Why Buy a Trimaran? Pros and Cons of Trimarans - NEEL 43

in reality the trimaran is better than anything, a catamaran you gain somethings and lose others, the trimaran is just better than everything in every way, the only downside is price and size, peaple think of boat's in length, but a trimaran have 3x more space, for a mono to compete it have to be 3x bigger in length, no one say a 100 feet mono is worse than a 50 because it is bigger... in my mind a trimaran is the same, only if you buy a small catamaran or trimaran this problem is real. for smal boats a mono is just better for the price.

As a catamaran owner, I have to respectfully disagree that cats wont sail to windward. Not all cats are dogs!. My Schionning catamaran will sail comfortably at 34 degrees apparent, 30 is pinching. Easily tacks within 90 degrees. In most conditions, it will also haul upwind with both dagger boards fully raised.

Why are so many used neel boats currently on sale? Maybe because the bulkheads just stick together with a sort of chewing gum glue. If you buy an older neel then check all the bulkheads and reinforce them with new glass just to be safe. And add additional layers wherever greater forces are transmitted.

Maybe we should think of a trimaran as a monohull with two outriggers

this video is great work in catching attention. My attention span is not very long and the first three sentences completely caught my attention completely. Good job Tim.

They weird

Stop saying “Try a maran” . It’s annoying !

Having sailed the transatlantic run on a Neel 47, I think it really stands out for comfort. If I were beating in the tri, I would beg to be on a monohull instead.

Your misinformation and the depth of inaccurate statements have erased all credibility with me. Not to mention the consistent mispronunciation of the word trimaran.
Just two things as examples. Trimarans rarely have much space for the size. and Trimarans like any performance sailboat are incredibly weight sensitive More so than most Catamarans. Perhaps this would have been better as a review of Neil trimarans instead to Trimarans as a whole.

It is "trimaran", not "triamaran" 😂😂😂

It all comes down to vessel storage - where are you going to put it, and for how much?

Trimarans always looked to me like a mono hull with training wheels. The lack of space in the small hulls is probably the biggest disadvantage. You can put a berth in there, but they are sleeping alone.

A terrific presentation as always. Thanks Tim.

I’ve got five kids and so that forced me to study hard the various brands of sailing vessels. I settled on the Neel 52 because it’s got upto 7 cabins, are way faster and more room than an equivalent cat. It’s not as pretty as some cats - I like the look of the Fountain Pajot 51 and the Nautitedh 48 open but it’s just better in all ways.

Neel has not a very good reputation on quality

My good buddy has a Neil 43. It is two years old and has been well taken care of. His transmission broke months ago and Neel is not covering the repair. Careful with this company. It is, however, a beautiful boat, fast and a pleasure to sail.

I have had a Piver Nimble, trailersailers, now a Grainger cat. Now consider trimarans as a failed concept. The “snap roll” of a trimaran is particularly awkward.

Tri all day they really rock. Try a Dragonfly and you sure will be hugged. Neels are a good life aboard but too many compromises, also they did improve quiet a bit over the last few years.

My wife and I lived aboard a Jim Brown 40 ft. Searunner tri for a while. It was a perfect size for a couple. GREAT center cockpit layout and roomy. Being 24 feet wide was a bit of a problem at times... our passage down the Erie canal coming back to Florida from Cleveland (where it was built) for example was.. a trip. Very comfortable and safe in almost any sea condition. And FAST when the wind was right.

Practical Sailor printed their last subscription print magazine this year that had been in print for what? 50 years? And this is the new direction I suppose. PS didn't even test sail the Neel 43 & testing was their thing! You're breaking my heart.

Great one, Tim!

Try-a-maran?

Well... other than being driven crazy by that interesting pronunciation, I enjoyed this video. I visited the Neel 43 at the Annapolis boat show just last month. Before the boat show it was a dream boat for me,. but sometimes you don't want to meet your dreams.

The Neel is a bit of a cross over. A Cat-a-ma-tri, perhaps? Anyhow... most tri's are a monohull with wings. All the stuff, and all the living quarters, are in the central hull. So you're living in a monohull, but traveling on a tri. The Neel changed that by putting a platform across the hull and the ama's and placing the main living area on that, like a Lagoon. I disagree with there being less space. There's boatloads (pardon the pun) of it... but its mostly storage. The ama's and the main hull all carry any damn thing you like, so for storage the Tri is by far the best. Another thing about the Neel that I loved was the swim platform. It doubles as dinghy storage when passaging and makes for unobstructed views when at anchor.

So the Neel 43 was a shortlist boat when I got to Annapolis, but unfortunately....

Firstly, the space in the main cabin was not used well. The odd choice to have a bed on one side of the main cabin just felt awkward. Neel says it's a reading nook type thing, or a place to rest when sitting watch on passage, but it felt more like they just didn't know what to do with the area. The bedroom has wonderful views, but a humped floor I tripped on twice, and a cramped feel despite the vistas. The wet head bathroom was likewise awkward and narrow, and a far cry from the master head on a Lagoon or Leopard 42. I can't help but feel a talented, nautical interior designer type could do far more with what they had for space, especially since Neel has realized the spectacular benefit to putting a deck between the amas and giving their trimaran a catamaran feel.

All of the negatives vanished in a puff of desire when I went on the Neel 52.

"Oh Holy Mother grant me a Lotto Win!!"

That was a boat that got it all correct. The cabin space. The views. The speed to outrun weather and beat everyone else to the best anchorages. That Neel had it all... for $1.25 million plus. I can't help but hope they redesign the Neel 43's main deck to make better use of the space, because if it could look like a mini 52, it would sell like hotcakes.

Trialmaran... =P

Is there a builder today who builds interiors. that don't look Ikea?

It's not "Tri A Maran" they are trimarans "Try Mar Ann"

I think you're far off base: much of what you say applies to the Neel designs, but not to trimarans in general. But you pull in lots of facts about racing trimarans and apply them to the Neel. I think this may be confusing and misleading:

"The amas are just barely in the water"--this is weird. True for most modern non-Neel trimarans that are siting disused. Generally false while you're actually sailing. But see somewhere further below...

"The topsides of a tri and cat may look the same"--most cruising cats have a lot of accommodation with the floor several feet above the water (where it can't pound), whereas most cruising tris have the floor a little below the waterline or barely above, since they're in a hull--more like a monohull. One thing that makes Neel trimarans unusual is that they've built a cat-like cabin--high above the water. I don't think it makes much sense to use them as your reference for trimaran topsides.

"Neel 43 is about the same weight as a 43-foot monohull, but a comparable cat is [30% heavier]"--this statement is problematic for two reasons.
- First, a big reason that multihulls are faster than monohulls is that they weigh less--because they're unballasted. If someone has managed to build a multihull that weighs the same as a monohull of the same length, I wouldn't expect it to perform "like a multihull" except in some very specific conditions.
- Second, monohulls (and multihulls) of a given length can vary in weight by a lot more than a factor of 30%. What's the standard deviation of sail area / displacement ratios for all the boats you have heard of? The basis of your comparison seems nonsensical.

"Because the weight is spread across three hulls, you can carry more weight than a cat"--um... you were closer to correct earlier in the video when you said the exact opposite! That is: the amas are generally loaded only when you heel. Only one (downwind, light air, tacking, or parked) or two hulls should be carrying significant weight. Which is more temperamental about added weight? Probably the lighter boat, whether it has one, two, or three hulls, although being overloaded hurts them all somewhat differently...

"Stability"--all wrong!!! "The centre hull never leaves the water" usually right in a cruising tri, but don't say never unless you mean it. "...because it's at the centre of rotation"--as Pauli would say, NOT EVEN WRONG. And for those rare trimarans in which what you say is closer to accurate--those with < 100%-buoyancy amas--your "27-degrees-of-heel" claim is no longer true.

Neel's claim about weight distribution being important is technically correct, but their use of that is not correct. If the boat isn't heeling much, then the vertical positioning of that weight is largely irrelevant--only the horizontal positioning matters. So the argument is... more marketing drivel than physics. This is Practical Sailor, so I request less advertising and more debunking, please.

Has a Neel competed in the ARC? Racing trimarans often win races for reasons that Neel has generally not implemented. It's like saying that because Comanche is fast (for a monohull), a Dutch Botter (also a monohull, like Comanche!) is also fast. If you're going to talk speed, I'd find PHRF or Texel ratings far more informative than claims about theoretical top speeds. AFAICT someone estimated the Neel 45 to have a Texel of 110, which doesn't sound too bad for a heavy boat of that length, but it's not exactly a scorcher. Can you dig up ratings better than I can?

"Monohulls point higher than cats; it's just by design." This is what really rubbed me the wrong way. It's simply incorrect. You could try saying "Boats with high-aspect foils point higher than boats without" but that isn't perfectly accurate--they generally make less leeway, but also high-aspect foils are often seen on boats that also have racing rigs. You could say "Monohulls tend to keep their jibstays tighter than multis, which leads to higher pointing", which is a start but is not the whole story--WHY don't multihulls keep their jibstays as taut? (What if, e.g., they both had backstays? Why are those less common on multihulls?) You could say "Boats with lower freeboard point higher", but that's not right either (it may involve wind shear, but more with design-intention correlations, although the extra drag of a high bridge will improve pointing by reducing speed, thus decreasing the boatspeed (headwind) component of apparent wind). You could say "Multihulls often make good more speed to windward when sailed a little more free", which is true of fast boats in general, but it's not what you said--it's a decision of the skipper, not of the design. You could talk about interactions with chop, which would add a useful piece as well. But as it stands, the statement turns a statistical tendency into a religious truth claim. Gross.

"Monohulls are more connected to the art of sailing--you feel everything on a mono"--you feel heel more, but you feel sail trim less. A light powerful boat such as a fast multihull can pick up a knot or two in about 5 seconds when you let the jib sheet out a couple of inches. That level of connection to the art of sailing is hard to find in a heavier boat. When a puff hits and you're already near hull speed, you'll never feel a monohull lift and accelerate the way a fast multihull will.

"Much harder to flip over"--I don't think your intuition here is borne out in practice, especially when e.g. reaching in high breaking seas. Statistics would convince me, if you have them, but I've seen a lot of arguments on this topic. You're the journalist; I'm just a sailor...

A Neel 43 is actually not so fast, precisely due to its high weight for its size. Trimarans are also quite weight sensitive.

It's like a Pogo and a Lagoon made a baby. Nice to sail, good to live on.

Looking for a boat that can do 20 knots like a tri but the multiple large rooms of a catamaran ⛵

I went on the Neel at the boat show and I wasn't impressed. I couldn't see it being a liveaboard cruiser in any capacity. I'd take a cat for less money and more space any day.

The pronunciation gets me real bad

are you butchering that word deliberately for comment bait ?

Tri a mararn? Huh?

I really don't like the generalization that Cats are naturally Faster than Monos, maybe performance Cats, but some of those those floating bricks are built to be at anchor! and that's fine, but rarely if ever will they see double digits. I don't like how cats ride, point (i mean crab) or the motion, i do like my Monohull (a Jeanneau 45 that will do 8knoats all day long and I've had up to 15!) passed many a Lagoon type Cat! I do like the NEEL Tri's and would take one over a Cat in fact i looked at buying a Neel 45 but was still a bit to dear so went for another Mono.

If you want the maneuverability of a catamaran in a trimaran add two electric pod drives.

I will tri...

The introduction of retractable or regening electric pod motors means that a Trimeran with a hybrid power set up can tank turn on the spor using pod motors out on the Amas... then there's steerable thrusters .. this is something they've done on the Leen.. power trimerans.

One more point is the fact the bigger the trimeran the more space in the Amas for seperate accomodation. I know the polish family that own the 51ft early prototype . I like that layout. ..Sailing Oceans.

Race boats are just monohuls with stabilisers 😂 .. yup to a point.
Cruising trimarans have bigger living deck areas and certainly have an advantage for someone with mobility problems. The bedroom and heads on the one level would make catering for a chair bound person easier. 🤔

Rapido has produced a halfway version with their XS cruising models.. they have a flared center section with greater living space but still the Amas are separated from the central hull by narrower nets.

I'd love to get a trimaran - if it's an Ed Horstman design. Yes, tris are fast and the rapido 60 may be the fastest (at an unattainable price), but it has less living space than any TriStar above 40ft. But space limitations around here don't allow a Tri...

I hear a few of what I believe to be misconceptions. First, trimarans are generally more weight sensitive than catamarans. This is because the outer hills are not suppose to bear any weight other than their selves. I have lived long enough to have lived through the development of modern, western trimarans. These have what are known as "full buoyancy floats", meaning the outer hills have enough volume to support the weight of the entire craft.

The original trimarans, basically Asian and Pacific island work boats, had "low buoyancy" floats, usually bamboo or timber logs shaped to go through the water. These were to the stability to carry sail. Think of them as floating ballast. They take the place of a ballast keel.

The earliest modern trimarans were designed by Arthur Pivor. These not only used full buoyancy floats, but extended the cabin well beyond sides of the main hull..

But weight was critical with these boats. This is because the main motivation for building them was speed. And such speed required a slim center hull. And slim hills sink down lower withe added weight, which kinda kills performance. Also, greater weight adds stress to the entire structure that is vastly more than the same added weight does to a monohull.

In the 1960's trimarans were largely built by amateurs, and we're considered less expensive to build the similar sized monohulls due to the absence of a ballast- keel.

A major minus of a large trimaran is it's huge beam. The beam/length ratio of a catamaran is typically 0.50. that of a trimaran is usually greater than 0.60. this can make finding slips at a marina a bit of a challenge. Also, hauling them out of the water is considerably more complicated than hauling out a mono or even a cat, and requires more specialized techniques and/ or equipment.

Trimarans suffer from the same problem as catamarans when sailing to wind. it's a matter of windage much more so that heeling. it's also an issue of volume. If you have a cat optimized to race with daggerboards or centerboards and very low volume it'll point well, if you have a trimaran with a full beam to beam deck house it'll point really poorly.

This article features a photo of a Neel 47, mistakenly labeled as a Neel 43. It's surprising how much credibility can be affected by such an oversight!

Trimirans are very cool & great fun to sail, I've only sailed small tris. The two biggest issues for me are the initial and ongoing costs over a monohull. Even the 8m wide marina berth is going to cost a bomb. Cheers Tim. ⚓

Mono-hull with training wheels

FYI, I spent a considerable time in La Rochelle France and I can tell the local professionals working on sailboats scorn Neel in terms of production quality

If you want to be taken seriously, learn to pronounce Trimaran.

one interesting thing about the Neel is that most the living space is very high - you never feel like you are deep in the boat like in a mono or the hulls in a cat. under sail we usually stay higher up - so a tri is the best for that

"Try-a-maran" Huh. I've always heard it pronanced "Tri-maran"

can many marinas accommodate this for a haul out?