In article <1175899319.850924.127760@d57g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>, williamdochnahl@adelphia.net says...
I am sure this has been a topic before but what do you all think of
these. Which do you prefer and why? Just curious.
We have owned only center cockpit boats, first a Dawson 26, now an O'Day 37. One word: Privacy. And I don't just mean when we have guests on board but the ability to get away from one another or to leave the other in peace. I can muck around in the galley or even get underway without disturbing my slumbering wife in the aft cabin. These boats did not and do not have a pass through below decks. To get from one cabin to the other you have to go through the cockpit. But this also means the boat keeps a low and sleek profile where other boats of the same size that do have internal pass throughs look like floating barns and the cockpit is shallow and looks like a howdah on top of an elephant. I think you have to get to 45 frrt ot more before you get pleasing proportions in boats with a below deck pass through. Anyway, we have long been sold on the center cockpit. And oh yeah, that big breaking wave looming up behind you doesn't look so threatening from a center cockpit.
On Apr 7, 7:59 am, Gogarty <Goga...@Clongowes.edu> wrote:
In article <1175899319.850924.127...@d57g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
williamdochn...@adelphia.net says...
I am sure this has been a topic before but what do you all think of
these. Which do you prefer and why? Just curious.
We have owned only center cockpit boats, first a Dawson 26, now an O'Day
37. One word: Privacy. And I don't just mean when we have guests on
board but the ability to get away from one another or to leave the other
in peace. I can muck around in the galley or even get underway without
disturbing my slumbering wife in the aft cabin. These boats did not and
do not have a pass through below decks. To get from one cabin to the
other you have to go through the cockpit. But this also means the boat
keeps a low and sleek profile where other boats of the same size that do
have internal pass throughs look like floating barns and the cockpit is
shallow and looks like a howdah on top of an elephant. I think you have
to get to 45 frrt ot more before you get pleasing proportions in boats
with a below deck pass through. Anyway, we have long been sold on the
center cockpit. And oh yeah, that big breaking wave looming up behind
you doesn't look so threatening from a center cockpit.
Amen. We were open to all when we started, having no design
specifications about center or aft cockpit, but the aft cabin, and
related separation, was the seller for us.
We've only had a center cockpit, and I don't think I'd like an aft cockpit boat .
However, we (well, Lydia) nixed the walkovers because she didn't want
to have to make the climb, in potentially rough or wet circumstances,
between living and sleeping areas.
We were the opposite. Bob wanted the WT (walkthrough) because he could walk into the engine room, and there's more room in there than in the WO (walkover) I didn't like the WT version of our boat (CSY) because
a) I felt the cockpit was up too high. It made me dizzy. Acerbated by the fact (unique to our kind of boat) that the WTs all had a tall mast (65 feet) and a shoal draft (5 feet) which made the boat very tender and it felt tippy to me.
This is even though our boat is technically a 44' (actually measures over 48 feet if you count the bow pulpit and the stuff at the stern.
b) There were more steps down to the saloon, and only one companionway rather than two. It felt more closed in c) The galley was not set up as well. On the WO (walkover) the sink was almost on the centerline and was perpendicular to the length of the boat. On the WT, it was necessarily on the side. The WO had chest type refrigerator/freezer which keeps the cold in it - the WT had an upright style. d) The nav. table was more accessible to the cockpit on the WO e) The cockpit was smaller and not as comfortable. I couldn't sit behind the wheel and put my feet on the floor. Some of the WTs that I saw later had a contoured seat and raised floor behind the wheel, but the one we lived on for a week didn't, so I didn't know that.
I totally didn't mind coming up and into the cockpit in order to get to the other half of the boat, but we have a cockpit enclosure so it isn't wet to do that.
The other differenced on OUR boat (i.e. CSY) is that the WO has 400 gallons of water and 100 gallons of fuel, and that tankage was removed to make room for the WT part. They have fuel and water tanks stashed around in various places and they have less total tankage.
Also it is way harder to get the engine out for a replacement in the WT - it has to be dragged out through the saloon and up the companionway, and the WO has hatches in the cockpit floor and the engine can just be lifted out.
However, with a 45' boat, our cockpit protrusion from the deck line is
only a few inches, so it's a good visual line, we think.
I am sure this has been a topic before but what do you all think of
these. Which do you prefer and why? Just curious.
Oh, that fabulous after saloon! Standing room, full double bed lying fore and aft, each side with its own long shelf and stowage . . . all on 41ft. Now what aft cockpit vessel could offer sssuch a lovely forn****orium?
In article <evct8o$fe0$1@news.freedom2surf.net>, nomail@jimb.f2s.com says...
I am sure this has been a topic before but what do you all think of
these. Which do you prefer and why? Just curious.
Oh, that fabulous after saloon! Standing room, full double bed lying fore
and aft, each side with its own long shelf and stowage . . . all on 41ft.
Now what aft cockpit vessel could offer sssuch a lovely forn****orium?
Thirty seven feet is not quite so roomy. There is full standing room in the aft cabin and a full head with toilet and shower. But the berth is athwartship, not best for sleeping underway and the occupant closest to the transom is trapped. But it is plenty wide enough and long enough for the dog, too. But the headroom in the berth does leave a little to be desired. Still, it's a whole lot better than being stuffed under the cockpit.
In article <4_rSh.1619$Dl1.1074@bignews2.bellsouth.net>, joyner_k@bellsouth.net says...
What is your 37 cc? An Irwin?
No. It's a 1982 O'Day, the largest boat they built at that time. They had two CC models, a 32 and then the 37. The 32 was a roomy boat but it looked truncated. The 37 has much more pleasing lines.
I prefer walkovers, hands down. Our last two were traditional Nauticats with flush cockpit/wheelhouse floors. From a living perspective, the upper- and lower-levels are much closer in height than on w/t models, so it's not like climbing down into a cave...or climbing up, out of one. Now I'm contemplating building a Roberts Spray or something similar, and I'll use the same design--in particular, the same floor heights. For interior arrangement, the aft cabin will have an athwartships queen bed, but with inserts to make longitudinal sleeping possible while underway. No head in the aft cabin; only one in the bow section. No bow cabin either; just the head and storage. Extra sleeping will be via pilot berths in the saloon.
As a major difference from the Nauticat though, I'll make the fore and aft sections watertight from the cockpit/wheelhouse, and put some big drain pipes leading out both sides. However, I'm going with a flush floor again, with built-in bench-boxes that can be moved outside. Using folding chairs in the cockpit/wheelhouse is nice at anchor, plus having uncluttered floor space facilitates engine access, which is only a few steps down. Generally, w/o's have plenty of room for tankage and batteries, and ample room to move around. However, it should be noted that a roof is probably a good idea, otherwise engine maintenance is limited to dry days. Also, if you sail offshore, a hard enclosure is good to avoid swamping the engine compartment while the floor hatches are open.
That's my input based on some previous experience. Happy sailing!
