The Brava 25 is as simple as it can be but offers a very interesting cruising interior, the seaworthiness of a Class B certification, and hopefully a very interesting price.
The design looks like a bigger and more modernized class 5.80 ( it is designed by one of the best NA cabinets (VPLP))and offers warranties in regards to safety and performance, taking into consideration this type of boat, that for the French is a very popular one.
In 1963 Philipe Harlé designed the Muscadet, and more than 500 sailboats were built over the next 15 years, a huge number for that time.
Muscadet
Not only many are still sailing today, as the demand for restoration (even new boats) is so considerable that Bava shipyard is dedicated to offering those services, not only restoring and building Muscadet but also Corsaire, an even older design and as popular as the Muscadet, both built with plywood bonded over a structure of massive wood.
Dominating perfectly this building technique they had the (great) idea to demand one of the best French Naval Cabinets to design what would be today a new Muscadet, meaning, using the same building materials, an inexpensive seaworthy boat, with a great cruising interior and updated performances.
The Brava 25 was the result and I kind of like its retro but functional looks, especially the interior where the use of plywood gives a very warm filling.
It is an unpretending little boat suitable for coastal cruising, hopefully at a low cost and pretending to do what Muscadet had done in its time, to allow more to cruise.
Comparing the Brava 25 dimensions with the ones of Muscadet: Brava has 7.50m HL (M- 6.48m), B-2.90m Beam (M- 2.26m), B- 1.60m Draft (M- 1.25), B- 600kg Ballast (M- 520kg), B- 1600kg Displacement (M- 1200kg), B- 37.5% B/D (M- 43.3%), B- 26.8 SA/D (M- 17.9), B- 126.7D/L (M-157.4).
No doubt Bava 25 will be a much faster boat with a much bigger overall stability and even in regards to safety stability and AVS, probably it is not worse, because the bigger Muscadet B/D will be probably compensated by the bigger draft, and a more efficient fixed keel (with the foil in cast iron and the ballast in lead).
The modern chinned hull seems quite nice to me and I will not be surprised if this boat has a very good sail performance. Note that contrary to the modern tendency this boat, even if relatively beamy, has fine bow entries.
It will be a success, or not, depending on the price, that has to be low. Probably a good idea was to offer also this boat as a kit, already cut and ready to assemble at home.
That would enlarge the market niche for this boat, which could be sold that way to clients outside Europe.
It seems simple enough to be mounted and assembled by most, not demanding special skills, but only time and space. That would make it less expensive and would conform with the original idea: a cruiser for all, even the ones that don't have much money.
Specifications are still a bit vague and they don't know yet how much the boat will cost. We know that it can be powered by an inboard electric motor or by an outboard, and will have a chemical WC. The interior has a height of 1.50m and that should be enough to sit comfortably in the interior.
I have been a bit reluctant about posting about the new Solaris 50. I still love the previous 50, that was elected 2016 Yacht of the year, and I did not see any reasons for changing it, except out of detail. The boat is fast, with an excellent interior and with potential for good storage.
In fact, the reasons for changing had nothing to do with having a better hull or a better sailing boat, but with providing a better cruising boat, for the ones that are never tired of having more interior volume and more space, and those are today the big majority.
There are several very positive points regarding that increase in volume: the garage is now separated from the two lateral spaces for storage, and that was possible because the dinghy enters the garage longitudinally and not laterally, which makes it also easier to get the dinghy in and out.
The two large storage spaces are accessed by the cockpit with a third upper access to the dinghy itself. The sail locker and the forward crew cabin are now bigger, and a very useful technical space was created between the two aft cabins without diminishing their size.
In regard to storage and place for technical equipment, like water maker or generator, the previous 50 had a problem: all the aft space (dinghy garage) was a semi-wet space because it is impossible to prevent some water from entering through the large garage door, that sometimes is partially submersed (when the boat heels).
Above, the new Solaris 50, below the old model
A very humid place and therefore not appropriate for most equipment, not to mention the dinghy, not only in relation to the space it occupies but due to the possibility of moving around when the boat heels.
Not having any space between the cabins, the only option for equipment was under the aft bunks, a space normally needed for another type of storage (provisions, pilot books, bikes, and so on).
That was, in regards to cruising, the biggest limitation of the previous boat, which could lead to the sacrifice of one of the aft cabins. That problem is solved in the new 50, but at some costs in regards to overall sailing performance, and even if they resisted the popular tendency of having large bow entries, to allow for a larger forward cabin, the beam was increased substantially, from 4.55 to 4.78m.
Above, the new 50, below, the old one
Solaris does not give hull length, only LOA and in that regard, the two boats are very similar, the new one slightly longer (15.50 to 15.40m) and with a bigger LWL (14.68 to 14.25). The older version displaces 14200kg while the new one displaces 15900kg.
The older version has a 34.5%B/D with ballast in a torpedo keel with a 2.80m draft; the new one has a 30.5%B/D in a similar keel, with the same draft (2.80m). In both keels, the fin is made of resin-bonded steel and the bulb is made of lead/ antinomy, covered with epoxy.
The sail area is slightly smaller than the previous version (155m2 to 160m2). The previous boat was narrower, lighter, with a bigger B/D and with more sail area, so undoubtedly faster, especially with weaker winds and upwind.
The hull is also different in regards to aft sections and transom design: the previous model did not have all beam pulled completely aft, and allowed more heel before too much drag was created. The new one has a hull that will heel less, hitting at smaller heel angles max hull form stability, and after that, more drag.
ICE 52
An easier-to-exploit hull, increasing easiness at the cost of speed and sensations, especially upwind. Anyway, the new Solaris, as usual by Soto Acebal, has a very nice hull, just different from the previous one, but not necessarily better, designed to maximize different priorities.
The new one without losing much in performance provides without any doubt space for a better cruising interior, and not only in what regards show off and interior volume (as many times happens) but in very important and many times neglected things, like outside storage, and inside space for equipment.
Preferring one hull over the other has to do with personal choices regarding what is valued most, if sail performance, or cruising amenities. Anyway, this is not a cruiser-racer, but a performance cruiser whose major focus is on going relatively fast with a small crew, or even solo, offering at the same time a voluminous, and comfortable interior.
First, the new S50, then the older model, below, ICE 52
That explains why both boats have a simplified running rigging, with only 4 winches near the steering wheel(s), with a self-tacking jib and without traveler for a genoa or traveler for the main. On a boat this size (and sail power) it makes sense if the main goal in what regards sail hardware choice is to warrant that it can be easily sailed solo, or with a short crew.
The older version could optionally be equipped with a more efficient running rigging, 6 winches and travelers, at an increased cost, but if that could make some sense on the previous version with a faster hull, it does not make much sense on this one, even if it is probably possible.
Above, the new S50, then the older model, last, ICE 52
On this one there is something that I find profoundly disagreeable and that would rule out this boat for my personal use, the almost inexistent seating place to sail the boat. Don't take me wrong, I don't need or like seats behind the wheel, but I do like to have a comfortable place to steer the boat from the side. In this boat, and contrary to the previous one, there is just a ridiculously small seat, that seems to appear as an afterthought.
Nobody steers for a long time a sailboat on foot behind the wheel (only while racing with frequent helmsman changes), but this is the only comfortable place this boat offers to hand steer. I guess they just assumed this yacht would be sailed on auto-pilot almost full-time.
Sure, most cruising boats, including mine, are most of the time sailed on auto-pilot while cruising, but anybody that likes sailing will like to hand steer the boat when the conditions are more difficult when the yacht is sailing fast when only a knowledgeable hand on the wheel can keep it at that speed. That is what sailors who like to have fun while sailing do, and sometimes for hours....but not standing, at least not all the time because it ends up being tiring.
New Solaris 50. Look at the seat for the helmsman
It is hard for me to understand how a boat that is about performance cruising, and that will be owned by a fair percentage of sailors that like to sail, and to hand steer on these conditions, does not offer a comfortable seating place to enjoy sailing.
The evolution from the previous model, (auto-pilot sailing included) marks the continuation of Solaris yachts towards the main market, a less sportive one, continuing to offer relatively fast and elegant boats, now with a bigger interior.
If someone desires what Solaris used to provide a decade ago, boats more aimed at the cruiser-racing market, or more sportive, faster performance cruisers, demanding an experienced sailor, then the boat to get is the ICE 52.
ICE 52 is slightly longer, with a 15.80 LOA (versus 15.50), with less beam (4.65 to 4.78m), lighter (12500 to 15900kg), with a bigger B/D (36.8% to 30.5%), on a similar keel with about the same draft and more sail area (157 to 155m2).
Being a more sportive boat the ICE comes with travelers for the genoa and the main and with 6 winches and a running rigging less simplified, allowing for better sail control, and more work (and knowledge) to have everything correctly trimmed. It demands an experienced sailor.
New Solaris 50
Solaris and ICE are very well-built boats. ICE has the possibility to be built fully in Carbon or Carbon and E-glass fiber, using epoxy resins, and, except for the custom ICE building and the use of epoxy (that allows for a lighter boat), they have many things in common in what regards building, even if the one of ICE is a bit superior.
Solaris uses E-glass, Airex closed cell foam vacuum bagged sandwich, using polyester resins for the hull and deck. Main bulkheads, and the one forward, are made in sandwich and all the composite and plywood bulkheads are resin bonded and laminated to the hull and deck.
Previous Solaris 50
Transverse and longitudinal reinforcements are made in E-glass and laminated with epoxy resin to the hull. In the high-load areas, reinforcements with unidirectional and bi-directional Carbon fabrics are used and the Airex core is replaced with a higher-density foam or marine plywood.
This allows for a stronger, lighter, and more rigid hull, but much costlier to build than the ones from the bigger main brands, which are built using mostly single skin and a contre-moule, plywood bulkheads and bonding agents to hold everything together.
ICE 52, a good quality interior, a bit less exuberant than the one on the Solaris
Below, previous Solaris 50, sailing to Australia, with a Sprayhood
Even having these boats a superior built, with more B/D, allowing them to be stronger and with better safety stability than most, inevitably there will be always many that will say that these boats are not ocean-worthy, and are only built for the Mediterranean.
This misconception originates from the images of these boats that are portrayed on the brand's website or on the images of Solaris tests in magazines, due to the provided yachts, without a mounted sprayhood, a bimini, or solar panels.
Below, Solaris 47 with sprayhood and two biminis
Today even mass-production boats are portrayed for publicity purposes without sprayhoods or biminis, partly because test sailors from magazines do not criticize the fact, and because they look faster and more beautiful in the eyes of the majority.
But of course, in the real world the Solaris or ICE that are used for extensive cruising, and they are many, are equipped with sprayhood, bimini, and some with solar panels. Typically on a boat this size with two biminis. They are available as options and mounted by dealers.
Solaris' interior quality is top, the design is even better and this boat looks particularly well sorted out, especially in the saloon.
Ice has also a high-quality interior but I would say that it is a more discreet one.
Solaris interior goes with the outside and it would be harder to find a cruising boat, beamy and with relatively high freeboards, that overall looks as well as the Solaris, especially at this time when almost all cruisers, even the very expensive ones, look fat, due to high free-boards and huge beams.
Yes, the new Solaris 50 is considerably beamier than the previous model and more than ICE 52, but it maintains slender bow entries, a not-too-excessive freeboard, and the max beam of 4.78m is not that big if compared with the one of the much smaller Hanse 468 (4.79m).
If we look at better-built boats, the beam the Hallberg Rassy 50 is 5.00m, the new Contest 49/50 beam is 4.90m and the same happens with almost all newly designed main market cruising sailboats, either from the main brands or from luxury ones.
Above and below, new Solaris 50
ICE 52 seems to be the best option if one wants a faster cruiser, if one does not care much about speed or sailing with lighter winds, doesn't mind the yacht looking a bit fat, and wants an even bigger interior, then the best options seem to me the Contest 49CS and the Hallberg Rassy 50. I have posted about them here:
What about price? Well, due to the way it is built, the quality of materials, the finish, and the quality of the interiors, it cannot be an inexpensive sailboat, but I would say that it has a better price (like ICE) than some other well-built luxurious brands. It costs around 542 000 euros standard without VAT.
Of course, a yacht fully equipped with VAT will be much more expensive but if we compare this price with the one of the Hallberg Rassy 50, or Contest 49CS, that cost without VAT more than one million euros, I would say that it is a very interesting price, for the ones that can afford it.
Maybe some think that I am praising too much this yacht. Well, the Solaris 50 was already tested by the biggest world sail magazine, Yacht.de, by one of the most experienced sail testers, who has already tested hundreds of sailboats and is difficult to impress, I am talking about Michael Good, since 2005 test editor of Yacht magazine, that, after having tested the Solaris 50 said:
"A true Gran Turismo and a feast for the senses: The look is simply stunning, the sailing characteristics excellent, the workmanship first class. Solaris Yachts in Italy is setting new standards for exclusive performance cruisers that other manufacturers find it difficult to match. The brand new 50 can underpin this reputation."
You can read the full article here, and have access to exclusive and very good pictures.
I am getting a bit tired of writing about boats that, for one reason or another, I would not have, whatever the sail and cruising program, but they are interesting because, for one reason or another, they are better than the competition, and therefore a good option for some.
This one will particularly suit a cruiser who wants a boat with a huge and nice cruising interior, with some reasonable sail ability (to save some diesel in good sailing conditions) and a big engine for cruising at slow revs (and for safety too), a boat with good overall stability and better safety stability than average.
Don't take me wrong, I know that this is what most cruisers want, and therefore most mass-production cruisers are designed to satisfy these requirements, and it is with those boats that the new Elan Impression 43 has to be compared.
Like all mass-produced yachts, the Elan Impression 43 is designed to look what it is not, a fast boat. Its slim cabin contrasts strongly with its fat underbody and with the bow's large entries.
Maybe a too-big contrast that instead of making the boat look more elegant, gives it a slightly odd look, like a lady with a slim upper body, huge hips, and a big ass.
The Elan 43 is, in fact, a 42ft sailboat, with a 12.82m HL and a 13.60 LOA (including bowsprit). It has a 4.25m beam, and 11.110kg displacement. It compares with the smaller Dufour 430 (41ft) which has more beam (4.30) and it is lighter (9700kg) and with the also smaller Jeanneau 449 (41.5ft) which has a similar beam (4.29m) and is also lighter (8561 kg). Bavaria, Hanse or Beneteau don't have comparable boats in size, they are either bigger or smaller.
Two things stand out, the Elan 43 is heavier and not as beamier as most big brand yachts and, in what regards that, it is similar to Jeanneau, and that means they are the narrowest yachts (even if beamy) among the mass-produced big brands.
In regards to weight, things can look different if we consider that the Elan is by far the boat with more ballast, 1261kg more than the Jeanneau, and 941kg more than the Dufour, and even considering that the Jeanneau and the Dufour have more draft (2.2 and 2.10 to 1.95m) and a slightly more efficient keel, it would not compensate the bigger Elan B/D (31.9%) that compares with Jeanneau 26.6% and Dufour 26.8%.
That means that a big part of that displacement difference is ballast, and that is the kind of extra displacement I don't mind having, quite the contrary.
Above, Jeanneau SO 440, below Dufour 430
Therefore the Elan will have a bigger and better overall stability (heavier) and also better safety stability (positive stability over 60º), and that, if it is as well built as the Jeanneau or the Dufour, will make it a better bluewater sailing boat, even if that does not necessarily mean faster.
In regard to speed, these boats with their large bow entries and large beams, don't have fast hulls. The bigger Elan B/D can improve sailing ability in strong winds, beam reaching, and especially upwind.
But with lighter winds the Dufour and the Jeanneau will be faster, having a considerably bigger SA/D.
Being a more stiff boat with bigger stability the Elan can carry more sail than the other two, but that is not the case according to the proposed sail plan. The three boats have more or less the same sail area, but the Elan will be able to maintain full sail with more wind, and will reef later than any of the others.
Above, Salona 41, Below, Dehler 42 and Jeanneau SO 440
In what regards building, I asked but I did not receive the Elan standard specifications, but they say the hull is built using their vacuum-assisted infusion lamination process and the vacuum-assisted infusion lamination is applied also to the vertical and lateral stringers. If that is true (and not an option) and if the hull is a sandwich one (you have to check it out), it will make for a better-built hull, more resistant to flexion than the ones of Jeanneau or Dufour, that are monolithic hulls with a "contre-moule" bonded to the hull.
The interior is nice, with the exception of the grey cabinets, which they will probably offer as an option with the same wood finish as the rest of the interior. The mast is a deck-stepped one with just what appears to be a very small compression post. That would leave me a bit worried, but you will find the same in most mass-produced cruising boats, including the Jeanneau and the Dufour, even if the one in the Elan seems to be even smaller.
Maybe that's just in the drawings.
In regards to sail hardware, the Elan follows big mass producers, presenting a very simplified one, with 4 winches, apparently without the possibility of upgrading to a 6 winch system.
The standard boat comes, like the two others with a self-tacking jib, with optional travelers for a genoa and without a traveler for the main, It can have an in-mast furler for the main or a single-line reefing system.
Above Elan, Below Jeanneau
For the ones who want a true motorsailer, with a capacity of facing almost any sea while motoring the Elan would be ideal because it offers an option for an 80hp engine! and also as an option a 470L water tankage.
But in what regards long-range cruising it is not all good news and if the inside storage is good, with plenty of cabinets and enough space between the two aft cabins to install equipment, like a generator or a watermaker, the outside space notwithstanding a nice sail locker and two cabin lockers under the seats does not offer a large cockpit aft locker, but three smaller aft lockers that do not take advantage of all available space, that is left unused.
Above Dufour, below Dehler and Salona.
All in all a nice boat, an option to the existing mass-produced big brands, and a better one, if frequent ocean crossings are part of the program.
If for ocean crossings, on the trade winds, the Elan sail area will be sufficient, for coastal cruising in lighter winds it will not be a match for Jeanneau or Dufour and will have to motor more.
If like me, you like to sail, dislike motoring, and for living comfortably aboard you don't need huge standing heights or large space volumes, other than the necessary space to live with comfort (space today is viewed like a luxury), you would be better with a Salona 41 or a Dehler 42.
They are as well built (or better) than the Elan 43 impression, offer equivalent safety stability (even if Salona overall stability would be smaller), have more resistant keel stepped masts, will keep sailing when the others have to motor, will sail much faster, and will be much more enjoyable to sail, not to mention that they will waste a lot less diesel.
Above and below, Elan Impression 43
Yes, I know, they both are older designs and have not been replaced because demand for really good cruising sailboats, with emphasis on the sailing, has been small, but even so, they are much better sailboats than any of the others, and contrary to what their names suggest they are not significantly smaller than the Dufour 430 or the Jeanneau SO 440, that have a 12.50 and 12.64m HL while the Salona 41 and the Dehler 42 have 12.50 and 12.42m HL.
The main difference between these two different types of boats is not length, but beam, B/D, and much narrower bow entries.
In regards to the difference between bow entries, just compare the hull shape, that is visible on the interior layouts.
While the Dufour and the Jeanneau have 4.30m and 4.29m beams the Salona and the Dehler have 3.89 and 3.91m. Regarding B/D, the Dufour and the Jeanneau have 26.8% and 26.6% while the Salona and the Dehler have 33.0% and 32.2%.
Both the Salona and the Dehler have not only more sail area upwind than the Dufour or the Jeanneau, but they develop less drag and therefore they will be considerably faster and will need less sail area to sail at the same speed, which makes them easier to sail in difficult circumstances.
They also offer more and better sail hardware that allows them better control of the sails and a better and more effective sail shape, but even if you want to reduce the sail hardware to a minimum (because you don't want to trim the sails) and want the main sail traveler mounted over the cockpit (for having a big bimini) even so, they will sail much better and faster than the Dufour or the Jeanneau.
The only point that can be disadvantageous regarding cruising is the bigger heel angle that both the Salona and the Dehler need to sail faster, especially upwind.
But you cannot make omelets without breaking eggs: the bigger heel is necessary to extract more power from the keel and to make the bigger B/D be worthwhile, in terms of extra power.
That will allow a much better pointing ability, in good conditions something like an 8º to 10º difference, that in what regards VMG against the wind makes for a big difference, that will be even bigger when that difference allows these boats not to tack and maintain course, while the others will have to tack.
Of course, if you, like many, prefer to motor upwind then nothing of this will be relevant and the huge 80hp engine on the Elan Impression 43/ will make all the difference, in a positive way, even if the large beam and large bow entries will make going against the waves a very uncomfortable ride.
I don't like much the Dehler interior design, even if the layout and quality are good, but the interior design of the 42 will probably be modified, as it was already done in the 38 and 46, with a new SQ version, making it a much more attractive one, even if not as voluminous as Elan 43 interior.
Regarding prices, the Elan costs without VAT at the shipyard, 270 000 euros, about the same as the Jeanneau, Dufour and Dehler.
Of course this is an indicative price because after having the sailboat equipped the way you want (and need), the prices can be quite different, and if you will never have in the Dehler or Salona the interior volume the others offer, it is also true that you will not have available in any of the others the sailing equipment that Dehler, or Salona, offers as optional.
.jpeg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
%20(1).jpg)