I am agnostic about the best boat size for offshore voyaging. There are just too many variables in play, most notably the plans, skills, and resources (read money) of the owners, to be even slightly dogmatic about a best size.
But ever since the tragic deaths of Volker-Karl Frank and Annamarie Auer-Frank on their CNB 66 Escape on a passage from Bermuda to Nova Scotia two years ago, I have been thinking about the upper boat-size limit for safe shorthanded offshore voyaging.
I also think this is a particularly important issue to shine the light of logic on because in recent years:
- The average size of voyaging cruising boats has increased.
- The nature of life career paths have changed so there are an increasing number of people with comparatively little sailing experience, at least offshore, but with deep pockets, who are shopping for a cruising boat.
- There’s a lot more money to be made building and selling large boats, resulting in a powerful inducement for builders to aggressively up-sell prospective buyers—see the screenshot above.
- The proliferation of automated sail-handling systems lets builders claim that even the largest boats can be sailed safely by shorthanded crews pushing buttons.
- I have been seeing a scary trend to optimizing deck layouts for lounging, entertaining and aesthetics, at the expense of function and safety.
Also, since I have praised a larger boat, albeit with caveats, and voyaged shorthanded on that relatively big boat for nearly three decades, I feel a responsibility to write about the flip side: the very real dangers of bigger boats, and the way those dangers scale.
Understanding Bigness
Let’s start with understanding how the forces we must control while sailing scale as boats get bigger. There are three variables:
Hi John,
A very nice article and lots of important observations.
People often ask about one’s boat: and I have developed a succinct response over the years, “ My boat (a Valiant 42) is much stronger and smarter than I am: and forgives a multitude of errors.” It is this last part of forgiving errors that I kept coming back to. It is scary to think what my errors might have resulted in were I in a substantially bigger boat.
My bet, Dick Stevenson, s/v Alchemy
Hi Dick,
Your point about forgiveness is very well taken. That’s another negative about automated systems and electric winches: Counterintuitively, they make the boat less forgiving of error: I can screw up horribly when reefing with slab and nothing, and nobody, gets hurt, except my pride, which is very different than with in-mast or in-boom reefing systems, or electric winches.
Having sailed bigger boats (55-72ft) regularly I can only agree with every word of this. The loads on everything are higher and careless handling have vastly different risks.
Sailing a Boreal 55 vs a 47 is very different, for example. The 55 powers up so much faster and the point of reefing arrives earlier upwind (and should equally downwind, in my view) so the skipper really needs to be on the ball in the bigger boat. Things can get out of control far sooner.
My recommendation to most cruising couples is a round 45-50 maximum.
Best wishes,
Colin
Hi Colin,
Thanks for the confirmation, particularly valuable given that it comes from a professional who has sailed more different boats than anyone I know. And good point about downwind reefing. I’m thinking about an article on just that.
My wife and I are full time cruisers on our Hylas 57, with over 30,000 offshore miles on various boats. I readily admit that the loads are enormous and that the potential for disaster is ever present. However, as a lifelong sailor, the most important skill I bring to the table is anticipation. We sail very conservatively, reefing often and that’s the key. Never losing respect (fear) of the boats potential. Let’s also remember the positives of bigger boats; storage, speed, comfort and overall livability for full timers. We love the boat.
Hi Michael,
Sounds like we are on the same page on much of that, including, the added care big boat require, as well as the benefits of big boats: https://www.morganscloud.com/2019/08/15/you-may-need-a-bigger-boat-than-you-think/
That said, your Hylas, although bigger than our M&R 56 is a lot smaller and less powerful than the Kraken 58.
Still, if I were advising a cruising couple I would, like Colin (see further up thread) almost certainly steer them away from the Hylas 57 to a bit smaller boat. For me “the potential for disaster” is just a bit too “ever present”.
I also agree with this comment! Especially the note about anticipation. The bigger the boat, the more you need to think ahead and take action well in advance if shorthanded.
I congratulate you for your clear-eyed assessment. Well written public service here.
Hi John,
I agree 100% with your well written and timely article. My wife just did the Marstrand to Plymouth passage with 59-North on Falken (due to weather it ended up being Marstrand to London to Dover to Weymouth to Plymouth). Her perspective on offshore and coastal sailing prior to this trip has been formed by sailing on our trimarans (our previous Corsair and current Dragonfly 32) and some experience sailing with me on a Gunboat 66, a massively loaded and very fast boat (25 knots downwind) that used electric winches for sheeting and handling of all sails.
Storyteller (our DF32), has a rig that in size is comparable to a 40-45 foot cruising monohull. We have one electric main winch that we use primarily for raising the mainsail. All sail sheeting tasks (jib, Code Zero, gennaker, and mainsail) have to performed with a winch unless it is less than 4 knots of wind. We followed your advice and bought a eWincher which is what my wife needs to use for any sail sheeting tasks (she is 5’ tall and 100lbs wet).
Trimarans and catamarans get lumped together by folks who have little experience sailing either and I have to strongly state they are two different animals. A monohull sailor will find a trimaran more familiar in the way the boat sails and handles. IME it really only feels drastically different when you are beam to hot broad reaching in big seas. It’s not uncomfortable or dangerous (assuming you have the right sail area up) just different. We never heel more than 10-12 degrees on Storyteller and while that gives you a sense of comfort and security, it has to be tempered by strict rules on reefing at specific wind strengthes and respect for sail loading. One of the features I really love about a trimaran such as the DF32 is that the beam of the boat allows us to position the boom away from cockpit for raising and lowering the mainsail (we turn the boat slightly down from head to wind so the boom is aligned with the apparent wind angle). With both the mainsheet and the preventer attached and slightly tensioned, we can stop the boom from flailing and it keeps loose lines out of the cockpit. We can use this technique for reefing also but we have found that we can set a mainsail reef while sailing downwind. Quorning Boats sets up the boats with single line reefing on the mainsail and while I hear the complaints about friction with such a system, so far it has worked well for us with no issues setting or removing reefs. I would advise anyone with a larger monohull to consider using their preventer if possible in a similar fashion to limit the movement of the boom while raising or lowering the mainsail or setting a reef.
We are tempted by a larger trimaran and the DF36/DF40 or the Rapido 40 would be dream boats to us but the extra room they would offer would come at the expense of exponentially higher costs and I am not sure we could handle the increased loads (we are 66 and 59 years old). Storyteller actually has as much or more storage than a comparably sized monohull because we can store up to 800 lbs of gear in our starboard and port floats but the caveat is that the float storage is not accessible while underway (unless we are motoring or sailing in very light wind and flat seas). We keep fenders, dock lines, paddle boards, spare fuel, dinghy motor, dinghy (when deflated), etc. in the floats. All vital equipment is in the main hull. This seems to work well.
The bottom line for us is to be happy with the smallest boat we can tolerate for our needs. This reduces costs and physical stress and I think in the long run we are happier. During Elise’s trip on Falken, they came out of Sweden beating upwind in 20 knots of wind with a staysail and reefed mainsail, 2m seas, and constant heel angle of around 20 degrees for nearly two days. She texted me that she will never pressure us to buy a cruising monohull for the rest of our sailing careers!
Hi Bob,
Thanks for the fill on Elise’s trip on Falken. And I agree, it’s unfortunate that cats and tris get lumped together. One of the things I find interesting about multihulls is that the variance between different boats and their suitability for task is much larger than it is for monohulls. For example the difference between your boat and the average charter type cat is just huge.
One point, you don’t have to be a multi hull to keep the boom out of the boat when hoisting etc. We used to do essentially the same on the M&R 56 with a tackle. A preventer does not work well because the angle is too acute. I should write about that.
As to reefing, we almost always reef down wind, so the preventer does work well for that: https://www.morganscloud.com/2010/11/19/reefing-a-sailboat/
I was on the same passage and agree with those comments. Also during more active sailing we often had two watches worth of crew on deck, especially during the day. Having a professional captain and mate plus 9 crew and a massive cockpit with loads of big manual winches really helps sail a boat of that size.
My wife and I cruise a 48-foot, 36k pound older boat (Hinckley 48 yawl) and that’s about the upper limit of what I feel comfortable double handing, or frequently single handing as one of us is typically dealing with our kids.
Smaller boats are just so much more forgiving and mistakes that go unnoticed or are easily remedied on a 40-footer can become true disasters on bigger boats. A while back I was part of a 40-person racing crew on a modern classic (160-ft LOA schooner, replica of a turn of the century cup boat). It was the first time I had raced on a boat over 50 feet. The schooner didn’t have automated sail handling systems (hence the 40-person crew) but there were powered winches for key loads. There were probably 5 full time crew with 35 mostly amateur sailors on for regattas. My station, with an assistant, was the port running backstay. In one tack, my counterpart on the starboard runner was having issues; the skipper didn’t notice, came through the tack and fell off after rounding the windward mark without a windward runner on. At the main trimmer’s direction, I kept the port runner on, but as soon as the starboard runner had been sorted he and the skipper began screaming at me to release because the massive mainsail was now loaded against the runner and threatening the rig as we were reaching along in 25 knots of breeze with the rail in the water and an extremely over-sheeted 2500 sq. ft. main. I tried to ease the runner without truly stripping the line off the winch and avoiding shock loads, but because the runner was on a 2-1 or 4-1 (with blocks the size of my head) and because the main was so massive I just couldn’t get ahead of the situation or ease the runner to a point where the winch was sufficiently unloaded to let the runner go free. Finally, as the main trimmer was yelling at me to release immediately, I made sure the line was clean and stripped the winch like I would on a 40-foot race boat tacking quickly. The main surged forward, the tail of the line didn’t snag anything, all was good, and the main trimmer gave me a thumbs up. The first mate, however, who was in charge of the foredeck came sprinting back screaming expletives at me and warned me never to release a winch like that again on his boat or he’d do horrible things to me.
After the race while we made peace over some beers, he told me the reason that he was so upset. Earlier that season, someone had released a winch near the foremast in a similar fashion after a botched tack had resulted in one of the bigger headsails backwinded and thrashing around. When the sheet was ripped off the winch and surged around the foredeck in a fury, it broke a block and then somehow wrapped around the outboard skeg of the tender that was strapped on the foredeck. As the sail came through the wind, the lazy sheet ripped the 15-foot RIB right off the boat and hurled it overboard, landing a good distance from the schooner. I had done a lot of racing on boats up to 50 feet or so, primarily as a bowman, but the concept of a lazy sheet moving about with enough force to catapult a tender off the boat was well beyond anything that I could have imagined.
The jib (or maybe flying jib) on that schooner was significantly bigger than the Kraken’s headsails, but I would imagine that the loads on Kraken’s probably 1000 plus sq. foot primary headsail are exponentially higher than on a 40-footer.
Hi Benjamin,
I have always been in awe of the seamanship big schooner crews exhibit and your story just reinforces that! Glad everyone got out of that one with all their appendages!
Re. the scaling relationships and how they affect forces.
If you want to apply math to the question “how difficult is it to work this boat”, you’re going to find that your answer depends, to a good first approximation, on just two factors:
A Sundeer 60 has a 49.6 m2 main and a 47.3 m2 jib. A C&C 35-2 has a 25.7 m2 main and a 32.7 m2 jib. On the same point of sail in the same wind, the Sundeer is about 44% more work for the jib trimmer and 93% more work for whomever’s on mainsail duty.
Sail area is proportional to displacement. Indeed, the SA/D ratio is half of how we group boats into classes in the first place.
The wind speed in which we’re willing to sail is proportional to displacement and to stability. 25 knots is utterly overwhelming for my daughter’s favourite Topper Topaz; it’s a good sturdy blow with reefed-down sails on my C&C 35-2; it’s an ordinary day of ordinary cruising for John’s old M&R 56. Stability depends on displacement, and also on beam (which depends on displacement).
If your boat is heavy enough and stable enough to feel comfortable in a 30 knot wind, you’re going to be working four times as hard to handle it as you’d work a boat with similar sails in a 15 knot wind.
What it boils down to is that you can noodle around on the relationships and the relative importance of various factors all you like, but when it’s time to assess “how big” a sailboat is from the standpoint of your ability to handle it, you really just need:
And everything else that matters flows from those two numbers.
Putting some rough numbers on it: Within the cruising boat SA/D range (call it 15 to 18), I would gently suggest that:
And you need to adjust those displacement figures downward if you turn up the SA/D ratio into the racer-cruiser range.
Hi Matt,
Hum, not sure I agree on limiting to those two factors. I thought a lot about including SA/D, but in the end went with sail area and stability. The reason I did is based on real real world experience: when we changed to a carbon mast on the M&R 56 (after the aluminium one started cracking) the loads went up substantially and we needed to be even more careful not to let the boat get ahead of us. The reason, of course, is that the stability went up substantially, even though SA/D and displacement remained the same. Another example is a cat where the loads can be huge because of the very high initial stability.
That said, I do agree that the Kraken 58 S/AD of nearly 19.3 is way too high for a cruising boat.
Fair point…. within boats of a given family / class / type, stability is closely linked to displacement, hence my suggestion to consider displacement the primary factor. But if you switch to a significantly different type of boat, or modify a boat so as to effectively change its class/type to a higher performance one (as you did with your CF mast), you may end up with much more stability and thus much more power at the same displacement.
So perhaps I recommended going a bit too far with simplifying assumptions in the previous comment.
On the design side, what we’re really looking at here is both the typical and maximum forces on the halyards, sheets, furling/reefing lines, and steering. Those forces depend on sail area (either on its own or as SA/D ratio, either way works), on wind speed, and on stability; stability in turn depends mainly on displacement, beam, and underwater shape; beam and shape in turn depend on displacement. The maximum wind speed in which you’re willing to sail before throwing in the towel is determined by many factors, but the dominant one is displacement.
So, in the simplified “how much boat can my spouse and I personally handle” first approximation, I think you can set your rough thresholds based on what performance class it is (sail area or SA/D) and how big it is (displacement). You can’t assess stability or sheet tension from YachtWorld listings or SailboatData.com tables. But when you start considering any one specific boat, then yes, those other factors come into play and you shouldn’t neglect them.
Great Post and I agree with everything you have said, especially about manual systems being safer. I am a big fan of the KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid) philosophy, although that may not be obvious when I tell you about my last choice of boat. I owned a custom gaff rigged Virginia pilot schooner from 2013 to 2021. It was 60 feet on deck and 75 overall with spars. To many this may sound like a large boat, but to John’s point, length can be deceiving. All manual systems – block and tackle, manual winches, windlass and reefing. It had a roller furling jib on the bowsprit and lugged on staysail. The main and foresail were both gaff rigged. The main mast was 63 feet off the water. The schooner rig allowed smaller sails and shorter masts (as well as shallow draft). The smaller sails meant smaller loads and safer handling. Displacement was only about 70,000 pounds. When people asked how many people it took to sail such a boat, most were shocked to hear that my wife and I often sailed it ourselves. It was wonderful to sail from our home in South Carolina to the Bahamas and back, which we did several times. It was fast, safe and comfortable. I am a fan of the schooner rig because of these traits, but you don’t see many around. I guess people view them as too complex. I am curious about others opinions.
Lee
Hi William,
I think your description is a great illustration on one of my pet peeves:
Rig types that allow each sail to be smaller, and the sail centre to come down lower, are better, especially for cruising, but have benefits elsewhere too.
The true cutter is perhaps the best of such rigs. It splits the normal area into 3, rather than two, meaning each sail is just 67% of its sloop counterpart, if the total area is the same. That’s about the same area as if the sloop puts in two reefs in each sail, while the cutter still runs on full power. The true cutter has the mast significantly further aft and ideally spreads the sails over a bigger part of the boat length, perhaps with a bowsprit, to keep the same driving force on a shorter mast. The sloop will be more efficient max upwind, when not reefed, and with a max spinnaker. The true cutter will be more efficient for everything else.
Your schooner has split the area probably in 4, or more, which is even better, but you need another mast and rig, which is much added weight and windage where we really don’t want it. That will reduce your upwind efficiency significantly, but you do get a very big boat that, as you describe, can be handled by a cruising couple. However, since this is a gaff schooner, I assume the priority has not been efficiency, but rather traditional elegant style. Mission accomplished!
To recap: My core point is that we have all experienced how a reef or two changes the whole situation from stressful to calm, as if the weather eased off significantly. That effect should influence the choice of rig type, as discussed above, and the choice of boat size, as is the main topic here. If we start out with a too big sail, we have a constant and dangerous problem.
PS
I’ve also sailed some times as a hired skipper on a 73 foot schooner. (Skydancer.no) She did the North West Passage this summer. I sailed her in in the winter in northern Norway and summer in Svalbard, Spitsbergen, up to 80 degrees north. She is a modern schooner, two 27,5 metre (about 90 foot) masts and long bow sprit, bringing LOA up to 86 feet. Zero electrical winches etc. I sailed her with unskilled guests and a couple of times alone. I did not feel calm… It’s definitely not suitable for that in heavy weather, and she’s a good illustration of the points in this article. Everything needs to be planned plenty early, and extremely conservatively. No room for surprises. Cruising and time will always bring surprises.
Hi Stein,
I totally agree, and that the true cutter is the best answer, particularly on bigger boats. One of the things that makes the Kraken 58 so unappealing to me is the solent rig. She would be way safer (not safe) as a cutter: https://www.morganscloud.com/2015/09/17/12-reasons-the-cutter-is-a-great-offshore-voyaging-rig/
Hi Lee,
Yes, I can see that. After all, as I understand it, the schooner rig evolved so that smaller crews could manage, particularly in the coastal trade. That said, I would still caution anyone considering a schooner that big that a very high level of seamanship is required to sail her safely.
Skip Novak’s latest book and a recent podcast with Andy Schell at 59-North is a good supplement to John’s discussion and points. Worth the listen and read.
Hi Bob,
Yes Skip is a good resource. That said, Skip is a pro and sails with pro crews, so I caution others to filter what he says through that lens (see #10): https://www.morganscloud.com/2018/12/02/which-old-salts-should-we-listen-to-10-ways-to-decide-part-2/
Fair statement but in this podcast he had some similar thought provoking comments on current trends in offshore yacht design. And his idea of a “small” boat starts at about 50’, not affordable for me and most folks.
I did enjoy his heavy weather Yachting World YT series but agree you have to frame the context of his advice against the actual boat you own, where you sail, and the experience level of the sailors on your boat.
Keep the good stuff coming John. I always stop what I am doing when I get an email from AAC.
Hi
I’ve been sailing some 60 years and mostly short or single handed the past decade. My current yacht is a deep keel Hinckley sou’wester 51 with leisurefurl boom
Coastal sailing can be solo. For her transatlantic and North Sea crossings she sails with a crew of 3-4
After 15 seasons I know the yacht and systems extremely well. But I’m now 71 without the mobility and strength of even 5 years ago
It’s no longer possible to single hand lift a #2 genoa and I only fly alone the asymmetric spinnaker or code sails (sock and furler respectively) in winds now less than 14 true
With prudent decisions re weather and earlier reefing loads stay tame on deck and manageable for me. I still run out of courage long before the yacht runs out of strength
But she is a small 51 footer compared to most yachts these days and wide transoms and lack of hand holds would add a lot of risk
So there will be a time of reluctant downsizing as I wish not to add more system complexity to be able to manage the yacht
I concur with your analysis and opinions
Hi Paul,
I hear, and sympathize, with you having just been through the same evolution.
And, as you point out, your SW 51 is a way easier and safer boat to sail than most modern 50 footers because she is actually much smaller and also very easily driven. I know this because, of course, the SW 51 is a smaller version of our M&R 56 designed by the same office—loverly boat, particularly the deep keel version like yours.
Hi John,
I totally agree with this thinking. It took me a long time to learn it as besides dinghy sailing, my sailing when I was younger was with our family boat that was tricky with items like a big rig that depended on running backstays, then working on vessels in the 100-300 ton displacement range and doing some deliveries with boat sizes in between. Even for people who don’t buy a big boat like the Kraken, I think there is a lot of value in having some time on a big boat that has a really competent crew as you will learn a ton. Once you are comfortable on a big boat, a lot of things are just easy on a small one sort of like how learning to make a boat go fast is often easiest on a small boat. Going on Falken sounds like a great way to do it but it could also be doing a bunch of local races on your competent friend’s Swan 60 which wouldn’t prepare you to take one offshore but might help you think about how to sail your own smaller boat.
I don’t have a ton of time on boats that are in the Krakens size range as they tend to be too small for pro crew and too big for couples so it is limited to a few deliveries. One thing that stands out to me is that the ergonomics on these boats is often unchanged from normal 40′ cruising boats. Stuff like kneeling and leaning forward while grinding a jib sheet sort of works on a 10 ton boat but doesn’t at all on a 30 ton boat. If you look at well designed modern big boats that are not highly automated, you see that they are designed to haul on lines, operate winches, etc. by standing in a very secure location and the mechanical advantage has been optimized. One of the deliveries I skippered was of an 80’er with all hydraulics and a very lazy crew so I did the old trick of shutting down the automated systems and the first thing we learned once the crew started paying attention and having a good time was that the manual systems were only there as afterthoughts and we had to re-lead a ton of stuff to make them work well.
Your numbers seem very reasonable to me for normal experienced sailing couples. There are of course people out there who will be far more capable and at a level that normal people will never achieve regardless of the amount of practice. The other thing though is enjoyment. To me, the ideal monohull size for non full time coastal cruising is in the 6-12 ton range and adding full time takes that to maybe 8 to 15 tons. Offshore in mid latitudes, there are undeniable benefits to size within limits and I would probably say that my sweet spot would be 8 to 20 tons. Of course, these numbers reflect my thoughts on loads, comfort, where to sail, cost, etc. but I think it is useful to not always assume that the biggest or smallest you can do something in is the best, I would actually feel comfortable on boats bigger than listed but it wouldn’t be the right boat.
To your comparison of the MR and the Kraken, I think you have hit the major factors. 3 and 4 kind of compound as not only is the ballast moving lower, the center of buoyancy is moving up so it makes that ballast more effective.
Eric
Hi Eric,
Lots of good thoughts. Your point about inefficient winch positions is particularly well taken. If we look at a boat like Falken we see cross linked coffee grinder pedastals in a safe place where two crew can be well braced to operate them, which, I’m sure, makes a huge difference. Contrast that to the Kraken 58 where the winches are in a position that will encourage crew to stand outside the cockpit and to leeward in a very vulnerable position to operate them. Our M&R 56, while not having room for a coffee grinder pedestal, is somewhere in the middle in that while we had to kneel on the seat, the winch was well positioned to get over it in an optimal position for grinding while well braced by the coaming. That said, there was no way Phyllis and I could have managed her as a sloop. The headsails would have been just too big for anything other than a stand up coffee grinder to work.
Thanks John. Another very worthy addition to the discourse on offshore sailboats used for short-handed extended cruising.
But I wonder if big boats it isn’t yet just another dumb idea to have pervaded the whole offshore cruising sailboat space. It seems to me we’re like the frog in the pot being gradually boiled alive as we get used to one dumb idea after another without realising the cumulative effect is dangerously unseaworthy vessels. This is probably worth another whole discussion, but here’s my attempt at a list of such.
DUMB STUFF on modern cruising yachts (in sort of chronological order) most of which are pretty good (or at least tolerably bad enough) in racing boats.
Very shallow bilges with no pump sump.
Rudders unsupported by skegs (now dual rudders unsupported by skegs, as if one isn’t bad enough).
Flat forward sections that pound like hell upwind and sometimes you’ve just got to get upwind.
Fractional rigs (brilliant on racing boats, but most cruisers want to sail downwind where sail area forward is far more stable).
S drive legs. Nothing like cutting a 12” hole in the bottom of your boat and hoping a rubber seal holds.
KEELS (don’t get me started – too late, I already have)
Short chord keels held on with very few keel bolts
. keels that seem to bolt to nothing in particular (I keep seeing these keel separations where the bolts haven’t broken, they’ve just pulled through the hull. I’m also a bit over the common refrain whenever a boat loses its keel and sailors everywhere say “what did it hit?” It shouldn’t matter what it hit, it should be designed to NOT fall off in the very likely event it does hit something FFS!
. vertical leading edges (that make it very difficult to dislodge anything caught on it)
. forward protruding keel bulbs (that make it IMPOSSIBLE to dislodge anything caught on it)
Huge wide sterns (so we can have two walk around king sized beds aft in a 40’ boat. Why??)
. now to accommodate this unnecessary thing we compound the felony with two unsupported and exposed rudders so we can control the boat when it heels
Plumb bows. Again wonderful in racing boats where maximising waterline length and minimising weight is everything, but in cruising boats they bring no increasing buoyancy as the bow plunges into the next wave and present a lovely expanse of hull for an anchor to swing out of the water and chip away at.
And now we’ve arrived at
Large windows in hull topsides of often several square feet, as if small windows and portholes weren’t always a big enough problem! What’s next, glass bottoms FFS??
All that said and to prove I’m not such an ornery old critter wistful for gaff rigs and long keels, there have been some GOOD improvements in modern cruising boats, including
Sugar scoop sterns
Beam aft (moderate) to enable comfortable double quarter berths or a (ie one) aft stateroom
Rod or wire chain plates below deck from the deck fitting to a strong structure lower in the boat to give more interior space flexibility without compromising strength.
I seriously hope I’m not that ornery old critter.
Hi Paul,
I would agree with most of that except the superiority of skeg rudders over spade. In my view there is no reason a spade rudder can’t be built that is just as robust as a skeg rudder, and there are a lot of handling benefits to spade rudders: https://www.morganscloud.com/2022/03/11/adventure-40-rudder-and-steering-gear/
Re: The spade rudder. Totally agree,John. Especially in a metal boat, a spade rudder can be built to be extremely tough. And they make the handling in tight quarters much easier. No bow thruster required. Other than that, Paul, you summed it up!
Paul, you may be at risk of becoming “that ornery old critter”…. but yes, a number of the issue you mention are ones that have been criticized previously on here. I would dispute your take on skeg rudders – an all-moving foil, if properly engineered, is both hydrodynamically and structurally superior – but the other points are cases where good engineering sense might fall victim to marketing and racing-rule pressure.
Big boats aren’t *inherently* a manifestation of that. An efficiently laid out, well designed big boat may we’ll be easier and safer to handle than a smaller one with more compromises in its design.
However, the trend to big boats that try to pack in all the luxuries of a four-star hotel back home – and thus end up totally dependent on power assistance to accomplish all but the most basic seamanship tasks – is concerning.
Thanks John. I had not considered the weight aspect and had instead focused on LOA, so this opens my eyes!
The one thing I wonder about: There are a lot of crewed yachts. Crewed usually by 2 to four people (and the other two will usually be stewards and cooks with limited experience).
The tragic accident on the CNB66 happened with a crew of four.
Point being, taking the shock loads point to its logical conclusion I would surmise that there is no safe yacht size unless there’s a sizable crew of very experienced sailors.
And considering the ‘we don’t scale point’: a 100ft yacht has incredible loads and I suppose handling that with manual winches becomes impossible?
Hi Basile,
That’s true about crewed yachts. In fact I was guide and ice pilot on a 93 foot sloop and that was exactly the situation. But here’s the dirty little secret about those boats: They don’t sail much. We went to Greenland and back from Newfoundland and we sailed for about 10 hours total, mainly so the owner could get a photo of the boat in front of an ice burg. We also met a really big sloop named Billy Bud in Greenland one year and when I asked the very experienced skipper about managing her under sail he said “are you nuts John, we don’t sail the boat, way too dangerous” or words to that effect. These big boats also often have a delivery rig of storm trysail and staysail that they motor sail with. That’s how the J boats get delivered.
And yes Escape had a crew of four, two owners and two quite experienced pick up crew, but that actually may have contributed to the accident in that it was one of the pick up crew that was steering when the accident happened. Point being that if there had been four fully experienced pros on Escape that night things might of gone fine, particularly since they probably would have reefed earlier. That said, there are things about that boat that are, in my view, intrinsically dangerous and no amount of crew, or skill, changes that.
As to electric winches, it is possible to handle a 100+ foot yacht without (Comanche is an example) but extremely difficult and requiring a big pro crew. You will note that the Kraken 58 comes standard with electric winches, and there are good reasons for that. (With coffee grinder pedestals manual would work, but not top handle.) But the problem with that is that electric winches, in and of themselves, escalate the risk of damage and injury.
All that said, I’m not sure why you would say “that there is no safe yacht size unless there’s a sizeable crew of very experienced sailors” ? Phylis and I sailed the McCurdy and Rhodes 56 over 100,000 miles without serious accident, or anyone getting hurt, and most of that with just the two of us, and occasionally three. That said, as I say in the article, risk of injury, and skill required to avert disaster, definitely goes up with boat size, and further, that’s not linear but exponential once boats get over about 40,000 lbs displacement. And one we get down to around 30,000 pounds things get way easier and safer because we can muscle our way out of mistakes. See Dick and Eric’s comments.
OK I am going to throw some chum in the water on this one. We bought a 2002 Beneteau First 47.7 and put about 8k NM on it be for Hurricane Beryl threw her to the ground while on the hard in Carriacou. She was catastrophically damaged by the impact w the ground. We are in the market for a new boat. We will have to finance it since although we have decent monthly income, the bank reserves crashed to the ground w the boat. We are not hard core sailers and have never raced. We are just turning 60. I grew up small boat sailing and love that level of fun. The 47.7 was a great boat to go from zero to hero fir us as the previous owner had been a racer and he tricked her out to short/solo hand so I have lots of notes to bring forward. We are also scuba divers and as such the boat will have to accomidate that hobby also. By the time the 47.7 was fitted out and modernized, she was too heavy and lost some performance as a result. So we are looking to go up in size – a little. This is where the conversation will devolve….
We can’t afford what you would generally feel is a bulletproof blue water boat that is under 25-30 years old and the bank won’t finance something that old. That leaves us with modern production boats from the brands regularly dissed around here. But reality is we have to make due with the cards we have to play. I am not opposed to updating/ replacing IMF and properly fitting out for lightwind sails. Beneataeu (Sense 50/55), Jenneau 53, Dufour 520, 56, Bavaria all are boats we are considering. I am wondering if we may be over reaching or maybe the 47.7 was actually more boat then some of these newer boats – larger sail plan, deeper draft.
Before you go recommending alternative models, if a model recommended needs a ladder to get down to the water, then you were not paying attention to the Scuba Diving reference.
She will be getting fitted with more solar than anyone here is comfortable with also.
So feedback welcome.
Hi Edward,
First off, good on you for recognizing the overload danger. I write about exactly that as a reason to upsize here: https://www.morganscloud.com/2019/08/15/you-may-need-a-bigger-boat-than-you-think/
That said, if you upsize you will want to be very careful you don’t go too far, particularly since you had relatively little time and miles on the 47.7 before she got wrecked. The above article will help you judge that. And the key to safety is not to rely on automated systems and make sure you have a really good slab reef system that will let you reef without rounding up: https://www.morganscloud.com/2010/11/19/reefing-a-sailboat/
You will also find a bunch of useful information in these two online books:
https://www.morganscloud.com/category/rigging-sails/book-sail-handling-rigging/
https://www.morganscloud.com/category/boat-design-selection/book-how-to-buy-a-cruising-boat/ (Just edited and updated)
As to specific boat recommendations, I don’t do that since it’s impossible to hipshot that kind of thing. Recommending a boat, done right, requires a complete analysis of the buyers needs. So I would suggest you retain Colin to help you zero in on the right boat. There is no one, but no one, who is better qualified: https://www.morganscloud.com/consulting/
One strong consideration for my wife and I on the purchase of a new boat recently was buying one that we would not age out of quickly because it would be difficult to handle as we get older. We bought the smallest and lightest of the boats we were considering. While it has a SA/D of 21 (which I note is higher than John recommends in a cruising boat), I think that the relatively small amount of total area of the Saga 43 as compared to the other boats we considered makes it acceptable. I also considered my wife and I are fit at 55 years old and plan to stay that way. Bottom line is that the boat was really not that much of a step up from our previous one in difficulty to handle, and I found the transition quite easy. One requirement was ease of single-handing and this boat fits that bill as well. Sure, another 10,000lb of displacement and another 5ft LOA would be more comfortable at sea, but then would we be capable of handling a boat like that in 15 years? Maybe, but I didn’t see the need to take that chance. And, with expenses scaling proportionally with displacement, the extra cost of ownership was also a factor.
Great article.
The problem of increasing numbers of, usually older, relatively wealthy but inexperienced people buying boats for long distance cruising is perhaps understated.
Relying on power operated devices to compensate for weakness of aging muscles is dangerous, made more so by declining levels of repair and maintenance know-how.
Used to be that most cruisers worked up on a shoestring, and only the (fool?)hardy ventured offshore.
Having been cruising since 74, we have observed increasing reliance on purchasing skilled services over DIY. These people are less likely to be able to keep the increasingly complex gadgets going at sea
Hi Neil,
Well put.
I consider being the skipper on one’s own sailboat with just a partner and occasional guest as one of the last areas where skill is developed over time and that, if fortunate, you can apprentice yourself every now and again to those who have been-there-done-that. Built into the “apprenticeship” notion is that skill development takes time and commitment and hands-on experience to develop and that there is really no way to jump-start the process. You just gotta pay your dues.
One can accelerate the learning curve with a full-time commitment to excursions on other boats, pushing personal boundaries on one’s own boat, readings, courses, etc., but money spent on boat and equipment designed to ease the learning curve will not purchase membership.
I believe an incentive for the skipper to make the necessary commitment is to fully realize that being a skipper is a huge responsibility. Most of us have at least one loved one aboard. There are not too many land-based recreations/activities where the well-being of another is so clearly in another’s hands. Every detail of seamanship and boat preparation then becomes important in the developing of a safe passage.
My best, Dick Stevenson, s/v Alchemy
Hi Dick,
Good points about the responsibility of being the skipper and the importance of taking our time to get qualified to take on that responsibility.
Hi Neil,
Good observations and very much in line with what Phyllis and I have noticed over the same period.
Hi Neil and John
I agree with both of you. It’s also the case that many younger owners haven’t ‘served the apprenticeship’ of owning old vehicles etc and developing the skills of repair over a lifetime. And perhaps (from my experience, at least) finding the skilled technicians in yards even in first world countries is getting increasingly difficult. KISS is the answer!
I was on Oyster’s website yesterday and watched a video they had of Shirley Robertson taking their new 495 on a 500 mile cruise. Beautiful boat and it looked like it performed extremely well but ALL sail handling was done by push buttons and electric motors (in mast furling for the mainsail). There were pretty big portholes in the top sides in the owner’s cabin for ocean view and all I could imagine were those windows getting broadsided by waves in rough weather. The interior of the boat had nearly every creature comfort a nice beach condo would have. A good portion of the marketing focus was that this was a boat that could be sailed by a couple around the world.
Not sure I would want to be more than 1-2 days from land on a boat with systems as complicated as this boat had. When they fail (especially any of the sail handling systems), it would be a significant challenge for a short handed crew.
Hi Bob,
Good points on the Oysters. I have not watched the 495 one, but I watched a video from Matt Sheahan on 595 that scared the living crap out of me, particularly the position of the mainsheet in relation to the crew positioning and the fact it is controlled by a electrically activated hydraulic ram in the boom…what could go wrong.
The other thing that drives me nuts is that I’m near-certain that Sheahan is paid by Oyster to do these “reviews” but that is never mentioned—no shame.
I have been thinking of doing an article taking one of these videos apart.
Hi John and all,
I look forward to your review of the video.
Oysters do not have a lock on what I call nautical design absurdities, but I was down the river from where they launched new Oysters a decade or so ago.
One owner waxed ecstatic about the weight savings he accrued when Oyster sold him on a carbon fiber steering wheel. It was indeed a sexy looking piece of kit: but weight savings on an Oyster?
And, I am not sure if this is generally the case with Oysters, but I was on a new one a decade or more ago and the owner offered a cup of tea. He needed to start the generator to make the tea: an all- electric stove. And it could not be run off the batteries, so the propulsion engine could not be a back-up. So, if/when the generator gets ornery, he is not able to cook.
I was reminded of acquaintances who left the Caribbean for the Azores on a tight budget and a modest boat with each thinking the other had filled the propane tank. Their food was primarily beans and rice and items which demanded heat to become edible. They ran out of propane a few days out and resorted to barbecue briquets for a day or two and then to pulling wood and anything that would burn out of the water.
They made it to the Azores, but lost a lot of weight and were only a few days from a MAYDAY call.
The above story caught my attention and I assured myself of having the parts necessary to get propane to the cooker in most eventualities. I was also pleased to have gotten the stove-top version of my Refleks heater which has been used to boil water and heat stews/soup on rainy cold days at anchor.
My best, Dick Stevenson, s/v Alchemy
Hi Dick,
To be fair on electric cooking, these days with lithium batteries it’s possible to cook for quite long periods without starting a generator. That said, to cook on electricity one will still end up with either a generator or an un-seamanlike solar array. https://www.morganscloud.com/2021/01/04/cooking-options-for-live-aboard-voyagers-part-1-electric/
On the other hand a single induction ring can make a nice backup to propane, We always carried one on the M&R 56, and before induction became available, an ordinary electric ring.
That said, in all my years of cruising I have never had a propane stove fail on me. They are pretty reliable, one of the great benefits.
Hi John,
I found your article interesting and informative and would heed your advice rather than depend solely on own (less) experience and intuition.
However, you didn’t mention the Outbound 46 after the analysis portion of your post. What are your conclusions regarding that boat in comparison to the M&R and Kraken?
Many thanks for being a trusted advisor for my sailing adventures and learning.
Steve
Hi Stephen,
In this case I was using the Outbound as a baseline, so no need to say anymore, but we have a complete review:https://www.morganscloud.com/category/boat-design-selection/outbound-46/
Hello. I am 64 years old and I own a 1977 sloop with a displacement of 14,000 pounds. I can steer it well on my own.
I’m planning to take the plunge and get an 18,000lb “two-tonner”, also from 1977. Being a two tonner it’s an ex IOR racing boat. I just need to figure out whether I can manage it on my own, unless I’m always going with reduced sails.
I’m looking to move up to a two-tonner because I like the flush deck, which makes movements much easier and faster than the current one. The boat is rigged as a sloop, with non structural running backstays. Hope also that the larger displacement would make sailbot movement more comfortable and sweet.
I’d appreciate your opinion, as I’ve never sailed on a two-tonner.
Thank you.
Hi Michele,
I’m also 64 and I used to race in the various IOR classes in the seventies and eigthies, including a couple of times on a two tonner. The One Ton, 3/4 Ton and the 1/2 Ton classes were far more competitive, while the Two Ton was predominantly for the very rich, and for the big boat in an Admirals Cup team. (Fastnet race was part of that cup. Probably still is?) It’s impossible to say anything conclusive about your questions without knowing the specific boat, especially since these were almost always one off built racers, but my general thoughts:
IOR was not a very good design rule, as it gave some rather unhealthy traces in the designs. Thick walled, thus heavy, but very thin profile mast tubes, measurement bumps in the hull, sometimes strange hull geometry, etc. However, the most important problem with them is that they are often pure racing boats, thus built to perform well for perhaps 5 years, and then be replaced, as they would not be competitive anymore. That means not very robustly built. They’re also usually designed for a trained crew of 8, meaning not very short hand friendly. A two tonner would typically be around 15 meters (50 feet), if I remember correctly, so it’s a big boat too.
Your potential new boat has had a long life after it’s racing life, so it’s probably built stronger than many of them, and it’s certainly been modified much, both on deck and probably has gotten an interior. The serious racers were often nearly empty inside. The updates may have made it into a nice cruiser, but I would certainly not take that for granted.
In general, old true race boats, whatever type, can look awesome, but are usually not good boats to buy. The state of the art materials were often used, but decades after, that’s usually not very much state of the art anymore, and the top notch materials were used to save weight, not to gain strength. The systems are often quite exotic and spare parts impossible to find. The rig loads are often way higher than on cruisers, meaning replacement parts are way more expensive and rig trim way more demanding.
As you already have guessed, my general message is: Be very careful with falling for this type of boat. It might be a great boat, but probably not, and if it still is, then probably not for shorthanded cruising.
Hi Michele,
I too sailed and raced on IOR boats in the late 70s and I’m, 100% with everything that Stein said. The bottom line is that the IOR produced some very weird boats and the Ton classes could be really weird. More on that here: https://www.morganscloud.com/2020/06/24/sail-area-overlap-multihulls-and-racing-rules/
The one thing I would add is that most of these IOR boats have very large foretriangles with huge jibs and small blade mainsails which makes them a problem for short handed sailing. So if you do buy the boat I would budget to convert her to a cutter: https://www.morganscloud.com/2015/09/17/12-reasons-the-cutter-is-a-great-offshore-voyaging-rig/
Totally agree! Buy the smallest simplest boat that will get you, your people, and your payload where you want to go. I accept that spacious luxury is attractive, and the smaller boat won’t have it, but you’ll have spent $00,000s less. Spend some of it on really nice hotels when you get there:-) No large luxury owner-operated yacht is as comfortable as even a mid-price hotel.
articles like this is why I subscribe to Morganscloud.com
Your experience and insight as well as your ability to convey that experience is invaluable.
personally my own choices in boat selection wer pe not how big a boat can I afford but how small a boat can I live with and meet my needs, (turns out I’m quit comfortable on a 29 footer).
if only more could learn form the experience of others vs having to learn a lesson the hard way,
The way you analyze situations and incidents not just your own but mishaps of others also gives you experience and a Lesson with out having to experience the situation yourself.
many of my own choices I make in boat selection and gear have been from lessons from others experience. I may say well ok that could happen to me how could i handle that OR how might I avoid that happening at all.
No my solutions and conclusions may not be the same as others. Like I will never own a bolt on fin keel boat it’s not that believe all bolt on keels will fall off like Tiki rifiki or everyone should avoid fin keel boats. It’s simple economics for me hauling out at least here In Florida is expensive and grounding and thin water is common here so shallow draft and a encapsulated modified full keel with a protected rudder just makes sense to me.
A damaged keel repair from a heavy grounding on a faster but deep fin keel could financially break me. so I choose to avoid that situation completely a grounding for me is a inconvenience but the only thing hurt is my pride the boat is as she could sit on the bottom all day waiting for the tide with no damage to the hull except a few less barnacles on the leading edge of the keel. And maybe the cost of a tow boat to pull me off should the tide not do it. The lesson of tiki rifiki is if you own that type of boat and don’t properly repair that keel structure after a grounding it could cost you your life. So do I have the finances to do a proper repair that I would feel comfortable about? No so I won’t own a boat like that. Should others well that’s up to them if they have the financial ability to afford the drawbacks they can take advantage of the sailing benefits of that design. A extreme example is ocean racing boats stuff breaks all the time on those boats as they push the boundaries of technology and deign for speed. So when a carbon fiber mast needs to be replaced they pull into the next port and fix it the cost of that repair would be the end of my sailing budget. But with the deep pockets of their sponsors not a problem. Same for their light hulls and cutting edge designs they are fast and they circumnavigate the world but doe that make the. A great choice or the technology they use something you want on your cruising boat? Ai suppose that depends on your circumstances both in seamanship and financial ability to Keep that boat safe. As these modern boats with all this automated system are very safe whe everything is working but not so should something break. So if you have the financial ability to also maintain and make sure your systems have redundancy built in as well and are always maintained in Bristol fashion well maybe a 65ft boat can be safely sailed with a small experienced crew. But I look at that and think about one the cost of that maintenance the what if Scenarios are simply overwhelming.
Hi Michael,
Thanks for the kind words, much appreciated.
However, this article has nothing to do with keel types or carbon fibre masts, it’s about safe boat size, so I would appreciate it is you would stay on topic with your comments. See our comment guide lines (#5):
We have a bunch of articles on keels and masts, so if you wish to express an opinion on that subject, please do so there, after reading it. Thanks.
John,
Another brilliant thought provoking article. It is like so many things in daily life ,there is no one size fits all. I came from scratch off a 38 footer with maybe 12000 miles, onto a 54 footer, on which I did another 30,000 miles. What kept me safe?
Build integrity, stability , small, very versatile ketch rig, and an over riding daily attitude of, “this is my very first time, and I’m not too sure what to do, so think it through first”. Sure, I had my moments, but every day I learnt a little more. Finally, I figured out that 54 feet was just a waste of space and money, especially as I was mostly alone, or with one other. Electric gizmos made you lazy and took away that sense of feel that sailing gives you. Now at 70 with a new young wife of 68, we have settled for 36 feet and the e-wincher that you recommended , and couldn’t be happier.
Fair Winds,
Trevor Lusty
Hi Trevor,
Sounds like you really thought sensibly about your boats and how you sailed them. That said, I would not necessarily agree that 54 feet is a waste of space and money. Rather, the way I look at it is that it depends what we plan to do. For example our 56 foot 25 ton boat was great for the northern expedition type cruises we did for so many years because of her load carrying ability, range and speed. But when we stopped that sort of voyaging, a smaller boat would definitely have made more sense and now we love our 35 foot 11,0000 pound boat. Horses for courses.
Hehe perfect John. On the review bullshit…
I just sold my 42 van de studt, and am keeping my lello 34.
I like small boats, sorry.
And for just cruising up and down my coast.
Durban to Kenya, Madagascar and back to Richards bay, she’s fine, tuff, built for this coast….I love how easy a 34 is, in all ways..
That’s maybe a childish example. But it illustrates the idea of scaling up the loads in respect to the strength of materials.
With a small scale model of a sailboat we can do almost whatever we want. Even stick the mast in the sand. And it will stand hull to the sky. And will be pretty much integral.
Can’t do that already with a sailing dinghy. And the bigger the big boat, the more it’s like a puffy cake ready to lose it’s decoration.
Hi Aleksejs,
Good point on scale.