British vs İtalian ribs

[OKİ]

Hi ... İ am owner of italian rib joker clubman 30, and i became member of your comunity 2weeks ago....i would like to have your opinion about diferences between italian and british ribs....i am leaving in Turkey and cruising on Turkish and Greek,Egean sea.....İMHO,italian ribs ,with better layout,are more dedicted for leisure ,and British ,with deep V-hull,are more for transfer from one to the other point.....İ am unexperienced ,so your opinions will be more valid!İts your turn gentlemen!....Thanx,OKİ

[cgf10]

Hi - welcome to Rib net. Perhaps we have deeper v shapes but last year I chartered a 26' Nuovo jolly in Croatia which had a great leisure layout, virtually a floating living room, but also handled some reasonably large seas pretty well.

[OKİ]

İ agree that there are italian boats with deep V hull,and i am satisfied with my boat (although i am amateur!), but the general opinion is more v for british,more leasure for italian.....btw,what is your opinion ,as ribeye owner,about ribeye as brand,hull,construction....i am interested in ribeye 1050 med(semi cabin) which is rare version but i would like to know opinions of ribeye owners...thanx,OKİ

[JamesF]

I've had some experience of both — 4.3 metre Arimar (Italian) vs. Avon SR4 (British) is probably the best comparison I can do, both being used every weekend for about 8 or 9 months of the year as safety boats.

The Arimar was a shallow-V hull that took a short-shaft 40hp two-stroke. We now use the same type of engine, but with a long shaft on our two SR4s (both with the jockey-console rescue layout; one deluxe model, one standard).

For leisure use, the Arimar would probably have been a pretty good boat. It had a good, grippy deck surface with a small sump at the back to keep your feet dry. It had a wide, square shape at the bows, and large-diameter tubes, which had a few different sections and were factory-fitted with inner tubes — complex, but giving a good level of redundancy.

It was really at its best on a flat sea — it felt fast flat-out, although I never found out exactly how fast it was. With the extra couple of inches of wooden keel guard we put on it, it turned like it was on rails, and being very low to the water hardly rolled into the turn at all. Without the keel, apparently it used to drift slightly sideways, but I never knew it before the keel, so I never felt that.

Where it wasn't as good was in strong winds and seas much more than a couple of feet. The waves were the trickiest part — although the shallow V and big, square-fronted tubes were good at keeping the spray away, they present a very big area for the wind to catch when you reach the top of a wave going upwind. It wasn't helped by the position of the helm, quite a long way aft to leave space for the anchor compartment (which was very generous — there was plenty of space in there to put other things on top). It took confidence and experience to be able to drive it upwind, fast, in much more than a flat sea. Breaking waves and surf were best taken at an angle, not head on.

The Avon SR4 is completely different. There's no space to put your sandwiches in the anchor compartment, because it hasn't got one (a canvas bag or an old plastic crate will do that job). What it has got is plenty of places to put the fuel tank — there's a handy retaining thingy in front of the console, there's adequate space under the seat, and on the deluxe model (!!) there's a recessed bit of floor by the transom as well. For minimum sogginess, sandwiches are best placed on top of the fuel tank at the front, or possibly on the battery underneath the seat. It's a two-man seat that just about seats one and a half not-very-tall people. On the other hand, we can carry three inflatable pillar buoys and a flag more easily in the SR4 than the Arimar — there's space for putting big things, but no cubby-holes for putting small (usually absorbant) items.

Unlike the Arimar, the SR4 has a deep-V hull with narrower tubes that come to a point. It's the perfect shape for punching a hole through the most innocuous-looking bit of chop and depositing a gallon of water on top of the helm's head (and the sandwiches, wherever you eventually put them). On the other hand, it's a better shape for going through breakers and surf without rearing up at an alarming angle. The reason I wear a peaked hat is not just for protection from the sun — it's for keeping the water out of my eyes.

Handling is confidence-inspiring in all of the weather I've been out in. It will drop stern-first if it's got a heavy four-stroke on the back, but a nice light two-stroke gives good balance. There's not much for the wind to catch on when you reach the top of a wave (that is, if you reach the crest without slicing the top third off and getting soaked again), so it's pretty benign in quite nasty conditions. A little confidence in getting onto the plane in waves rewards with a smooth ride, while the Arimar needed a lot of confidence and tended to slam more.

There was very little to choose between the build quality of the two boats. The Arimar held up very well as the primary safety boat for about ten years; the only repairs it needed were to our extra keel guard, and they get a real hammering on the beach over the years. It had years left in it. The reasons for selling it on were: the age of the engine and difficulty of getting a new one of the same type; and the fact that some of our helms didn't like driving it in waves.

The SR4 that is now our first-choice boat is a 1988 deluxe model. We replaced the Arimar with a standard model SR4 of indeterminate age.

So on the whole, and without ever having experienced British-built leisure-oriented boats, Italian-built working boats, or anything larger than 5.4 metres long, I'd say you were about right. The Italian Arimar was much more comfortable for two or three people on a flat sea, on a sunny day; but the British SR4 is much more capable in a wider variety of conditions, but has absolutely nowhere to put incidental things like your lunch.


Edit: Did I really just write that much?!

[9D280]

Oki,

Welcome!

One thing I can say for certain - Person A's favourite boat of all time will be Person B's worst nightmare!

Build quality (or lack of it!) will show up fairly quickly, but as for layout etc the "best" depends on a lot of factors.

So I will turn the question round - does the Clubman work for you?
If the answer is yes, don't loose any sleep over it!
If the answer is "no", then what annoys you about it? Is it space, seating layout, ergonomics of the driving position, handling in biog waves / short chop etc..... ? Knowing exactly what you want to fix is going to make it a lot easier to fix it!

I may of course have just read way too much into your question!

Put this in perspective:
I got my current boat because the price was right. I had never had a Humber on the shopping list. Having now taken it through a variety of weather & sea conditions I would now make a point of buying the modern version of it if I ever lost or broke the hull.

When I bought it:
The hull was a state - I fixed it.
The tubes are a state. I'll eoter paint or replace them.
The seat annoys me ergonomically. I'll rebuild it.
The A- frame now isn't right to hold the current suite of lights & antennae. It was fine for the one light it used to hold. I'll replace it.
etc etc.
Sometime in the futre I'll get a boat that fits me perfectly.

[longjohn]

I've got an Italian Capelli Tempest 470 - which seems to me a very capable & dry boat for its size. It has a reasonably deep V - much more than say an Avon Adventure 470 but probably slightly less than a Searider. I've crossed the Channel to Alderney in it and I'm able to hold my own reasonably well in the company of much bigger boats.
It's definitely configured for the sun though, with sun bathing spaces rather than jockey seat passenger accommodation. The finish & build is top spec (Hypalon) with tons of storage.
All in all suits me very well - even better if we got some more dun here!