Conference unifix::sailing

    My apologies to anyone who attempted to reply to this topic while it
    was stamped as NOWRITE.
     
    Never was very good at reading the fine print.
    

There is such a large difference between powerboats and sailboats that 
choosing one over the other based on economy of operation seems a little 
odd to me. What seems important to me is what kind of cruising do you
want to do? 

Powerboats tend to have more interior volume (stowage) for a given
overall length than sailboats, they are faster, noisier, less fuel
efficient, less seaworthy, and much more limited in range. They're fine
for near coastal cruising, but not for going offshore (in powerboats I
assume that most of us can afford). 

We have a 32' sailboat with a small diesel engine. Under power we get 
about 11.4 nm/gallon and have a maximum range of about 450 miles under 
power. A 32' power boat, even a diesel trawler, will use much more fuel 
and have a much shorter powering range. 

I don't know of any 32' powerboat I'd care to take very far offshore or 
take out in very rough weather. We've sailed our boat to Bermuda and 
survived 40+ knots gales with no difficulty. 

But you asked about economy. Well, a new engine (25 hp) for our boat is
about $6000. A diesel for a typical powerboat is several times more than 
that, I'd guess. We use our engine less than 100 hours per year. The 
typical life of a yacht diesel is at most a few thousand hours. If you 
do any serious cruising, you accumulate hours quickly. Our sails lasted 
about 15 000 miles, replacement cost was about $4000. That's less than 
$0.30 per mile. I'm sure that fuel cost per mile for a powerboat would 
be much higher.

Many costs, electronics, dockage, etc, would be the same for either.

Just some quick thoughts.

Alan

    The economics of cruising powerboats vs sailboats can be an interesting
    discussion albeit a somewhat academic one.  Both tend to be poor
    financial investments. I agree with the points raised by Alan.
    
    However the emotional economics can be quite important to the
    individual eg. being goal vs process oriented.
    
    Regards,
    
    	Howard
    

    
    Interesting points Alan. On the economy of cruising, I wouldn't base any
    decision to aquire a crusing vessel soley on this, but it is a factor which
    I'd like to know more about. It seems reasonable to assume that the longer 
    the voyage, the more expensive the powerboat option becomes. The seaworth-
    iness issue you mentioned is not something I've seen stated outright, but 
    this does appear to be the case from my reading and limited experience. At
    least when it comes to open sea voyages.
      

    Quite so Howard, boats usually don't make good investments. But if you
    have to do it, one must be better then the other for a given cruising
    lifestyle. Interesting comment regarding the 'emotional economics'. I 
    interpret this as a reference to the style of cruising that makes one 
    happy. Being in a hurry verses getting there when you get there.
    
    Dirk
    

re .4 and seaworthiness:

This is probably a topic that will arouse much heated discussion, 
especially among powerboat owners. 

Bad weather (high winds, rough seas) happens, both offshore and near 
coasts. I think that the argument used by powerboaters is along the 
lines of "because of my speed, I can reach a safe harbor before the 
weather gets really bad". Well, maybe. This puts much faith in the 
accuracy of weather forecasts and one's own ability to predict when the 
conditions are going to become serious enough that heading for safe 
harbor is prudent and possible. It also assumes that the boat won't have
an engine failure at just the wrong time. 

I have no doubt that a reasonably well-built small sailboat is more
likely to survive bad weather at sea than a similar sized powerboat due
to the sailboat's smaller cockpit and windows (ports) if for no other
reasons. Most sailboats designed for offshore sailing can be rolled 
at least 120 degrees or even capsized without really disastrous results. 
Not so for powerboats. 

At anchor, the higher windage of a powerboat increases the loads on the
anchor and makes dragging or other problems more likely and more
difficult to cope with as compared to a similer-sized (length) sailboat.

Bad weather aside, it seems to me that a powerboat is more likely to hit 
and be damaged by hitting floating debris due to the powerboat's higher 
speed. 

'Tis odd, but random observation seems to indicate that rather more 
sailboats carry liferafts than powerboats. Are sailors more cautious, 
more realistic about dangers, or what?

Depending on the cruising one wants to do, a sailboat may be the only 
financially reasonable option. I could sail my 32' boat around the 
world, but I don't know of any powerboat I could possibly afford aboard 
which I could circumnavigate, going to the places I'd like to go.

Alan

    
    	Alan, your numbers ($/mile) are good scales, but, I think the only
    way to really do it is total up all neccessary costs from layup to
    final decommission of the sail/power boat. For instance, halyards,
    shrouds and snatchblocks wear, too.
    	Now, if you only have a short time, and a lot of relatively short
    hops, then a powerboat might do. Or if you have to get out to the Banks
    by 10am for fishing.
    	But, the prices these days for used boats are pretty good. If you
    don't feel the need for very square rooms and over 10 kts, I can't
    imagine power beating sail.
    
    	But then, start this note in the Powerboater's conference, let them
    trash rag-propulsion! "What, no icecubes?"
    
    	Hmm... now would I have to work so hard on the bottom of a
    stinkpot?? hmmmm
    
    	Sandpaper_Scott
    

    re: .6  potential for heated discussion
    
    Heres' hoping that cooler heads will prevail. I don't want to get
    religious with this, just looking for economic facts (altho the points
    regarding seaworthiness are just as useful and much more interesting). 
    I personally have 25' CrisCraft, but have no macho-gravitation towards 
    power nor any romantic inclination for sail. Just wannabe on the water 
    and I'm looking at all the factors in this complicated equation. 
            
    /d

all kidding aside, (the title is just pure fun)


I might opt for a Grand Banks type, they are pretty economical.

@ 8 knots about 2 gals hr. or 2 gals for 8 NM.

They claim to be very seaworthy, also they are comfortable,

i have been aboard at dockside only, of course the proof is in

running the boat for a period of time. With room you can add some

necessities, a water maker might be one, i understand that south

of here water can be costly, this unit might pay for itself in a 

reasonable time, plus you have control over the purity.

From my very limited experience with sail (none) what i've seen

is considerably less space, as the folks on my dock who own them

have told me.  For me, if i were a livaboard, i would opt for the

room, vs. the absoulte of economy, if you travel the east coast,

the inland waterway is pretty well protected.


JIm

    Two things:
    
    	First, is the trip worth more than the arrival (wannabe on the
    water??).  If so then turn the key and get there in a jiffy (the main
    advantage of power) is not a strong argument.  Some say, "but so much
    work to do before getting started (as opposed to turning the key)." 
    Not necessarily so.  I turn the key, power out of the slip, out of the
    marina, set the autopilot, and then take the cover off the main.  At
    five knots under 1/2 throttle,  get the sails up and into warp speed
    6.8knots :>), within a mile or two.
    
    	As a previous power boat owner (everyone has skeletons in the
    closet) the argument for using speed to get off the water in the event
    of inclement weather is naive at best, dangerous at worst.  I scared my
    self silly off Point Judith one (is that the right name for a part of
    Rhode Island that sticks into the Atlantic? - its been a long time)
    time when a big blow started and everytime I try to plane off, I would
    stick my bow into and under those monster waves.  A few of those, and
    we were carrying too much weigh in water to stop it from happening off 
    plane.  I had to go in the wrong direction a long time before the pumps
    got the situation under control.   The winds were probably about
    35knots and this seemed really bad.
    
    By contrast,  When my previous SO and sailed to Put-In-Bay in similar
    conditions we did so primarily up wind with a reefed main and, in
    lulls, a blade jib.  When we got there, everybody was talking about the
    "storm", we became worried as we were heading on to Sandusky and the
    weather channel was talking moderating conditions.  The "Storm" was the
    front we had just sailed through.  With a smile (inward and outward) we
    left shortly.  About four miles out a larger (about 35-40ft) cruiser
    follows us out.  Quartering seas now and beam wind too.  Really scooting 
    at 12 -13 knots with full main, vanged out and jibtop.  The power cruiser 
    takes all morning to eat those four miles and the rest of the day to gain 
    the same advantage.   She passed about 150yds to weather, rolling and
    pitching in the short Erie swells.  The Soverel would scoot down a wave
    for 20-30 seconds then slowly pitch bow up as we ran onto the back of
    the wave in front.  All at a constant angle of heel.  I KNOW we were
    more comfortable and did not have $50 fuel bill at the end of that run
    either.  Would I go back, never...........
       

Having a 22 foot shoal draft sail boat this discussion has caught my interest.
WINDSONG is certainly not an offshore boat, not even a coastal cruiser. More a
well equipped comfortable day sailer and sometime weekender.

I just upgraded from the original wire luff roller furling 110 jib to a 150 on a
Cruising Designs Flexible Furler. An investment in excess of 13% of the price I
paid for the 1986 boat in 1989. I have had to replace various bits of 'wire'
(very small comapared to most boats represented in this conference) to the tune
of $50 to $100 per year. Several because I was lazy and left then stored
attached to the deck for the winter only to be stepped on. (not any more)

Of course my fuel bill ranges from $9 to 15$ per year. 

As long as i have the physical ability to climb around the decks and handle the
sails, I probably will. BUT, if the time comes, I will probably shift to some
form of Power. Most likely some form of displacement hull designed to be a 'sea
kindly' as possible and be fairly easy on it demand for fuel. 

For me, its not how quick you get there, its how you get there.

Fred who-still-has-to-fitout-his-boat-after-major-electrical-and-hull-work-
     due-to-lightning-strike-back-in-october-and-is-thankful-for-his-BOAT-
     US-Insurance
     

I am a powerboat owner who reads this conference with great interest.  WHile
some of the discussions are 'strictly sail'  there is a wealth of knowledge
and information put forth that is useful for anyone who floats a boat regardless
of it's method of propulsion.

This particular discussion is great, as I tend to dream of far off places (who 
doesnt?) and have often thought about the advantages/disadvatages of sail vs. 
power;  I can easily tick off lots of them from the powerboat perspective but 
have lots less knowledge regarding sail.

Tom Urban   (Urban Renewal, Fays Boatyard, L. WInni,  NH) 

    1nm/g for a Grand Banks/Trawler type compared to Alan's 11.4nm/g is a 
    a powerful plus for sail. Coupled with its seaworthiness, this seems to
    provide compensation for space limitations. But sooo much topside space is
    dedicated to the wind propulsion. Wondering about the compromises a muliti-
    hull would offer. Something like a 32' Gemini. Cavernous inside, space to 
    hangout topside, sails and motoring capacity. Haven't found convincing
    arguements for or against its seaworthiness tho, this concerns me. It would 
    not be very economical to have my possesions strewn about if capsized.
    
    I thought Jims observation regarding watermakers was very pointed. You
    could probably find space for one in any good sized boat, and sounds like a
    smart move econimically.
    
    Note .10 was pretty interesting, not because I cruise around Narragansett 
    Bay, but that a sailboat will come out on top in bad weather - but this
    has a lot to do with the skippers ability SAIL, a genuine skill. In a 
    powerboat, most of your skippering is done with a steering wheel. 
    

The choice is so personal that a debate doesn't lend much.

For myself, i only have from friday night to sunday night, i usually

want to spend time at a particular place, i dont wnat to spend time

getting there, power fits this application well.

Folks who enjoy sailing, want to spend time sailing to a place and

sailing back, its the time on the water that counts.

You need to decide how you will use the vessel, and then add up the

pro's and cons.

Neither is better, although this is the 3rd thing , other than politics

and religion.

I was being pointed about the watermaker, however you will find more

accessible space on a power boat, simply because of the way its built,

accessibilty will be important with a watermaker, as they need constatnt

maintenance.

On the 1nm per gal on the grand banks, please re-read my reply.

JIm

    Having recently had an opportunity to assist on a delivery, I got a
    dose of CAT-data from a dealer that does a lot of this.  The boat was a
    Jeanneau Lagoon 37.  As a Cat it is quite a great cruiser, twin engines
    (one in each hull - 18hp each).  Jeanneau in my opinion builds a great
    boat too.
    
    BUT...........no less than three of these solid boats were recently
    lost in delivery across the Gulf of Mexico.  I was surprised at this
    and asked why.  The dealer, who is a very experienced sailor, said its
    primarily design related.  Big cats exert tremendous torsional loads on
    the hull or rather the joining construction between the hulls.  His
    answer, "You have to know when to stay home".  We need to run from
    Newport down to NYC, then up the Hudson to the EBC and into Lake Erie.
    
    So maybe there is no thing as a compromise.  I would not take my boat
    offshore.  It's slight rig can take a lot, but only if you stay focused
    on supporting it.  Get tired or something breaks (like a runner) in a
    seaway and its history.  Care to see how far 8hp and 9 gal of fuel go
    then?  Not me.  But give me 7-8kn true wind (which happens a lot around
    here) and I'll be over the horizon so fast you'll think you are going
    backwards!
    
    Bob (who hit 7.04kn yesterday with main only on first sail since 1990)
                                                                  

    Figured Catamaran drawbacks to include 1. rough ride in chop and 2. no 
    chance of becoming upright if swamped. I thought only the earlier homemade
    cats had load problems with the twin hulls. Wonder if 37' marks a point 
    where the materials can no longer withstand the stress, and the smaller
    ones possibly more seaworthy (~32').  Or maybe its Jeanneau-design
    specific. Or a statistical anomally? (hey, it could happen).
    

    Here is one brand of power boat that is meant for trans ocean travel.
    
    I saw this one at the newport boat show a couple of years ago.  So the
    info is from memory.
    
    Nordhaven  46'  
    Hull full displacement  with keel
    single 100 hp Luger
    Backup wing engine  36 hp  Luger
    Bow thruster
    1000 gal of fuel.  6 fuel tanks
    500? gal of water
    Max speed   9 knts
    Cruise 6 knts
    Max range at 5 knts 6000 NM.
    
    The sales brochure  was very interesting.  There where several pages on
    the stability requirements for ocean crossing vessels.  This included
    the impact loading  due to waves. Also a couple of pages on the backup 
    "wing" engine and propeller.  
    
    the boat had a completely enclosed pilot house with a bunk for an off
    watch crew member. Plotting table was next the helm station.  Also just
    below the pilot house was a small office with desk and draws for chart
    storage (flat).
    
    A walk around Portuguese bridge  with wings that allow the pilot to 
    see both the bow and stern.  Pilot house glass was 0.5" tempered 
    glass 0.25" plastic lamimate between the two pieces. Also the glass was 
    angled out at the top to reduce glare.  In front of the helm was a Kent
    clear vision screen.  
    
    Ports where stainless with 1" thick glass.  The deck hatches where 
    made by Freeman.
    
    All the wiring and plumbing where in exposed cable ways.  I counted 12
    8d batteries in three locations.     The general inpression was not of a
    large boat but a small ship.
    
    And for most important question.  Base price in 91 was $380k
    I can dream.
                     

re .18

Very interesting indeed. The description of the boat provides good
insight into the sea conditions that can be encountered in voyaging
offshore. The windows/ports are clearly far, far stronger than those
found on more ordinary boats. 

I'd be interested to see their description of stability requirements. 
The studies done after the disastrous 1979 Fastnet race incline me to 
the cynical view that the question is when, not if, will you be capsized
when venturing across oceans. I would be considerably more cautious 
about weather in a small powerboat than in a small sailboat.

I wonder if the specifications you quote are correct in one particular. 
A small diesel uses something like 0.055 US gallon per hour per 
horsepower. From the range numbers you give it would appear that at 5 
knot cruise the fuel consumption is only about 0.8 gal per hour and that 
only about 15 hp is needed to push the boat along. This sounds suspiciously 
low. 

By the way, the 5 knot cruising speed is lower than that of many equal
length sailboats in light to moderate winds. We averaged a bit over 5 
knots for 24 hours on a 32' sailboat returning from Bermuda. But then 
engine power is (usually) less fickle than wind power.

Alan

I have a 25' sailboat , my brother has an ~25' cabin cruiser- figure docking/
mooring is equivalent. 

It costs me about $5.00 to fill my tank for a weekend of fun (I have a 9.9 
Yamaha four-stroke that's gets me where I want to go when there is no wind) and 
it costs my brother between $80 and $100 for the weekend.

Winterizing my engine costs about $25 and it rarely goes in for maintenance. 
(I am probably jinxing myself right now) 

..it all depends on what you consider economy..

    re .19
    
    We have a 120hp Lehman diesel, use 1 gallon of diesel per hour at
    between 5-6 knots cruise speed (not motorsailing). With 200 gallon
    tank, that gives us a range of 1000nm, depending on conditions. The
    figures given in .18 are about right.

    Started reading a book called "Boating Without Going Broke". Some of
    the axioms so far:
    
    	o The length of the boat should be as long as the owners
          age in years.
    	o Compared as dollars/pound, a bigger boat is cheaper to operate
          then a little one. 
    	o Most boat owners don't really need all the things they buy
          'for the boat'. 
        o The more you know, the more you save.

    Did you pay much for the book ?

re .22:

    Started reading a book called "Boating Without Going Broke". Some of
    the axioms so far:
    
    	o The length of the boat should be as long as the owners
          age in years.

>>> Oh, come on! Be serious! By this rule, I should be sailing a 50' 
>>> boat. I should be so wealthy. The length of one's boat's, ego aside, 
>>> should be appropriate for the intended use. Sure, I'd very much like
>>> a Valiant 40, but for the sailing I do (mostly summer coastal cruising 
>>> and a trip to Bermuda) our Valiant 32 is amply large enough and is 
>>> certainly seaworthy enough. More than one 32' boat has circumnavigated.

    	o Compared as dollars/pound, a bigger boat is cheaper to operate
          then a little one. 

>>> So what? As I see it, the total cost of ownership is the important 
>>> number, not the cost per pound or cost per foot or cost per whatever. 
>>> Bigger is more expensive. Bigger boats can carry more equipment, and 
>>> boats tend to have as much equipment as there is room for. I'd like
>>> refrigeration, but cramming it into our boat would be difficult, for 
>>> example . It would be easy to install on a Valiant 40.

    	o Most boat owners don't really need all the things they buy
          'for the boat'. 

>>> True.

        o The more you know, the more you save.

>>> Or the more you know, the more you spend. A friend of ours who 
>>> sailed back from Bermuda with us jokes that the trip cost him $10000 
>>> because he now understands that some equipment he hadn't before 
>>> considered is now, in his view, useful and necessary (eg, a windvane).

>>> When was this book published? Once upon a time, when the wealthy 
>>> were really wealthy, and only the wealthly owned yachts, the rule was 
>>> one foot of waterline length per year of one's age, and most yachts 
>>> had crew quarters forward. 

>>> Alan

    Gee, with my lenght to age ratio at 2.57, I guess I should have quit
    sailing before I started (in 1960). It was 1.25 back then.
    
    Bill
    

    re. 25
    
    No Bill, it just means you are young at heart!
    
    By the way, exactly how old are those guys running Aircraft carriers? ;>)

    >>> Oh, come on! Be serious! [age verses length axiom]
    
        Author may have been trying for a bit wit, or maybe saying in a
        roundabout way that the older you get, the more comfortable a boat
        should be. Every book that I've read so far that dealt with the theme 
        of leaving the rat-race behind for an life on the ocean inevitably
        has the author returning to a home on land at the end of the book, 
        with only fond memories of his aquatic adventures.
    
    >>> So what? [per pound expenses cheaper for bigger boats]
    
        So far the message I'm getting from this 'rule' is that for some
        boating scenarios, some of your costs will remain the same or go
        down, a fact which should be considered. In my case, the cost
        of traveling to RI from NH, where my boat is parked, remains fixed 
        no matter what size boat I own. Once my 25footer is ready to launch, 
        this cost will bo down since I can spend the night onboard.
    
    >>> Or the more you know, the more you spend. [vice versa]
    
        The 'more you know/save' idea was targeting the avoidance of big
        mistakes, which usually cost big money. This is especially easy to do 
        in a powerboat, where the constitution preserves your right to buy a
        big boat, load it full of people and ride out into a gale.
    
    >>> When was this book published?
    
        In the '70's. Yea, its a bit dated, but I'd go broke reading the
        same number of new books. Sometimes the earlier perspective on
        things can be give you greater insight. For instance, this one was
        written during the fuel crisis, and the message comes thru loud
        and clear when the author talks about boats that rely soley on
        power to get around. 
    
    Dirk
    

    Ours is a big offshore ketch, 51' on deck. And it takes about 1,000
    hours per year to maintain, and a bunch of money in
    hauling/painting/docking fees. As Alan says, the total cost is very
    important. If we could, we'd have a 70' cruiser, but we'd go broke fast
    or the boat would deteriorate in just a few years.

    >>> Did you pay much for the book ?
    
        $1. Everything I own is used.
    
    
    

Alan, please move this if it is more appriopriate elsewhere.

As some of you may be aware, I grew up camping in the Rockies.  I may have as
many miles under my backpack as some of you do under your keels.

My sister asked for advice on packing equipment for a son who has just moved up
from cib scouts to boy scouts.  As I gave her my advice I noticed a couple of
patterns emerging which also apply to Holiday and how I am out fitting her.

Escpeially as I get better at something, I rely on my knowledge and skill more,
and physical things less.  I suggested good solid major components to her,
(backpack sleeping bag, and knife), also a couple of conviences.   Then I spen
alot of time telling her what was a waste.

I noticed that I am doing a similar thing with Holiday.  Fortunately Dick
Ashenden (previous owner) and I agree on approach.  Holiday is a good solid
boat.  Sails and rigging have been kept up.  There isn't anything fancy at the
moment.  The extras are simple and few, jacklines, 12 V power (no AC), hand held
GPS (gotta have some new toys).

Like my 20 year old Kelty back pack, the boat is in pretty good nick.  As such,
the cost of operation should be quite low.  Having bought the boat in the fall,
I have a large number of up front expenses.  Even so, the cost is less than $1k
for a summer's use.  I have not tried to amatorize the sails yet. However I
expect the annual cost of use, including the money diverted from investments, to
run less than $2.5k.  A power boat would run a similar amount plus fuel.  The
way I would use the boat, this would come to an additional $500-$600.

In conclusion, I feel that sail is demonstratively cheaper than power.  The cost
of either goes way down and enjoyment goes way up, by using your skill to offset
the bottom line of the marine suppliers.

Doug Claflin

Re: .31

Doug raises an interesting point, which is equally relevant to "economical"
boating, whether power or sail.

When is a safety feature not a safety feature?

Answer - when it is only the manufacturer that tells you so!

I have been fitting out a new boat from scratch, and so I have had to decide and
to justify what equipment I have installed. Admittedly, the size of the boat
(only 16') has automatically limited me. However, I have been reading the ads in
the yachting press more closely than usual, and I note with interest how many
items are promoted as being "essential safety aids". "Never go to sea without
one!" is the message being given. If I fitted every item promoted in this way,
not only could I never get on board over the pile of equipment, liferafts,
batteries to drive the radar, differential GPS with Decca backup, etc, but I
would also be painting the boot-top along the sheer strake.

So, I openly and publicly declare it - 

		I have COMPROMISED on safety!

I'm glad to have got that admission off my chest :-)

- Brian