Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 03-09-2015, 06:33 PM   #1
Guru
 
Rustybarge's Avatar
 
City: I need a bigger boat!
Country: Ireland
Vessel Model: Cheetah 25' Powercat.
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 925
Mainship 34 Mk 1-3 Vs. 34T useful load.

Hi All,

Looking at the specs of the mainship 34 mk1-3 it seems to tip the scales at about 14,000lbs (6 1/4 tons), and the 2005 34T 375hp at 20,000 (9 tons)...

Does this mean I can haul around an extra 6000 lbs of stuff if I buy the Mk1?
__________________
Advertisement

__________________
Peter.
Rustybarge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2015, 07:19 PM   #2
Guru
 
Rustybarge's Avatar
 
City: I need a bigger boat!
Country: Ireland
Vessel Model: Cheetah 25' Powercat.
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 925
Just realised that 6000 pounds equals 3200 ltrs of diesel.

Trans -Atlantic at 6 kts?
__________________

__________________
Peter.
Rustybarge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2015, 07:43 PM   #3
Guru
 
djmarchand's Avatar
 
City: East Greenwich, RI
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Bella
Vessel Model: Mainship Pilot 34
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 2,881
Not unless you can somehow make up the almost 2' beam difference between the two boats.

Davd
djmarchand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2015, 07:57 PM   #4
Guru
 
Rustybarge's Avatar
 
City: I need a bigger boat!
Country: Ireland
Vessel Model: Cheetah 25' Powercat.
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 925
Quote:
Originally Posted by djmarchand View Post
Not unless you can somehow make up the almost 2' beam difference between the two boats.

Davd
Aha thanks, all is revealed.

It's amazing that the extra 2' weighs so much; nearly 50% more.
The price I suppose is 375hp instead of 220hp.

It reminds me a bit of cars, they always seem to get heavier and heavier. My son drives an Mx5 mk2 which weighs a lot more than the mk1; I just saw that the latest model just released weighs 100kg less; contrary to past practice.

Just shows that 'weight costs' in a S/D boat.
__________________
Peter.
Rustybarge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2015, 02:06 AM   #5
Newbie
 
City: Norfolk
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Jabou III
Vessel Model: 1982 Mainship 34' Mark I
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 3
I have a 1982 Mainship 34 Mark I and it weighs in at approx. 16,000 lbs (at least that is what I have been told).
Mark D. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2015, 05:53 AM   #6
Guru
 
Rustybarge's Avatar
 
City: I need a bigger boat!
Country: Ireland
Vessel Model: Cheetah 25' Powercat.
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 925
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark D. View Post
I have a 1982 Mainship 34 Mark I and it weighs in at approx. 16,000 lbs (at least that is what I have been told).
I think the early models are the prettiest; I really like the Mk1 version. I'm beginning to realise that it might be an unique classic light weight design at that displacement.

The modern Swift trawler 34 is around 9-91/2 tons, just like the later 34t. At slow speeds it hardly matters what the weight is, but if you want a boat with 'run for shelter ' ability a 3 ton advantage is going to make a massive fuel saving at 14-15kts.

I'm going to try to track down a mk1 here in Europe.
__________________
Peter.
Rustybarge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2015, 06:38 AM   #7
Guru
 
Rustybarge's Avatar
 
City: I need a bigger boat!
Country: Ireland
Vessel Model: Cheetah 25' Powercat.
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 925
Is it my imagination, or is the later 34t very top heavy looking ?







The Mk1 is better portioned...

Is there more headroom in a later 34t?

Almost perfect.
__________________
Peter.
Rustybarge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2015, 11:24 AM   #8
Guru
 
jleonard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,740
When I had my 78 Mainship 1 I had it weighed as they were hauling me for winter storage. I wanted good numbers since I was planning a future repower.
With 3/4 fuel and full water, plus all our gear (except the dinghy) we came in at 21,000 lbs.
I used that number in my running gear calc and hit the nail squarely on the head.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Attitude.jpg
Views:	114
Size:	95.1 KB
ID:	38376  
__________________
Jay Leonard
Attitude Adjustment
40 Albin
Mystic,Ct. /New Port Richey,Fl
jleonard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2015, 02:49 PM   #9
Guru
 
Rustybarge's Avatar
 
City: I need a bigger boat!
Country: Ireland
Vessel Model: Cheetah 25' Powercat.
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 925
Quote:
Originally Posted by jleonard View Post
When I had my 78 Mainship 1 I had it weighed as they were hauling me for winter storage. I wanted good numbers since I was planning a future repower.
With 3/4 fuel and full water, plus all our gear (except the dinghy) we came in at 21,000 lbs.
I used that number in my running gear calc and hit the nail squarely on the head.
21, 000 lbs....!!! 21,000 lbs!!!

Going on the basis of 50hp per ton for a s/d design you'll need 470 hp.

...or maybe jet power, as in 747.

I'm going to guess the crane weight meter was wrong; it's not possible.
__________________
Peter.
Rustybarge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2015, 02:58 PM   #10
Guru
 
ranger42c's Avatar
 
City: Maryland
Country: USA
Vessel Model: 42' Sportfish
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 3,159
Our '87 Mk III was documented as 16 gross tons, 13 net. Realize that's different than weight but...


Adding 300 gallons of diesel (I forget the actual capacity) would be what, another 2000 lbs? Full water tanks (I forget that, too), another thou or more?


Plus "stuff"?


(Something odd about the second pic in your post #7... unless the two pics with red hulls are 400s?)


-Chris
__________________
South River, Chesapeake Bay
ranger42c is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2015, 03:11 PM   #11
Guru
 
Rustybarge's Avatar
 
City: I need a bigger boat!
Country: Ireland
Vessel Model: Cheetah 25' Powercat.
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 925
Quote:
Originally Posted by ranger42c View Post
Our '87 Mk III was documented as 16 gross tons, 13 net. Realize that's different than weight but...


Adding 300 gallons of diesel (I forget the actual capacity) would be what, another 2000 lbs? Full water tanks (I forget that, too), another thou or more?


Plus "stuff"?


(Something odd about the second pic in your post #7... unless the two pics with red hulls are 400s?)


-Chris
16 tons is nearly 36,000 lbs
I think I've been mislead by the advertisements that list the weight of the MK 1 at 14,000lbs, which is why I said I thought it was a lightweight classic in comparison to the later 2005 34t.

PS: the GB 42 weighs 16 tons and has twin 500hp to reach 18kts max.

Thanks for pointing out the error with the pics; I've never actually seen a Mainship as there are very few over here in Europe.
__________________
Peter.
Rustybarge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2015, 04:27 PM   #12
Guru
 
jleonard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,740
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rustybarge View Post
21, 000 lbs....!!! 21,000 lbs!!!

Going on the basis of 50hp per ton for a s/d design you'll need 470 hp.

...or maybe jet power, as in 747.

I'm going to guess the crane weight meter was wrong; it's not possible.
No the weight was pretty accurate. Verified by the prop calculations and resulting performance. Remember the boat got on plane very easily with the 270 HP repower. And yes on plane as the wake was very flat. So perhaps the "rule" you are using does not apply here.

Pic #2 is a Mainship 350/390 1997 thru 2005 maybe? (I forget when they stopped production of that model)
__________________
Jay Leonard
Attitude Adjustment
40 Albin
Mystic,Ct. /New Port Richey,Fl
jleonard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2015, 04:29 PM   #13
Guru
 
Rustybarge's Avatar
 
City: I need a bigger boat!
Country: Ireland
Vessel Model: Cheetah 25' Powercat.
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 925
Quote:
Originally Posted by ranger42c View Post
Our '87 Mk III was documented as 16 gross tons, 13 net. Realize that's different than weight but...


Adding 300 gallons of diesel (I forget the actual capacity) would be what, another 2000 lbs? Full water tanks (I forget that, too), another thou or more?


Plus "stuff"?


(Something odd about the second pic in your post #7... unless the two pics with red hulls are 400s?)


-Chris
Just realised your boat did weigh 16 tons, but at the extended reach of the crane jib. Cranes are normally rated a gross weight at 2mtrs reach, half that amount a 4mtrs reach etc etc.....

So maybe your boat puts 16tons weight on the crane at 4mtrs and a bit reach....
__________________
Peter.
Rustybarge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2015, 04:34 PM   #14
Guru
 
Rustybarge's Avatar
 
City: I need a bigger boat!
Country: Ireland
Vessel Model: Cheetah 25' Powercat.
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 925
Quote:
Originally Posted by jleonard View Post
No the weight was pretty accurate. Verified by the prop calculations and resulting performance. Remember the boat got on plane very easily with the 270 HP repower. And yes on plane as the wake was very flat. So perhaps the "rule" you are using does not apply here.

Pic #2 is a Mainship 350/390 1997 thru 2005 maybe? (I forget when they stopped production of that model)
Ah ok, that makes sense.

I think the later 2005 34' t has a totally different hull shape, but it needs 370 hp to max out at 17kts according to several owners on the forum.

Maybe a deeper vee needs more power?
__________________
Peter.
Rustybarge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2015, 05:14 PM   #15
Guru
 
ranger42c's Avatar
 
City: Maryland
Country: USA
Vessel Model: 42' Sportfish
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 3,159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rustybarge View Post
16 tons is nearly 36,000 lbs
I think I've been mislead by the advertisements that list the weight of the MK 1 at 14,000lbs, which is why I said I thought it was a lightweight classic in comparison to the later 2005 34t.

PS: the GB 42 weighs 16 tons and has twin 500hp to reach 18kts max.

Thanks for pointing out the error with the pics; I've never actually seen a Mainship as there are very few over here in Europe.

Ummm.... well, no, gross tonnage is a volume measurement, not exactly equitable to weight. Just meant to point out that sometimes you may be seeing apples and oranges in ad specs. (But then I rambled off into weight things, likely confusing...)

The second pic looks to me like a 350/390, but I thought those models had a swim platform that was more or less integral with the hull, not bolted on as in that pic.

-Chris
__________________
South River, Chesapeake Bay
ranger42c is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2015, 05:43 PM   #16
Guru
 
Rustybarge's Avatar
 
City: I need a bigger boat!
Country: Ireland
Vessel Model: Cheetah 25' Powercat.
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 925
Quote:
Originally Posted by ranger42c View Post
Ummm.... well, no, gross tonnage is a volume measurement, not exactly equitable to weight. Just meant to point out that sometimes you may be seeing apples and oranges in ad specs. (But then I rambled off into weight things, likely confusing...)

The second pic looks to me like a 350/390, but I thought those models had a swim platform that was more or less integral with the hull, not bolted on as in that pic.

-Chris
I've heard of this before; it's a way of measuring how much a commercial freight ship can carry at the different plimsole lines, and of course allows the customs impose tariffs on ships in an equitable way.

I believe there was yet another system used on the Thames in London at the turn of the century, to measure volume/load carrying capacity.
__________________
Peter.
Rustybarge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2015, 07:35 AM   #17
Guru
 
jleonard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,740
[QUOTE=ranger42c;317804
The second pic looks to me like a 350/390, but I thought those models had a swim platform that was more or less integral with the hull, not bolted on as in that pic.

-Chris[/QUOTE]

They do have an integral platform...however that was not the initial design so perhaps this is a very early one.
OR since the integral platform leaked so badly maybe this was a permanent fix.
__________________
Jay Leonard
Attitude Adjustment
40 Albin
Mystic,Ct. /New Port Richey,Fl
jleonard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2015, 07:38 AM   #18
Guru
 
jleonard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,740
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rustybarge View Post
Ah ok, that makes sense.

I think the later 2005 34' t has a totally different hull shape, but it needs 370 hp to max out at 17kts according to several owners on the forum.

Maybe a deeper vee needs more power?
That could be. I know I could get to 18.5 knots in mine but after 16 it got squirrely because there was not much left in the water.
__________________
Jay Leonard
Attitude Adjustment
40 Albin
Mystic,Ct. /New Port Richey,Fl
jleonard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2015, 08:04 AM   #19
Guru
 
ranger42c's Avatar
 
City: Maryland
Country: USA
Vessel Model: 42' Sportfish
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 3,159
Quote:
Originally Posted by jleonard View Post
They do have an integral platform...however that was not the initial design so perhaps this is a very early one.
OR since the integral platform leaked so badly maybe this was a permanent fix.

Ah. Yep, could be either. best I could say is it looks like a 350/390 with an odd-looking swim platform.

We shopped pretty hard on those back in the late '90s. At the time, the leaky swim platform wasn't known (or at least publicized much, yet) but in any case we really liked the boat. Turned out we went a different direction, though, partly because the 350s were so new at the time we couldn't afford one. (And then since then, we've gone a third direction, anyway...)

-Chris
__________________
South River, Chesapeake Bay
ranger42c is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2015, 10:03 PM   #20
Senior Member
 
johnma's Avatar
 
City: Philadelphia
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Dreamers Holiday
Vessel Model: Mainship 390
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 322
photo #1 is a 400; photo #2 is a 34T. The 400 and 34T look a little top heavy because of the overhang on the side decks. The 390 did not have that and they look more like the older 34 I-II-III

john
2003 MS390
__________________

johnma is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:43 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2006 - 2012