Select to expand quotewongaga said..
Yes, totally irrelevant comparison. How many have circumnavigated in them?
Plenty of people have circumnavigated in Beneteau Oceanises (Oceaniii?) and when the first Golden Globe was on, a French singlehander on an Oceanis went down to help the guy whose Atkins double ended ketch was sinking. A Farr 40 IOR one tonner has done a singlehanded RTW race, and finished with no real issues. Heck, a Finn dinghy has sailed across much of the Pacific. Circumnavigation numbers don't prove seaworthiness either way.
The thread is also not about how many boats have circumnavigated, but how many 34 footers are faster than an S&S 34. The answer is thousands. That's no disrespect to the very fine S&S 34, but a reflection of reality.
As an example of how many 34 footers are quicker than the S&S 34, the 34' Lombard design Mistral finished the Hobart in 3d, 5h 36 minutes and did it two handed. Azzuro finished in 3d, 22h, 55min. The conditions obviously favoured Mistral but under ORC she is rated a full 20% faster even when two-handed.
It's interesting that the ORC certificates, which come from actual measurement, show that Mistral is much stiffer than Azzuro - 140 kg/m versus 92. The S&S, in contrast, has a higher LPS (132 versus 124)
The Sun Fast 3300s are rated as 11% quicker, when two-handed, than the fully crewed Azzuro.
A nice 33' racer/cruiser like the X332 is 9% quicker than the S&S 34, and the X-yacht is now over 25 years old.
Given the reality of ocean sailing, if you get somewhere 10% quicker you are probably 10% less likely to be exposed to extreme conditions, and the proportion of boats that get rolled and/or sunk etc even in extreme conditions is pretty low. So one can make a pretty good case that getting to your destination about 10% quicker is safer, overall, than having a higher LPS etc.
None of this is downgrading S&S34s, any more than stating that my Laser is slower than my catamaran is downgrading my Laser. It's merely pointing out the facts about speed and some aspects of seagoing.
Try taking different designs to windward in 4 metre seas and 30kn for a day or so. The S&S would be my preferred choice.
Select to expand quotesaltiest1 said..
Try taking different designs to windward in 4 metre seas and 30kn for a day or so. The S&S would be my preferred choice.
Having done that and worse a few times, it is still an untidy experience in an S&S.
I see Morning Bird is for sale again, down in Melbourne.
www.boatsonline.com.au/boats-for-sale/used/sailing-boats/sparkman-stephens-34/287391
Select to expand quoteMorningBird said
I see Morning Bird is for sale again, down in Melbourne.
www.boatsonline.com.au/boats-for-sale/used/sailing-boats/sparkman-stephens-34/287391
Just looking at the mast base at deck level.No waterproofing boot. Almost looks like there might be a pin through the front so that it can pivot forwards and down like a backwards trailer sailer which seems totally wrong. These things have keel stepped masts don't they?
Select to expand quotesaltiest1 said..
Try taking different designs to windward in 4 metre seas and 30kn for a day or so. The S&S would be my preferred choice.
But that's not relevant to the question, which is what 34 footers are faster than an S&S 34.
I've tried taking different designs upwind in those conditions, and personally (like Syd Fisher and Lou Abrahams) don't really think the "classics" are better per se. Each type has its pluses and minuses, and people are different in their preferences.
Select to expand quotejulesmoto said..MorningBird said
I see Morning Bird is for sale again, down in Melbourne.
www.boatsonline.com.au/boats-for-sale/used/sailing-boats/sparkman-stephens-34/287391
Just looking at the mast base at deck level.No waterproofing boot. Almost looks like there might be a pin through the front so that it can pivot forwards and down like a backwards trailer sailer which seems totally wrong. These things have keel stepped masts don't they?
Standard design on Perth boats, where you need to drop the stick to get under the bridges at the mouth of the river. I think even the maxis have tabernacles there, and WA boats are built to handle rough stuff.
I think that all the ss34's that have circumnavigated have been keel stepped with forward and after lowers. Like Chris said, lots have tabernacles,,, and lots have very simple single spreader short rigs with single inline lowers and a baby stay. Alot of the double spreader tall rigs are also configured the same way. (Not really that much taller )
MB did have very simple single spreader deck stepped short rig with single inline lowers and a baby stay (mast support not for a sail). To compensate for the inherently lower strength of a deck stepped rig, MBs mast was much more robust than the keel stepped ones and with bigger section stays. Being deck stepped there was no water ingress from that area.
The majority of S&S34s I know, which is quite a few, had folding masts so it was a disappointment that MB didn't. I would have like to be able to drop the mast to take her more places like up the Hawkesbury or under the Spit or Iron Cove bridges. She was built to race in Pittwater so had no need for the folding mast.
The pin I think is referred to is possibly the sheave pin.
Select to expand quotejulesmoto said..
This is 33ft so about the right size. Faster than an S&S 34 but very similar size and quite a few have gone to Hobart. Bit expensive ATM. Not sure if I'd trust an autopilot, myself or anyone else tho.
Tether essential in the cockpit and maybe scuba gear. Best keep the companionway shut. Don't hit anything with the keel or rudders either.
Watch to the end. It's less than 2 mins.
Nice wipeout, but of course the vast majority of boats will do the same thing pushed that hard. There's a great book about Rainbow II, the one tonner that was a predecessor to the S&S 34, with lots of vivid descriptions about how badly it rolled and repeatedly broached, spinning out 25 times on the run down the Tassy coast wnen pressed hard to win the '68 Hobart.
Select to expand quoteAll@Sea said..
Disclaimer, I have a vested interest in this post;)
Prion (31') will beat an S&S34 every day of the week on the water and often on handicap.... depending on conditions she is more than competitive boat for boat with the likes of the sf3200 and j99....
yachthub.com/list/yachts-for-sale/used/sail-monohulls/mount-gay-30-cat-1-capable-exceptional-performance/280186
Lovely boat, and what a keel!
Select to expand quoteChris 249 said..saltiest1 said..
Try taking different designs to windward in 4 metre seas and 30kn for a day or so. The S&S would be my preferred choice.
But that's not relevant to the question, which is what 34 footers are faster than an S&S 34.
I've tried taking different designs upwind in those conditions, and personally (like Syd Fisher and Lou Abrahams) don't really think the "classics" are better per se. Each type has its pluses and minuses, and people are different in their preferences.
That was the title but the actual question was "what is the most seaworthy and fastest 34 footer for under 100K". All the light displacement boats that float on top of the water with high aspect keels and spade rudders that are very fast are also very vunerable to catastrophic damage if they hit an underwater obstruction. Is a seaworthy worthy boat really that vunerable to such a common occurance, do you just put it down to bad luck if you hit something that takes you out or is it really just good luck if you don't. As mentioned I think if fastest and most seaworthy are competing characteristics and you have to decide what compromise works best for you.
good discussion. I'm going with Prion. Sailed on a MG 30 for a couple of years and it was a brilliant but at times scary ride. Scary because it was a fast boat that was quite technical, same number of strings as the whitbread 60 but in half the size.
Best sailing I have ever enjoyed was from the sf lightship to santa cruz, downwind with big winter swell and that beast surfing for 20 minutes at a time.
btw, the first one, Sticky Fingers (Rogers Design) won the 94 round Britain race.
Select to expand quoteMorningBird said..
MB did have very simple single spreader deck stepped short rig with single inline lowers and a baby stay (mast support not for a sail). To compensate for the inherently lower strength of a deck stepped rig, MBs mast was much more robust than the keel stepped ones and with bigger section stays. Being deck stepped there was no water ingress from that area.
The majority of S&S34s I know, which is quite a few, had folding masts so it was a disappointment that MB didn't. I would have like to be able to drop the mast to take her more places like up the Hawkesbury or under the Spit or Iron Cove bridges. She was built to race in Pittwater so had no need for the folding mast.
The pin I think is referred to is possibly the sheave pin.
It was a standard practise to give the deck stepped rigs a larger mast section.
Select to expand quoteChris 249 said..
Nice wipeout, but ...
Actually if you rewatch the video carefully it was actually pretty much under control until the guy lost his footing on that ridiculously little fold up footrest due to a wave coming into the ridiculously unprotected ridiculously wide cockpit/sidedeck/seating position with ridiculously absent coaming or any other structure to hold onto except the tiller.
Select to expand quotejulesmoto said..Chris 249 said..
Nice wipeout, but ...
Actually if you rewatch the video carefully it was actually pretty much under control until the guy lost his footing on that ridiculously little fold up footrest due to a wave coming into the ridiculously unprotected ridiculously wide cockpit/sidedeck/seating position with ridiculously absent coaming or any other structure to hold onto except the tiller.
Funnily enough, the Yachting World test commented on how deep and secure the 3300's cockpit is! :-)
I'm torn; I'm pretty sure that the guys who designed that cockpit know a lot more about shorthanded racing than any of us here, but o the other hand the French shorthanders have often had amazingly exposed-looking helm positions. I know when I've redesigned an offshore cockpit, I took off the coamings.
Talking about French boats, this one shakes my booty. Would be a bit different than this in a 3 to 4 m swell.
Select to expand quoteChris 249 said..
As an example of how many 34 footers are quicker than the S&S 34, the 34' Lombard design Mistral finished the Hobart in 3d, 5h 36 minutes and did it two handed. Azzuro finished in 3d, 22h, 55min. The conditions obviously favoured Mistral but under ORC she is rated a full 20% faster even when two-handed.
It's interesting that the ORC certificates, which come from actual measurement, show that Mistral is much stiffer than Azzuro - 140 kg/m versus 92. The S&S, in contrast, has a higher LPS (132 versus 124)
The Sun Fast 3300s are rated as 11% quicker, when two-handed, than the fully crewed Azzuro.
A nice 33' racer/cruiser like the X332 is 9% quicker than the S&S 34, and the X-yacht is now over 25 years old.
Given the reality of ocean sailing, if you get somewhere 10% quicker you are probably 10% less likely to be exposed to extreme conditions, and the proportion of boats that get rolled and/or sunk etc even in extreme conditions is pretty low. So one can make a pretty good case that getting to your destination about 10% quicker is safer, overall, than having a higher LPS etc.
None of this is downgrading S&S34s, any more than stating that my Laser is slower than my catamaran is downgrading my Laser. It's merely pointing out the facts about speed and some aspects of seagoing.
I had never seen a Sunfast 33 until today . Didn't catch her name ( had an RQ sail no. ) as she was / is heading north toward Redland / Moreton Bay and I was beating the other way in 20kn winds . Suit me every day thank you. At the end of a Westcoaster
In the early 80's I was having a quiet drink with an SS 34 skipper and he said he had had enough with everything below saturated with crew jumping in and out with sail changes etc. My Bounty 35 was dry below and we only finished a couple of hours apart.
OK so I have not done much offshore racing in the last ten years but before that plenty of the previous 30 years including some pretty tough delivery passages short handed on all types of boats from 1970 classics to late IRC and ORCi boats.
Here is my top five of boats to be in a gale and be able to go upwind despite the sea state.
Sonata 8 fixed keel (I will let the geniuses here work out why)
Dubios 1/2 ton (similar consideration to the Sonata 8)
Swanson 32 (properly built one not a bad owner builder job) or a Brolga over an S&S 34 any day.
All time winner against all opposition is the Sydney 38
Any IMS boat over 43 feet.
Sure none are perfect but each are standouts and a few just miss out like the Peterson 43 (which I will also now add to the list for Cisco.)
That should get people going.
And just remember, I am still here to type this.
To be fair the list of worse boats include very late model IOR boat over 40 feet.
Any purpose built IRC boat.
IRC is now encouraging very dangerous design configurations.
Very high stability, very high sail area, very efficient foils but very loose oversight of the structures needed to carry the loads.
It will not be long before a catastrophic structural failure most likely of the deck structure.
Select to expand quotelydia said..
Sure none are perfect but each are standouts and a few just miss out like the Peterson 43 (which I will also now add to the list for Cisco.)
Thanks for the mention lydia. Envy II is actually 42 ft. The Petersons of that era varied from 40 to 44 ft. They were all designed as IOR 2 tonners and probably no two had exactly the same hull form as he was constantly experimenting adding a bump here or a hollow there.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doug_Peterson_(yacht_designer)
sailboatdata.com/designer/peterson-doug
Mal Hewitt, the builder of Envy II, campaigned her in I think 4 Brisbane-Noumea races winning I believe 3.
The first was only a week or two after initial launching. The fleet headed to Cape Moreton and all but Envy turned back, anchored behind the Tangalooma wrecks and got into their duty free grog.
Envy continued and stood near vertical going through the waves. She arrived in Noumea and had to wait 4 days for the rest of the fleet to arrive. I believe that constitutes a line honors and handicap win.
All of this was related to me thus not my first hand experience however I did have her off Cairns once in 25 kts with a 2m wind swell and she just powered to windward at 7.5 kts with two reefs in the main and the working jib. The only other yacht I have been on that came near to that was my Windrush Wildfire 23 ft trailer sailor. Interestingly with yachts that power to windward like that you stay fairly dry in the cockpit with most of the spray going to leeward.
I never got the opportunty to have my Lotus 9.2 in similar conditions but I do believe she would point as well as an S&S 30 or 34.
The beauty of Envy was that the mast was in line with the front foot of the keel making her very much a headsail powered yacht.
Windward capability I believe is essential in a yacht because there will come a time when you have to claw your way from a lee shore.
Good to see your fingers are still keyboard capable. Mine are taking on a similar appearance to Keith Richards'.
Thought someone may have had a bite at the Sonata 8 comment.
Like the OVNI Alubat, the internal ballast is heavier than the keel so you have a very low pitching moment which give rise to a very comfortable and even motion for the sea state.
once upon a time we were allowed. to race small boat in the ocean at night and even do 200 miles races.
I also find it interesting that science behind both the build structure and the science behind the balancing of the boat is usually ignored in choosing a good safe very heavy air boat.
These of course are the two primary criteria.
The Sonata was also quite narrow in the stern for a fractional, so balanced well.
Dubois half tonners had high freeboard for their size and MW could put lots of off-duty crew in the right place, if I recall correctly.
Lou Abrahams mentioned that his Sydney 38 had the best rig of any boat he had ever owned; if I recall correctly it was tough and simple, not too stiff, and of course was fractional.
In terms of balance, in my first offshore season we were still allowed hydraulic rams on the forestay. The Kaufman one and two tonners could just crank the rig fore and aft to get perfect balance upwind. Superstar, the Peterson 46, was also an absolute upwind weapon in its day.
I can also remember watching the Farr one tonners Piccollo and Vanguard, ex-centreboarders, move upwind in an amazing way because of the mass of internal ballast and outstanding weight concentration. The knuckled bow would seem to hang in the air with the whole boat moving up and down bodily but level, while the other boats pitched.
I always thought the Brolga was under-rated but am curious to know why you would prefer it to an S&S34 upwind. I know "Fearless Freddy" Thomas, veteran sparmaker and Hobart winner, didn't like Joubert boats because of the narrow shroud base.
Select to expand quoteChris 249 said..
The Sonata was also quite narrow in the stern for a fractional, so balanced well.
Dubois half tonners had high freeboard for their size and MW could put lots of off-duty crew in the right place, if I recall correctly.
Lou Abrahams mentioned that his Sydney 38 had the best rig of any boat he had ever owned; if I recall correctly it was tough and simple, not too stiff, and of course was fractional.
In terms of balance, in my first offshore season we were still allowed hydraulic rams on the forestay. The Kaufman one and two tonners could just crank the rig fore and aft to get perfect balance upwind. Superstar, the Peterson 46, was also an absolute upwind weapon in its day.
I can also remember watching the Farr one tonners Piccollo and Vanguard, ex-centreboarders, move upwind in an amazing way because of the mass of internal ballast and outstanding weight concentration. The knuckled bow would seem to hang in the air with the whole boat moving up and down bodily but level, while the other boats pitched.
I always thought the Brolga was under-rated but am curious to know why you would prefer it to an S&S34 upwind. I know "Fearless Freddy" Thomas, veteran sparmaker and Hobart winner, didn't like Joubert boats because of the narrow shroud base.
Excellent summary Chris and the brolga is far less wet like not under water
It's worth checking out the video Bass straight surfing part 2 on this page.
www.facebook.com/cruxracing
I was offshore yesterday in a brisk SE and a sloppy sea and I can say the SS34 is definitely a wetter boat than a Currawong.
Select to expand quoteChris 249 said..
The Sonata was also quite narrow in the stern for a fractional, so balanced well.
Dubois half tonners had high freeboard for their size and MW could put lots of off-duty crew in the right place, if I recall correctly.
Lou Abrahams mentioned that his Sydney 38 had the best rig of any boat he had ever owned; if I recall correctly it was tough and simple, not too stiff, and of course was fractional.
In terms of balance, in my first offshore season we were still allowed hydraulic rams on the forestay. The Kaufman one and two tonners could just crank the rig fore and aft to get perfect balance upwind. Superstar, the Peterson 46, was also an absolute upwind weapon in its day.
I can also remember watching the Farr one tonners Piccollo and Vanguard, ex-centreboarders, move upwind in an amazing way because of the mass of internal ballast and outstanding weight concentration. The knuckled bow would seem to hang in the air with the whole boat moving up and down bodily but level, while the other boats pitched.
I always thought the Brolga was under-rated but am curious to know why you would prefer it to an S&S34 upwind. I know "Fearless Freddy" Thomas, veteran sparmaker and Hobart winner, didn't like Joubert boats because of the narrow shroud base.
Great write up Chris, thanks very much. The previous owner of my Sonata 8 was bragging about how he found all this lead around the keel and he'd removed it to 'make it faster' . He couldn't understand why I was unimpressed.
Select to expand quote
Great vid. Shame no shot of the wake. Hell of a lot dryer, stable and secure helming position than that Sunfast video I posted.Love the high bow wave that doesn't come aboard. I'll forego the extra speed thanks. If I want an experience like the Sunfast I'd be on a foiling moth or my skiff close to land.
Select to expand quoteRamona said..
It's worth checking out the video Bass straight surfing part 2 on this page.
www.facebook.com/cruxracing
I was offshore yesterday in a brisk SE and a sloppy sea and I can say the SS34 is definitely a wetter boat than a Currawong.
That's an inspiring video! Thanks for posting.
K.
