Canoe Boat Plans
Two boats pointed to the same type of sailors but two very different boats even if sharing a kind of similar look. The Garcia is an aluminium centerboarder with almost all the ballast inside the boat, the Comet is a swing keel boat with all ballast on the keel. Both have a cutter rig.
This gives Garcia an advantage in what regards simplicity and Comet a clear advantage in what regards performance: For the same RM the Comet will only need a percentage of the ballast that will be needed on the Garcia.The Garcia is almost integrally built in Aluminium, the Comet is made of vinylester resins, Eglass and kevlar and carbon reinforcements, using an infusion process. The finality is giving max impact and compression resistance on critical areas. The boat has a sacrificial crash box at the bow and another one at the stern. The cabin can have a watertight door. Even with all the kevlar reinforcements in what regards resistance to impact I believe that the aluminium hull will be a better option.
Regarding dimensions (m, kg, m2, L): LOA: G - 14.21; C - 13.99. LWL: G- 12.57; C - 13.97. Beam: G - 4.44; C - 4.50. Displacement: G - 14 100; C - 11 500. Draft: G - 1.14/2.90; C - 1.60/3.50. Ballast: G - 4300; C - 4800. Sail Area upwind: G - 91.0; C - 85.3 (with Jib) 116 (with Genoa). Engine: G - 55/75hp; C - 75hp. Tankage: G - Water 500; Diesel 700; C - Water 440; Diesel 680.From the dimensions we can see that to a very close LOA and Beam correspond a bigger LWL and ballast on the Comet. The max draft is also deeper but the really huge difference regards RM and almost for sure AVS and inverted stability. The Comet has more 500kg of ballast but most of all it has all that ballast on a keel wilt 3.5m, while the Garcia has most of it inside the boat, just a bit below the water line. The difference of effectiveness of both ballasts is huge as the stability of both boats, not in what concerns overall stability, due to the Garcia bigger weight, but in what concerns the stability/weight ratio.
The Comet will not only be a much more powerful boat in what regards sailing as it will have a better reserve stability and will recover much quickly from a knock out. The Garcia has the advantage of maintaining intact its stability with the centerboard up and that can be important regarding seaworthiness in extreme weather but probably the Comet with the keel up will have a similar stability to the one of Garcia.
It seems to me that the Garcia is a more specific yacht, pointed to voyages in extreme latitudes while the Comet will also be able to do that (even with a less resistant hull) but will be a more versatile sailboat with a much better sailing performance, a long range cruising boat with a big autonomy and seaworthiness.
Both boats can be sailed from the interior and have an all around view from the cabin and the rigging is designed to be used by a solo sailor.
The Comet looked a lot worse on the first low quality drawings. On the new ones the boat looks a lot better and more elegant than the Garcia that,as I have already said, looks fat and too high to me. Not that I find the Comet particularly beautiful even if I like the hull.
Do you find information about Canoe Boat Plans are you looking for? If not, below may help you find more information about the Canoe Boat Plans. Thank you for visiting, have a great day.
I dont know why I have not posted about this boat already, certainly it is one of the most interesting 40fters around, a Ceccarelli design. I had made a quick reference to it on the old thread but at the time it was only at a building stage. Now it is on the water, winning races and most of all showing an incredible performance in real time and also a huge seaworthiness (on the stormy Middle Sea race). After that race the crew said about the boat and the sea conditions:
We were consistently between 16 and 18 knots, with peaks around 22 and beyond. At 22 knots the log was out of water and did not work anymore, so we do not know how much speed we made, but it was really tough. The unusual thing was that the wind never fell, ..40-45 knots for at least 12 consecutive hours, it was really hard...Waves as ever Ive ever seen in Mediterranean and we manage to sail the boat in safety without giving up performance. .. the boat behaved very well and we have not broken anything, I noticed a excellent behavior under storm jib. ..... we have outsailed 50 fters and beaten boats like the B2 and a Cookson 50..."
LOA: J -12.19; N - 12.15. LWL: J - 10.55; N - 11.50. Beam: J - 3.63; N - 3.99; Weight: J - 6770; N - 4600. B/D ratio: J -37,4%; N - 52,2%. Draft: J - 2.20; N - 2.60/1.60.SA upwind: J - 80.4 N - 105.0.
Two very different boats. The carbon Neo makes the J look very heavy (it isnt) but the four most remarkable differences are the huge difference in RM, the difference in weight, the difference in LWL and the diference in hull design. No wonder the Neo 400 is so seaworthy, it is incredibly stiff.
The J122 is a stiff boat but the Neo with a lot more beam, a hugely bigger B/D ratio, a considerable bigger draft and a more efficiently designed keel, makes it it look like a tender boat. Also impressive is the difference on the LWL, almost 1 meter on a boat that has about the same LOA. The difference in weight was expected, being the Neo a carbon boat.
Regarding hull design the Neo 400 is very modern, with a lot of beam and all of it pulled back with a transom design that would make easier to control the boat downwind sailing fast. The J 122 has a very different hull, a more dated one, not because it is narrower but because a more modern design would have that transom slightly modified and the beam more brought back, as it is featured on the more modern J111. That and the old designed keel on the J122 makes the boat look outdated when compared with the Neo, even if still able to deliver an impressive performance.The first time I saw The Neo 400 specifications I thought: WOW!!! and when I saw what the boat was capable of doing on that race, I said again... WOW!!! what a boat!!!
They will have a performance cruiser version (PC) and a performance racing version (PR) and probably that denomination, like on the Dehler R is a bit misleading since the PR it will be probably just an upgraded epoxy boat with a lead keel, more draft and better specs. Sure they will also make a true racing version for the clients that want to make top racing but then it will be a boat based on the PR with higher specifications, like basalt/carbon bulkheads, carbon spars and even special keels. Anyway, very curious to see the hull dimensions and the B/D ratio, even if I dont expect nothing very different from the actual 38. Two completely different boats, not sharing the same hull with the same basic name: Salona 38. Thats quite unusual.
