassage.com/cheapcat.html

 

$21.000 - not bad at all!! What would a woods or wharram of equivilent length cost to build? I see Glenn Tieman built a 37' child of the sea for only $14.000!!!
My next question is alt rigs - Is there anything other than bermudans for cats that can reduce cost/complexity and cost? Problem with this idea being that most cats are designed for bermudans - occaionally for ketch but thats not necessarilly cheaper or easier to singlehand.....bearing in mind it is for a cruiser and not a fast racer/cruiser.
A lot on the net about crabclaws and i'm curious - it seems to be a love-hate relationship? The lower cg and flat cut allow for more diy - therefore savings? 99.99999999% of rigs are bermudans here with only the occassional gaff rig. I made a tiny test crabclaw to play with - next will make basic model cat to test it on. If bi rig - could you sail it mainly on the lee side - is there anything to the extra lift it gives to allow that? It would keep the deck clear if nothing else? Could also use fixed stays with this configuration. After reading thread on mast/sail loads being an unknown to most - is it viable to go unstayed? Or does this remove the ability to have a jib-storm jib spinnaker etc?
Sorry for too many strange idea's / stupid idea's................................=)

 

Richard

The pictures you posted a few messages above of the Cat on the slips, plus the final shot before launching are actually my "Little Bear" and you will find more pictures on the website www.mainproject.info

This is a Simpson Signwave and you are right in pointing out the difference between the design water line and the actual, though it has actually come up a bit since I removed building tools, construction materials and heaps of junk. Part of the reason it is overweight is that it was overbuilt - a common amateur construction fault. The scantlings were oversize, also the rudder stocks were 2" stainless, an inboard diesel instead of the 9.9 outboard specified and the decks and cabin roof were double-skinned to stop condensation and heat - all good ways to make the boat strong and livable but certainly slower than designed.

It is worth mentioning that I have no interest in racing and the 7 to 9 knots I get from this boat is more than adequate, considering how comfortable it is. I lived on board for 3 months and loved every minute of it without feeling cramped or uncomfortable. Others may not like this concept, but it does for me. Incidentally, I nearly chose your "Eclipse" and don't remember why the Signwave was preferred. I also looked at some of Derek Kelsall's designs but I was determined to build in strip cedar/epoxy and Derek does not approve of this as I recall.

As stared elsewhere, this has been a very interesting thread. What it all comes down to is an objective assessment of what on wants to do with the boat, versus how much time and money is available.

Cheers

Alan

 

Apologies Richard - the pictures mentioned were posted by Bruce Woods, not you. In other respects, my comments remain valid

Alan