Dusseldorf boat show, the biggest on the planet for sailboats, was killed by Covid and it did not happen for two long years in a row and its survival as main boat show was questioned by many because Covid is stronger in winter, and Dusseldorf boat show takes place in late January, while many other major sailboat shows take place in the fall or summer, and brands had reoriented their promotional exhibits to those shows.
First 36
And when two major brands (group Hanse and X-yachts) announced that they would not be there, I feared for the worst. In fact this edition posed a risk because for a brand, the participation on a show like this, with several yachts involved, implies that they take the decision many months before, and then nobody knew what the conditions in winter would be, in what regards Covid, in Germany, what would be the travel restrictions and even the restrictions that could be imposed to the ones that were visiting the boat show, in what regards social distancing, use of mask.
First 36
And we all know that, when there is a need for it, the German authorities are pro-active in legislating, and are quite strict about enforcing the law.
But the ones that were afraid lost the bet, and the many that came won: no flight restrictions, nor mandatory use of masks (only in public transports), in fact I was quite surprised because I was expecting masks to be mandatory in the boat show, and thought that visitors allowed inside the boats at the same time would be less than in previous years, but no, nothing of that, and nobody is using masks on the boat show.
First 36
And in what regards sailboats on the boat show, maybe there are slightly less bigger boats but there are probably more smaller sailboats exposed, and the two big pavilions that are normally reserved for sailboats were full.
Anyway I would have come to Dusseldorf, even if the "Messe" was smaller this year because I was really missing the annual beer "treatment". I love the city, and most of all its breweries and nice people.
Dusseldorf, and some smaller cities around, have a distinct bear that they call Alt (old in German) because they still make them by the same process it was used in medieval times. It is brewed on the spot and served as fresh as possible, in fact in some breweries you can hear the wooden barrels being rolled from the brewery to the bar.
On top Pogo 36, above J112e
The number of old breweries is big for a town of 650 000 inhabitants and they are always full and not mainly with tourists but with locals. Maybe this kind of socialization makes for the warmer character of the inhabitants face to the ones of other German cities, where people go to bed earlier. Here breweries are open till midnight and one of them till 1.00 in the morning.
First boat I visited was the First 36. I was accompanied by a friend that was particularly interested in that boat. I was very curious to see if what I had written regarding the boat, just looking at pictures and dimensions, was confirmed by a visit, namely the size of the head that seemed on the drawings incredibly small to me.
Pogo 36
And yes, the head is really bad, not only due to size but for having a foldable washbasin, something that would be acceptable in a 28/30ft boat, but completely inadequate to a 36ft performance cruiser and that diminishes in much the First 36 cruising potential, specially in what regards family cruising.
The boat interior looks good, it is functional, comfortable and nice, for a fast race-cruiser and that just turns more incongruous the choice of having that ridiculous head, just for having a 3 cabin as the only layout. Who needs 3 cabins with that head?
J112e
It is so amateurish a choice that it is hard to understand as a big firm like Beneteau went for it. With 2 cabins and a space for sail storage and cruising stuff, it would be possible to make a boat with a good head.
Anyway while cruising or racing, one of the cabins has to be occupied, either with cruising stuff or with racing sails, because there is not enough storage outside for that, so why a 3 cabin layout at the cost of a decent head?
First 36
Overall the First 36 looks nice, and very beamy, but not properly innovative. In what regards that, light years away from the innovation that the First 27 brought to sailboat design, when it was designed 12 years ago (then named Seascape 27). I still think that the designer of the two boats, Sam Manuard (First 36 in collaboration with others) was conditioned in the design, and that Beneteau would have done far better letting him do freely what he does best: designing innovative sailboats, racers or cruisers.
Pogo 36 Below, J112e
For knowing more about the boat in what regards design and performance, as well suitability for different types of races, look here:
One of the most, if not the most interesting things in the Beneteau stand was the opportunity to know Lars Reisberg, the one that was going to show the First 36 to my friend.
Lars is the author of my favorite boat blog, full of interesting stuff, and very interesting interviews. It was nice to know that he knows my blog and that he truly appreciates it. If you don't know Lars' blog, here it is a link to it:
After seeing the First 36 we visited part of the competition, the J112e and the Pogo 36, both in the boat show. These two boats, plus the performance cruising version of the JPK 10.80, are the closest competitors. They are the other 36ft fast sailingboats that offer a comfortable and suitable interior for cruising.
The Pogo 36, has almost the same HL (10.86 to 11.00m) and it is an even beamier boat (4.0 to 3.8m). I believe that while racing, overall, the First will be faster (in real time), with a better performance upwind, and will have a better ratting for IRC/ORC, but downwind the Pogo is probably faster (it is lighter - 3800 kg to 4800) and overall easier to be sailed fast, by a less experienced sailor.
Pogo 36
The Pogo interior is more radical, meaning out of the usual, than the one of the First 36, maybe not as well finished, but functional, full of light and offering an all around outside view from the interior while sailing, allowing to do a watch without going outside.
It has much more storage space, namely in what refers cabinets, offering a decent head that has the disadvantage of being inside the front cabin, taking privacy to the ones that are using the cabin, and that is not the case in the First 36.
But on the First the head is so tiny that if you are big you won't be able to close the door, seated in the bowl. Taking a shower in that space should not be easy, not to mention the foldable washbasin, that you have to rise to use the toilet bowl. More about the Pogo 36:
The J112e looks like a jboat, elegant for the ones that like that kind of more classical hulls, with the beam not all pulled back. Curiously the J112e is beamier than it looks, and if it looks narrow compared to the First 36 and Pogo 36 is not because it is a narrow boat, but because the other two are very beamy boats, with all beam pulled aft.
If compared to the Sunfast 3600 many would be surprised to learn that the Jeanneau has less beam than the Sunfast (3.55 to 3.60) and that the JPK 10.80 is very close, even if beamier (3.65 to 3.60).
J112e
The 112e has a very nice, I would say, classy interior, even if the choice of colors (or even finish) of the one that was at the boat show was not the nicest I have seen. The interior finish is very good.
It has about the same cabinet storage as the First 36, but an incomparably better head, and this one offering all privacy, not intruding with any cabin or even the saloon.
J112e
It offers only two cabins, but contrary to the other two offers a truly dedicated and very functional big storage space, that can be accessed by the outside or by the inside (through the head), and because a storage space will be needed for racing (sails) or cruising it has by far, from the three, the layout that is better suited for both activities.
Compared to the First 36, it is a slightly heavier boat (5125 to 4800kg) being that difference in weight due mostly to a bigger ballast needed because it has less draft (2.10 to 2.25) and a less effective L keel. I believe this solution is taken not because the boat is not well designed but to give it the better ratio/performance, and in fact from the three this is by far the best boat in IRC/ORC racing, with many victories in major races.
First 36
Yes, I know many would say that the Pogo 36 and the First 36 would be faster in real time and in some conditions, I am sure that is true, but almost all would misjudge the J112e comparative performance.
I would say that overall a Pogo 36 is slower than a JPK 10.80 (even if in some conditions it can be faster), and regarding the First 36, even if there is not yet data to really know for sure, I would say the overall performance should be close, with different strong points. Probably the JPK 10.80 is better for racing due to a better rating, but that is another story.
Pogo 36
And a J112e is slower than a JPK 10.80, right? Well I thought that was the case, even if not by much, but then in the 2018 Spi-Ouest, being both boats raced by top teams, it was not the case. A surprisingly fast boat, the J112e:
"In the final analysis of the leading IRC boats, some fascinating facts emerge. For those four races, the J/112E beat the winning First 40.7 (with pro's and sailmakers driving) by an average of 1:56 elapsed and by 1:36 on corrected.
J112e
And, versus the JPK 10.80 Dream Pearls (a famous Fastnet Race winner), the J/112E beat them by an average 1:29 elapsed and 1:14 corrected. Perhaps even more fascinating, the brand new JPK 11.80 sailed in IRC 1 Class by owner Gery Trentesaux ("Mr JPK" and Fastnet Race/ RORC winner) and professional skipper Jimmy Pahun and a fully pro'd up crew, got beaten by the J/112E "sport cruiser" by an average 2:04 corrected on the same race track! In fact, the 11.80 (a bare-bones, semi-custom, IRC-optimized racing boat) could barely muster a 2:30 elapsed time over the J/112E family sport cruiser. Amazing."
Boat building quality and building techniques are similar on the three boats, using vacuum infusion, a cored hull (foam in the Pogo and First, balsa on the Jboat) polyester resins with an outer layer of vinylester, cored bulkheads. Regarding the way the structure and bulkheads are fixed to the hull, Beneteau and Pogo don't mention it (I assume they are bonded) on Jboats say that besides being bonded all intermediate bulkheads are also glassed to the hull and deck.
Pogo 36 cockpit
Both Pogo and First use deck steeped masts while the Jboat uses a keel steeped mast. Both systems are safe, but keel steeped masts offer additional resistance, with the disadvantage of being difficult to prevent a small entrance of water, even if there are systems that can manage that.
Last but not the least, the price, and it is with surprise that I find out that the First 36 is the more expensive at 234 130 euros, followed by the 112e that costs 222 270 euros, being the less expensive the Pogo 36 at 201 000 euros (with a fixed keel). A swing keel version costs 5000 euros more. Prices for standard boats at the shipyard without taxes.
J112e cockpit, This boat has not a fixed cockpit table option , but it has an option for a collapsible table mounted on the side, on a rail
With an European 20% VAT and equipped, ready to sail swing keel Pogo 36 will end up costing over 300 000 euros. The others should not come cheaper, but because the equipment prices for different boats can be different, to really know and compare prices, you need to have them with the same equipment.
By the way, the First 36 has won the 2023 European award for the best performance cruiser beating the Elan E6, the Grand Soleil 40, the Italia 12.98 and the Solaris 50. The result was announced at Dusseldorf. I don't understand how such a flawed 36ft cruiser (by the inadequacy of its head for cruising) can have won the award, even if they loved the way it sails.
They are choosing a performance CRUISER, and no matter how good it sails, the cruising ability is the main attribute and if one side of the equation is so inadequate as it is the case in the First 36, how is it possible to consider it better than other boats, where excellent performance meets great cruising potential, as it is for example the case with the Italia 12.98?
Thank you for the story! Regarding the voting, if you look at EBOTY at a scale of 10-15 years, Benetau group boats are there every 2-3 years, in different categories, never being a good boats in any category. Agree about Js, never been exited by aesthetics, but good sailers indeed!
Personally I find that the foldable sink is a fairly good idea and for that size of a yacht, three cabins should be the standard (it is easier to use one to store sails than to turn a storage compartment into a cabin). Thanks for the other information, quite interesting. PS: I did visit all three boats in Düsseldorf.
Some yachts of that size have a toilet with a separated shower. You should not be big, or then you did not seat on the bowl, otherwise you would have find out that you would not be able to close the door.
Saying that is a good solution for a 36ft performance cruiser makes no sense. Many 30ft boats have better toilets. That toilet is not suited for family cruising.
The First 36 is not a racer, however if the boat is used exclusively for racing that toilet would not pose a problem, you don't need to close the door.
I don't know if that is the use you are going to do to the boat, if it is going to be used for racing or solo cruising, I can understand your comment, if you are going to use it for cruising, probably your family is going to hate living in the boat, and sooner or later will force you to change it for a cruiser with a decent head.
Hello Paulo! it's a small world, I have two favorite blogs about sailing yachts: yours and Lars' blog :)
Please tell me, are there new serial offshore boats of 25-28 feet on the market now that can cross the Atlantic? Ideally with a centerboard so to dry-out on tidal flats.
Experience has shown that almost any boat can cross the Atlantic. It has all to do with the risks you are disposed to face, reasonable or not.
I would trust class A as a minimum in what regards acceptable risks. If we are talking about class A boats, then there is nothing new in what regards small boats with those characteristics.
The best options in what regards boats that can have a swing keel and are seaworthy are still the the Pogo 30, the Django 770, Mojito 888 and the RM 890. From those I would chose the Pogo, for crossing the Atlantic. Several have already done that.
I decided to look at the previous blog posts again, suddenly I missed something. And here it is - Sarch S8! This boat has the minimum comfort I need and can be towed on a trailer. But I don’t know if I’m really ready for such Spartan conditions :)
In my short list there are boats that you named. But my favorite is the Mojito 888. This boat has optimal comfort for me, a tender garage and is fast. In second place is Mojito 1088. I want to see if I need the extra space that this boat has. Why is Pogo your choice?
A little bit about yourself. I've been sailing for less than a month, and I've been swimming on the lake. I liked it and now I want to buy my own yacht. I have been studying the topic for about a year. I want to order a yacht this summer and learn how to sail while it is being built. Maybe I'm rushing things, but I don't want to spend several years cruising on charter yachts :) And yet, I'm 192 centimeters tall and I rest my head on the ceiling :) Maybe you can give me some useful advice. Tolerate a low ceiling or look for the right boat?
Hello Paulo, Very interesting to read your analysis as always. Especially as they are much more technical and in debt than any sailing magazine offer. So keep it up. When it comes to comparing the sailing qualities of these performance boats I noticed you are not presenting the ORC ratings. I found the GPH for each of the yachts on the ORC web page. FIRST 36: 583 , POGO 36: 547 and the J112e: 585. The ratings are based on advanced formulas and should reflect the performance of each yacht? Or do you find rating systems not accurate?
Hi, I suppose you are talking about GPH? They changed it (this year) for APH, that are very much the same thing, but the numbers are different. GPH stands for the time in seconds, that the yacht will takes to complete a mile.
So, contrary to IRC TCC, the higher the GPH (ORC) the slower the boat.
ORC in its more complex version (ORCI) is the best ratting system, and can make allowances for different wind conditions, but there is no perfect model and the allowances are really only on the spot in what regards around the cans races, in a limited area, not really in offshore races.
The allowances are intended to correct different performances of different sailboats with more or less wind, more or less waves, and in fact the comparative performances can vary a lot with different conditions.
There is also another factor, the potential for speed in a sailboat, to be more or less difficult to reach, and if it is very difficult, it makes the sailboat slower than what its rating indicates, and that is for instance what happens with the Pogo, that only in Transats can reach its speed potential, in what regards rating.
The best way to understand a boat speed potential, and also how good it is in compensated rating (meaning how easy it is to reach its speed potential), is looking at high profile races results, at the elapsed time and at the compensated time, taking into consideration the conditions prevailing in those races.
I have been doing that for many years and that's were my knowledge regarding sailboats and speed is based.
If you are interested in the subject there are on the blog many analyses about the performance of different boats (and hulls), on the main IRC/ORC races.
For understand better ORCI rating look here (4 pages), and put the mouse over each factor (for instance GPH) and an explanation will appear.
Yes, I know, but the ones that are on the other cabin have to enter the bow cabin to go to the head and there goes privacy.
In fact in a boat of this size and type it makes not much sense to have 3 cabins so it would make more sense to offer a bigger head with a separated shower instead of one of the back cabins plus more storage space.
That way privacy for the two cabins would be warranted, and the boat would have more space for sails and cruising stuff. Without the head at the bow, it could even have a bigger cabin plus a saillocker.
No, they don’t have to enter the bow cabin to go to the head, there is an additional bulhead (and door) between the head and bow cabin. It is a different configuration vs your picture
As you can see in the drawing on the link below, if a bulkhead is placed it will be just in face of the bed, the dor will have to open to the outside and it will be dificult to access the bed, not to mention that the cloth cabinet is out of the cabin. https://www.pogostructures.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/P-36-plan-de-presentation_31b-768x333-1.jpg
I understand that some resort to that solution due to the lack of privacy but it is a bad solution, not one that any designer would have done.
I speak because that way is how my Pogo 36 is, no need to see a drawing :-) The solution works perfectly, plenty of space between bulkhead and bed (more than half a meter probably), and the cabinet is NOT outside the cabin (just the wet locker is, as it should be. I can post pictures next time, trust me
You know space is not elastic, if you have half a meter between the bulkhead and the bed, than the bed is shorter than the one without a bulkhead because I don't believe that they had made a smaller head (that one is already small).
Any solution is good if it leaves the client happy but I bet you are not over six feet tall.
No Paulo, the bed is exactly the same in both version (194cm)! You should trust me, I own this boat. And also the head is the same. The bulkhead is not structural.
.jpg)
Thank you for the story! Regarding the voting, if you look at EBOTY at a scale of 10-15 years, Benetau group boats are there every 2-3 years, in different categories, never being a good boats in any category. Agree about Js, never been exited by aesthetics, but good sailers indeed!
ReplyDeletePersonally I find that the foldable sink is a fairly good idea and for that size of a yacht, three cabins should be the standard (it is easier to use one to store sails than to turn a storage compartment into a cabin). Thanks for the other information, quite interesting.
ReplyDeletePS: I did visit all three boats in Düsseldorf.
Some yachts of that size have a toilet with a separated shower. You should not be big, or then you did not seat on the bowl, otherwise you would have find out that you would not be able to close the door.
DeleteSaying that is a good solution for a 36ft performance cruiser makes no sense. Many 30ft boats have better toilets. That toilet is not suited for family cruising.
The First 36 is not a racer, however if the boat is used exclusively for racing that toilet would not pose a problem, you don't need to close the door.
I don't know if that is the use you are going to do to the boat, if it is going to be used for racing or solo cruising, I can understand your comment, if you are going to use it for cruising, probably your family is going to hate living in the boat, and sooner or later will force you to change it for a cruiser with a decent head.
Hello Paulo! it's a small world, I have two favorite blogs about sailing yachts: yours and Lars' blog :)
ReplyDeletePlease tell me, are there new serial offshore boats of 25-28 feet on the market now that can cross the Atlantic? Ideally with a centerboard so to dry-out on tidal flats.
Hi Ari,
ReplyDeleteExperience has shown that almost any boat can cross the Atlantic. It has all to do with the risks you are disposed to face, reasonable or not.
I would trust class A as a minimum in what regards acceptable risks. If we are talking about class A boats, then there is nothing new in what regards small boats with those characteristics.
The best options in what regards boats that can have a swing keel and are seaworthy are still the the Pogo 30, the Django 770, Mojito 888 and the RM 890. From those I would chose the Pogo, for crossing the Atlantic. Several have already done that.
Thanks Paulo!
DeleteI decided to look at the previous blog posts again, suddenly I missed something. And here it is - Sarch S8! This boat has the minimum comfort I need and can be towed on a trailer. But I don’t know if I’m really ready for such Spartan conditions :)
In my short list there are boats that you named. But my favorite is the Mojito 888. This boat has optimal comfort for me, a tender garage and is fast. In second place is Mojito 1088. I want to see if I need the extra space that this boat has. Why is Pogo your choice?
A little bit about yourself. I've been sailing for less than a month, and I've been swimming on the lake. I liked it and now I want to buy my own yacht. I have been studying the topic for about a year. I want to order a yacht this summer and learn how to sail while it is being built. Maybe I'm rushing things, but I don't want to spend several years cruising on charter yachts :) And yet, I'm 192 centimeters tall and I rest my head on the ceiling :) Maybe you can give me some useful advice. Tolerate a low ceiling or look for the right boat?
Hello Paulo,
ReplyDeleteVery interesting to read your analysis as always. Especially as they are much more technical and in debt than any sailing magazine offer. So keep it up.
When it comes to comparing the sailing qualities of these performance boats I noticed you are not presenting the ORC ratings. I found the GPH for each of the yachts on the ORC web page. FIRST 36: 583 , POGO 36: 547 and the J112e: 585.
The ratings are based on advanced formulas and should reflect the performance of
each yacht? Or do you find rating systems not accurate?
Hi,
DeleteI suppose you are talking about GPH? They changed it (this year) for APH, that are very much the same thing, but the numbers are different. GPH stands for the time in seconds, that the yacht will takes to complete a mile.
So, contrary to IRC TCC, the higher the GPH (ORC) the slower the boat.
ORC in its more complex version (ORCI) is the best ratting system, and can make allowances for different wind conditions, but there is no perfect model and the allowances are really only on the spot in what regards around the cans races, in a limited area, not really in offshore races.
The allowances are intended to correct different performances of different sailboats with more or less wind, more or less waves, and in fact the comparative performances can vary a lot with different conditions.
There is also another factor, the potential for speed in a sailboat, to be more or less difficult to reach, and if it is very difficult, it makes the sailboat slower than what its rating indicates, and that is for instance what happens with the Pogo, that only in Transats can reach its speed potential, in what regards rating.
The best way to understand a boat speed potential, and also how good it is in compensated rating (meaning how easy it is to reach its speed potential), is looking at high profile races results, at the elapsed time and at the compensated time, taking into consideration the conditions prevailing in those races.
I have been doing that for many years and that's were my knowledge regarding sailboats and speed is based.
If you are interested in the subject there are on the blog many analyses about the performance of different boats (and hulls), on the main IRC/ORC races.
For understand better ORCI rating look here (4 pages), and put the mouse over each factor (for instance GPH) and an explanation will appear.
https://www.orc.org/index.asp?id=23
I
Paulo, on the Pogo 36, most are sold with an additional optional bulkhead that separates the head from the front cabin if privacy is neeed
ReplyDeleteYes, I know, but the ones that are on the other cabin have to enter the bow cabin to go to the head and there goes privacy.
DeleteIn fact in a boat of this size and type it makes not much sense to have 3 cabins so it would make more sense to offer a bigger head with a separated shower instead of one of the back cabins plus more storage space.
That way privacy for the two cabins would be warranted, and the boat would have more space for sails and cruising stuff. Without the head at the bow, it could even have a bigger cabin plus a saillocker.
https://www.pogostructures.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/P-36-plan-de-presentation_31b-768x333-1.jpg
No, they don’t have to enter the bow cabin to go to the head, there is an additional bulhead (and door) between the head and bow cabin. It is a different configuration vs your picture
ReplyDeleteAs you can see in the drawing on the link below, if a bulkhead is placed it will be just in face of the bed, the dor will have to open to the outside and it will be dificult to access the bed, not to mention that the cloth cabinet is out of the cabin.
Deletehttps://www.pogostructures.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/P-36-plan-de-presentation_31b-768x333-1.jpg
I understand that some resort to that solution due to the lack of privacy but it is a bad solution, not one that any designer would have done.
I speak because that way is how my Pogo 36 is, no need to see a drawing :-) The solution works perfectly, plenty of space between bulkhead and bed (more than half a meter probably), and the cabinet is NOT outside the cabin (just the wet locker is, as it should be. I can post pictures next time, trust me
ReplyDeleteYou know space is not elastic, if you have half a meter between the bulkhead and the bed, than the bed is shorter than the one without a bulkhead because I don't believe that they had made a smaller head (that one is already small).
DeleteAny solution is good if it leaves the client happy but I bet you are not over six feet tall.
No Paulo, the bed is exactly the same in both version (194cm)! You should trust me, I own this boat. And also the head is the same. The bulkhead is not structural.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous description (June 25/26, 2023) is completly right, it is perfect. The drawings are not showing the reality. In reality it is much better.
ReplyDeleteI know. Paulo is talking about something he does not know and is looking at drawings of a different configuration
Delete