JPK 39FC: THE BEST SMALL FAST VOYAGE CRUISER?

In 2007 I was still looking for the boat to substitute my 5-year-old Bavaria 36, not because the boat had any problem, or because I wanted a newer one but because the Bavaria was not what wanted as a yacht for the retirement days, nothing to do with the interior, cruising amenities or even storage space, but with the upwind potential with stronger conditions. I explained the "problem" on the Luffe post, here:

JPK 110

https://interestingsailboats.blogspot.com/

So, one year after having sailed the Luffe 40.04, I went to France to see/testsail some boats and visit some shipyards being one of them JPK. JPK stands for Jean-Pierre Kelbert, the founder and owner of the shipyard, which at the time was a very small one.

He had only produced two boats, the JPK 9.60 (2003) and the one I was interested in, the JPK  110, a 36fter cruiser-racer that had been launched 2 years before.

The shipyard, as a yacht shipyard, was a very recent one (4 years old), but not only were the boats fast and very competitive on offshore races and Transats (the 9.60 had won the Transquadra and the Fastnet), as they have proven to be very resistant and well built.

The 36ft was not as successful as her little sister  but had already won several offshore races and at least one of the boats was being successfully used as a fast performance cruiser by a French sailor. This description, by an owner, about how the boat sailed with bad weather, had convinced me to check on that boat as a possible candidate for the Bavaria replacement.

JPK 110

http://www.jpk.fr/?titre=un-convoyage-muscle-en-jpk-110&mode=temoignages&idFicheMere=94&id=190

Notwithstanding being a very recent yacht builder, JPK shipyard had already a big experience in top quality composites: since 1992 they produced high-quality windsurf boards for professional or top amateurs, and also composite parts for some of the best and bigger racing shipyards like CDK Technologies or Multiplast.

I had booked a meeting with Jean-Pierre, and, even if I knew that it would be impossible to test sail the 110 (few boats built and none readily available, being out in different locations, most of them racing or preparing to race), he was building one that was already in an advanced state of completion, and he could show me that boat.

Talking with JPK was a very pleasant experience, he obviously knew not only a lot about boatbuilding but also a lot about sailing. He had been the European Windsurf Champion (1988, 1989), and later, racing his boats, many times with clients, he had become a very successful sail racer, in duo and with a crew. 

From the top: JPK111, 38FC and 39FC

I wanted a boat for cruising fast and since my wife does not share my passion for sailing (just for cruising), being this a powerful sailboat, I wanted a boat with a rigging adapted for easy solo sailing and even if that boat was being rigged for crewed racing he knew exactly what I was talking about and suggested not only to mount the winches in other position but also suggested other running rigging changes that made all the sense and that showed that not only he knew exactly what was needed to make solo sailing easier, as he was willing to modify the rigging to my needs.

I was very impressed with the boat, the quality of the work and with Jean-Pierre, who besides having a huge experience and knowledge, is a very nice guy, honest and straightforward. I remember that he invited me for a beer and I had to declined because I had a test sail and a visit to another shipyard that  afternoon.

RM 1200

He asked me what was the boat and the shipyard and I told him it was a RM 1200 and Fora Marine (at the time also a small shipyard even if several times bigger than JPK) and even if potentially I would choose between his boat and the RM 1200, without being asked, he told me that the RM 1200 was a different boat but well made and a very good cruising boat.

For different reasons, I chose neither the RM 1200 nor the JPK 110. The JPK 110 was ruled out not because of the way it sailed, neither due to the quality of the cruising interior (that was a very nice one for a fast boat), but due to the small forward cabin and due to an outside lack of storage. It had storage space on the cockpit floor, but with a very unpractical access, through a small hatch.

JPK 38 FC

Five years later, in 2012, JPK would launch the boat I was looking for, the JPK 38FC that seemed to be designed for me, well, maybe I would have preferred it slightly less beamy and more light wind/upwind balanced, in what regards sail potential maximization, but the essential was there: fast, with a sail performance not too much compromised by a downwind maximization, well built with a very nice interior, big enough cabins, and enough outside storage space with good access. 

https://interestingsailboats.blogspot.com/2016/01/jpk-38fc.html

JPK 39FC

The new JPK 39FC is an evolution of the 38 and they had the courage of not making an MKII, but an entirely new boat even if the alterations over the previous hull seem to be small, but important, not so much in what regards how the boat sails, but regarding interior space, namely the forward cabin that was a bit small on the 38.

JPK 39FC

The 39 is longer (11.72 to 11.38m) but has about the same beam (3.98 to 3.99m). The 39 is proportionally less beamier (length to beam) but it has slightly fatter bow sections, a rounded bow, inverted on the top, comes already with a big retractable bowsprit, and has a completely new, very interesting cabin design.

The wider bow sections and the rounded bow allows a much wider front cabin and even if it diminishes very slightly the upwind ability it will increase the downwind and beam reaching potential, not only due to the increased hull form stability but also due to the increased buoyancy on the forward sections,  contributing to keeping the bow up while planning downwind, preventing it to dig on waves. 

All the other dimensions are the same except for displacement that was 5000kg on the 38 and  is now 5500kg on the 39. The ballast on the standard 2.15m draft keel (cast iron fin, lead torpedo) is the same, 1900kg. 

This gives a lower B/D to the 39, (34.6% to 38.0%). The safety stability and AVS will be slightly worse than in the 38 but even so largely sufficient. That difference in B/D will be mostly noted on the 39 upwind performance with stronger weather, even considering the bigger 39 LWL, (11.0 for 10.4m). The bigger displacement will also have a negative influence on the downwind planning performance.

But 500kg seems a big difference for just  34cm difference in length, maintaining beam and it is possible that the JPK 38FC is heavier than the projected weight, and in that case, the difference in what regards B/D will be less and probably represents just a better adherence to reality.

The drawing shows a big retractile bowsprit (carbon) but there is an intriguing hole on the bow on hull 1. Due to the inverted bow, it will be difficult to solve the anchor stand problem and the easiest solution seems to have it integrated on the bowsprit, but that seems not to be the case. 

That hole on the bow seems too low for an anchor stand. I am puzzled and curious about the solution they will find for the problem.

Regarding the interior, the bigger bow cabin allows a better layout and even a three cabin solution that I don't see as a good solution for most users, providing little storage space and a very small head.

The two-cabin layout has a bigger head that even so remains small, without a separate shower. But if the position of the aft cabin is inverted it will be easy to have a head with a separate shower that can be used also as a wet locker, losing not much in what regards storage space and having the advantage of a  nicer and bigger saloon. Such alteration should be possible without considerable costs.

JPK 39FC 2 two cabin layout

With this alteration the JPK 39FC will have two good cabins, a big head, a big galley, a wet locker, a big chart table, enough storage space inside and outside, a nice and comfortable saloon, the option of a swing bulbed keel (1.30/2.70m), and a tankage of 360L of water and 90+90L diesel (option).

It will be close to perfection for a couple, or a couple with kids, to do a budget circumnavigation, or extensive sailing in the trade winds on a fast boat, without being too handicapped if after that, or during the circumnavigation, out of the trade winds, the boat is sailed in areas where upwind sailing is dominant, like the Med or the Baltic.

Hull - JPK 38FC

The JPK 39FC will pay a lot less than a bigger boat in marinas and ports, will have less expensive maintenance while being as fast as much bigger sailboats. If I had such a sailing program the JPK 39FC would  probably be the boat I would choose (on a budget), but it is not the case and for sailing mostly on the Med or Baltic, I would probably choose a different boat, one with better upwind ability, even if this boat should be considerably better and more comfortable upwind than a Pogo 36, that is smaller and has already more beam.

But regarding the Pogo, besides this being a more well-balanced boat in what regards overall sailing, what seems remarkable in this design is that they managed to solve the problem of forward visibility from inside the boat and the need for a considerable standing height without making the boat look ugly. I find the cabin design elegant, a very clever design that allows having on the interior good standing height without increasing a lot the freeboard. 

Hull - JPK 38FC

The outside cabin height seems smaller than what it really is due to its length, it should also provide great all-around illumination and views from the exterior, which are supplemented by three narrow but long port-hulls. The interior standing height should be good too. The interior should not be very different from the 38, a nice one, will be much less spartan and nicer than the one from the Pogo.

The engine is a small 30hp Volvo with an option for a 38hp Yanmar that will be able to move the 5500kg without problems and wasting little fuel and the 90+90L (optional) diesel tankage should be more than enough.

Hull- JPK 38 FC

Some will be asking if a boat with 11,72m weighing only 5500kg will not be necessarily a lot less strong and less seaworthy than for instance a Hallberg Rassy 372, which is smaller in length (11,35 to 11.72) and beam (3.60 to 3.98m) but that it is much heavier (7500 to 5500kg).

And that would be the case if the boats were built the same way with the same materials, but they are not and that makes all the difference. While the JPK hull is built like the one of a racing boat, with better materials, vinylester and polyester resins (polyester on the HR, except on the outside layer that is vinylester), sandwich using vacuum infusion ( sandwich composite, hand laid on the HR), Airex as core (probably similar quality Divinycel on the HR), boat structure directly infused on the hull (matrix structure bonded and laminated to the hull on the HR), sandwich infused composite bulkheads, bonded and laminated to the hull and deck (plywood bulkheads glued and laminated to the hull and deck).

I am quite sure the HR is well-built and a very strong boat but it is not built in a way to save weight (maintaining the strength). The vacuum infusion process and the bigger use of vinylester resins will allow saving on the hull 300 or 400kg, while the use of infused composite sandwich and the directly infused boat structure will save other hundred kg, and more savings will come from a composite infused interior (galley and head) and lighter cabinets. 

JPK 38FC interior

There is a difference of 2000 kg between the two boats that would be bigger if the HR had the size of the JPK but we could see that half of that difference is on ballast and that perhaps about 20% or 25% of that difference is just due to a more efficient keel design and more draft on the JPK (2.15m draft to 1.99m and a lead bulbed keel versus a cast iron, lead torpedo keel).

And in this case ballast can be misleading, because the, JPK (excluded the keel) is much lighter (by building techniques and materials) than the HR and therefore much less ballast is needed for obtaining the same B/D. The JPK 39FC has a 34.6% B/D while the HR 372 has 38.6% but if we apply a 20% correction due to the less efficient HR keel and draft then the comparable HR B/D is 30.9%.

More about JPK shipyard:  https://interestingsailboats.blogspot.com/2018/01/jpk-best-small-boat-builder.html

JPK 38FC torpedo keel

Note that I am not saying negative things about the HR372 that is a very good boat and marks HR turning point versus better sailing boats, I am just trying to explain why the JPK 39FC can be much lighter without being significantly weaker. 

It is also important to understand that even if the JPK 39C has a better GZ curve (arms curve) the smaller HR 372 has probably a close overall stability: the RM curve is obtained by multiplying boat mass by heeling arm (at all heeling points) and the overall stability corresponds to the total area under the positive part of the RM curve. The 36% HR mass will be compensated by the bigger JPK arm.

The bigger JPK GZ on all heeling points is due to a bigger hull form stability (much more beam) and also by a bigger corrected B/D (lower center of gravity), which will give it also better dynamic stability and better safety stability for an AVS that should not be very different, between 120 and 130º (HR372 has a 128º AVS).

HR 372 bulbed keel

The point here is to give a comparative reference in what regards overall stability and seaworthiness with a well-known seaworthy yacht, the HR372 a medium weight cruiser that most will consider being adequate for bluewater sailing with a comfortable safety margin, one that will not be inferior to the one offered by a JPK 39FC. 

Probably bigger, if we consider the better dynamic stability, the better safety stability, and the bigger ability to escape bad weather, due to much bigger overall speed, especially while beam reaching or sailing downwind. 

A faster passage will be potentially a safer one because fewer days will be passed on passage and the bigger the possibility to remain inside the right meteorological window one wants to sail.

JPK 38FC optional arch

The JPK 38FC comes already with carbon dual tillers, carbon bowsprit, 3D genoa tuning system, 6 winches, mainsail rail and foldable propeller. The list of options is not big and includes things like a sandwich composite arch for solar panels and to carry the dinghy (4321 €), the prices of extras seem correct as well as the price of the standard yacht, 205 100€ with the standard 2.15m keel, 225 800€ with the optional swing keel (all prices at the shipyard without taxes).

What is offered for the price seems very good: a safe, very fast, very well built yacht, with a nice interior that will have relatively economic maintenance due to small sails (lightweight), small engine and small size (marina costs). But if you are interested in one it is better to hurry because right now the delivery time is already one year and I bet that when sailors see the real thing the waiting time is going to double very quickly.