OCEANIS 41.1, JEANNEAU 419, DUFOUR 40e/412, DEHLER 42, ELAN A5, SALONA 41, BAVARIA 41.

Dufour 40e

No, I had not a madness attack but Quique Valdivia made me so many questions regarding these boats that it makes no sense replying to that on a comment since I believe his questions have interest to many and if I am having a lot of work, at least i will make it profitable to more than one.

Dufour 40e

The first question: How does compare the Dufour performance with the Dehler 42?

They are the same type of boat. The one closest is the 40e. The Dufour is a much older design and you can notice it on the stern design. Sail area and weight are not very different but in what regards building while the Dehler uses a sandwich hull and a carbon reinforced structure for the keel the Dufour uses only sandwich on the non immersed part of hull and a system similar to Beneteau or Jeanneau with single skin and a inner moulded body (contre-moule) on the bottom with laminated structural framing.

I don't know why (probably due to racing rating) the previous version of the Dufour (older than 2006) have a bigger B/D ratio, closer to the one of the Dehler, the newer versions have a considerably smaller B/D ratio. The older use a molded cast lead keel the new one a more modern keel with a lower CG and probably that will compensate the difference in ballast weight. Anyway the Dehler has also a very efficient keel and considerably more ballast ratio.

 Both are good boats, well built but I would prefer the Dehler not only because it is a newer design but also because I like more the way it is built and because the bigger B/D will give it a better final stability.
http://www.dufour-yachts.com/documents/description-40e.pdf

The second question: Even though the Dufour 40E hull construction might not be as strong as the Dehler, would the quality of Dufour might still be durable for long term (i.e 15-20 years) under normal coastal cruising?

Dehler 42

I did not said that the Dehler 42 is stronger than the Dufour 40e. Both are well built boats,  using vacuum infusion or injection techniques. Those techniques  will allow stronger boats for the same weight. I don't believe any of them will have any problem in 15 or 20 years use, given normal maintenance, in coastal or offshore use. In fact the first Dufour 40 performance are now 13 years's old and I don't know of any particular problems with them. They still maintains a good resale value and it is one of the best and more modern boats of that era on that price range. An interesting buy as an used boat.

Dehler uses an integral sandwich hull while Dufour uses in the immersed part a single skin and a contre moulded bottom. Those systems have advantages and disadvantages. Weight for weight Sandwish is much stronger in what regards everything except possibly abrasion but has the disadvantage of  a possible (but rare) water intrusion that with time can create some problems even if the core is closed cell foam, as it is the case.

The system of a contre moule has the disadvantage of making very difficult to verify if everything is alright in what regards keel support structure and in case of de-bonding or needed reparation due to an hard grounding, makes the reparation much more difficult. That system is not very different than the one used by Jeanneau or Beneteau with the diference those brands use contre moule not only on the bottom but on a big part of the hull.

The third question: What would be the "minimum ideal" B/D be for the type of boats we are discussing here?

Old massive keel on the Dufour 40

You cannot look only at B/D to have a measure of a boats stability, not even regarding AVS or final stability. Type of keel and its efficiency as well as draft are as important. Regarding that have a look here:

http://interestingsailboats.blogspot.pt/2014/03/stability-1-misleading-information.html and also here, an interesting article by Dufour Yachts about keels: http://www.dufour-yachts.com/fr/community/articles/99/dufour-insider-keels

As you can see, regarding B/D you cannot put things like that. There is not a "minimum ideal". Regarding an acceptable stability all boats have to pass RCD standards and that in what regards safety stability, warrants the minimum that is considered safe for each type of use, on this case, Class A, that means Offshore use.

The keel used now on the Dufour 40

There is a minimum but in what I am concerned stability cannot bee too much and more is always better. Modern sailboats use two ways to get stability (putting it on a simplified way) trough ballast and trough hull form stability that is directly linked with beam. Hull form stability is very relevant to the stability that is used while sailing, to conter act the moment created by the wind on the sails, but serves almost nothing in what regards final stability and AVS and that is why it is important to have as much coming from the keel/ballast as we possible can.

Normally this type of boats (performance cruisers) have a lot more stability coming from the keel/ballast than main market mass production boats and therefore have a better final stability and a better AVS. Talking about "minimum ideal" does not make sense but in what concerns me if I could have a performance boat with an efficient deep keel with over 40% of his weight on ballast it would be what I would chose.

Knierim 49

However, the same way that it is inexpensive to build boats with a lesser righting moment coming from the ballast (that's why almost all main mass market boats have a relatively small B/D ratio) to built the kind of boats I would prefer, with a very big B/D, is VERY expensive since the loads generated by the ballast/big draft will be huge and the boat has to have a very strong structure and to be very strong. As an example you can have the Knierim 49, a very fast boat that can go as fast as an Outremer 51, very seaworthy and with a B/D ratio of 35% on a 3m draft high performance keel.

If you chose to have a keel with 2,2m draft instead and the same RM, than the needed B/D would rise probably to 40% or over. So, minimum and ideal are contradicting terms in what regards B/D on a modern sailboat, unless we are talking about something over 45%, or talking about what would be preferable to get a good performance in what regards compensated results in racing. Many times a bigger ballast ( bigger RM) can be not ideal in what regards IRC racing, but hardly in what regards pure performance or seaworthiness, if the boat is designed taking into account that.

The fourth question: I live in Peru were the fleet is small and we only see Beneteau,  Jeanneau and Dufour boats. Are Elan, Salona brands at the same level as Beneteau, Jeanneau or are considered in Europe as better quality brands?

Jeanneau 419

Not an easy question LOL. First of all, as I have been trying to say not all boats from a brand are equal specially when brands like Beneteau, Elan or Dufour have two different series of boats.

On all of them performance cruisers are more expensive, as I have explained on the post about the Dehler 42, not only because they need to have more power (stability) as because they have more power they have to be built strongly to be able to handle that power without breakage. Also the sailing hardware is, for the same reason, of better quality  and masts come inside the boat and are posed over the keel. All that increases prices.

Since we talk about Dufour lets look at the new Dufour 412 (that is basically a 410) and compare it with the Dufour 40e: We can see that in what regards B/D there is no diference, with  both boats having 29% with similar keels and similar Draft (2.10m) a not usual situation and that contributes to explain why the Dufour GL is more expensive than a Beneteau Oceanis 41: Both boats, the Oceanis and the GL have a similarly big beam but the Oceanis has 27% on a less efficient keel with a bit less draft (2.05m).

Dufour 410GL

The biggest diferences regarding the two Dufours regards the type of hull, offering the 410 much more hull form stability (and that means that has an overall bigger stability), with a considerable bigger beam (4.20m to 3.90m) and in what regards hull built. 

The 410 is a single skin hull and only on the bottom uses the same building techniques of the 40e, with a contre moule. That means that the Dufour 40 hull, that is a vacuum infused sandwich hull over waterline, will be much stronger specially in what regards flexing efforts.

In what regards B/D ratio the Dufour 40e is not an example in what regards performance cruisers the same way the Dufour 410/412 and the Jeanneau 409/419 are not in what regards main mass production cruisers. The Jeanneau 419 has 29% of B/D with a keel similar to the one of Oceanis, a less performant keel (meaning needing more ballast to do the same job) than the one of the Dufours. The Jeanneau beam is between the ones of the two Dufours.

Oceanis 41

The Jeanneau hull is similar to the one of the Dufour GL with single skin hull a contre moule for the bottom and partially the sides. The contre moule is bonded and stratified. Similar to what has the Beneteau except that here the contre-moule is only bonded. 

The Bavaria 41 uses, like on the Dufour 40e, a sandwich hull, that means, double skin hulls over the waterline with a resin impregnated foam core (does not use vacuum infusion), monolithic single skin below and a composite structure for the keel and shrouds laminated and bonded to the hull.

Bavaria uses on the 41 one keel similar to the ones of Oceanis and Jeanneau but with a bigger B/D ratio: 31% for the same draft of the Oceanis 41 and the same beam of Jeanneau 419 weighting about more 1T, seeming to indicate that it is a stronger boat.

Salona 41

The Salona 41, that belong to the same category of Dufour 40e has, like the Dehler 42, a double skin hull made using vacuum infusion with reinforcements on slamming zones of the hull. As the back bone of the boat, to distribute the loads of the keel and rig, it was a stainless steel structure and carbon reinforcements, something that is only normally used on more expensive boats.

The Salona has a B/D of 32% on a 2.0m keel similar to the ones of Dufour. To that Ballast we could join the 500kg of the steel structure on the bottom of the boat that also contribute to boat stability. Salona uses high quality vinylester resins and the 41, with a superior built, quality weights only 400kg less than the SO 419 indicating a strong boat, since it is built in a superior way.

Elan E5

Elan has two lines of sailboats one that they call Impression and other they call the performance one. Like with the rivals the performance one has better quality and the cruising one is so ugly that I will pass any comment (even if I have heard that they are well built boats). Their 40fter is now denominated E5, that is basically the former Elan 400. The boat as a B/D of 37% on a keel as performant as the ones of Dufour (even more, like the one of Dehler) on a 2.20m draft.

The Elan E5 has a sandwich hull made using vacuum technology, uses high quality resins and  a structural composite structure to distribute the loads from the keel and rig. The boat weights about as much as the Salona and has the same beam. Let me remind that the Dehler 42 weights a lot more (1.5T more) that the built techniques are not very different from Elan and even if the resins on the basic version of Dehler can be of inferior quality (and that means more quantity has to be utilized, therefore more weight) that diference in weight, specially regarding a boat like Jeanneau or Oceanis will indicate a considerably stronger boat.

Dehler 42

Let me point out again that the Dehler 42 has a B/D ratio of 32.4% with a high performance keel on a draft only matched here by the Elan: 2.20m. That does not mean that the Dehler cannot have a lesser draft but in that case it will have a keel with more ballast and a bigger B/D to compensate (35% for a 1.98m draft).

Probably the Dehler is not a match in speed in what regards the Elan, the Salona or my own boat even considering a much more expensive top specification version but in what regards cruising it makes all the sense, offering very good speed, a very good stability that comes not only from the superior B/D ratio, the hull stability but also from a superior displacement regarding the other performance cruisers. Probably not as fast as the other performance cruisers on most situations, but in a blow going upwind, that would not only the boat were I would like to be but also probably the fastest of all of these.

Regarding  vacuum infusion and double skin sandwich hulls to be better building technologies, some good articles that explain why:

https://www.google.pt/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=10&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjBqc306bPKAhWKnRoKHWEbD6QQFghOMAk&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.materialstoday.com%2Fdownload%2F79617%2F&usg=AFQjCNFow16poepwokJFzaQyP3Q4evg0PA&sig2=V0y8owslxSiNPNF-E_oeeQ&bvm=bv.112064104,d.ZWU

http://www.compositesworld.com/knowledgecenter/closed-molding/Closed-Mold-Process/Vacuum-Infusion-Process
http://www.boatdesign.net/articles/foam-core/

DEHLER 42

Beautiful design by Judel-Vrolijk, on the classic side, a boat that should be a very interesting proposal to all that like sailing and cruising, with many options that can make it faster or slower, more expensive or less expensive, more adapted to a dual propose utilization (cruiser-racer) or only fit for cruising.

 It is not a completely new boat but an upgrade of the existent Dehler 41; the same hull with new built materials, in what regards the less expensive version (closed foan instead of balsa) and most of all a much nicer cabin design and I hope a much nicer interior, since the one of the 41, the first boat since Dehler was bought by Hanse, was ugly.  In any of the cases, even on the lesser specification version, a better sailboat than a Beneteau, Hanse, Bavaria, Jeanneau or Dufour GL.

And that is a thing most cruisers seem not to understand: they look at a sailboat like this and only see a sailboat with a slighter smaller interior (less fat) and associate the sleek lines to racing thinking that it is designed for racing and that a main market mass production boat is a better cruising boat, safer and stronger.

Well it is a worse one, unless you cannot live comfortably on the slightly less spacious space these type of boats (Salona, Arcona, Comfortina, Solaris) offer because in what regards all the rest these boats are better, offering a much better sailing hardware, better building (hull and structure) more seaworthiness, with a better stability and most of all a better final stability. And off course, they sail better in a more comfortable way, specially in bad weather upwind.

But the truth is that most cruisers assume that main market cruising boats are safer than these ones just because they are fatter and most chose, sailboats by the interior they can see on boat shows, with a big help from their wives. That really pisses me because makes these type of boats, better sailboats, a species in extinction. It seems Beneteau is going to finish with its First line, the one that was on the origin of the Brand and we see Grand Soleil, that always had made this type of boats, starting to make fat boats. Not commercially interesting this type in what regards mass production boats.

So what you can get better on this boat even if you chose an inexpensive downgraded version that is not much more expensive than a Beneteau or a Jeanneau?: You can get a vacuum infused foam sandwich hull using  vinylester resins on the outer layers you get carbon reinforced hull structure laminated to the hull to distribute keel and rig forces, and all that means a stronger boat. You get higher quality sailing hardware, bigger winches, you get a sailboat with a more comfortable motion, you get a sailboat with a better stability and a bigger B/D ratio, a more seaworthy sailboat, you get a faster sailboat.

All this seems  to be completely ignored by sailors when they buy a sailboat and I believe that most disregard all this by ignorance, assuming that Beneteaus and Jeanneaus are built the same way, with the same materials, have just a bigger interior and are slower. Well, I hope this small rant contributes to clean the waters.

Regarding the boat itself there is not much to say, it is a kind of classic boat regarding this type of boats so there is nothing really special about it, except that it is a very nice design and offers a very big list of options that can make of a basic boat different sailboats with very different performances and prices. Curiously the boat is more pointed to cruisers than to serious cruising-racers not offering even on its higher specification a racing top specification.

The Dehler 42 weight can go from 9350kg to 8450kg, possibly less with carbon spars, the draft can go from 1.98m to 2.40m with different types of keels offered, including L ones, the sail area upwind can go from 93m2 to 99.5m2, depending on the lenght of the mast. 

Regarding the interior no images are shown but it will be an interior very similar and with the same quality of the one of the Dehler 38 or Dehler 46 and that means a very good cruising interior with a cozy look and feel. I like more the one of the 38, that seems more well proportioned and there is a fair chance that this one would be just like the 38 but better and bigger.

The basic price is very interesting at 169 900 euros but if you are interested on a boat of this size, just pick the airplane to Dusseldorf, go to the boat fair (end of this month) and they will offer you huge discounts, I bet more than the announced 50% discount on the extra packages.

http://www.yachtingpartners.com.mt/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/D42_16_PL_EUR_20150721-7d42c1.pdf

JPK 38FC

Normally I post here about new boats, this one has already 5 years and that means that a new re-make, if not a new boat, should be on the way to substitute it, except I don't think it is going to happen, or even that it is needed  and since this boat is not on this blog (the blog started in 2014) it is time to post about it because I find it one of the most interesting around.

JPK stands for Jean-Pierre Kelbert, the initials of the builder. JPK is a great guy, I knew him personally some years ago while I was looking for my next boat and made a tour of the shipyards that had boats that interested me.

 I meat at that time some very interesting guys but none as interesting as JPK. He was a racer that started building boats and still races occasionally, crewing on his client's boats and he certainly has some top racers as clients. They buy mostly two of his cruiser racers, the JPK 10.10 and the JPK 10.80.

Both boats have already won the Fastnet  and the Transaquadra. The 10.80 won the last Transquadra and its division on the Sydney-Hobart. On both, on the Transquadra (duo Transat) and on the Sydney-Hobart, JPK was part of the crew. So I can tell you that, with a vast experience of crew racing and solo racing, building winning boats, he knows exactly what he is talking about when you discuss with you your particular requirements. He can offer very positive and meaningful suggestions regarding the sailing and cruising needs of any sailor and make them happen on the boats.

That was what I felt when I talked with him regarding having a JPK 110 more adapted to cruising and solo sailing. But in the end I felt that the 110 was just a bit smaller than what I needed, specially regarding storage space and even if impressed with the boat and boat building quality I moved on. If he had already the 38FC probably I would have that boat.

FC stands for fast cruising and the boat seems to respond to all I want on a sailboat. It was not designed with racing on mind but for the ones whose principal enjoyment is cruising on a rewarding and fast boat, including offshore cruising. Compared with the 110 the 38 is bigger, more stable, easier to sail (due to a a bigger transom and more beam), has an option for a swing keel (with all the ballast on the keel), has a much bigger galley and much more storage space.

Its  small weight (5000kg), allow for the use of relatively small sails, easily manageable, the big form stability and big B/D ratio (38%) on a big draft (1.35/2.70m) gives it a huge stability and a very good reserve or final stability. A powerful easy and very seaworthy boat built with infusion vacuum techniques on a cored (20mm) hull using vinylester resins and as core Balsa light and Airex. In fact the  hull is built like the one of a racing 40 class boat (that they built too).

Many times what the builders or designers says about their boats is exaggerated but I don't think it is the case with JPK that "explains" the 38FC better than me.

"The  JPK 38 reunites the cumulative experience of offshore racing, the cruising experience and a desire to voyage combining the pleasure of sailing, the quality of life aboard and safety. Many boats are on the market but none of them really combines all these qualities:

There are boats with a good cruising interior but with a hull limited by weight resulting in a diminished sailing pleasure and an offshore seaworthiness not entirely convincing. And also boats very light, with a minimalist interior and a open type of hull but not tolerant about the overload inherent to offshore cruising. They have very flat hull sections that will be very uncomfortable going close to the wind in a seaway.

The JPK 38 FC measure 11.38 meters to 4 meters wide. It is an ideal size in our opinion in what regards simple management of navigation and boat maintenance. The sail areas will generate little effort and are easily to handle. They are complemented with a gennaker or a code 0 on a retractable carbon bowsprit, allowing an uncluttered front deck. Bow thruster and electric winch remain unnecessary comfort options.

We considered having this boat made on the hull mold of JPK Class 40 , it would be easier and less expensive but Jacques Valer (the NA) immediately felt that it was impossible to achieve a true "good cruise sailingboat" by exploiting the mold of a boat designed to weigh 4500 kg 
 when in Version cruise we would need 5500 kg.

The JPK 38 FC is a synthesis between an "open" planing boat and a "displacement" boat. A beamy and powerful hull but with the frontal sections deep enough for a good wave passage and a deeper central hull, accepting the overload needed for voyaging. The result is a stable boat capable of sailing at a very high average speed in all sea conditions. The super careful construction in infused sandwich allows a large hull volume for a light displacement of 5 T, despite a substantial ballast of 1900 kg in the deep keel version.

The low weight is the key factor on all the architecture of the boat is based. The objective is to obtain a sufficiently rigid and fast hull to quickly exceed hull speed without dragging water even under load. A boat that will be fast upwind, downwind and in light winds.

For the ones that want the best in what regards sheltered anchorage and dream to voyage to the "end of the world" we have developed our swinging keel that allows to vary the draft from 2.70 m to 1.35 m. The keel foil is made of an infused composite web and the bulbed part is lead. It provides a RM similar to the one of the fixed keel with an estimate overall weight slightly lower. The necessary interior arrangements regarding the lifting mechanism don't interfere with the habitability.

In summary, the JPK 38 FC is a true synthesis of a modern voyage boat: Convivial, easy, seaworthy and very fast."

Regarding to be very fast, even if deigned as a cruising boat and with a rating that will not make competitive in IRC compensated racing, on the last Silverrudder, the most famous Nordic solo race, with 330 competitors, a race that experienced almost all wind conditions, a JPK 38 won with such an easiness that leaved all astonished.

That particular JPK 38FC is used normally for family cruising won not only its category, "keel boat large" but was also the fastest cruiser/racer monohull in all monohull categories including fastest than any of the much bigger "XL keel boat" category. And there were some very fast boats among the beaten ones, like for instance a racing J111 very well sailed (Blur), a Xp44 and a Grand Soleil 43.

In real time the boat was only beaten by a race monohull boat and some very race oriented trimarans, beating most of them, including all Corsair and all Farrier. So I guess we can say that JPK is not exaggerating when he states that the 38FC is "very fast" ;-)

If you want to try one these guys have one for charter:
http://www.eridan-naviroise.com/jfk-38-fc.html

COMFORTINA 46

Comfortina is a German brand that always have impressed and pissed me at the same time: Why a brand that makes such beautiful crafted boats, with some of the nicest and best finished interiors I have ever seen, a brand that produces very well built boats with a quality that is evident, was unable to present a contemporary designed boat?

And I am not talking about the cozy interiors with a traditional but very nice design, but about hull design, that was hopefully outdated. The best example is the 42, still in production, that looks good, has a very nice interior but has a hull that could have been designed 30 years ago. Look at the images (on the right) to understand what I mean.

What a waste, what a pity. They know how to built great boats why can't they get a top NA do design them a more efficient hull? Well it is done now. The new 46 is designed by Dieter Blank and even if the designs and the data about the boat is still incomplete we can see already that it has a contemporary hull and Dieter Blank is known to design fast and very seaworthy boats.

The Comfortina 46 will have  a kind of classic modern look, probably a classic interior but that is were the "old"outlook finishes. The hull has very fine entries, almost all the considerable beam (4.15m) pulled back and will be proposed with two types of keels, a fixed one (2.30m or 2.60m) and a lifting keel (2.40/1,35m). 

They don't give the weight but Comfortinas are a kind of very comfortable performance cruisers, not really a cruiser-racer, but fast cruisers, not among the lightest but far from an heavy boat and this one would not be an exception. 

The boat is built in epoxy using vacuum infusion. Previous boats had cored hulls above water line and solid laminate below. I am not sure about this one since they say that the chain plates and parts of the underbody are made of carbon fiber and critical design elements are reinforced with Kevlar inserts, so possibly this will be a full cored hull with reinforced parts. That will make it even a lighter and stronger boat.

The price it is not yet public but this boat is going to be made in Poland and not, as the others, in Germany, so probably the price would be attractive regarding the quality and Poland has already a big know how in what regards to built yachts.

I would say that someone interested on a very high quality boat of this dimension, a specially well built, seaworthy fast cruiser, should have a better look at this one, specially if the program is not pointed to cruiser/racing but just to a fine fast bluewater boat. Of course, the price is not going to be the same as the one of a  Bavaria 46, but that is to be expected.

WANT TO MAKE A TRANSAT ON AN INTERESTING FAST BOAT?

They are looking for some honorary Vikings to help crew this 115ft Draken on a transat. Seems fun to me ;-)

http://wavetrain.net/news-a-views/706-calling-all-vikings-volunteer-crew-needed-for-transatlantic-voyage-on-a-115-foot-longship

HANSE 315

There is another little Hanse, a new 315. I confess that I did not take a second look at the boat when I saw it the first time. Sure it is a nice little boat but nothing specially attractive or looking anything out of the ordinary. So, why am I posted about it?

Because I start reading several test sails from magazines from different countries and all test sailors are unanimous in referring that the boat really sails very well and it is fast for a non performance boat. Looking again we can see some details that are very interesting like the control of the boom near the steering wheel, a traveller there, the option for a rudder or two wheels, a self tacking jib, a good B/D ratio for the type of boat, type of keel and draft and a very attractive price starting at 60 000 euros.

The Hanse 315 has also a very nice light and bright interior and it is no wonder to have been nominated for the European boat of the year contest. It would not surprise me if it won it on his category. Sometimes simplicity and effectiveness are underrated, sometimes not.

http://www.yachtingpartners.com.mt/yachts/hanse-315/

X4 (41ft) : FROM THE NEW SERIES OF X YACHTS

I have to say that never understood very well why X yachts have launched the XC series with the characteristic they have: Middle weight, very classical in design. Don't take me wrong, the XC series are great boats but I never understood why that type of boat would be the vision X yacht had of  a cruising boat. Maybe they just wanted to compete on the Halberg Rassy more traditional market and if it was all about that, no doubt that they accomplished the task.

But personally I would have took without any hesitation for cruising a boat from the XP line  over one of the XC. Sure, the XC has a better interior for cruising but all that weight does not make my style. I like rewarding boats to sail, even if I would like a Xp with a better cruising interior, not that the XP line has a bad one, but it is not a match for the cruising interior of the XC series.

Well it seems I am not the only one since X yacht launched a new series for me :-) and all that share my tastes, simply the X series. They describe the new line, referring to the first boat on the line, the X6 (the X4 is made according the same principles) like this:

"Utilizing the very latest state-of the art design concepts, yet unmistakably an X-Yacht, the X-Yachts designers started with a clean slate for the all-new X6. Developed to provide ultimate luxury, without sacrificing the renowned X-Yachts sailing performance, the X6 will take her owners and crew anywhere in sumptuous style and comfort...
Building upon the best features of the world beating Xcruising and Xperformance ranges, the X6 will utilize the same hi tech, low weight construction techniques as the latest generation of Xp racer-cruisers, including vacuum infused epoxy with localized carbon fiber reinforcements for strength, stiffness and stability.

The weight saved has been put to good use: allowing long-range fuel and water tanks, larger battery banks and optional equipment such as water makers and dive compressors to be fitted without sacrificing performance. The new ‘X’ range will be a luxurious and impressively fast collection of performance cruising yachts for state-of-the-art bluewater sailing".

Well, it makes sense to me ;-) The X4 will be a bit heavier than the XP series, but nothing like the XC. The new 41ft will weight 8850kg with a big B/D ratio (42.9%) for a boat with a standard draft of 2.20m and a torpedo keel. It will have a considerable beam of 3.95m (not beamy by modern standards) and that will give it a huge stability.

A L keel can also be provided, with a draft of 1.85m (and more ballast) or with the same ballast and 2.5m of draft (to compensate the less efficient keel design).

It will come with a 45hp engine, 97m2 of sail upwind, a tankage of 200L of diesel and 340L of water. First boats will be delivered next summer. I like it...maybe because it is very similar to my boat, that is just a bit less beamy and a bit lighter. My kind of cruisers ;-)