Chris, do you have any hard numbers for the weight variations of the S&S 34s, say Boomaroo or bluebell vs Crux.
I would bet the range was well over 1200kg.
Also interesting from the pics of different boats would be the aft freeboard's.
Select to expand quotelydia said..
Chris, do you have any hard numbers for the weight variations of the S&S 34s, say Boomaroo or bluebell vs Crux.
I would bet the range was well over 1200kg.
Also interesting from the pics of different boats would be the aft freeboard's.
Not trying to steal Chris's thunder but the weights can be found here.
www.ss34.org/index.php/the-ss34/specifications/
They vary a lot! The early Swarbrick's were well over the designed weight. The weight of the last built boats are on the ss34 association somewhere. I can't find the weight of mine on the measurement certificate but with a 7mm plywood deck it would be on the low side.
www.ss34.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/migrate-details-ricochett-ii-rating-cert-1985.pdf
Crux.
www.ss34.org/index.php/directory/blondie/
Interestingly these last 3 boats had the option of putting the engine back in the saloon. Looking at the photos it looks like Crux has the engine under the bridge deck.
I've only got numbers from the more racing oriented ones that have had an IRC rating semi recently, however:
Crux/Blondie: 5069kg
Huckleberry: 4748kg
Swagman: 5150lg
Le Jag: 5275kg
Soon: 5325kg
Perie Banou III: 4950kg
Azzurro is apparently around 4800kg (which is kinda heavy when you consider it has basically no interior, yet Huckleberry does). Apparently the original Perie Banou was around 4500kg and had a stripped out interior, although thats only from what i've been told by Jon.
Some were built with thicker layups by the original owners, some have foam core decks and obviously no two have the same interor fitout. So yeah, lots of variance. More cruising oriented ones could be upwards of 5500kg+
Select to expand quotecambid said..
I've only got numbers from the more racing oriented ones that have had an IRC rating semi recently, however:
Crux/Blondie: 5069kg
Huckleberry: 4748kg
Swagman: 5150lg
Le Jag: 5275kg
Soon: 5325kg
Perie Banou III: 4950kg
Azzurro is apparently around 4800kg (which is kinda heavy when you consider it has basically no interior, yet Huckleberry does). Apparently the original Perie Banou was around 4500kg and had a stripped out interior, although thats only from what i've been told by Jon.
Some were built with thicker layups by the original owners, some have foam core decks and obviously no two have the same interor fitout. So yeah, lots of variance. More cruising oriented ones could be upwards of 5500kg+
Some of the weight differences in the keels. The later boats keels were a couple of hundred kilos lighter! The Aquafiber built SS34's were 4,100 kg with a full fit out!
According to this page the boats after 2004 are 25% lighter than the original Swarbicks.
sailboat.guide/ss-34
Select to expand quoteRamona said..
According to this page the boats after 2004 are 25% lighter than the original Swarbicks.
sailboat.guide/ss-34
The scales dont lie, the new build are not 25% lighter total. It's a bit of marketing. The hull is 25% lighter but the hull itself is probably only about a quater of the total weight, so in reality, the new builds are only a few hundred kgs lighter. The hulls are much stiffer and stronger though.
Huckleberry has a wafer thin layup on the cabin sides. I can flex it with my hands, whereas Perie Banou III's is twice as thick. But then PB3 has a foam cored deck. Swagman has a lot more glass running along the centerline, and so on. There's all sorts of weird quirks with the construction.
The mk2 keel is a bit lighter than the mk1 on account of the deeper draught. I've seen a few ORCi certs from the UK boats, they aint anywhere near 4100kg. I don't think any 34 got near the original design displacement.
fb.watch/h-FOTIfx-z/
Footage from Crux last month in Sydney to Hobart, 16.4kts peak speed
Select to expand quotecambid said..Ramona said..
According to this page the boats after 2004 are 25% lighter than the original Swarbicks.
sailboat.guide/ss-34
The scales dont lie, the new build are not 25% lighter total. It's a bit of marketing. The hull is 25% lighter but the hull itself is probably only about a quater of the total weight, so in reality, the new builds are only a few hundred kgs lighter. The hulls are much stiffer and stronger though.
Huckleberry has a wafer thin layup on the cabin sides. I can flex it with my hands, whereas Perie Banou III's is twice as thick. But then PB3 has a foam cored deck. Swagman has a lot more glass running along the centerline, and so on. There's all sorts of weird quirks with the construction.
The mk2 keel is a bit lighter than the mk1 on account of the deeper draught. I've seen a few ORCi certs from the UK boats, they aint anywhere near 4100kg. I don't think any 34 got near the original design displacement.
Morning Cloud's displacement is 13,000 pounds! About the only comment to be made about SS34's are they are all different. Even Swarbrick built ones.
Select to expand quoteMorningBird said..All@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
How does it like 50+kts on the continental shelf?
Apparently did really well in a windy Lord Howe Isl, and has done a couple of Sydney-Hobarts - the S2H being the goal of the original post.
Select to expand quotewongaga said..
Yes, totally irrelevant comparison. How many have circumnavigated in them?
Totally relevant comparison as the question pertained to the Sydney to Hobart. She's done 2.
Select to expand quoteEastCoastSail said..
fb.watch/h-FOTIfx-z/
Footage from Crux last month in Sydney to Hobart, 16.4kts peak speed
That's great helming, but those bow waves...ugh. The loads on the rigging, the poor thing. What a displacement hull looks like bludgeoning a few ton of water out of the way as its skulldragged through the water 
.
Select to expand quoteshaggybaxter said..
The loads on the rigging, the poor thing. What a displacement hull looks like bludgeoning a few ton of water out of the way as its skulldragged through the water .
It's gravity and pushing from the water at the rear that is doing most of the work. The main sheet is fairly slack a lot of the time and particularly while surfing downhill so maybe the forces on the rig aren't that bad.
If the forces were all from the rig the yacht would probably be burying it's bow and becoming very hard to control before it went that fast.
Perhaps his mate isn't asleep but is running backwards and forwards in the cabin to stay on the waves :-).
Select to expand quotejulesmoto said..shaggybaxter said..
The loads on the rigging, the poor thing. What a displacement hull looks like bludgeoning a few ton of water out of the way as its skulldragged through the water .
It's gravity and pushing from the water at the rear that is doing most of the work. The main sheet is fairly slack a lot of the time and particularly while surfing downhill so maybe the forces on the rig aren't that bad.
If the forces were all from the rig the yacht would probably be burying it's bow and becoming very hard to control before it went that fast.
Perhaps his mate isn't asleep but is running backwards and forwards in the cabin to stay on the waves :-).
Good point that. On an modded Swarbrick 42 the fastest speed we did in Bass Strait was all surfs, and that was purely because we were falling down near-vertical wave fronts more than sail power. The sails would be flapping and completely depowered in the troughs then almost blow out every time you crested a wave. The boat was pinned on its ear on the crest and upright and wallowing in the trough, horrible to helm in.
Great vid. What I was impressed with was how light the helm is. Some boats are heavy on the helm in this situation. Especially older and long keel boats.
As julesmoto said they are not burying the nose too badly. One of the reasons is they have done a good job of sail management. No point over powering the boat and making it difficult to helm.
Obviously a good keel and rudder design. And the rudder must be balanced. This is when you find out about any play or unbalanced rudder.
Yes as the boat speeds up down the wave and the apparent wind goes forward the loads decrease on the rig. I know most people here understand that but will mention it for others. Again because they have not over powered the boat.
He should have the mainsheet in one hand pumping it in the surfs!
Too funny
if reported correctly there is a measurement there is measurement controversy between the s&s 34 s
azzurro has requested a remeasurement of crux
Select to expand quotelydia said..
Too funny
if reported correctly there is a measurement there is measurement controversy between the s&s 34 s
azzurro has requested a remeasurement of crux
Crux's ORCi cert has used the wrong hull offset file since forever, pretty much since she's was Blondie. ie the mk1 foils instead of the mk2 which she is. As for the IRC rating? the waterline thing is kinda interesting because the old Blondie cert I have shows a waterline that is longer than it should for the weight that is listed. But IRC has never really cared about how heavy your S&S 34 is anyway, weight has almost no effect on rating
