Tuesday, January 30, 2018


By other words, where to find a charter sailboat, on the Med, that is not a main market mass production  boat (designed for charter) but a smaller series yacht designed for sailing very well and for fast cruising, a modern performance cruiser. Many that follow this thread like performance cruisers but don't have one yet and they do charter on the holidays. So why not charter a performance cruiser instead of a typical charter boat? Where to find performance cruisers for charter?

If we look at the charter companies that operate on the Med, very few have performance boats, for several reasons: they carry less people and they are more expensive to own and to operate. They are less attractive for most since the charter price will have to be bigger to compensate the extra costs. If we look well we can find some advertisements, mostly from not very expensive or very fast performance cruisers like a Dehler 38, an Elan 350 or some Salona but they are very rare and the boats are already some years old.

However there are two charter companies with considerable fleets, of mostly new boats, that are specialized on the charter of fast or even very fast cruisers, one in Greece, the other in Croatia. I am talking about FastSailing in Greece  and More charter in Croaria, both operating near international airports. Fastsailing base is in Lavrio, near Athens and More yachts in Primosten a beautiful old village near Split.
More 55

More Yachts offer, beside the two boats that they build, the More 40 and More 55, the older fleet of Salonas: eleven Salona 38, one 41 and four 44. Prices in June for week go from 6000 euro on the More 55 down to 2000 euro for a Salona 38. 

FastSailing, that started some years ago with a Pogo 12.50, has now a considerable fleet of very fast performance cruisers (and a cruiser-racer) plus a fleet of fast performance cruisers, a bit better on the luxury side than the More, even if slower. 

They have on the first fleet one Pogo 50, four Pogo 12.50, one Pogo 36 and one Sydney 43GTS cruiser-racer (the cover image). On the second fleet they have one X4 and a X50 both from X-yachts and with a great quality interior.

In June, the week charter prices on the very fast performance cruising line, go from 7900 euro on the Pogo 50 down  to 3300 on the Pogo 36. On the other fleet the X4 costs 4900 and the X50, that is only chartered with a skipper, costs 6900 euro. They offer also training courses in March and November at interesting prices, 1250 euros for person for a week.

If we compare these charter prices with the ones of new main market mass production sailboats we will see that the prices are not high, specially considering the difference on the new price of the boats: In June charter a recent Dufour 520 will cost 5300 euros and a Dufour 382 will cost 2650 euro.

Why not join the pleasure of sailing fast and have fun to the pleasure of sailing with the family? Between boats I have done this myself chartering in 2011 a then brand new performance  Salona 41,  a very nice boat to sail and cruise. I liked it so much that I bought a similar type cruiser.

Sunday, January 28, 2018


One of the most interesting things I saw this year at the Dusseldorf  boat show was a chart table. I am one of those that think that the big dedicated chart table is a thing of the past. They were needed and justifiable when for coastal navigation we had to have big charts and had to do a lot of graphic work just to know where we were. Offshore, after using a sextant,  a lot of calculations were need to be made and  tables consulted to determine position. All of that took not only time but needed a dedicated space.

Today a chart is used as a backup to the plotter, or laptop, where the navigation is done. The chart is used not only for confirmation but also because the small size of the plotter does not allow a global picture covering the space where we are to where we want to sail. A lot of zooms are needed and sometimes, somewhere along the route marked by the "go to",  reefs or sandbars can escape our eyes.

Also where a lot of islands or reefs exist, a small plotter can be difficult to work with, in what regards choosing the best courses around the obstacles. That's where the bigger chart is still very handy allowing to do that quickly.

And what if the plotter were as big as the chart? And if it did not serve only as a plotter but also as a screen for TV, movies, games and as a computer? That would be perfect and sometime in the future it will happen on small yachts. No, WRONG, it will not be in the future, there was on Dusseldorf a relatively small yacht equipped with not one but two of those systems, a sort of overkill LOL.

The Allures 45.9, a French voyage aluminum boat had mounted the first of these new  multi function chart tables designed for yachts, produced by another French manufacturer, Kara technologies, that makes multi touch screens with an incorporated computer for different types of users, now for sailors as well.

And chart tables is a way of saying it because on Allures not only the chart table is one of those screens but also the saloon table. This allows a new definition of spaces on the boat with the possibility of part of the saloon table or even all of it to have a new function, dispensing for good the conventional chart table. Off course a space has to be previewed for storing papel charts (as a backup).

I tried the chart table (well, much more than a chart table) and it is a pleasure to use. The only drawback, a big one, is the price that is relatively high (a plotter of that size is not much cheaper), about 12 500 euros for one of those babies including telescopic lift, tilting hinge and software. It is a very resistant system with an anti-scratch screen, prof shock (IK10), with a high resistance to water (IP 65) and a consumption of 12.5 Amps (42''). The consumption is not as bad as it looks since the system enters in sleep mode  consuming almost nothing when not in use while most plotters are draining energy all the time.

 A touch screen with a computer included of about the same size costs less than 6 time that price but will not be suitable for this use without a complete modification and a costly one. I hope  that the price of these wonders will come down, as it always happens with electronics, because this is certainly the way to go.

The movie is self explanatory regarding the multifunctionality of the "chart table":


Friday, January 26, 2018


Following the previous evaluation post on the More 40: 
https://interestingsailboats.blogspot.de/2018/01/more-40-best-quality-price.html and after visiting it at Dusseldorf boat show, having as guide the boat engineer (Leo Curin) I have more information suplemented by the data I got in an exchange of emails with the only journalists that had sail tested the boat, namely Vedran Rozic (whom I thank) from the Croatian sail magazine More (more means sea in Croatian). 

So, first of all the interior: "Is it good?" After having visited the More 40 I visited the also new Hanse 548 and I can tell that the quality is better on the More. Not a very innovative interior, I would even say that the materials seem better than the design, that is not bad, just a bit bland, but very practical. In fact it looks better than on the photos. 

The main design issue has to do with the portholes that  are too low (regarding the design) and too small. Also a black floor that absorbs too much light making the interior a lot less luminous than it could be. I am sure that the floor boards can be of another color. The finish of the ones on the More 55 would suit very well this interior.

Regarding those panels, the color may not be the best but it would be very dificult to beat its quality even on very expensive boats: not to lose shape or twist with time and use those boards are sandwich made having as core aluminium honeycomb!!!

 There are lots of practical interior details, the chart table can turn around and be transformed in part of a continuous bigger settee, the stove will raise from the position that you see on the photo, to protect the sides of the corian working bench from the heat. Behind the stove there is a corian panel that can be brought over the stove forming a continuous bench. 

The floor on the More 55
There is plenty of storage on cabinets and the boat can have two fridges even if the energy for that will only be possible while at the port or marina, unless one chooses to motor. The outside storage is very good, with two side lockers, and a big central locker (under the cockpit). 

I had a look at the boat structure (stainless steel frame) and it is even more impressive than the one on the 55. Kind of inspires you confidence to know that the keel is bolted to that and not to a fiberglass floor. Leo said that the guys from Swan visited the boat and were impressed. Not easy to impress those guys.

The chain locker has a decent size and can be accessed from the cockpit. I don't like the anchor stand that is on the side nor visually neither in what regards effectiveness.

 It seems that the intention was to get it out of the way of the geenaker pole that will be mounted on the other side but I really don't see the need and even if the hull is reinforced internally on the supports it is much more difficult to make it strong than it would be if it was mounted the traditional way, over a stand that would serve also as a geenaker pole (X-yacht style).

In fact, on the other side of the hull, opposed to the anchor stand there is a removable fiberglass panel that will allow a spinnaker pole to be mounted. You can see it on the movie made by "Yachting World (on the bottom). It could be justifiable, I mean the anchor stand on the side and even interesting if the spinacker pole was a retractile one, like on some Elan or J boats but it seems not to be the case. This way only if the boat is used for serious racing it will make sense, including the detachable anchor stand on the size

Everything on the deck is very well done and finished, from the teak deck (option), to the quality of the sail hardware and the big swimming platform, that closes the transom. The GFC steering wheels have a nice touch and they are associated to nicely designed pedestals with solid hand grabs on the back. The cockpit table is nice, solid, easily removable and can be stowed on one of the cockpit lockers.

The engine is a 40hp Yanmar and it has a big diesel tank (for this type of boat) with 250 liters. The standard water tankage is not so good (250 liters) but an additional tank can be mounted.

The information I have regarding the ones that sailed the boat is in accordance with what would be expected from the design: the boat has a great performance on light winds, is stiff, was sailed on 40kt wind at 11k (without spi or geenaker) and it behaved well.

The Polar speed chart is impressive with the boat doing 5kt speed with 4kt wind, 7kt with 8kt wind and 9kt with 16kt wind. Of course these numbers refer to a light boat sailing on flat seas. On a normally loaded cruising boat the numbers will not be so good but still it will be a very fast cruising boat.

I had a look at the stability curve and it is also good, especially considering that this is a boat with considerably less freeboard than mass production main market cruisers: the AVS is almost 120º and the righting moment at 90º is about the same as it is at 30º and that means a lot of RM. It is never too much to emphasize the importance of having a lot of RM at 90º since it means a rapid recovery from a knock down.The inverted stability is about half of the positive stability.

So, is this the best boat regarding price quality? I know a lot of them and I am not seeing anything that can compare, except the bigger brother, the 55. If I had to nominate another I would say the Maxi 1200, not better built, with less sail hardware, a slower boat (even if a fast cruiser)  but with a superior quality interior. It should cost about 50 to 70 000 euros more than the More 40.

Don't miss the "Yachting World" movie made on the boat show that shows many of the things I talk about on the post:  https://www.facebook.com/yachtingworldmagazine/videos/1608977529185513/

Tuesday, January 23, 2018


This year’s European boats of the year choices leave me a bit concerned about the way test sailors and sail magazine directors are viewing the industry, consumer needs and the way sailboats respond to them.

On the more prestigious category the Luxury Cruiser one, that was won by the Amel 50, they nominated more two boats, the Halberg Rassy 44 and the ICE 60....except that the ICE 60 is a performance cruiser and has nothing to do with the Amel or the Halberg-Rassy. It is a mystery why the ICE 60 was included in this category and not on the category where it belongs, the one of Performance Cruisers.

It can be said that on this class all cruisers, including performance cruisers, can be included if they have a price tag and a finish that makes them a luxury product, but then the Swan 50, for its price, finish and the clients that it is aimed for, should have been included here. If we consider the luxury market, the Swan 50 is from all yachts nominated the one more aimed at the luxury market.

The lack of definition in what is valued in this class leads to arbitrary choices: what is more valued, luxury, finish and the boat interior design or seaworthiness, sail ability and yacht exterior design? Or as it seems fit to me all these things balanced together with a bit more emphasis on the last group?

Why more on the last group? Because a seaworthy sailboat with a good sail performance and a not so good interior can still be a good cruising sailboat but an unseaworthy sailboat with a bad sail performance even if with a very good interior can never be a good cruising sailboat.

If this was the perspective the boats were looked upon, the choice of the Amel 50 over the Halberg Rassy 44 makes no sense. Sure there are points where the Amel is stronger namely a very spacious high quality interior very well designed but at the cost of a huge freeboard and a huge beam that results in a lot of windage, less finer entries and finer forward sections, making it a very massive boat that hardly has the visual finesse of lines that characterize 50fters and bigger boats.

Compared with the narrower and lower HR the superior Amel’s windage, the much bigger beam, the larger forward sections and the consequent bigger prismatic coefficient will result not only in more pounding upwind, bigger drag, particularly wave drag upwind. To match the HR performance the Amel will need much more power and it will be always at the cost of comfort and sea motion. And the Amel is not a more powerful boat than the HR, quite the contrary.

We cannot compare directly, due to the difference in size, but I can put things in perspective if I say that the Amel 50 has about the same beam as the beamiest of all mass production boats, about the same as an Oceanis 51.1, while the Oceanis 45 has 4.50 that compares with only 4.20m on the Halberg Rassy, a considerably less beamier boat.

But that is not the worst of it: contrary to what was usual on older Amels, the Amel 50 has a B/D similar to mass production boats, a factor that is aggravated by a smaller draft and in most cases a less efficient keel. That’s true that a beamier boat needs less ballast to sail since more stability comes from hull form but in what regards safety stability at big angles of heel and AVS, hull form stability is irrelevant and detrimental in what regards inverted stability. For that what counts is the boat lower CG that is obtained trough ballast and draft.

The HR 44 has a B/D of 39.9% with a 2.1m draft keel, the Amel 50 has a ballast of 28.5% with 2,15m draft. If we compare with a mass production boat with just a bit less beam (4.75 to 4.78m), the Hanse 505, we will see that the 28%B/D is close, having the Hanse a much lower CG on that ballast due to more draft (2.35 to 2.15m) and to a much more efficient (in lowering the CG) torpedo keel. That means that actually the Hanse has a higher B/D than the one of the Amel if we consider draft and type of keel.

We can also look at the Jeanneau 509 that with a less beamy hull (4.69 to 4.78m), more draft (2.36 to 2.15m) and a 29.6% B/D compared with 28.5% on the Amel . Note that to be of similar effect the B/D of the Amel should be considerably bigger (not smaller) than the one of the Jeanneau to compensate the difference in draft, when in reality is smaller.

This means that the AVS of the Amel, as well as its safety stability is smaller while the inverted stability is bigger than the ones of the Jeanneau and Hanse and much smaller than the one on the HR.

These are not the only disadvantages of having a boat with a lower B/D than the ideal one. These boats if beamy and well designed sail well in light or medium conditions, even upwind. But with stronger conditions upwind, when waves start to grow, because of the large beam and beamy forward sections, the wave drag grows much more rapidly than on a narrower boat, with finer bow sections and much more power will be needed.

On strong conditions upwind the extra power has to come from the ballast while the boat heels, except that on the Amel´s case not much will happen when the boat heels, the power will not be there due to the low B/D and low draft.

The difference between the Amel and the HR in what regards sailing upwind in strong conditions will be simply huge as it is big the difference in what regards safety stability, AVS and inverted stability.

If we look at other expensive similar type of boats like Najad, Discovery, Halberg Rassy, Oyster we will see that the Amel 50 is an exception, that all the others have a B/D superior to the ones of mass production boats and much superior to the one of the Amel. In fact that is normal because it is not only a safety factor but also one that increases the boat power and stiffness.

The reason why all boats don’t have the most desirable B/D regarding the type of design, namely the less expensive ones, has to do with costs. It is expensive to increase the ballast on the boat not because of the cost of the keel or ballast itself but due to the increasing in forces transmitted by the keel to the hull. Also more power means more sail area and that results in bigger efforts on the rig that are transmitted to the hull. All these extra efforts need a stronger hull and a stronger hull structure to absorb them and that is what is expensive.

Finally we arrive to the much praised big fixed dodger of the Amel 50 with a big armchair for the sailor that seats in front of the wheel facing a lot of buttons to command all the winches that are way back on the central cockpit.

Except that this type of set up, big chair and all is used on motorboats or cats, boats that don’t heel. Even with a moderate heel of 15º seating, with all the body weight to one side, is not comfortable, much less for a long time.

 And most of all how can someone adjust the sails under a big fixed dodger without being able to see the main and seeing poorly the trim of the frontal sails?

It is assumed by the ones that have chosen the boat as a winner that this setup, kind of cat style, is the ideal setup for a skipper while sailing on a cruising monohull. I doubt very much.

 If that was the case we would have seen long ago many boats adapting this set up, namely the ones designed as offshore ones. It seems to me that the steering position on the HR is much better than the one on the Amel, with the winch and the traveler at easy reach of the sailor, seated on the high side of the boat with a much better view forward.

ICE 60
On the few occasions that it will be more comfortable or agreeable for the sailor not to hand steer the boat or sail it from near the wheel he can sit under a big removable dodger and command the boat from there the same way the Amel is sailed, with the exception that he will be sailing on autopilot or using a portable autopilot control device to steer the boat.

It would be expected all this to be taken into consideration regarding the comparison between the AMEL and the HR but obviously it was not. I would say that we can all have a look at the sailboat interior and see the differences and our preferences, what is expected of test sails and specialized reviews is the information most cannot see regarding the differences between boats.

And one of those differences that a test sail can help to clear is how different boats sail, except that sailing the boat once or twice, especially if the conditions were light (as it was the case) will only give information regarding those conditions and eventually how the boat feels at the steering wheel and nothing regarding all other sailing conditions.

So, it is not possible to have a good idea of how a given boat will sail on all conditions without testing it? No, it is quite possible to have a good general impression and that is why I am saying that the HR will sail upwind very well with strong winds and the Amel will do it badly. Also that, comparatively to the boat weight, the Halberg Rassy will be able to carry more sail and will reef considerably later than the Amel. To be able to know this all it is needed is to know enough about sailboat design and have comparative data.

If we add to those sailing performance advantages the ones regarding a better safety stability, a better recovery from a knock-down, a better AVS and lower inverted stability, we can say In few words, that the HR is a much better offshore sailboat than the Amel.

While the Amel 50 is in some aspects worse than old designed Amel, the Halberg Rassy 44 is one of the best HR ever made, one that unites the good building and seaworthiness of previous boats to the better speed a modern hull design has allowed.

And the confusion continues on the Performance Cruiser class. Here they nominated three boats: The Swan Club 50 that is used almost exclusively for racing and that does not even have an anchor stand, having a very small galley.

The Grand Soleil 34 points much more for sportive sailing and racing than for cruising, it does not have an anchor stand (much less problematic than on a 50fter) but has a better interior for cruising than the Swan (sizes apart), with a comparatively bigger galley.

The third one, the JPK 45 is a very fast boat with all the needed equipment even for long range cruising without handicapping performance, a kind of a Pogo with a smaller beam, with a much more comfortable interior and better equipped for cruising.

And they chose as 2018 Performance Cruiser the yacht that is designed and used almost exclusively for racing, the Swan club 50!!!

Not meaning that the Swan 50 is not a great and innovative boat but certainly not a performance cruiser. Putting it on this category and not on the category of Special Yachts makes not any sense. Choosing it as the best Performance Cruiser, even less.

This is providing bad information to the public: a performance cruiser is a boat that has as clients the ones that like to cruise in a performance way, fast, having fun while doing it. The Swan club 50 is a boat that has as client rich racers that like to race in a kind of social way and therefore the name Club racer, a top one no doubt in what regards that.

Friday, January 19, 2018


The best of all VOR legs had not a so interesting finish, a kind of an anti-climax sadly broken by Vestas collision with a small fishing boat that resulted on a dead fisherman.

Scallywag advance, that was conquered with a brilliant tactical routing option, was diminished by the closest pursuers, Vestas and Dongfeng, but in no time they were in position to overtake. Vestas decided to retire from the race after the accident, motoring to Hong-Kong with a hole on the bow.

While racing Vestas was always able to maintain the advance over Dongfeng that a slightly better option out of the doldrums gave them, even if they were not able to increase that advance. But something very positive happened on this leg: many boats chose very different routing options and that's what made this leg much better and more interesting than the others. And something very negative, the death of a fisherman.

Mapfre this time did not follow Dongfeng and was, among the leading boats, the big loser. He will be only 4th, now that Vestas has retired. That will not be enough to lose the race leadership but will allow Dongfeng to narrow the difference. Vestas had a big hit on the classification and this race seems to be now even more dominated by the French and the Spanish teams, on Dongfeng and Mapfre. 

What we have seen on this edition is that there are several teams that are very close in  sailing ability and that it was the routing the decisive factor. Till now we had seen 3 teams at the same sailing level, Mapfre, Vestas and Dongfeng and quite surprisingly on this leg we had Scallywag matching their sailing performance and winning over routing.

And regarding routing  Scallywag  changed from mediocre to outstanding with a new navigator, a woman, Libby Greenhalgh, a British, the SCA navigaror on the previous VOR and a meteorologist. She was able to find the right way to beat all the others. The true winner of this leg.

It is very funny because Scallywag's skipper, David Witt, had previously said that women would not have a place on his boat, referring to the new VOR rules that give an advantage in having women on board, allowing for more crew. I agree with him regarding this statement: "but I think the way the rule is written is actually derogatory to women sailors as well – what you’re saying is you can have an extra person but only a girl because they aren’t good enough", but he just forgot that there are some women that in what regards ocean sailing, are as good as men and he owes his victory on this leg to one of them. Let's see what he says about that at the end of the leg LOL.

Maybe Libby, Scallywag navigator, with her knowledge as a meteorologist, can be an advantage on the next leg, where between land masses, the winds are more variable and difficult, but in what regards the legs ahead with double points, the one on the Southern Ocean and the one on the North Atlantic, I don't believe she will have the experience to be at the same level of  Dongfeng in what regards navigation. They have on board not only a great navigator but several, all of them with a huge experience on those waters. 

Wednesday, January 17, 2018


After many American brands having delocalized their production to China it was only a matter of time to see Chinese producing high quality boats but it comes as a surprise that the first Chinese brand that is producing high quality boats is one specialized in racing and cruiser-racer sailboats.

It is not a new brand, it has already produced several racers, among them a carbon one, a smaller cruiser racer, the Fareast 26 and even a 36ft cruising cat (a daysailer). The new 37 seems to be the most ambitious project and the first one that points for a true dual purpose monohull.

I have met some of the shipyard top management at Dusseldorf some years ago and they were incredibly young and motivated. I was impressed and if I were an investor I would believe them to be a sound investment. They have the energy, the motivation, the know how, are associated with a good naval cabinet and have some of the world's most inexpensive production costs.

The Fareast 37 will be a very fast sailboat with a good cruising interior. The boat is designed by Simonis & Voogd Yacht Design, built using vacuum infusion techniques, it has a high B/D ratio (2.25m draft) it is light (4400kg), moderately beamy (3.66m) and the hull looks great, not far away from the one of the JPK 1080.

They say that the boat will cost 140 000 USD without VAT, probably in China. Hard to say how much it will cost delivered in US or in Europe. They will be in Dusseldorf. More information later.

This is the smaller brother, the 28R:

Monday, January 15, 2018


Unbelievable!!! Just when they were preparing to cross the start line for an attempt to the absolute circumnavigation sail record (with crew) on Spindrift 2, the maxi trimaran lost the mast. Bad luck for Yann Guichard and the crew , or maybe not, because if it had not broken now probably it would not  have taken them all around the world.

Sunday, January 14, 2018


This rescue shows again how difficult it is the recovering of a man overboard on fast boats: it was in daylight on a calm sea and the boat was not going very fast, even so Scallywag crew took 7 minutes to recover the sailor. This was on warm waters, 7 minutes on the high latitudes could have been too much and on those latitudes the sea is rarely flat like it was here. 

This poses some safety questions since the man on the water was on a black outfit without any fluorescent strips, no whistle or strobe light attached and much less a personal epirb. Something should change in what regards safety stuff that should be used all times. This does not mean really extra weight since a small strobe light and reflective strips weight almost nothing. 

In what regards racing,this leg is the most interesting till now and it has been great. Scallywag's option more to the rhumb line showed to have pay off and even if the option of the ones that took the more Eastern route proved also to be a good one, Scallywag has a bit of advance over those boats (Dongfeng, Vestas and AksoNobel).

I believe that any of them can still win this leg and the finish is going to be great with very strong winds a day ahead. Don't miss this finish, it has been a truly great race and it will be even better at the end.

Thursday, January 11, 2018


More is an intriguing brand: the 40fter is already on the water and besides some miserably bad photos I don't hear or see anything about it, certainly not from sail magazines, nor from the shipyard. It is as if the boat was an uninteresting one or if the boatyard was not really interested in selling boats. All very odd.

I have already posted about the More 55, that is a pretty much ignored boat, with no sail tests from any of the major sail magazines even if it is amazingly inexpensive and very well built. Maybe they should start to buy advertising space on sail magazines LOL.

The shipyard story is as odd as the silence about their boats: They were and still are a Swedish -Croatian charter company specialized in performance cruising that asked Salona, the biggest Croatian sailboat builder, for the deliver of twelve 55ft performance cruisers for their business.

They didn't reach an agreement and More charter company decided to build themselves the boats. As Salona was financially in bad shape many of the workers of Salona went to work for More including top level ones, the best engineers and designers. A true transfer of technology from Salona to More.

And the boats were built, several have already crossed the Atlantic three times, since they charter in the Med and Caribbean, and it seems that the reason that they don't make advertising is because they don't need it, having their full production capacity sold out and keep receiving new orders. Weird!

Regarding financing the boat they propose, as many charter companies, to charter the boat for 6 years offering 2 weeks to the owner, the diference here are the numbers that they present that are quite incredible, maybe because they make their own boats and charter them full year, half on the Caribbean, half on the Med. Just look at this and tell me if it is not unbelievable. 

For the More 40: Price of the boat fully equipped. 200 000 euros, total return over 6 years charter - 148 000 Euros, value of the boat after six years 120 000 euros, total value of the 2 weeks free sailing over the 6 years 47 000 euros!!!!. This means that in 6 years instead of having cost you any money, it will generate you a profit of 115 000 euros, assuming you sell it.

Of course this is pretty much impossible since it gives you an interest rate of 9.5% over your money and the value of those two weeks of sailing a year having a value of 7 833 euros is exaggerated, unless it is a brand new boat and the boat will only be new on the first two years or so, then the price will be slightly lower. Probably the same happens in what regards all those numbers. But even if the numbers are just as off as the ones for the value of the two weeks, it is a very good proposition.

Assuming you keep the boat they say the cost for the owner will be at the end of 6 years 35 000 euros. Even if their values are inflated in 25% it will mean that you will have a boat free of charges for about 44 000 euros, 63 000 euros with VAT paid (in Europe), certainly much less than the value of the boat. They talk about 120 000 euros, I would say that probably 100 000 is a more realistic value for a charter boat with 6 years but even so it represents a gain of 37 000 euros.
So, it is cheap but is it good? Well, there is nothing like that on the market for the basic price of 185 000 euros (standard boat, no VAT paid). This boat has a much superior build than any mass market boat from the main shipyards. The hull is entirely cored using vacuum injection and vinylester resins and the back bone of the hull is a stainless steel grid that supports the keel and takes the efforts from the shrouds. Keel and rig efforts are that way distributed on the hull.

One of the ways you can rapidly see if a boat is built cutting some corners, in what regards boat design, is to look at the B/D numbers. Having a big ballast on a boat at the end of a deep keel increases a lot the efforts on the hull and a more expensive and strong hull and structure is needed. That extra power for more B/D will give the stability needed for more sail area and again  a stronger structure and hull will be needed for taking all those extra sail efforts and distribute them by the boat structure.

Normally main market 40ft mass production boats have, with a similar type of keel, a B/D of about 30% with a draft between 2.0 and 2.1m. The exception is the Hanse that has a good B/D of 32.5%. The More 40 has a 34.9% B/D not with a 2.0 draft but with a 2.35m draft. That will correspond to a much bigger B/D ratio, probably around 39% for a 2.0 m keel. That should be the B/D of a More with a 2.0m draft to have a similar RM of one with 2.35m draft.

Only this makes the More 40 a different boat. The superior B/D will make it not only a more powerful boat but also one with a better reserve (or safety) stability and one with a better AVS. But that is not the only diference because the boat is lighter and as strong (or more) due to the use of a completely cored hull and the use of vacuum infusion techniques and vinylester resins. The More 40 displaces 7000kg and it is about 400kg lighter than a Jeanneau SO 409 and 1800kg lighter than the Hanse 418.

Even if lighter, the More 40 can carry upwind  95m2 of sail while the heavier Hanse 418 can carry 87m2 (both boats with a jib). That will give an idea between the performance of the two boats that will be even bigger (upwind) if we consider that the More has a beam of 4.0m while the Hanse has 4.17m and less finer entries.

Another difference has to do with the number of winches, 6 on the More, 4 on the Hanse. Also in what regards travellers, the Hanse has one for the forward jib the More has one for main sail, near the wheel. More easiness on the Hanse (if one uses a small jib) and better sail control on the More. 

Regarding the Hanse it should be said that a genoa cannot be used or not be used conveniently, because the boat does not have a genoa car so a genoa cannot be conveniently reefed. This is important because while the much lighter More will have no trouble sailing in light winds with the optional genoa, that can be reefed, the Hanse will need a more expensive and less practical code 0.

The boat design is very similar to the one of the Salona 380, just a bit bigger, designed by the same naval architect,  the Italian Maurizio Cossutti that is also the designer of the new C line of Bavaria. It has  a very nice hull, one that will not only perform well while cruising but that will probably allow some good results on handicap racing.

I saw only one very bad photo of the interior that I will not post (too bad). The interior looked simple and funcional but regarding quality I can say nothing except that the one on the bigger boat is good even if the design is a bit uninspired. This will be one of the boats I will be more curious about on the Dusseldorf boat show. More information and maybe some photos of the interior after the boat show.

About the more 55: http://interestingsailboats.blogspot.pt/2017/02/more-55-more-40-too-good-to-be-true.html