Great video, as someone who is in the process of buying a Nauticat 38 your videos have been invaluable to me. Mine gets the survey done this Tuesday so hopefully she’ll be mine soon.
Thanks a lot for your comment. It is very inspiring for me. Good luck with your new Nauticat 38. I hope you will be happy with it, and looking forward to get to hear about your experience later on..
Thanks for your comment. Glad you liked it. We can not all of us prefer the same boats, that would be boring. But looking at other boats is great. Fair winds!
When I think of sailing performance, I pretty much just focus on sailing up wind and pointing. If your boat points well, chances are it'll sail well in all other conditions. Pointing is limited by windage, and boy most Nauticats have a lot of windage. Windage from high bulwarks, the pilot house, the high aft "castle" that the raised cockpit sets on, and the mizzen mast + mizzen rigging that most Nauticat's have. But everything is a compromise. You get some nice benefits form all of those things that cause the increased windage. So, you have to have to accept the fact that these are motor sailers and you pretty much always motor upwind. As this video points out, there are many different Nauticats, so it's hard to "generalize". Along with those hull shapes this video discussed, there's pretty much a model for every foot from 33 to 44, and then two 52 foot models. For a relatively small sailboat company, they made A LOT of different models, but their core product was the heavy displacement, full keel, ketch motor sailer. Unfortunately, the market shifted towards much roomier and faster coastal "racer/cruiser" boats and the company closed it's doors in 2018. I love my Nauticat 44, but if all I wanted to do was coastal cruising, a racer cruiser would have been a better boat. The Nauticats were made in Finland and "bred" for the North Sea, not the Caribbean.
@@Sailing-Maja Thanks. I figured you knew all of this already, but you didn't mention it in your video, so I thought I'd add it for whoever reads comments. When I was looking for my first 30+ foot sailboat, I had a hard time understanding the tradeoffs between all of the boats. Originally I wanted a racer/cruiser as I wanted to be able to sail fast and point into the wind. Then I started considering the fact that my wife and I would be in our early 60's when we started cruising, and I started thinking that more comfortable boats would be a better choice for us. There happened to be an NC44 within a half day's drive, so we went to see it. Man, I immediately fell in love with the pilot house and could no longer stand the thought of climbing down into a "cave". Almost a year later I finally bought it. I would love a boat with a 15 foot beam that didn't roll as much, but everything's a tradeoff. I think that one sail with a flat bottom boat pounding hard into the waves so the whole boat is shaking and shuddering would scare my wife too much to get back on the thing. I haven't had the 44 out in those conditions yet, but it must to better than a flat bottom racer/cruiser.
@@jasonmcintosh2632 There are so many compromises when choosing a boat, as you describe. I know there are even moire option than in my video, but making a video is also a compromise. Tell everything possible, and possibly too technical, or give just enough information. In this video the purpose was wo tell people that two different Nauticats are not the same. And your comments are great for those who want to look even more into it. Thanks!
Then you have the NA 36 with long keel and narrower hull, sails well for being long keeled. A type of grand tour... GT... where the keel has a concave shape that gives a more stable ride through waves. It is the one I sailed by the NA boats and experience it fast on longer distances. not second trimming of sails as in a dinghy but 15 minutes of trimming :)
I lived aboard my N33 (1973), for 30 yearsI added a bowsprit which completely revolutionised her 'upwind' ability. I note the comment about hard to tack, with which I can't agree. Even in the lightest airs, I would back the mizzen, until the Genoa luff had gone through the wind, then there was a 'bit of a scramble' to change over the Genoa sheets - but round she'd come! This model didn't have the raised aft deck - I accept that had some advantages, but for actual sailing, I preferred the 'flat deck'. On long passages in fair weather, I'd fit the emergency tiller, & sit on the roof of the aft cabin!
Thanks for your thoughts. Of course you can tack. My comment as that the boats with the shorter keel tacks more easy, not that the long keel version dont tack at all. Anyway, smart idea with the backing of the mizzen. I have not thought of that before, and it sounds like a great idea (and it sort of confirms that some help is needed to go through a tack). Regarding the aft deck, for sailing and safety I definitely think the low deck is better. In harbor the raised aft deck is super, and it also gives a lot of indoor space. But for sailing in heavy weather, I and scared when I work at the aft deck. Buy the way, you must have been very happy with her since you lived in it for 30 years. Sounds great!
@@Sailing-Maja I delivered a N331 (I think it was) some years ago, from S.Wales to N.Ireland. It got a 'bit lumpy' across the Irish Sea. I realised my 'flat deck' was better in those circumstances. Yes - I loved my old girl'. Crossed Biscay 3 x times, always lumpy, always dry! Pronounced paddle wheel effect became an asset when I worked it out! Marinas, French canals, she was game for anything! If I was going round again, I wouldn't want for a better boat - even if I did spend an inordinate time varnishing!
I have around 9 yrs sailing experience on a Nauticat 38 that belongs to a good friend of mine. Over the years I have done a lot of cruising both within local coastal environments and offshore. I have experienced all sorts of weather and sea conditions during cruising on the boat. In overall terms, I know that the boat is very safe and will protect you even under extreme conditions (>65 kts). The boat is well appointed and given the right conditions sails very well. However, I do have a number of criticisms of the boat and these relate in part to some of the compromises in its design. First up, in my view it’s too tall for its beam, such that with a full complement of sails up (heady, staysail, main and mizzen), its angle of heel in anything above 15-20kts can be very uncomfortable. Also, raising and lowering the mizzen is a pain and from observation does very little in respect of the balance. When steering from the poop deck (stern), you are very exposed to the elements. Also, the size of the steering wheel is too small meaning you have to stoop to steer the boat. Given the hydraulic steering system, which can be prone to failure, I find it very vague in regards to directional stability, unlike the mechanical steering system on my traditional IOR 30 ft yacht. The narrow sides down along the pilot house and complications of sheets, blocks etc are uncomfortable and in some some ways potential trip hazards. Bear in mind my friend has added many systems to his boat for cruising, including bow thruster, water maker, electronic antifoul and many other electrical upgrades, and at times these have all played up, meaning that it takes a lot of care to maintain the systems. In the end while I recognise it is a quality built boat and is very capable, personally, I don’t enjoy its sailing motion and it’s not a boat I would wish to own.
Thanks a lot for your comment. It is really valuable. I do agree with a lot of what you are saying. The Nauticat 38 is great, but far from perfect. The things I dont like with it is the doors on the side. They are perfect in harbor and nice weather, but tricky in heavy weather. Climbing out and walking on the side in rough sea is scary. Also, as you say, working at the poop deck is too far up from the water. There are lots of movement up there, and the guard rail is too low (I have a plan to rise that rail). So, I agree with a lot of what you are saying. Would I buy it again? That depends on how it is supposed to be used. To cross an ocean in heavy weather, probably not. For costal cruising in predictable condition, I would most probably buy it again. Are there better boats out there, Yes of course. Is it a good buy for the price, as long as you understand what you buy, Yes I think so.
While the (traditional) motorsailer may have acquired the image as the unloved step child of yacht design and one that is guaranteed to earn you the politely pitying smiles of the dockside experts, I still think they are unsurpassed as a longdistance, comfortable, liveaboard cruiser, particularly for the (much) more demanding, northern climate zones. Not all motorsailers are created equal, nor are all contemporary sailing yachts. Any yacht can become uncomfortable when you exceed the point at which you should have commenced reefing. This includes ones that were designed to IOR rules, which had a tendency to punish stability and speed potential. Hence the Guppy bellies, tightly pinched sterns that like to suck up their stern wave and promote spectacular rolling when going downhill in any kind of blow that might take them past their potential hull speed. Plenty of sailing craft have to start reefing when the apparent wind exceeds 10 kts, which puts one that can stand up to some 20kts into a somewhat better perspective. I have sailed longdistance and offshore in a classic yacht that happily rolled through some 100 degr. downwind and would readily sail at some 50 degr when going to weather and where the crew would fight over the leeward bunk and being able to successfully use the head should have gotten you an immediate job offer from Cirque du Soleil. Any yacht is a compromise, as is a motorsailer, but I do not think that the demerits are as severe as we are commonly led to believe. Any boat can be made unnecessarily complicated and any boat can be overloaded, though and within reason, the normally generous displacement of a motorsailer is likely better suited to absorbing this without impacting the performance. The contemporary version of a traditional motorsailer, in avoidance of any negative association, is now the "expetdition type yacht". They too have some form of permanent steering shelter, are much heavier than most of their contemporary sisters, carry powerful engines and large tanks and, generally speaking, are quite large. As to their cost: they would make the most expensive traditional motorsailer look like a bargain basement deal by comparison. For what is possible with even a small traditional motorsailer, feel free to watch my RUclips video: Rehabilitating the Traditional Motorsailer.
What determines a boat's performance potential has less to do with the keel configuration than with her sail area/displacement ratio and her length/displacement ratio. The NC 38 has a SA/D of 13.67, which is within the recommended range for a motorsailer (Brewer, 13 - 14). This, together with her D/L ratio of 387, which by contemporary standards is extremely heavy, indicates why her performance will be inferior to that of a pure sailing boat. We own a 32' Colvic Watson motorsailer which we have cruised extensively in Northern waters. We have increased her SA/D to 17.8, which puts her firmly in the mid cruiser/racer category. It has significantly improved her windward ability, long keel and all, and in light conditions and on reaching courses we regularly outsail much lighter and supposedly more performance orientated yachts . Downwind, even in a strong quartering sea, her long keel lets her track like a train, requiring little input from her helmsman or autopilot. Once we had the opportunity to spar against a Nauticat 35 sloop and on a variety of courses, including ones to windward. It wasn't even close. After 25 miles we could barely make them out with the binoculars. Sailing in the Orkneys, we were able to hold our own against a NC 44. Other than for maneuverability, sail area/displacement ratio (SA/D) is where it is at!
Thanks a lot for your valuable input. This is one of the things I really like having a RUclips channel about sailing. I learn so much about boats myself. I really appreciate your comments. As a mechanical engineer myself, I love numbers and calculations like the ratios you describe. Are there any books I can read to understand more about this, I find it really interesting. Please feel free to advise. It looks like I need to make a follow up video taking into account all the great feed back and comments I have got from this video.
@@Sailing-Maja For further information on general boat data and technical design ratios I can recommend Eric Sponberg's lecture on Sponberg Yacht Design Inc. Furthermore Dave Gerr, "The Nature of Boats", which is a bit of a "Boats for Dummies", but is an easily accessible read that gives some insight as to how things are related. Lastly and since you have a technical background: Larsson & Eliasson, "The Principals of Yacht Design". The last one requires some self-directed input to make the necessary connections and conclusions, but I think that you should be quite capable of managing that. Best, A.
I'm curious about the comparison between NC441 and NC38. The high-end version of the Nauticat, the NC441, still has a full keel, but I've heard that it has improved sailing performance. Nevertheless, the shape of the keel make it less sailing performance than the NC38?
@@sailinghyeonjoong Great question! I have seen the 441, and it is a great boat, and as you say it’s a high end boat. The performance is good, but I wonder if this is a because of the total lenght, or because of the under water shape. A 44 foot boat will sail faster than a 38 because of the lenght, but with performance I dont mean only speed. By performance I mean how sharp it can go againt the wind, and how easy it will tack. With the long waterline and the long keel in combination, I would guess it is fast, but still not the best against the wind and when tacking. Does anyone have first hand experience with the 441, and can you help us clarify? I am curious myself.
@@Kippis.. Det er absolutt en risiko for det i veldig hardt vær. Slike forhold har ikke vi opplevd. Om båten blir slått ned, så er det selvfølgelig en fare. På den annen side, om båten blir slått ned og dørene er lukket, så vil hytta / styrhuset / pilothouse gi så mye oppdrift at båten retter seg raskt. Da rekker det ikke å komme mye vann inn. Det er i alle fall min teori, og heldigvis har jeg ikke testet det i praksis. Dette er nok grunnen til at båten er i CE kategori B og ikke i A.
@@myparadiseonbantayanisland9030 That is cortect. That is not a catamaran. That is a Nauticat. Nauticat has nothing to do with catamarans, they only built monohulls.
Honest and well planned video, bravo..
Thank you. Really appriciate your comment.
Great video, as someone who is in the process of buying a Nauticat 38 your videos have been invaluable to me. Mine gets the survey done this Tuesday so hopefully she’ll be mine soon.
Thanks a lot for your comment. It is very inspiring for me. Good luck with your new Nauticat 38. I hope you will be happy with it, and looking forward to get to hear about your experience later on..
Thank you for the profound overview.
You are welcome, and thanks for appreciating our effort.
Very good presentation, I prefer other boats but from your point of view very realistic.
Thanks for your comment. Glad you liked it. We can not all of us prefer the same boats, that would be boring. But looking at other boats is great. Fair winds!
Nice, quality boats from Finland 🇫🇮
Yes, indeed!
Takk for en flott video, virkelig inspirerende
Mange takk for det, og takk for at du følger. Fint å kunne inspirere.
Wheelhouse doors ( yes) . Flush stern decks (yes) love it .
Understand what you mean, and I do agree.
When I think of sailing performance, I pretty much just focus on sailing up wind and pointing. If your boat points well, chances are it'll sail well in all other conditions. Pointing is limited by windage, and boy most Nauticats have a lot of windage. Windage from high bulwarks, the pilot house, the high aft "castle" that the raised cockpit sets on, and the mizzen mast + mizzen rigging that most Nauticat's have. But everything is a compromise. You get some nice benefits form all of those things that cause the increased windage. So, you have to have to accept the fact that these are motor sailers and you pretty much always motor upwind.
As this video points out, there are many different Nauticats, so it's hard to "generalize". Along with those hull shapes this video discussed, there's pretty much a model for every foot from 33 to 44, and then two 52 foot models. For a relatively small sailboat company, they made A LOT of different models, but their core product was the heavy displacement, full keel, ketch motor sailer. Unfortunately, the market shifted towards much roomier and faster coastal "racer/cruiser" boats and the company closed it's doors in 2018. I love my Nauticat 44, but if all I wanted to do was coastal cruising, a racer cruiser would have been a better boat. The Nauticats were made in Finland and "bred" for the North Sea, not the Caribbean.
Thanks for the summary, which I completely agree with.
@@Sailing-Maja Thanks. I figured you knew all of this already, but you didn't mention it in your video, so I thought I'd add it for whoever reads comments.
When I was looking for my first 30+ foot sailboat, I had a hard time understanding the tradeoffs between all of the boats. Originally I wanted a racer/cruiser as I wanted to be able to sail fast and point into the wind. Then I started considering the fact that my wife and I would be in our early 60's when we started cruising, and I started thinking that more comfortable boats would be a better choice for us.
There happened to be an NC44 within a half day's drive, so we went to see it. Man, I immediately fell in love with the pilot house and could no longer stand the thought of climbing down into a "cave". Almost a year later I finally bought it. I would love a boat with a 15 foot beam that didn't roll as much, but everything's a tradeoff. I think that one sail with a flat bottom boat pounding hard into the waves so the whole boat is shaking and shuddering would scare my wife too much to get back on the thing. I haven't had the 44 out in those conditions yet, but it must to better than a flat bottom racer/cruiser.
@@jasonmcintosh2632 There are so many compromises when choosing a boat, as you describe. I know there are even moire option than in my video, but making a video is also a compromise. Tell everything possible, and possibly too technical, or give just enough information. In this video the purpose was wo tell people that two different Nauticats are not the same. And your comments are great for those who want to look even more into it. Thanks!
Then you have the NA 36 with long keel and narrower hull, sails well for being long keeled. A type of grand tour... GT... where the keel has a concave shape that gives a more stable ride through waves. It is the one I sailed by the NA boats and experience it fast on longer distances. not second trimming of sails as in a dinghy but 15 minutes of trimming :)
Yes, they built an impressive collection of different boats. It's not like a Nauticat is a Nauticat. They are all different.
I lived aboard my N33 (1973), for 30 yearsI added a bowsprit which completely revolutionised her 'upwind' ability.
I note the comment about hard to tack, with which I can't agree.
Even in the lightest airs, I would back the mizzen, until the Genoa luff had gone through the wind, then there was a 'bit of a scramble' to change over the Genoa sheets - but round she'd come!
This model didn't have the raised aft deck - I accept that had some advantages, but for actual sailing, I preferred the 'flat deck'.
On long passages in fair weather, I'd fit the emergency tiller, & sit on the roof of the aft cabin!
Thanks for your thoughts. Of course you can tack. My comment as that the boats with the shorter keel tacks more easy, not that the long keel version dont tack at all. Anyway, smart idea with the backing of the mizzen. I have not thought of that before, and it sounds like a great idea (and it sort of confirms that some help is needed to go through a tack).
Regarding the aft deck, for sailing and safety I definitely think the low deck is better. In harbor the raised aft deck is super, and it also gives a lot of indoor space. But for sailing in heavy weather, I and scared when I work at the aft deck.
Buy the way, you must have been very happy with her since you lived in it for 30 years. Sounds great!
@@Sailing-Maja I delivered a N331 (I think it was) some years ago, from S.Wales to N.Ireland.
It got a 'bit lumpy' across the Irish Sea.
I realised my 'flat deck' was better in those circumstances.
Yes - I loved my old girl'.
Crossed Biscay 3 x times, always lumpy, always dry!
Pronounced paddle wheel effect became an asset when I worked it out!
Marinas, French canals, she was game for anything!
If I was going round again, I wouldn't want for a better boat - even if I did spend an inordinate time varnishing!
When yuo sailng come the water on the deek .seething
I have around 9 yrs sailing experience on a Nauticat 38 that belongs to a good friend of mine. Over the years I have done a lot of cruising both within local coastal environments and offshore. I have experienced all sorts of weather and sea conditions during cruising on the boat. In overall terms, I know that the boat is very safe and will protect you even under extreme conditions (>65 kts). The boat is well appointed and given the right conditions sails very well. However, I do have a number of criticisms of the boat and these relate in part to some of the compromises in its design. First up, in my view it’s too tall for its beam, such that with a full complement of sails up (heady, staysail, main and mizzen), its angle of heel in anything above 15-20kts can be very uncomfortable. Also, raising and lowering the mizzen is a pain and from observation does very little in respect of the balance. When steering from the poop deck (stern), you are very exposed to the elements. Also, the size of the steering wheel is too small meaning you have to stoop to steer the boat. Given the hydraulic steering system, which can be prone to failure, I find it very vague in regards to directional stability, unlike the mechanical steering system on my traditional IOR 30 ft yacht. The narrow sides down along the pilot house and complications of sheets, blocks etc are uncomfortable and in some some ways potential trip hazards. Bear in mind my friend has added many systems to his boat for cruising, including bow thruster, water maker, electronic antifoul and many other electrical upgrades, and at times these have all played up, meaning that it takes a lot of care to maintain the systems. In the end while I recognise it is a quality built boat and is very capable, personally, I don’t enjoy its sailing motion and it’s not a boat I would wish to own.
100% agreement.
Thanks a lot for your comment. It is really valuable. I do agree with a lot of what you are saying. The Nauticat 38 is great, but far from perfect. The things I dont like with it is the doors on the side. They are perfect in harbor and nice weather, but tricky in heavy weather. Climbing out and walking on the side in rough sea is scary. Also, as you say, working at the poop deck is too far up from the water. There are lots of movement up there, and the guard rail is too low (I have a plan to rise that rail). So, I agree with a lot of what you are saying. Would I buy it again? That depends on how it is supposed to be used. To cross an ocean in heavy weather, probably not. For costal cruising in predictable condition, I would most probably buy it again. Are there better boats out there, Yes of course. Is it a good buy for the price, as long as you understand what you buy, Yes I think so.
While the (traditional) motorsailer may have acquired the image as the unloved step child of yacht design and one that is guaranteed to earn you the politely pitying smiles of the dockside experts, I still think they are unsurpassed as a longdistance, comfortable, liveaboard cruiser, particularly for the (much) more demanding, northern climate zones.
Not all motorsailers are created equal, nor are all contemporary sailing yachts. Any yacht can become uncomfortable when you exceed the point at which you should have commenced reefing. This includes ones that were designed to IOR rules, which had a tendency to punish stability and speed potential. Hence the Guppy bellies, tightly pinched sterns that like to suck up their stern wave and promote spectacular rolling when going downhill in any kind of blow that might take them past their potential hull speed. Plenty of sailing craft have to start reefing when the apparent wind exceeds 10 kts, which puts one that can stand up to some 20kts into a somewhat better perspective. I have sailed longdistance and offshore in a classic yacht that happily rolled through some 100 degr. downwind and would readily sail at some 50 degr when going to weather and where the crew would fight over the leeward bunk and being able to successfully use the head should have gotten you an immediate job offer from Cirque du Soleil.
Any yacht is a compromise, as is a motorsailer, but I do not think that the demerits are as severe as we are commonly led to believe. Any boat can be made unnecessarily complicated and any boat can be overloaded, though and within reason, the normally generous displacement of a motorsailer is likely better suited to absorbing this without impacting the performance.
The contemporary version of a traditional motorsailer, in avoidance of any negative association, is now the "expetdition type yacht". They too have some form of permanent steering shelter, are much heavier than most of their contemporary sisters, carry powerful engines and large tanks and, generally speaking, are quite large. As to their cost: they would make the most expensive traditional motorsailer look like a bargain basement deal by comparison.
For what is possible with even a small traditional motorsailer, feel free to watch my RUclips video: Rehabilitating the Traditional Motorsailer.
@@LaminarFlow896 Thanks for your comment. I watched your mentioned video. That was really great!
I have a Swift Trawler 34, I don’t even need sails 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻
@@PhilbyFavourites 👍⛵️😉 I know what you mean. I know that type of sailors. Myself I do sail a lot, but that dont mean I need to stop the engine!
What determines a boat's performance potential has less to do with the keel configuration than with her sail area/displacement ratio and her length/displacement ratio. The NC 38 has a SA/D of 13.67, which is within the recommended range for a motorsailer (Brewer, 13 - 14). This, together with her D/L ratio of 387, which by contemporary standards is extremely heavy, indicates why her performance will be inferior to that of a pure sailing boat. We own a 32' Colvic Watson motorsailer which we have cruised extensively in Northern waters. We have increased her SA/D to 17.8, which puts her firmly in the mid cruiser/racer category. It has significantly improved her windward ability, long keel and all, and in light conditions and on reaching courses we regularly outsail much lighter and supposedly more performance orientated yachts . Downwind, even in a strong quartering sea, her long keel lets her track like a train, requiring little input from her helmsman or autopilot. Once we had the opportunity to spar against a Nauticat 35 sloop and on a variety of courses, including ones to windward. It wasn't even close. After 25 miles we could barely make them out with the binoculars. Sailing in the Orkneys, we were able to hold our own against a NC 44. Other than for maneuverability, sail area/displacement ratio (SA/D) is where it is at!
Thanks a lot for your valuable input. This is one of the things I really like having a RUclips channel about sailing. I learn so much about boats myself. I really appreciate your comments. As a mechanical engineer myself, I love numbers and calculations like the ratios you describe. Are there any books I can read to understand more about this, I find it really interesting. Please feel free to advise.
It looks like I need to make a follow up video taking into account all the great feed back and comments I have got from this video.
@@Sailing-Maja For further information on general boat data and technical design ratios I can recommend Eric Sponberg's lecture on Sponberg Yacht Design Inc.
Furthermore Dave Gerr, "The Nature of Boats", which is a bit of a "Boats for Dummies", but is an easily accessible read that gives some insight as to how things are related. Lastly and since you have a technical background: Larsson & Eliasson, "The Principals of Yacht Design".
The last one requires some self-directed input to make the necessary connections and conclusions, but I think that you should be quite capable of managing that.
Best, A.
I'm curious about the comparison between NC441 and NC38.
The high-end version of the Nauticat, the NC441, still has a full keel, but I've heard that it has improved sailing performance.
Nevertheless, the shape of the keel make it less sailing performance than the NC38?
@@sailinghyeonjoong Great question! I have seen the 441, and it is a great boat, and as you say it’s a high end boat. The performance is good, but I wonder if this is a because of the total lenght, or because of the under water shape. A 44 foot boat will sail faster than a 38 because of the lenght, but with performance I dont mean only speed. By performance I mean how sharp it can go againt the wind, and how easy it will tack. With the long waterline and the long keel in combination, I would guess it is fast, but still not the best against the wind and when tacking.
Does anyone have first hand experience with the 441, and can you help us clarify? I am curious myself.
Kan dom syda så mycket att det kommer vatten upp på däck, blir rädd att kommer vatten in i båten dom där dörrar knappast vatten täta
@@Kippis.. Det er absolutt en risiko for det i veldig hardt vær. Slike forhold har ikke vi opplevd. Om båten blir slått ned, så er det selvfølgelig en fare. På den annen side, om båten blir slått ned og dørene er lukket, så vil hytta / styrhuset / pilothouse gi så mye oppdrift at båten retter seg raskt. Da rekker det ikke å komme mye vann inn. Det er i alle fall min teori, og heldigvis har jeg ikke testet det i praksis.
Dette er nok grunnen til at båten er i CE kategori B og ikke i A.
😀😀
@@gima_11 ⛵️🏝️
That's not a catamaran😁
@@myparadiseonbantayanisland9030 That is cortect. That is not a catamaran. That is a Nauticat. Nauticat has nothing to do with catamarans, they only built monohulls.