© Attainable Adventure Cruising Ltd and the authors, all rights are reserved.
Nothing on this website or in direct communications received from us, or in our articles in the media, should be construed to mean or imply that offshore voyaging is anything other than potentially hazardous. Dangers such as, but not limited to, extreme weather, cold, ice, lack of help or assistance, gear failure, grounding, and falling overboard could injure or kill you and wreck your boat. Decisions such as, but not limited to, heading offshore, where you go, and how you equip your boat, are yours and yours alone. The information on this web site is based on what has worked for the authors in the past, but that does not mean it will work for you, or that it is the best, or even a good way for you to do things.
I’ve found the dodgiest bit about working on the deck of the Boreal is at the front. 2 particular jobs require care: attaching/removing the shackle of the snubber to the anchor chain (if its under tension, it’s got to be done forward of the bow roller), and attaching/removing the tack for downwind sails to the end of the sprit. Both require ones centre of gravity at or beyond the edge of the hull.
The rear lazerette is indeed huge on the Boreal. After took delivery of ours, we transfered every bit of our cruising equipment from our previous boat and put it into the rear locker….and then 7 people got in! More practically, on long passages we stored dinghy, 2 outboards (2hp and 10hp), series drogue, SUP, dive compresser and 2 anchors (kedge plus 1), 2 x dive equipment (inc bottles)…it’s huge.
Hi Robert,
Thanks for the fill on that. Details from someone who has sailed the boat as far as you have are the most valuable of all.
But I don’t want to know what the 7 of you were doing in there!
Hi Robert
re huge lazerettes
My approach to packing heavy items like anchors and outboard motors when going to sea is to ask myself what happens if you are upside down. So when I began to pack a Oyster 56 for a fall trip to the Windies the fact that the designer provided only two attachment points for lashings in a lazerette large enough to live in is a bit questionable.
I have the unusual ability to sleep well when airborne during every other wave. But a loose 15hp outboard has a mind of it’s own! Boats designed by an artist on a computer without being verified by miles at sea are usually lacking in the details that actually make them function properly.
John, you are exactly right re the cockpit sightlines on the two boats. The Boreal is excellent. Even if you’re short, you can stand on the deck behind the wheel and have a clear view forward over the doghouse. I pick up moorings singlehanded on my Boreal all the time, quite easily, as I can keep the mooring in sight for a long long ways standing on the deck behind the wheel. On the Garcia a singlehanded mooring pick-up would be much tougher, as the sightlines are poor.
Also, as you say, on the Boreal you do feel exposed doing anything aft of the wheel when conditions are strong. Ordering the removable backrest would help alleviate this a good deal, and I wish now I had done that. Unfortunately, they can’t be easily retrofitted. I did get three handrails from Boreal after the fact that I had welded on to the stern arch and this helps. (They should be standard!) Ideally, I would say you want both the handrails and the backrest.
On the Boreal I have often wished that the grab-bar at the top of the steering pedestal came up above the top of the wheel. I am tall enough that when I stand behind the wheel I can reach over the wheel to grab the bar, but my wife cannot. Also, even for me it would be much easier to move around the wheel in strong conditions if that grab-bar were taller, so that I could hold on to the bar while pivoting all the way around the wheel. Ordering a boat now, I would insist on this. It is a simple change.
Compare this to the Garcia, which has much larger, easier-to-grab granny bars in front of the wheels.
The Garcia’s fixed cockpit table also provides something to brace against as you work around the wide cockpit when things are sporty. On my Boreal I asked for a removable foot brace to help me move around the wide cockpit more securely, and this has worked very well. I would say its actually better than a fixed table for bracing purposes, because you can easily move from one side of the cockpit to the other over it. With the table you have to go around. Or take a big hop over.
I never sailed Jimmy’s Garcia in very strong conditions, but I would guess overall I would feel a bit more secure in the Garcia’s cockpit than in my cockpit as it stands, with no backrest and the short grab-bar on the pedestal.
Steering ergonomics: I generally prefer to stand when steering. I feel the boat better that way. I had Boreal put on extra outboard foot-braces for that, and they work well. I liked the ergonomics on the Garcia as well.
Windlass: The inboard windlass/chain stowage on both boats is commendable. The Boreal’s set-up is superior, as you can use the windlass as a power winch to heave on halyards at the mast if you like. I do this with my main halyard from time to time. This is not possible on the Garcia.
Robert is correct about clipping on a chain snubber. You have to get a little ways outboard on the sprit to do it. But I carry a block and line on the end of my sprit when sailing and use these to haul the tack of any sail I want to fly off the sprit outboard. I do not need to get out on the sprit while underway.
One deck problem I’ve had on the Boreal that will never be a problem on the Garcia: twice while offshore I’ve had flying fish at night swoop into the air vent that spans the back of the doghouse roof. The vent feeds air into what are effectively giant Dorade boxes in the sides of the doghouse that in turn send the air below to help ventilate the aft cabins.
To get the fish out of the boxes I had to drag them bit by bit with a bent coat-hangar out the tiny drain holes at deck level. A disgusting and tedious job. The first fish was badly decomposed by the time we figured out what had happened and it took over an hour to pull all its rotting flesh out the hole. With a fresh fish it goes much faster. It comes out in bigger chunks.
One solution to this would be to install inspection ports in the doghouse sides, so that debris inside can be easily removed. Another would to put a screen of some sort on the roof air vent. I think I favor the first option. If I catch more fish this way I may well try it.
I know this has happened on at least one other Boreal.
Hi Charles,
Thanks very much for all the great tips. After Robert’s comment I wondered about using a block and tack line, so good to hear that works. As to the fish in the vent, yuk! Just proves what I always say “the law of unintended consequences was invented on offshore sailboats”.
Great tip in making the grab bar on the binnacle higher. Small changes like that can improve things a truly amazing amount.
Dear Charles
Reading your enlightening and informative comments have inspired me to re-visit your website. Thank you for being so open about the niggles you have encountered with your boat.
As someone who can only fantasise about commissioning a new boat this is an eye opener. Its not as if you are pioneering the Boreal. This is an already established long distance cruising design. And still stuff goes wrong. And not exotic stuff. Quite normal stuff that one might have expected to have been understood and rectified on subsequent builds.
When I read about rebuilds and refits of older boats and read the words: ” we updated this and replaced that” I sometimes wonder: “was the old this and that still working ? After many years of fiddling to make it work reliably ?” So maybe it was less energy efficient than the shiny new kit. But what about the energy you will use fettling it to work properly ? And the dollars you will spend.
Please don’t get me wrong. As far as voyaging boats go I think there is Boreal and then there are the rest. If I won the lottery the first thing I would do is ring Boreal. If a new Arthur Beiser wrote The Proper Go Anywhere Yacht the Boreal would be on the cover.
Hi Mark,
Yes, it is amazing how even a boat as good as the Boreal can still have little niggles. That said I have owned “Morgan’s Cloud” for nearly 30 years and have been improving things all that time, and yet I often say that “I’m about half done, but in another 30 years I will have her perfect”. I think it’s just the nature of offshore boats because of the low production numbers. After all, a car maker would probably built at least 50 prototypes before releasing a car, but that’s the total of the Boreals built.
Unless it is a Tesla Truck. LOL
Hi Charlie
Good to see someone mention one of my pet peeves— lack of a grab bar in front of the wheel that is at least as high as the wheel so you can actually reach it!
You need a ship’s cat and a few paw sized access cut-outs to solve your fish problem!
Party cockpits can actually be more secure than overly wide single wheel cockpits if the table is strongly attached and has a grab rail full length along the center. Of course they need to have a means of completely closing off the exit chute down the transom and providing secure seating at the helms as you pound across the 12′ square waves of the Gulf Stream in November.
The safest cockpit design has a deep footwell narrow enough so you can brace your feet on the face of the opposite seat front when heeled. A party downer for sure. But if you really want to party, get a catamaran.
The majority of center cockpit designs and many others are unsuitable for going to sea because they do not permit access to the wheel from the seating area without standing precariously on the seats. (usually after unclipping from the safety tether.) A major safety issue that has cost lives.
All Swan-style cockpits with what I call “dumpster diver” companionways are unsuitable for ocean cruising due to the danger from the boom when going forward standing, necessity to crawl over the cabin top in order to reach the companionway in rough going, risk posed by the tall ladder, and impossibility of providing a proper dodger.
There is only one proper height for a soft or hard dodger– the nose height of a 6’0″ man. When combined with platforms for shorter crew and a bit more crouching by ex NBA types it allows the crew to perform a 360 degree scan and still duck spray or a wave when it comes aboard.
Dodgers that are tall enough to require looking through them are unseamanlike. The vision through a salt caked or rain covered piece of UV crazed plastic is hardly better than sitting below watching the radar. Once the dodger/doghouse grows to this size it should be designed as a pilothouse with tempered glass windows and effective window wipers or a North Sea active view port and full instrumentation.
The little gun slits on the Garcia hard dodger are a joke. Without the benefit of actual time on the boat, I’d have to say that visibility issues that John pointed out would be the deal breaker for me.
Phyllis looks decidedly unhappy sitting under the Boreal hard dodger with her head scrunched forward. Kind of reminds me of potential partners I took out on their first date (and last) sail. I doubt if a cushion would make much difference the first time someone bounced their head off the overhead after the boat fell off a wave. The Boreal has a stylistically attractive indentation on the dodger/doghouse side that serves as a footrest when entering the cockpit. Perhaps style should have been sacrificed for another 12″ of width and headroom?
One other point about dodger design: The dodger must be long enough that the rain and spray that continually drips off the back edge doesn’t land directly on your neck! Almost worse than no dodger at all!
Hi Richard,
All good thoughts. As you know more than most, all cockpits are trade offs, and one of the driving tradeoffs in the Boreal 44 was the swing of the door to dog house and that’s why the foot well of the cockpit is as wide as it is. Interestingly it’s also why the boat is 44 feet long: that was the smallest boat that the JFs could make the dog house and door swing work on. And then the desire to keep the boat small and relatively affordable—at about Euro 500K fully tricked out, the 44 is a hell of a good deal—drove the shape of the dog house. Take the boat to 52 feet and everything changes, but the price goes up a lot: https://www.boreal-yachts.com/portfolio/le-boreal-52-2/?lang=en
Some years ago Phyllis and I spent a bundle and a huge amount of thought on the trade offs between visibility and comfort underneath for our hard dodger (our third iteration). It was really hard to balance and we have a boat that’s twice the size of the Boreal 44 and we don’t have the door swing problem. More here: https://www.morganscloud.com/2008/06/01/hard-dodger-for-morgans-cloud/
That seating position under the dodger of the Boreal, as demonstrated by Phyllis, would be a definite deal-breaker for me. How tall is Phyllis? They would have to fix that, or no Boreal. I am working on the design of a 43′ expedition catamaran, light, fast, good sailing hull and I learn a lot from these reviews. I am checking all my systems against your comments 🙂
Hi Gerben,
Phyllis is 5′ 11″ All boats are compromises, so I would rather have to reach for a cushion, which fixes the problem, than have visibility problems like the Garcia has and the Boreal would have if the dog house/dodger was made higher and wider. To me function and safety always trump comfort and convenience. In fact, what I’m noticing as I compare the two boats is that Boreal generally put the former first and Garcia the latter.
Hi Gerben
Another hard dodger design that is quite different but equally stylistic and distinctive is the one on the Van de Stadt 47. However the sides are much more vertical than the Boreal concept and thus avoid headroom problems when seated.
Hi Richard,
That’s true, and our dodger is more vertical too (see my last comment) but let’s not forget that the Van de Stadt is a bigger boat by over a metric ton. These things always get easier as the boat gets bigger. Also, I think I’m right in saying that the Van de Stadt does not have the door swing problem to deal with and that is what pushes the seats outboard.
Hawk was retro-fitted with a swinging door, picture in Beth’s book
Hi Alan,
That’s true, but I’m fairly sure that it would not swing flat against the aft face of the dog house as the one on the Boreal does. If not, the doors on Hawk would be a real pain in the neck when left open since the would be sticking out aft. The beauty of the Boreal door is it can be left open most of the time, and still not be in the way.
Hi Alan,
I found a pic of Hawk’s door https://www.practical-sailor.com/issues/37_58/psadvisory/Bulletproof-Companionways_11810-1.html
In her case it works because of the inset companionway, but this would not work on the Boreal because she has a dodger and a dog house, not just a dodger the way Hawk does.
I modelled my custom-fabricated door on that of “Hawk”, and while it does not swing fully open due to the camber of the pilothouse roof, it is easily secured at about 165 degrees open with the “upper flap” down, allowing easy access in front of the traveller on our cutter. On the other hand, our own preference is for a very small companionway hatch compared to most boats today, which made the job easier than a side-byside style of companionway door. We often sail in wet conditions with the top half of the door down and very few drops get in, and a piece of stout fabric would stop even that. See https://alchemy2009.blogspot.com/2017/07/fab-results.html
The cockpit benches on the Boreal does not seem long enough to lay down in full body lenght for an outdoor sleep shelterd by the dodger?
Hi Henrik,
I don’t think so, but there are good reasons for that: If the seats were made that long the wheel would need to be smaller and, even so, crew would need to jump up on the seat when going past the wheel, a big safety problem—an acquaintance of mine was lost at sea some years ago doing just that. And making the wheel smaller would make it difficult to steer from a sitting position as you see me doing in the photo. The other way to get a bigger cockpit would be to get rid of the dog house or the lazaret, but I think those would be terrible mistakes.
So, in summary, without making the boat longer there is no practical way to make the cockpit bigger without screwing something really important up. That said, Boreal do have a boat for those who want a more “party” cockpit: https://www.boreal-yachts.com/portfolio/boreal-55-oc/?lang=en
A smaller canting wheel should free up a lot of cockpit space and allow both longer benches and easy passage past the wheel.
00:45-03:00 https://youtu.be/OJNFmRGnMV4
Seems to be a reliable system.
Thanks PD
That is what happens when your starting point of design is human ergonomics and function!
We’ve been discussing the strengths and flaws in the Boreal and Garcia cockpits, but this boat simply blows almost any competitor away. John has said that the only way to avoid most cockpit compromises it to make the boat bigger (Boreal 52, Morgan Cloud 55) —- but this boat is only 35′!
Sirius 35ds: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJNFmRGnMV4&feature=youtu.be
Too bad they didn’t find time to actually design the main sheet attachment instead of simply hooking it onto a flimsy looking welded-on bail!
No such thing as a perfect yacht eh, … sigh. Mind you, Sirius has been building this one since 2011. Surely in all those years someone has “tested” the bail with a crash gybe sans preventer or boom brake. And the main isn’t large. Maybe the bail is strong enough. Sirius obviously hasn’t read John’s books though, lots of points in the cockpit to clip a lifeline to, but all hard! The cabin-top centreline jackline is, however, straight out of the book. The big question that none of the reviews seem to tackle is: how does it sail?
Hi PD,
Yes indeed, that is the big question.
Hi Richard,
Hum, while agree the boat is innovative I can also see some drawbacks. The biggest question to me is what is she going to be like offshore in waves with all that volume in such a short hull. As you know, probably better than I, there is no free lunch in yacht design. I would really like to know what the prismatic coefficient is. Very high I’m betting.
And I agree on that bail, first thing that caught my eye.
Hi John
My comments were directed solely at the thought that went into the cockpit design of this boat, which is brilliant. Starting with the swing wheel! As to whether it is a Sirius offshore boat— my first impression is that it would be great for living aboard and gunkholing around the Med once you got over how homely it is, but I doubt if there is enough money in the world to convince me to deliver it from Newport to the BVI in November.
As to the cost of complexity—– I believe the 40′ version pushes toward $750k when fully kitted out. That supports your comment that a Boreal is a “cheap” boat in all the best ways!
Hi PD,
Thanks for the link. At first glance my basic distrust of complexity kicked in hard, but after thinking about it I can certainly see the benefits.
The canting wheel saves 3′ of cockpit length and the deck-saloon saves another 3′ by including the hard-dodger functions. So the 35’er should have as much space as a 41’er, which it probably does. However, as you observe, it’s a lot of volume on a short hull so should probably be stretched to 41′ anyway.
A quick play with some scaled images shows the 35’er just fits within the height and depth of Philip Rhodes’ 48′ Thunderhead design, which seems nice.
How did our parents / grand-parents ever cruise so happily in their 36’ers?
Hi PD,
That’s an interesting and informative comparison. Like you say, I would be a lot happier if they kept the innovative layout and put it in a 40-foot or so hull. And the ironic thing is that said boat probably would not cost any more since the boat would be easier to build. Cramming the most one can in a short hull is probably the most destructive trend in yacht design in the last 50 years.
John mentions under one of the photos that Phyllis is 5 ft 11 ins. That’s 1.82 m in new money.
What’s with this lying down in the cockpit ? I’m struggling to remember having purposely slept on deck either at sea or in harbour. Precarious for all sorts of reasons. Perhaps more suited to a beach holiday ?
Hi Mark,
I do have to confess that when well offshore I quite often take a 10 minute nap (with an alarm set to wake me) in the cockpit on Morgan’s Cloud where I can stretch right out, so I think it’s a valid concern, particularly for those short or single handed. But our boat is 56′ and the Boreal 44 (without the sugar scoop) so we can have that without sacrificing the lazaret.
Hi Mark,
Hi John,
I would say that I believe that, short handed, most of us do snooze once in a while.
John : on your Boréal you will snooze in your doghouse… as do all (almost all ?) our owners…
It is a new world, a different way of sailing… I know : Hard to imagine until you have practised it
You can also snooze outside on the leeward bench with a pillow in your back against the wall of the doghouse…
Hi Jean-François,
On reflection, I think that it was a mistake for me to put that photo in. I was thinking about how Phyllis and I sail MC where we spend many hours on watch under the dodger like that, but as you say, sailing a Boreal will be different. Also it would be really nice to snooze inside out of the wind as I often wake up cold after my naps in the cockpit.
Hi Jean Francois and John
I realise I came over rather Colonel Blimp-ish on the subject of designing cockpits for sleeping in. We all doze off from time to time – and wake up with a cricked neck.
My biggest fantasy when sailing (and motoring) alone in Chile was the idea of being able to stay warm and dry while on watch. In some of the the tighter channels it was nigh on impossible to leave the cockpit for hours at a time. I spent many hours when moored up in the evenings making bad sketches of possible solutions. Now when I look at a boat one of the first things I examine is the cockpit layout and how efficient is the dodger ? This seems to me to be another weakness of a bridge deck design and resulting coal hole style hatch – its very hard to get the spray hood to stretch far enough aft for the watch keeper to hide under. A water resistant sprayhood/dodger with maybe some vertical curtains hanging from the back end – as I saw recently on a Dutch single hander who had just come in from the Faroes – is high on the wishlist for the next and probably last boat. Obviously a hard solution with a watertight door would be ideal but that is not easy to get right on a 40 footer – the most I can stretch to.
The Boréal seems to have come up with the most elegant solution to this problem that I have seen so far. I find most deckhouse yachts clumsy looking. They spoil the lines of an often otherwise elegant design. The Boréal looks positively racy by comparison to the competition.
Hi Mark,
Having spent many hours (thousands?) in an open cockpit in icy waters, I agree, this is a big issue. Luckily MC has a great dodger and cockpit layout, so we were never exposed to much wind, but still, both Phyllis and I agree that the Boreal dog house is the ultimate solution.
Hi Mark, I wrote the following a few years back when full cockpit enclosures were under discussion. It describes a solution that allows for protection that could be considered for most any boat with a dodger. Dick
Hi John and everyone,
I feel most cockpit enclosures as seen in use are often quite unwise. I have observed them be so seductive that poor seamanship occurs: not being dressed to go on deck and deal with a deck problem or not wearing a harness/tether/inflatable while on watch. (An acquaintance came into an anchorage and waved to us in shorts and a t-shirt later sharing that the overnight he had just done in rain & 16C/60F temperatures was a doddle as he never left his enclosure, nav’ing by radar below-decks and chartplotter under the dodger). Crew will need to fight against the tendency to cut corners. Other caveats include: designs where running the ship is compromised (such as winches that can’t be used as the handle hits the canvas), where access to the side decks takes time (unzipping and needing gymnastics to get onto the side deck), inability to safely take the helm if necessary (visibility compromised through often spray covered plastic and compromised hearing/feeling the elements). Seeing the sails takes effort, so it is likely the sailing will be done by instrument. Finally, many enclosures make keeping a proper watch less likely: getting your head/ears/eyes out into the elements and not compromised with plastic, ceilings etc. There are numerous other examples. So, generally, I see most enclosures as making the running of the boat more difficult while making life, especially at anchor and in marinas, far more appealing. In most areas of choosing systems: ground tackle, sail handling equipment etc., the boat comes first. With enclosures you bump into the interface of how and how much one compromises seamanship and boat handling ease with being more comfortable (recognizing that being comfortable and rested does contribute to safety and good decision making).
That said, the enclosure we have come up (on our 40 foot sailboat) has extended our cruising season a month to 6 weeks on either end in our sailing in colder climes and solves most of the above concerns, but fails at being a sun room in which to entertain while at anchor. Extending one’s season is a big bonus for us and, in practice, we have left our “enclosure” up most of the season (and not just the beginning and ends) in the colder, wetter sailing we have found in Northern Europe (it is easily and quickly adjusted to allow for enjoying the occasional warm sunny day) and now after 3 seasons in the Canadian Maritimes. We succeeded in this by forgoing some of the attributes that make enclosures so wonderful when at anchor and, even more so, at a marina.
My dodger consists of a hard-top and canvas sides. The hard-top provides great handholds and a feeling of security. The enclosure idea emerged during one very late start going south from New England (USA). We were unhappily cold/wet so I taped some random plastic sheeting on the aft edge of our dodger (think of the doorway entrances to ice houses) and the difference this made was very quickly impressive. Since then, this idea has evolved and improved (with the help of great canvas workers) into an aft see-through curtain done in 3 sections, the side sections are basically fixed while the middle section allows easy entrance/exit.
The difference this simple arrangement makes is huge. Not having cold wind (or rain or sleet) on you as it wraps around the sides of the dodger into the sitting area is an impressive comfort in long watch hours (we are rarely at the helm). Things like cushions, books, Kindle etc. stay dry and safe in most weather. When sunny, it acts like a greenhouse and is very warm and inviting (especially when sunny and still cold/windy). During winter lay-up months (when we are still living aboard) it acts like a mud room. With the companionway open, it can be heated when the boat is kept warm.
In this design, all winches are fully functional and no aspect of running the boat is compromised. One can step in to the cockpit through the center flap and be completely outside the enclosure to see well above the dodger and be allowed to feel the wind and to hear. We do not generally “heat” the area so we are always dressed for action on deck and since we have regular visits to the open cockpit there is no temptation to not be harnessed up and tethered. Finally, it is a design for a couple or crew of 2 and, I suspect, some dodgers might not come far enough aft to make sufficient space. Angling the enclosure curtain aft might help.
This “enclosure” for sure has many compromises, but it has worked for us for over a decade and has extended our season by 20-30% while making all lousy weather sailing far more pleasant. We are not young anymore and not stoics and very much like our comforts. I doubt we would have done the cold/wet weather area sailing that we have so very much enjoyed without this addition.
My best to all, Dick Stevenson, s/v Alchemy
Hi Dick, would you mind sharing some images of your dodger? It sounds just perfect …
Hi Ernest, I am happy to share pictures, but not sure whether I can do so on the AAC site. I do not have a public blog of any sort, but we could move off site if nothing else works and I could send pics directly. Dick
You might try Imgur (https://imgur.com/upload) to share images for free?
Hi Ernest,
Tried Imgur and could not get it to work (not surprising as I am not good at computers). Contact me at alchemy128(at)gmail.com and I will send them directly. Dick
With Dicks consent I am sharing the images to his cockpit enclosure:
https://imgur.com/gallery/UWMhBc0
Thank you Dick – most appreciated!
While I can only dream of owning either one of these boats, I find your comparison helpful as a baseline guide for anyone on the hunt for any new boat. My heart goes pitter patter when I these boats dockside. They ooze of uncompromising purpose and scream “Let’s Go!” For those sailors fortunate enough to own one, I’m envious but realistic. An expedition boat would be overkill for the sailing I do. One observation- the absence of a sizable lazarette on the Garcia seems out of character for a top notch cruising machine and smacks of a production boat trend to sacrifice practical storage for another aft cabin that by the way, becomes a depository for kinds of crap! I look forward to part 3.
Hi Karl,
I agree that the lazaret is really important. But in the case of the Garcia it’s loss is due to the twin wheel open stern cockpit design, not the aft cabins, which end further forward than a lazaret would be. The Boreal has two aft cabins (more on that in part 4) and still manages a massive lazaret.
From the photographs of the Garcia windlass position showing the access hatch forward of the windlass one wonders how easy it is to reach it to unlock and relock the gypsy let alone get at the windlass to clean or repair it.
Whilst I appreciate the advantage of moving the chain locker amidships for balance I still prefer an easily accessible Horizontal Bow mounted windlass with an integral sealed motor ( to protect it from the elements ) , and a separate rope drum which is useful for winding one up the mast .
As you so often remind us – boat design is a compromise.
Hi James, If I remember right it is much harder on the Garcia to release the Gypsy. And if I remember right that if your chain fell over on its self in the chain locker on the Garcia you would have to go below and remove the door to chain locker to fix that situation. On our Boreal we never had that problem with 10 mm chain. On the Boreal I’m on now it has 12 mm chain and takes up a little more of the chain locker and once in a great while has fallen over on its self and not allowing chain to free flow out the bow. With Boreal it is very easy to untangle the chain by just reaching down and pulling on the chain. No going below spending 20 minutes of more undoing the double door set up to straiten out your tangled chain.
By the way I’d never go back to a chain locker in the front of the boat for many many reasons. Number one is on the Boreal you have the most amazing sail locker one could have on a 44/47 foot boat.
Cheers
Steve and Tracy.
Hi James,
Yes, it’s a trade off. Do note though that the windlass on the Boreal is horizontal and the drum can be used to hoist. Best of both worlds I think. You can see a picture in this post: https://www.morganscloud.com/2010/06/12/boreal-44-test-sail/
I should have added to to my previous comment re: lying down in the cockpit the epochryphal words of a British judge: “who are the Rolling Stones ?”
As a first timer in the comments section I better open with “l am sailing a Boréal 47 right now, have 2000 miles so far on this one and quite a few more planned”. Professional sailing is my livelihood and has been for many years. I really like this Boréal and agree with much of what you’re saying John. A couple of things spring to mind though. Given you’re love of anchoring it’s important to know that there is no way in the world you can attach a manual windlass lever to the wind las because Boréal have put it in a nice box under the deck. Because it’s at the mast and the chain runs under the deck there is no way to pull the anchor up from the bow (unless you happen to be Thor). In terms of helm position, At 5’3” my sailing companion has no difficulty seeing where she’s going. The area behind the helm is roomy enough to move across the boat and small enough to be secure, so it works for small people as well as tall. The mainsail rig is good but does not run easily up the mast. The double purchase halyard isn’t really necessary on a boat this size and would be better if run through a roller instead of a low friction shackle. I agree that reefing at the mast is seamanlike, but the cars need to run easily in the track so it’s easy to get the main down when reefing. That’s not the case on this boat and requires pulling the sail down which means climbing on the coach roof. That shouldn’t be a necessity when reefing in windy weather. The odd little cockpit hatch covers are rubbish, the winch positions and furling line locations mean you have to leave the cockpit to reef headsails and the seating inside is not comfortable on passage. That said the beds in the aft cabins are fantastic when sailing….. I’ve never sailed a Garcia so this is not a comparison but the Boréal, as fine as it is, is not perfect. That’s a few things they could work on and the people who design Boréal boats listen to the likes of you and I so I expect a great boat will get even better.
Hi Peter,
Thanks for the observations, seems like we agree on most stuff.
As you say, the great things is that the Boreal listen. Both JFs are often heard to say “no boat is perfect”.
As to the windlass, I hear you on the manual leaver. but then again most manual levers on electric windlasses (maybe all) are pretty useless and impractical (ours certainly is) so I’m not sure it’s that important. For this reason we carry a spare windlass motor.
Also if the windlass did croak I think that a nipper line lead to a cockpit winch would be a more practical retrieval than most manual options.
And I totally agree on the mainsail handling issues, see part 1.
Hi John
I’d need a fair bit of convincing that a nipper line to the cockpit is a realistic workable option given the chain is in a tunnel under the foredeck. I spoke to jf about it and he says that the windlass doesn’t break down so it’s not an issue. There’s another thing I’m not sure about.
Anyway as it’s about a comparison to Garcia, I’m betting they have the same setup and hence the same issue. Looking forward to part three whilst waiting for alternator repairs in the canaries
Hi Peter,
Good point on the channel under the deck making the nipper much harder to use. I had forgotten that.
Hi Peter,
Good to read you here. If you do allow me:
Generally speaking : I don’t think I ever say something will never break on a boat. (If I did, I shouldn’t) When I speak about any hardware on a sailing boat I always refer to one of my mentors, Bernard Moitessier, saying : “the only thing which will not break on a sailing boat are the things which you will have left on the pontoon”.
On the windlass : what can go wrong ?
– the remote control : Back-up are foot switches at the mast.
– the foot switches : You have direct access in the saloon to the connections of the foot switches to the relay. If you switch the wires the up becomes the down and the other way around. So unless both go wrong at the same time you have a solution.
– The relay : again direct access to the relay. Yes you will have sparks but in case of emergency you can bypass the relay…
– The motor of the anchorwinch : yes you than need to repair/replace the motor and yes that would take you some time.
Up to now, and from what I know, no Boréal owner had the motor of the anchor winch breaking. But yes this is an eventuality.
And yes one would have to bring the chain up on deck, either with a nipper line to to cockpit, either – with a much shorter working range – on the winch on the mast foot… And yes, it would be a long and hard job…
In case of emergency, having to leave an anchorage at once, I believe I would consider abandoning – temporarily – my chain with a buoy. (No, the end of the chain is not linked directly to the boat, so yes you can cut the chain off)
Reefing the headsails :
Yes you need to reach your arm out of the cockpit to reach the clucth for the lines of the two furlers.
But no, if you use one of the two winches, you don’t need to go out of the cockpit to furl/unfurl.
The mainsail sheet is a continuous system with a clutch and winch on each side. So you can always free the mainsail winch and use it for something else.
Behind the clutch of the furling line there is a block on a spring with a fair lead to the winch…
I certainly do not want to be “a smart ass” and I don’t have any problem admitting when I’m wrong but – I’m sure every one will understand – I want to put the record straight any time needed…
Hi jf
Thanks for coming back to me. You are correct, all these things are good ways of dealing with the issues and so far they are in my imagination, not reality. This Boréal, for me at least, remains a fantastic boat. I don’t mean to come across as a “know it all” either and am happy to hear your thoughts and try the ideas out in practice.
Thanks again for staying in touch
Peter
Hi Jean-François,
On the windlass, like Boreal we have never burned out a motor, but we have lost two switches and and solenoid over the years—easy and quick to fix.
And like you, our ultimate fall back is to slip the chain on a buoy and come back for it later after solving the problem.
John & JF
You guys that have never burned out a windlass should switch to a Lewmar V1 Ocean Series windlass (AKA “battery”). Then you will have more stories about innovative repairs and alternative ways of retrieving the anchor.
ps: Yes, sometimes I’m a “smart ass.”!
I was struck by one of John’s pithy insights on current trends in popular marine architecture: “We must never forget that boats are vehicles…not houses, and the cockpit is the command center…not a patio.” He reminds us that boats, like all consumer products are marketed to the aspirations of potential buyers, many of whom use their vessel as a social platform rather than vehicle to distant places.
This is the conundrum for both designers and purchasers.
There is the rule of thumb that 90% of a cruising boat’s time is spent at anchor.
Looking back at my cruise around the Sth Pacific following the very typical route for NZ based boats, ie NZ – Tonga – Fiji – Vanuatu – New Caledonia – NZ, there are the following stats; distance logged 4,700 NM, total duration of cruise 146 days, time on passage between countries (and between the islands in Vanuatu which are all “ocean” passages), 25 days, ie ~ 17% of time voyaging.
At anchor with my small centre cockpit, which I cannot stretch out in, I would at times feel a little envious of catamarans with their large cockpits sitting quite flat in rolly anchorages, similarly the cockpit space in the European coastal cruising monhulls. But at sea when it was blowing 30kt’s there was no where else I would rather be than my monohull’s deep sheltered centre cockpit.
There is no prefect solution and at the end of the day it comes down to where you place your priorities.
I really like the Boreal concept and spent alot of time looking over Lunacy and talking to Jean Francois at Annapolis 2018. I did find the 44 a little “tight” and acknowledge John’s comment that the 52/55 addresses this, albeit at significantly greater cost. Unfortunately given the state of the NZD this is just dreaming for now….
Hi Alan,
Good point and good analysis. Interestingly, despite coming from a 56 foot boat Phyllis and I were surprised by how roomy we found the Boreal. The only slight exception was the heads.
Can you explain the comment about center board boats supposedly not needing a drogue device?
Hi Ben,
See the linked article under further reading.
Thanks for the direction. Read it. Makes sense.
Peter Vandenberg: You lucky guy, to have a Boreal. For mainsail hoisting and dousing/reefing, install a Tides Marine Sail track. Your main will go up easily and and come down in a rush. Replace it every 10 years to deal with UV degradation–and they will charge you less for the 2nd one than your sailmaker did for the first.
On the Garcia, a boat wide enough in the stern for two wheels is not designed for offshore work in my view–and I thought John was of the same opinion.
I installed the Tides Marine track when we got a new main a couple of years ago. We have found it a very good “middle ground” between traditional slugs and a battcar setup like the racing boats have. It has given trouble-free service to date, so much so that if we notice resistance in a hoist, I automatically check to see if the halyard has hung up somewhere, because it’s never been the sail.
+1 for Tides Marine tracks. I have them on each mast of my schooner.
great topic! would love to own either of these boats!
Rustler has an interesting boat in the 57! Looks like a good cruising boat but a “bit” pricey at 1.5M$. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3IqLVBQix2A&feature=em-uploademail
So even on this boat I see a lot of problems, the running rigging on the side decks is abysmal. And the salon looks great for learning how to fly! But I still want.
Hi Robert,
Thanks for the link. I really quite liked the boat and didn’t see a big problem below in the salon given the presence of that sturdy table to lean on while grabbing the rail above. Might have them add a rail along it. Also, I did not see a problem with running rigging on the side-decks. Were you perhaps referring to the impingement of the standing rigging when going forward? If so that’s the drawback of fore and aft lowers and is pretty much unavoidable if one wants that more robust rig. Having lived with fore and aft lowers for most all of my sailing life, I find that one gets used to swinging around them pretty quickly. That said, on my boat the chain plates are inboard, so I can also walk between them and the lifelines. But then again, inboard chain plates are a big hit on interior volume, particularly when built right. But inboard plates also make the boat more close winded. It’s all about tradeoffs, but I think Rustler did a pretty good job balancing those tradeoffs all and all.
John
I agree that Rustler has done a great job(as I said, I want one!) and adding poles and more handholds in the salon would be easy. I have done that on our current boat. As to the side decks. The standing rigging is fine, the lowers are a little in the way as this is inherent with fore and aft lowers. No, what I was referring to is the sheet tracks and leads, they look like moving them slightly inboard would give you better trip free walking space.
Bob
Hi Robert,
Oh, I see. One thought, that boat is rigged as a cutter so moving the jib top leads could choke off the slot to the staysail. Not saying that’s the case, but athwartship position of sheet leads in normally governed by the rig design and is particularly sensitive on a cutter.
John
I think you are correct about “chocking the slot” and I am sure that Rustler tested the location of the track. Unfortunately this is probably the best placement although it does inhibit walking along the side deck. Darn those compromises!
Bob
Hi John, you mentioned that centerboard boats do not need Jordan Series Drougs, can you elaborate please or let me know where I can read more about this subject. I would like to understand why they might now need one. Thanks.
Hi Rusian,
Please see the links under further reading at the bottom of the article.
Thank God you are doing this comparison, John! Ive been trying to find any reviews on Garcia Exploraion for a couple years. And thankfully I found this great site whith a great content for cruisers! This boat is very popular amongst armchair experts thanks to its very unusual look and great marketing Garcia co is doing. An it is. It is very attractive and very adorable for many unexperiensed cruisers who’s does not yet know what they actually need. Unfortunattely there are no objective boat test drives and reviews unlike the car industry.
Hi Alexey,
Glad it’s useful. Two more parts to come.
Interesting discussion about two great expedition boats. They are both well insulated aluminum hull boats and John goes into depth with his thoughts. Boreal is fully welded both the top and the hull which may make it more torsional rigid, Garcia has GPR composite part on the cabin top roof that some find attractive. Visiting such a Garcia (HaiYou) in Patagonia last year we felt comfortable and warm as guests and we was a little jealous on the separate shower that the Boreal do not have. We are a little hard-core sailor to sacrifice this we said as we return to our boat.
Must say that the Garcia people also bragged the Boreal when visiting us, and yes you can take a shower in a little simpler way in both the front and rear head.
The seating position Phyllis experienced is the same as I felt the first time I was on a Boreal. We have not experienced this as a problem later, a pillow fixes it if there are several people sitting. We normally sit perpendicular to this with the legs on the bench and it is very comfortable. It’s also satisfactory to take a nap on the bench without touching the wheel.
The big lazarette was one of the reasons for my choice of boat, and I chose the 44 which have even larger lazarette than the 47. This extra space is so important that I had chosen the 44 even though the prices were similar. In addition when we chose the 6-man soft high-tech life raft bag from Winslow and placed it under the bench in the doghouse we did´t need the extra welded room (that take space) to accommodate a life raft in the lazarette with the opening lid to the stern. The 44/47 are identical all the way to the aft deck that is bigger on the 44 because of the bigger lid and the spacier rom under. With the bathing platform folded down the 44 is longer than the 47 (the difference on the two boats is 53 cm based on my drawing, so it´s a 45+).
As Charles tells the backrest is a must, it´s good to lean on and a safety piece when moving around since you can grab it securely.
Hoisting the main sail was a so easy when we switched to the Antal snatch looper D46 block, now I can lift it almost completely to the top by hand with the 2: 1 system that works well. After that I never use the opportunity that is in the anchor winch. But it´s good to have that as security if you need it, and in the same way the drill is equipped with a Winch Bit so we can go electrical if needed for a short time. If you are not 100% fit after illness or after an accident it´s good to have that aid.
I was close to installing some electric winches for this safety thinking and the fact that one can get older, -if we are lucky. Along the way, the new Pontos winches appeared which have 4 gears so we went for them and I have no regrets on that. It´s great winches from the racing world, anyway Boral’s standard winches are small so you need to upgrade to be happy and then have a boat you can get old with.
It´s fully possible and feels safe to sail singlehanded with the Boreal especially when having a bow thruster.
Ho Odd Arne,
Great analysis, that adds a lot of really good information, thank you. Also some very good information how to think about stowage and planning for aging or injury. I certainly learned several very useful things from your comment.
Hi Martin,
I would like to respectfully disagree with you.
I hope my feedabck will not offend you as it is not the purpose…
Yes, I’m biased but I have sailed with both boats.
NO the watchkeeping can NOT be done in the same on both boats.
On a Boréal you have a an (almost) a 360° view and you can see your mainsail and the genoa. You do not sit at the mast foot, where you only see in front of you and 180° (maybe a bit more) where you do NOT see right behind you and you do NOT see your mainsail.
Isn’t that a security issue ?
Moreover on a Boréal you have a direct contact between cockpit and doghouse which means you don’t have to cross your complete saloon with dripping foul weather to go to your chart table or to go outside…
Why would go and sit in the dark, wet ,storm… outside in a dodger when you can sit (and even snooze) in a well protected and warm doghouse… You should try. You would see it is totally different way of keeping watches (at least when the going gets though)…
Most of our owners do sail their boat shorthanded and some singlhanded.
The most popular one amongst Boréal owners is Matt (But he will say he is not sailing singlehanded because he sails with his dog). He has gone all the way to Hongkong via Cape Horn and back. I do myself on regular base.
Yes you need to be organized, yes it very personal to decide whether you can handle a such a boat singlehanded but some experience it is pretty easy.
Dear Jean-Francois
I am not offended the least and I have only seen constructive comments about the ship you know to the detail from bow to stern. And thank you for relevant qualities of the Boreal. It should never be your job to bring out the qualities of the competition.
The Garcia and Boreal are probably aiming at many of the same qualities of sailing. But I think the products are so different and attract very different types of sailors tempermentwise, that you fill different segments of the “expedition market”. Frankly some of the sailing and liveablity differences are so obvious that I think the sailor will make their mind very quickly.
Keep up the great work at Boreal.
I am envious of the Boreal’s dodger and would have enjoyed it when we were in Scotland, Spitsbergen etc
It is a brilliant design, particularly since it also ventilates the aft cabin(s)
However, writing this at 9 deg North, I would hate to have it because we would cook in the cockpit
If I bought a Boreal, or installed a hard dodger on our Passoa, it would have a large opening hatch in front, despite the loss of the sleek roof. Probably a forward opening hatch in the top too
Hi Neil,
Boreal offer the option of two hatches in the dog house roof, which I gather solves most of the problem.
Agreed that lifelines are too low on most boats
We had Garcia build our hull and pulpits for 90cm (about 3ft) and have never regretted it. ( We neither have not want a deck sweeping Jenny)
It took a bit of arguing with Jean-Louis to persuade him to build this way, but he was always a believer in “the customer is always right”
If building another boat, I would install three lines, since the space below our lower one is relatively large, and people have been lost below standard 24” lifelines
All anchor windlass systems should be able to handle both rope and chain
There are mathematics to prove that all chain rode is bad in a real blow, and we have experience to support that
When anchored on 60 metres chain in 3 metres water, our chain was bar tight from about 40 knots wind speed up. There is no spring effect so in big waves something serious will break
We sat through a Cat 4 hurricane (David 1979) on same boat with 30 metres chain and 30 metres rope on the end in 5 metres water. Never moved. Our old CQR dug half way down to China. Most of the 20 or so anchored boats with us dragged
In our current boat, we have 60 metres chain with 150 metres of rope on the end. Most rope we have used is about 50 metres in Norway
To sum up, both the Expedition 45 and the Boreal seem a bit weak on anchor rode to me
Hi Neil,
As when we first met, you and I will have to agree to disagree on that one. I just don’t see a benefit to hybrid rodes, particularly given the handling issues. What I have always seen, and experienced on our own boat, is that the loads are actually lower on all chain rode than with hybrid or all rope, due to less hunting.
On a boat like the Boreal or Garcia with a centralised chain locker, I don’t see why you would want to use a hybrid chain/rode. You can carry masses of chain without excessive weight penalty in the bow, and simply lash on a long snubber line for shock damping. Even if the rode breaks, you just fall back on the chain.
I have hybrid rode/chain on my current boat but only by necessity because all chain would be too heavy in the bow chain locker. I have to say some nights in a blow I wonder how strong my rope to chain splice is – would much rather the Boreal arrangement.
I’ve never owned an aluminium boat, but one aspect that niggles me a little is that I suspect it must be difficult and costly to make any alterations to the layout of the deck hardware. I’ve constantly tinkered with my previous boats moving pad-eyes, fairleads etc and this is no problem on a GRP top – but much more difficult on an all welded deck. I guess the solution is to spend a lot of time at the factory in the build stage and get it right first time.
But the all welded leak free end product far outweighs that minor drawback. I look at that photo of the GRP top of the Garcia with stainless steel granny bars and fairleads just bolted through the GRP and already dread the inevitable leaks in a few years.
Hi Richard,
Yes, you definitely want to get the deck layout right the first time. That said, if you do want to add something later a cool trick, which we have used, is to get a plate made up with blind holes for the fitting on the top and blind holes to mount it on the bottom, and then mount it with machine screws coming up from underneath—guaranteed waterproof.