bfloyd4445
Guru
Can't decide which to buy Nord 40 to 46 or a kady same size range. Looking for extreme range and the ability to stay weeks at sea. Any suggestions?
Can't decide which to buy Nord 40 to 46 or a kady same size range. Looking for extreme range and the ability to stay weeks at sea. Any suggestions?
Better??
Better at what? Better value.. probably the KK, better at going a really long distance of true blue water.. Nordy.
Do you have $ 200,00 or $ 400,000 to spend.. that is really the question. Both boats have a stable value that all in all are very equal. I believe the KK is a bit faster and more fuel efficient.. But the Nordy carries more fuel.. and I feel that the N46 is a slightly better big water boat. And for the record I am not knocking the KK abilities one bit.
In total crap conditions I would rather be in a N46.. better layout for that kind of thing. It s kind of like asking what SUV is better a Yukon Denali or a Caddy Escalade, both will get you there.. but at a different cost.
I have been a few thousand miles at sea in a N46, and spent time in a KK42 at anchor and at the dock.. but not at sea.. so I cannot say I have a totally informed opinion. But if I had $200,000 and wanted a blue water boat I would seriously look at the KK42
That being said, I have plans to acquire a N46 for my next big adventure..
but I wish they were only $ 200,000
HOLLYWOOD
Can you explain a bit what you mean by staying weeks at sea? Do you mean along coasts or never within view of land? The only situations I know that require weeks at sea are Atlantic and Pacific crossings and while you might do that, it's not an every day thing. Otherwise the longest distances you'll face between land are about 500-700 nm.
I look at them this way...if you want to spend your days at sea in a vault, Nordhavn is the answer., and in pure blue water travel, one can be grateful to be in a vault.
In most other catagories outside "pure" blue water, KK.
I pretty much agree with much of what has been said by all so far and Hollywood's summary is good.
I came unto this scene, looking for a passagemaker, in 2008, 8 years ago, we bought the KK42 3 years ago.
I didn't know Jim Leishman from Jim Krogen. I only knew what I read, and I read a lot. I probably spent a couple hours per day finding and reading everything I could for the first three years. Key points I came away with:
- The Krogen is at least 10% more efficient at comparable speeds and sizes than the Nordhavn. This was very important to me knowing the distances I would travel and my budget for that travel.
- The Nordy "looks" more seaworthy.
- The Krogen living space is much better. This was also a big consideration since I wanted to live on the boat at some point.
I also drew some conclusions based on what I read or didn't read, as the case may be. This stuff was less objective, but still factors to consider:
Passagemaker magazine was not a neutral party. Their start was in large part (funded) a way to get the Nordhavn message out.
Nordhavn folks published a lot. In large part due to the PM mag connection and Nordhavn spent a lot sponsoring people to do stuff with their boats, at least until the 2008 crisis.
The publish a lot is a double edged sword, on one hand they seem to go every place, but on the other hand, they always seem to have problems, as in "we had to get this part helicoptered in to us".
Most Nordhahn owners seem to have unlimited budgets.
In the meantime, Kadey Krogen makes their owners sign a secrecy pact; or so it seems.
Krogens do go places, you just have to fill in the blanks, as in "Jill and Kevin were in Australia and now they are South America" That's abouit as wordy as it gets.
PM mag has had one article in the last 10 years about a KK crossing the ocean.
In the meanitme, Pm mag just spent 10 pages on how a Nordy figured out its fuel consumption (what no dip stick for them!)
The Marketing person for KK had a baby. I do not know it's name.
In sum, there is a lot of marketing hype out there and you must really be careful to separate the smoke from the fire. I think Passagemaking Under Power is still the bible, even having been updated by JL, and it mentions a number of ocean capable boats.
I think any decision is a compromise and as Hollywood said, one needs to figure out what they really want and/or need.
My only caveat is that a stand-up engine room does not make the boat more seaworthy, though it may change it's look.
I do have reason to believe, hope, that I will never encounter such bad conditions as I did in my North Atlantic passage:
- in 28 days on the ocean, we only had 6 days with winds less than 15 knots. We had at least 8 days with winds 25+knots. highest winds just south of Ireland on the last day were 35 gusting to 40.
- I had three days of seas on the beam or close to it, of 9 to 27 feet.
- I was dead in the water three times for about 10 to 20 minutes each because I was a dope that had nothing to do with the boat.
- And during those three stops, I never had water over any rail.
- I never had green water over any rail. I had very little spray (though I did have spray on Long Island Sound that went OVER the pilot house).
When dead in the water, lying abeam, the Krogen just sorts of bobs up and down.
In sum, my research led me to the KK knowing I liked the compromises it made.
My Atlantic Passage made me see that maybe Jim Krogen did not make that many compromises at all.
You can make a Pacific Crossing via Hawaii with a lot shorter passages. SF to Hawaii is 2100nm. From Hawaii you can head south to NZ without any longer passages.... In the Pacific, the longest run is Galapagos to the Marquesas, about 3,000 miles, or 17-18 days @ 7.5 knots. ...
I think you first need to look at exactly what you want to do. An Atlantic crossing is very different from a pacific crossing. Lots of boats can make the approx 1800nm Atlantic crossing. But a lot fewer can make the 2400nm Pacific crossing. So I think you really need to look closely at exactly how far you want to be able to go, then evaluate specific boats with that in mind. Just saying Nordhavn vs KK probably isn't specific enough. Different models will perform differently, have different fuel capacity, and different ability to carry a fuel bladder which might be needed. If you can pass on the Pacific and just want to cross the Atlantic, it will open up your options considerably.
A lot of times I hear about Nordhavn's great marketing. I'm not saying it's bad. Not by any means. But it's not Nordhavn's marketing department who are out cruising around the world, crossing oceans, and racking up millions of miles. OK, they did do the N40 around the world trip, but that's one trip. It's their owners and their boat's that are out cruising the world, doing it all the time, over and over again. I don't think it's a stretch to say that every day there is a Nordhavn making an ocean crossing somewhere in the world. In that respect, I don't think there is any comparison with KK - not even close. Marketing is easy when there is a story to tell. KK has a great story too, but it's generally not an ocean crossing story.
Hawaii is easy from the west coast and in a powerboat the doldrums are not a real problem. Are you gonna do Cape horn?You can make a Pacific Crossing via Hawaii with a lot shorter passages. SF to Hawaii is 2100nm. From Hawaii you can head south to NZ without any longer passages.
At least that's how I plan to do it
Richard
You can make a Pacific Crossing via Hawaii with a lot shorter passages. SF to Hawaii is 2100nm. From Hawaii you can head south to NZ without any longer passages.
At least that's how I plan to do it
Richard
Richard,
It is a long way across some big water either south or west of Hawaii.. And there is a LOT of Pacific Ocean out there. If one wishes to stay in the N.Pac Hawaii is ok.. if you want to go South it is a uncomfortable ride with a big beam sea for a long way.
One the plus side you have a great boat to do it in
HOLLYWOOD
Britt-if you are really interested primarily in multi-day offshore fishing, neither the Nord or the KK would be on my list. Neither is set up for fishing and would take major modifications before either would be even minimally suitable. For that you really need something like what MYTraveler has, I think a 75' Mikelson.
Britt-if you are really interested primarily in multi-day offshore fishing, neither the Nord or the KK would be on my list. Neither is set up for fishing and would take major modifications before either would be even minimally suitable. For that you really need something like what MYTraveler has, I think a 75' Mikelson.
That's where things really get complicated for him as the Mikelson and most other similar boats lacks the range to cross the Atlantic or Pacific. The 75' Mikelson only carries 2600 gallons of fuel and with twin 1825 HP CAT's that's not going to get you across.
Sportfishing aficionados could never live with the slow speed of a KK or Nordhavn. They want to get to the hot spots more quickly.
My question would be to you sir how does your ocean alexandra compare to a nord and kk in your opinion?
So far you've indicated that 100% of the time you'll either be fishing offshore or gunk holing. So the question you've asked, is the wrong question! A huge number of boats Will do what you've indicated you want to do!Good question: I will in all probability use the boat for offshore fishing likely out of sight of land 80% of the time I'm aboard. The other 20% will likely be gunkholing and i am entertaining the idea of an atlantic crossing and a trip to Hawaii. I'm retired and can fine the time. But the truth is i mostly fish and want a boat that can handle a typhoon or hurricane and force 10 winds seas.
Britt-if you are really interested primarily in multi-day offshore fishing, neither the Nord or the KK would be on my list. Neither is set up for fishing and would take major modifications before either would be even minimally suitable. For that you really need something like what MYTraveler has, I think a 75' Mikelson.
"i mostly fish and want a boat that can handle a typhoon or hurricane and force 10 winds seas."
Weather fax is free on the air to your computer.
There is no reason ever to be caught out in F10 . 55-65K no big deal but 120K , hardly.
The hassle is the compromises required to survive in really heavy weather (which would include rollovers) makes for a really crappy vessel for the 99.999 of the time .
Huge fuel and water tanks , eat much of the interior volume .
Tiny ports , super strong doors and the requirement for multiple hand holds inside do not make for a comfortable boat at any time.
Watch a couple of issues on TV of the folks fishing off Alaska in the winter and decide if that is going to be your retirement dream.