40 years of monohull "evolution"

[Bill Baum]

Christian (#39)- No, the 150+ catamarans in George Town harbor are not on moorings. They're privately owned cruising boats on anchor. We do wonder where they all go when the winter season ends, especially since about half of the owners are Canadian. Clearly many are full-timers, so they don't need slips or marinas. (We' been underway since January 3 and haven't touched a dock or mooring ball). I really am puzzled where the other cats go if they're not full timers.

Tonight we are at Hog Cay, in the Southern Ragged Islands of the Bahamas , just 40 miles North of Cuba. There are six boats here. We're the only monohull! Most of the five catamarans appear to be families with children. The cruising world is changing!

 

[southofvictor]

Everytime I'm ripping off downwind 15kts+ on my Melges 15 or my Nacra F18 I think man I wish sailboat designed just stopped in the 1980's that was peak fun.

Those boats are plenty fun, as are my friends’ 29’ers or lasers. I’d suggest they still have more in common with 80’s boat design than they do with today’s AC boats, especially in that they don’t require megawatts of power to make them sail. And as many have said above, any boat that’s designed well for it‘s purpose is usually impressive.

Even a foiling Moth that uses impressive engineering to make it work is all analog. No electrical power required.

 

[Christian Williams]

As a kid, Moths were the entry development class, and they all looked wonderfully different. You could build one of plywood in the garage. They were fun to sail, even as they made every concession to speed at expense of comfort.

I dont; think the foiling moths are comparable fun in any way. They have to be carried sideways into the water. They're really difficult to sail, ultra twitchy and requiring wind. Tacking is something to watch, as I guess the idea is to try to keep up on the foil, which requires gymnastics on the head of a pin.

A Laser leads you to a Rhodes 19 when the stomach muscles give out. I don't know where a foiling Moth leads anybody. Perhaps to the America's Cup?

 

[ConchyDug]

Lasers are feeder boats for foiling Moths, Lasers also have Grand Master(age 55-64), Great Grand Master(age 65-74), and Legend(age 75+) classes, maybe in 20yrs Moths will too. A lot of classes have the same age divisions, just last week the yacht club my wife is the sailing director of was hosting a Grand Master team racing event in Sonars and the clubs registered were NYYC, St Francis, Southern and a couple others I forget.

There are also several foiling boats beyond the Moth like the Wazp, 69F and the whole spectrum of foiling catamarans. Also don't forget that foil kiting, wing foiling, and kiteboarding are sailing and their growth is exploding. Yes most high level foil sailors work their way up to AC and SailGP, but they started in Optis or similar. Yes most have manual control or use an auto trim stick forward of the leading foil but it's the same principal as the AC and SailGP boats with digital input/output "flight control systems" which has an operator who is a pretty accomplished sailor. The cyclist are just charging an accumulator which is pretty much the same as the "grinders" on older boats. I mean last time I checked the AC boats still have telltales on the sails... The advanced VMG calculating software and start line guidance software is available in a toned down form in cell phone sized instruments like the Vakaros Atlas 2 for dinghies. The Melges 15 class rules just changed to utilize this tech to help manage large fleets like 90+ boats at the Midwinters this year, so less people are needed for race committee. So I'd say the tech trickles down and helps the sport overall.

And with the F18 and M15 comment, I mean there has been substantial progress in materials, boat handling techniques, sail handling, and sail design since the 80's. Like they were using sym kites on catamarans in the 80's launched from deck bags, fast forward to today we use single pull snuffers with asyms. Yes granted that isn't as profound a change as foiling has been but it's progress and helps make handling high performance boats easier. I bought my Ericson 38 when I was 31yrs old in 2016 that would've been impossible if someone didn't experiment with making cheap fiberglass boats decades before I was born.

Hundreds of cruising cats in the Caribbean? Cool that means in 20yrs there will be hundreds of cheaper used cruising cats available to purchase when I retire and have time to cruise.

 

[bsangs]

Speaking of SailGP, don't press the wrong button! https://www.royalgazette.com/sailin...d-and-shamed-for-causing-team-usa-to-capzise/

 

[Prairie Schooner]

When we were on Block Island several weeks ago some friends rafted up with us. It was interesting to compare their 2017 Juneau Sun Odyssey 349 to our 1986 E35-3. The 35-3 is about a foot longer than the 349. The beams are virtually the same. Their hull speed is .2 kt faster than ours. The photo looking across our cabin top toward theirs shows a notable difference in height off the water.

Features of the 349 which make me envious:
Garage: They have the single aft berth version which gives them an enormous aft locker. It is accessible from the cockpit or a door in the shower. The wide stern yields massive amounts of useful storage which you can walk into.
Swim platform: It’s far easier to climb out of the water or a dinghy with this feature. It has a fun open feel when at anchor and extends the living area of the cockpit.
Built on bowsprit: Our Ericson is only rigged for asymmetrical spinnaker and right now all we have to tack it to is the anchor rode roller.
Hull Portlight: It’s really kind of cool to be inside, sailing, and look leeward to see the water rushing by.

Features of the 349 I particularly don’t like:
Shallow Cockpit: The floor of the cockpit rides high to make more room down below. Sailing on their boat feels more like sitting ON a motorcycle where ours is like settling IN a sports car. Ours feels more secure and part of the boat.
Simplified Running Rigging: Specifically, there is no traveller. Theirs has a triangulated mainsheet. You can never centerline the boom. Maybe a proper traveller was an option.
Styling: I think of the difference as that between a tasteful Miami condo and a traditional Cape Cod cottage. Both are nicely done. I prefer our cottage.
Hull Portlight: I worry about the hull integrity.

 

[Martin King]

It's kind of interesting if you look at relative time. If someone was rigging their 1944 sailboat staring down at a brand new Ericson 35-3 in 1984, I wonder what they would have thought and the horrible thigs they were saying about the new boat. What would they have been rigging?

L. Francis Herreshoff famously referred to fiberglass boats as being built out of frozen snot.

 

[Loren Beach]

Another way to understand the comparisons in Reply 66, is to view it thru a purely "marketing" lens. I note that the form factor used for present sail boats does produce boats with more one-dimensional sailing performance that fits the "sailing lifestyle" of the buyers, but it's not the well rounded performance envelope of boats like ours and similar models from recent generations of Ericson's, Sabre, Hinterhoeler, or C&C's. (to name only a few)
Of course, when my MORC-derived design was new, it likely seemed a bit unusual to sailors loving those "meter boat derived" designs of the 30's and 40's, too.

Given that the founder(s) of Yacht Constructors in Portland were members of our club, we have a lot of their later various Cascade models (27, 29, 36, 42) in the moorage, but we also have, down from several, one fully restored Chinook 34 here. It looks fabulous. And likely has less interior room than an Ericson 30+. The owners love it tho, and that's all that counts.

CHINOOK 34 - sailboatdata

Based on the Vigilant Class, designed by Geiger for wood construction. With some justification, the CHINOOK 34 holds the claim as being the first fiberglass production sailboat of this size to be built in the US. The builder, Marine Costructors Inc. was founded by a group of indiduals who wished...

sailboatdata.com

 

[Kenneth K]

It was interesting to compare their 2017 Juneau Sun Odyssey 349 to our 1986 E35-3.

In short; one boat is very pretty, one boat is not!

 

[Christian Williams]

I agree with Ken, and recognize my bias. It is toward pretty.

But evolution does what it does--survival of fittest. And the new boats fit their use better.

And what's more, I don't think the use has changed much, in terms of family cruising. It's just that we never knew about twin wheels and dinghy platforms and in-mast furling, and happily clambered around narrow cockpits and dealt with roller furling booms and changing hanked jibs every 5 knots of wind.

Why do we find them ugly? Perhaps because utility isn't our standard. Perhaps it is why we don't own a motorboat trawler, which does everything a sailboat does except sail. That choice is apples and oranges. Why?

The new boats sail fine for cruising purposes. Is it the shape that offends the eye? Why is high freeboard and a plumb bow and a wedge shape less pleasing that traditional? Perhaps because traditional to us means wet and uncomfortable, with no headroom and narrow berths. The Ericsons we own improved on all that, but incrementally. Why is the next increment offensive?

A big family station wagon worked well for trips. It carried luggage, was near silent at highway speeds, and had a luxury ride. You could load the roof racks effortlessly. It was supplanted by enormous SUVS on truck suspensions that kids had to climb into, and the roof needed a ladder. Why?

Maybe the answer is just contemporary standards. An SUV puts the driver higher, bigger, and feels safer. A Beneteau, the same. In a showroom, side by side, today's buyer would not hesitate to make the choice between our boats and new ones. Which was prettier would be obscure and debatable. And although a buyer might not know exactly why, it would be apparent that one design was yesterday and the other was today.

Today is full of adaptations that succeed by polling. Everything new is an announced improvement.

What has changed? Expectation.

 

[windblown]

I agree with Ken, and recognize my bias. It is toward pretty.

But evolution does what it does--survival of fittest. And the new boats fit their use better.

And what's more, I don't think the use has changed much, in terms of family cruising. It's just that we never knew about twin wheels and dinghy platforms and in-mast furling, and happily clambered around narrow cockpits and dealt with roller furling booms and changing hanked jibs every 5 knots of wind.

Why do we find them ugly? Perhaps because utility isn't our standard. Perhaps it is why we don't own a motorboat trawler, which does everything a sailboat does except sail. That choice is apples and oranges. Why?

The new boats sail fine for cruising purposes. Is it the shape that offends the eye? Why is high freeboard and a plumb bow and a wedge shape less pleasing that traditional? Perhaps because traditional to us means wet and uncomfortable, with no headroom and narrow berths. The Ericsons we own improved on all that, but incrementally. Why is the next increment offensive?

A big family station wagon worked well for trips. It carried luggage, was near silent at highway speeds, and had a luxury ride. You could load the roof racks effortlessly. It was supplanted by enormous SUVS on truck suspensions that kids had to climb into, and the roof needed a ladder. Why?

Maybe the answer is just contemporary standards. An SUV puts the driver higher, bigger, and feels safer. A Beneteau, the same. In a showroom, side by side, today's buyer would not hesitate to make the choice between our boats and new ones. Which was prettier would be obscure and debatable. And although a buyer might not know exactly why, it would be apparent that one design was yesterday and the other was today.

Today is full of adaptations that succeed by polling. Everything new is an announced improvement.

What has changed? Expectation.

We have a little red 1987 BMW convertible. The ride is rather rough, when compared to almost any new car today. But it’s so much fun to drive and get the ol’ girl to perform. I can’t stop grinning when I drive it. Strangers smile with admiration and often wave when we drive by. Our Ericson 32-3 has the same effect on this skipper. I can’t stop grinning when we sail. And strangers smile with admiration, too. Evolution may improve function or change expectations, but some beauty is just plain timeless and classic.

 

[Drewm3i]

I agree with Ken, and recognize my bias. It is toward pretty.

But evolution does what it does--survival of fittest. And the new boats fit their use better.

And what's more, I don't think the use has changed much, in terms of family cruising. It's just that we never knew about twin wheels and dinghy platforms and in-mast furling, and happily clambered around narrow cockpits and dealt with roller furling booms and changing hanked jibs every 5 knots of wind.

Why do we find them ugly? Perhaps because utility isn't our standard. Perhaps it is why we don't own a motorboat trawler, which does everything a sailboat does except sail. That choice is apples and oranges. Why?

The new boats sail fine for cruising purposes. Is it the shape that offends the eye? Why is high freeboard and a plumb bow and a wedge shape less pleasing that traditional? Perhaps because traditional to us means wet and uncomfortable, with no headroom and narrow berths. The Ericsons we own improved on all that, but incrementally. Why is the next increment offensive?

A big family station wagon worked well for trips. It carried luggage, was near silent at highway speeds, and had a luxury ride. You could load the roof racks effortlessly. It was supplanted by enormous SUVS on truck suspensions that kids had to climb into, and the roof needed a ladder. Why?

Maybe the answer is just contemporary standards. An SUV puts the driver higher, bigger, and feels safer. A Beneteau, the same. In a showroom, side by side, today's buyer would not hesitate to make the choice between our boats and new ones. Which was prettier would be obscure and debatable. And although a buyer might not know exactly why, it would be apparent that one design was yesterday and the other was today.

Today is full of adaptations that succeed by polling. Everything new is an announced improvement.

What has changed? Expectation.

I think a somewhat objective case can be made about some of these things and there are many "features" on new boats that simply don't speak to me and I'm only 30...probably the youngest around these parts I would imagine.

1. The interiors of new boats are both better and worse: better because they are spacious and filled with natural light, worse because they use such cheap and simple materials (have you seen how ugly the cushions are on new boats these days???). There is simply zero craftsmanship these days--nothing is built by hand or with soul--aka meraki as the Greeks would have called it. Ericsons are quite honestly one of the last production boats to be lovingly built by and for middle-class working people, especially in the US. Sabre and other similar boats are beautiful too, but most of those are/were in a different price bracket so they aren't directly equivalent IMO.

2. Ericsons prioritized performance without sacrificing safety and build quality. New boats do the former at the expense of the latter. We can debate plexus vs tabbing all day, but there's a reason why Ericsons have the track record they do vs. other brands that have lots of hull, grid, keel, mast/rigging, and rudder failures. One area where Ericsons tended to be deficient was storage space IMO, but you can only do so much with a pleasant and traditional hull form and Ericson largely prioritized interior volume over storage.

3. Ericson also went out of business, probably because they did not evolve with the times. When other companies like Hunter were going to Corian, Ericson still used Formica. When A/C, refrigeration, and below-decks autopilots became standard equipment on boats, Ericson simply left these and more as options. When boats were getting longer and longer, Ericson's largest boat remained a 38, which probably competed with their own 32, 34, and 35. Wouldn't it have been something if the E-43 that was posted here was actually built?