Moonstruck wrote:RetSurfer wrote:
*I'm not sure if there are places along the ICW down here to anchor each night on a several day cruise and we don't want to stay in marinas.
*Mark get Skipper Bob's book on anchorages along the ICW.* Also join Active Captain as many anchorages are rated on their website>
The Bahamas in an NH55 is doable.* Of course you know there are many shallow spots.* I would prefer a shallower draft boat for that.
I will do both. Thank you!
*I remember looking at anchorages along the ICW in SC and GA several years ago and they we're few and far between. I think it was the swing room, if that's the proper phrase to use. Something tells me 5 feet draft would work.
Anyway I think a smaller boat that I can afford now without worring about it along with something we BOTH can learn is called for.....
If your budget for this "learner trawler" is about $250k then you have some nice possibilities ahead of you. Everyone you talk to will have their own opinion of what you might want to consider, so here's mine:
Grand Banks made their 36-footer in four different configurations, one of which is the Europa. As you probably know, the Europa-configuration (I think GB originated the term but it's applied to everthing like this now) has covered side and aft decks. This configuration offers a huge advantage in our rainy, windy, cold climate but I suspect it might be equally user-friendly in the hot climate back east. Be it a rainy day or a hot, sunny day, the covered aft deck allows you to be outside without being outside.
The GB36 Europa is available with a single engine if that is what you decide you prefer. In fact I've lately seen more single-engine GB36 Europas come through our local GB dealership than twins. And while the only stateroom on a GB36 Europa is up forward, it's pretty large and some of them have full walk-around berths as opposed to V-berths.
Some advantages of a Grand Banks are:
1) higher resale value due to brand name and quality (or*perceived quality) of the boat.
2) first class construction, high quality components, and build quaility consistency from boat to boat (as opposed to some of the so-called "Taiwan Trawlers" where the build quality within a specific boat brand and model can vary all over the map).
3) Great visibility from inside.
4) If you like running a boat from a flying bridge (we don't) the GB has a good one.
5) Efficiently driven at lower cruise speeds. An aquaintance with a single-engine GB36 Europa with an FL135 engine in it claims to get 1.5 gph but I don't know what cruise speed he goes nor do I know his rpm. Knowing him, I suspect he's running too slow and too cool. Nevertheless the GB36 can be a pretty efficient boat.
6) Easily maneuvered in either single or twin configurations. We've driven both (the single has a bow thruster) but both versions have large rudders and are very responsive to the use of rudder and thrust to move the back end around very smartly.
7) The single has a good size keel for this type of boat and the prop and rudder are both protected by it and the rudder shoe. And while the running gear of the twin hangs out in the open, the keel is considerably deeper than the bottom of the spade rudders and props so the boat will ground on the keel well before the props or rudders are put in danger. And if you should really screw up and put the boat on the beach in an ebbing tide and the twin lies down it will rest on the keel and the chine with the downside rudder and prop safely off the ground between them. Not an advantage you want to take advantage of, however.....
Disadvantages of GBs can be:
1) A considerable amount of exterior teak trim, moreso on the older ones than the new ones. Boats made from the late 90s on have very little exterior teak as they could be ordered with stainless handrails and grabrails. They all have teak caprails, however. I believe this is a manufacturing requirement of the hull to deck joint.
2) Teak decks on most of them. I happen to view this as a big advantage but in a hot climate teak decks can be a pain--- literally--- as they get very hot and are not comfortable to walk on in bare feet. An old teak deck like ours can require more maintenance than some people want to perform. The newest GBs have glued-down teak decks instead of screwed-down decks but I don't believe they started doing this until well after the GB36 line was shut down for good in the early 2000s. Here again the Europa configuration has an advantage in that the side and aft decking is "under cover."
3) Higher purchase price due to the branding and image of the name. Whether this higher price is deserved is a matter of personal opinion.
4) Semi-planing,*hard-chine*hull has a "snap-back" roll in a beam sea. Some people don't mind it, others hate it.* The boat rolls less than a round-bottom displacement boat, but when it does roll it is not a particularly gentle affair.
5) It is a "wet" boat. There is not much flare in the bow so waves that whack into the side of the hull are thrown up rather than out and down, at which point the wind catches them and blows a ton of water onto the boat (well, not a ton but you get the idea). This deluge of salt water is great for the teak decking but your windshield wipers will get a workout.
6) A purely coastal cruiser. A GB was not designed for open ocean cruising, at least not for very far or very long. The boat is not designed to do well in open-ocean storms--- the windows are far too large, the boat may be more top-heavy than one would like, etc. In this respect the GB is no different than all the other boats with this same basic configuration--- CHB, Island Gyspy, Puget Trawler, etc. But it's something to be aware of.
-- Edited by Marin on Monday 1st of August 2011 07:39:27 PM
Your post on page 2 about the pilothouse boats was great. It's my favorite. The first trawler we looked at was a GlenL pilothouse much like the Nordics and I've never seen a configuration better.
On the GB I take issue w your " higher resale value due to brand name and quality (or*perceived quality) of the boat." Buying anything w a good resale value will insure that you pay more to own the product. Sure you get more when you sell but you pay more when you buy. As the boat depreciates and the value gets less and less the high entry price and good resale value element gets less and less too. Since time must pass between the purchase and sale of the boat one gets less back than they paid. If you keep the boat until it's dead you get no resale value at all but you did pay the high price. So getting a high price upper end product costs more and you loose more when you sell it for more than average compared to average product. But the end result is that you pay more for the better product (if it is) and that is the way it should be. But people seem to think they get their money back on a good expensive product when they sell but it just ain't so.
As to quality I'm sure the wood GBs were a very good boat built of the best materials but I don't see the plastic GBs as significantly superior in any way except probably design from a aesthetic point of view. The only thing I know about the GBs performance wise is that they are wet boats*** ....that obviously being a negative. You say they are easily driven. I'd bet money the CHB is more easily driven at the speeds both boats usually go. But the looks of the older Grand Banks Yachts are top notch. No argument here on that score. And there's nothing negative enough about then to keep me from buying one. I would have liked that 36 w twin 55hp Yanmars or one w a newer 80hp single Deer.
JohnP- VERY nice looking GB and I love that it is a single diesel!!
Retsurfer.....if I were you and looking for a coastal cruiser with a mind to future longer range cruising, why not go for the boat that has done more circumnavigations than any other production power boat ever built? Namely, the Nordhavn 46. There is one for sale in the midwest that is perhaps not out of your price range: http://www.yachtworld.com/boats/1989.../United-States
The N46 is one of the most proven hulls and capable of cruising anywhere in the world yet is small enough to fit where larger boats cannot though draft I think is only about 12" less than the 55. Google the vessel "Egret" which is an N46 that did a huge circumnavigation and is fully documented. There are many blogs of owners of this boat cruising the world right now. The N46 is a boat, to me, that could meet both your short and long term goals as you've described them.
First, we have been on a N46 and have followed the Egret for several years. Simply wonderful what they have accomplished.
My stance now is to spend no more than 250K. It's a dollar amount that will not affect my future purchase if the boat hasn't sold. It's funny how with each 50K increase above that*the more attractive boats become. BUT, I need to remember we're only going to spend a limited time on this vessel, so I'm setting priorities which learning if this is for us is #1.
1. On the GB I take issue w your " higher resale value due to brand name and quality (or*perceived quality) of the boat." Buying anything w a good resale value will insure that you pay more to own the product. Sure you get more when you sell but you pay more when you buy.
2. But people seem to think they get their money back on a good expensive product when they sell but it just ain't so.
3. As to quality I'm sure the wood GBs were a very good boat built of the best materials but I don't see the plastic GBs as significantly superior in any way except probably design from a aesthetic point of view.
*1.* I believe GBs (and other top quality brands like Fleming and the like) lose their value more slowly than boats of lesser quality (which is not the same thing as saying lousy boats).* You're right, you pay more for the GB brand name but after x-amount of time that brand name gets you somewhat*more resale value, assuming the boat has been kept up and all that.* If I buy a GB, keep for ten years, and then sell it, I'll get more of my money "back" than if I'd have done the same thing with a CHB.* Lot of variables here, of course, like the market, boat condition, etc.
2.* I think you're 100 percent correct on that one.* A boat--- at least a recreational trawler-type boat---* should never be viewed as an investment.* One will always lose dollar value on it.
3.* The only superiority of a fiberglass GB over a wood GB is only*that it's not a wood GB.* Not that a wood GB can't be a fantastic boat--- there are a lot of them around in our area for example.* But a fiberglass boat by the very nature of its build material means it will hold up better over time with less care than a wood boat.* So over time it will require less of its owner (unless the owner has a boathouse).
The original molds for the glass GBs exactly*duplicated the shape, size, detail,*and configuration of the wood boats.* So in that regard there is no superiority of one over the other.
The trick is to either get a fiberglass GB from the first year of manufacture--- mid 1973 to mid 1974, which have what many people consider the best fiberglass hulls American Marine ever built-- or much later boats. Starting in mid-1974 American Marine had some problems with their fiberglass and gelcoat*hull work and this continued off and on for*several years. They brought the fellow who had built the original molds and supervised the layup of every fiberglass GB hull through mid-74 back to the factory several times in attempts to fix the problems.
We accidentally knocked a fitting off the side of our 1973 hull up just below the rub strip not long after we got the boat. The blow that tore out the screws and knocked the fitting off was so strong it actually bent the 1/2" bronze mounting flange back 90 degrees. I figured the hull would be chewed up at that spot, but all there was was a tiny ding in the gelcoat. And since the fitting was hanging out of the hull on the pipe it was attached to we could see how thick the hull was at this point. It was at least*an inch and a half*thick as measured against my finger, and this was well above the waterline. No surprise this 36' boat weighs in excess of 28,000 pounds....
-- Edited by Marin on Tuesday 2nd of August 2011 02:16:16 PM
3. As to quality I'm sure the wood GBs were a very good boat built of the best materials but I don't see the plastic GBs as significantly superior in any way except probably design from a aesthetic point of view.
******* Much research into both boats leads me to agree with Eric. The GB
* * * * name is better known, but as to quality, many in the know would
******* I've clipped some inserts from an artcle in "Power Boat Reports" in
******* their June 1995 issue. I didn't include the whole article as it was very
-- Edited by SeaHorse II on Tuesday 2nd of August 2011 04:58:55 PM
SeaHorse II wrote:
* Much research into both boats leads me to agree with Eric. The GB name is better known, but as to quality, many in the know would disagree.
*Well, it all depends on what you read. I've read dozens of articles over the years all sorts of magazines that say exactly the opposite.* That GB is absolute*tops in quality, value, blah, blah, blah.* I don't particularly agree with this, by the way.*
But what GB (American Marine, actually) DID do is bring consistency to this kind of boat at a time when there wasn't much of it.* The Taiwan-built boats tended to vary all over the map in terms of quality as did a lot of other makes and, of course, the custom-builds.* With their Grand Banks line, first in wood and later in fiberglass, what American Marine did was bring a high*level of consistent quality from boat to boat.
Are there better designed, better built production boats?* Sure, although from what I've seen and been told by Island Gypsy*owners on our an adjacent docks I'm not sure IG is necessarily*one of them.* But if there's anything that Grand Banks brought to the boat manufacturing table starting in the mid-1960s, it was consistency.* You could depend on a GB being what the manufacturer said it was all across the line.
Magazine reviews don't mean much as, first of all, they can't piss off their advertisers so will find SOMETHING good about any product no matter how crappy it might be.* Second, magazine writers are as biased as everyone else.* So one guy might think an IG or CHB is as good or better a buy as a GB and the next guy might think the opposite.
More telling, I think, are the prices the boats command over time which reflect the value the buyers, owners, dealers, brokers, and sellers put on them.*
None of this is to say I think an IG is a lesser boat than a GB.* But I don't think it's any better.* Actually I would say they are very much the same, in no small part because the "Kong" in Kong & Halverson was an engineer for American Marine and was*heavily involved in the Grand Banks line*before he eventually left to team up with Halverson and create the Island Gypsy line.
PS-- I should proabably add that I say all this not from a position of being a particular Grand Banks fan.* We have one and it serves us well but it is by no means our defintion of an ideal boat.**Aestheticallyi I*think the lines are awkward and top-heavy and*the sheer line has a major design*flaw in it.* The windows are too big, the flying bridge is a waste of space and weight, and the proportions of the main cabin to the trunk and forward cabin are all wrong.* It's not an ugly boat but it's definitely not a pretty one either.
As I've stated somewhere else, to both my wife and I the ideal design for a recreational cruising boat is a pilothouse design.* In terms of absolute top-notch quality and aesthetics there is only one boat I am actually familiar with that fills the bill, and that is the Fleming.* The de Fever 46 also fills our bill from an asthetics standpoint, which stands to reason as the American Marine Alaskan Series was based on a deFever design, which is also why the Fleming looks like the deFever looks like an Alaskan (Tony Fleming ran the American Marine yard for awhile before leaving to start his own company).* But I don't know anything personally about the build quality, etc. of the deFever 46*other than there is one on the next dock over from us that is an absolute beauty.
Another very good looking boat but one I know virtually nothing about is the Krogen Express.
Compared to these boats a GB and an IG and in fact*all the similar looking "trawlers" are tubs :-)**Strictly in*my opinion of course......
-- Edited by Marin on Tuesday 2nd of August 2011 05:46:04 PM
I need to say (respectfully) that I think you missed my point.
" I'll get more of my money "back" than if I'd have done the same thing with a CHB."
All products eventually become valueless. A high end product costs more and has has further to fall (value wise) so it has more value to loose so on average it looses more value every time it's sold even though it's sold for a higher price. The guy that buys the high end product pays more and he sells for more but he looses more.
*A high end product costs more and has has further to fall (value wise) so it has more value to loose so on average it looses more value every time it's sold even though it's sold for a higher price.
*Eric--- Okay, I'll go along with that, at least to a degree.* I think it's tough to make blanket statement to that effect that applies to everything all the time, but I understand your logic.
If boats were all created equal, it would make sense that the boat that lost the least in value between*buying and selling*might be the smartest buy. But since all boats aren't created equal, how do you calibrate the value of buying a higher-end boat?* Does having a better boat offset the potentially higher drop in dollar value between when you buy it and when you sell it?* What is the value to the owner of having and using*a higher-end boat with its better build quality, fewer problems, etc. during the time he owns it?* Is "value" always related to dollars, or is there an intangible defintion of "value" that cannot be calculated in dollars?
This is one of those largely theoretical discussions that may not be worth taking any farther, but I think there is more to the "higher-end" aspect of any product--- boat, car, house, revolver, lawn mower--- that affects the "value" issue than just the dollars involved.
I have an arsenal of info at my disposal relating to GBs & IGs. I have decided, however, to live to fight another day. There is no winning here.
*So does the local GB dealer.* So do the folks on the two GB owners forums (including, interestingly enough Kong's son, who grew up in both*yards and*has a GB :-) ).* And you're right, there's no winning here.* Or, in my case, caring :-)
As we all know automobiles loose a big chunk of their value when they roll of the showroom floor. And there are many other non-lineair aspects of depreciation curves that dictate that much greater loses are borne by owners at various stages in the life of a product. Where do you all think a typical trawler would suffer it's greatest losses of value excluding the very end and beginning of the lifespan of the trawler? All of my previous ideas on this thread were based on linear depreciation. Consider the 1st, 2nd and third quarter of the trawlers life. What say guys.
All of my previous ideas on this thread were based on linear depreciation.
*How can it be linear when the economy isn't?* Value loss is governed as much by the market, which is governed by the economy, as it is some sort of mathmatical depreciation formula.* When the economy is good, people have more discretionary income and are more inclined to pay higher asking prices for used boats.* When the economy is in the tank (as it has been for a few years now) that discretionary income isn't there and even people who are in the market for a boat can't afford the higher prices, so the prices come down.
The most dramatic case in point I've witnessed to date is the couple I met last year who had just purchased a brand new GB47.* This is a boat that normally sells new for over a million dollars.* The GB dealership in Seattle had gone bust and the GB47 and a brand new GB41 (the pod drive boat) were still in their inventory.* The bank that foreclosed had no interest in being a boat dealer and were themselves in financial trouble.* The boats had to go and had to go fast. So they advertised them for exactly half price.* I don't know what happened to the GB41 but this couple (from England), who obviously had the money to spend and in fact had earlier that year bought a late model GB46, snapped up the GB47 as well.* $500k for a $1 million dollar boat.* Not a bad deal.
So I think you have to account for what the market is doing to the economy in your calculations of boat value drop and that is not linear.
Now if you're talking about depreciation in the sense of depreciating something for business tax purposes, that's another deal and is (I believe) formula based. But I don't think you're talking about that, Eric.* I think you're talking about the drop in value that is reflected in the buying and selling price of a boat over time.* Yes, no, maybe?
-- Edited by Marin on Tuesday 2nd of August 2011 11:51:41 PM
Simple. Use only the DIFFERENCES in values between high and low end products. When the economy's in the tank the high and low end products depreciate about the same percentage.
I'm going to guess boats depreciate heavily in the first few years, not so much in mid life and more sharply in later life. Assuming that's true the best time to buy and sell a boat (from a standpoint of depreciation loss) is during mid life. And at the later end of that range the lesser values to be considered should produce minimum losses per year. Surely someone must have an opinion. And of course I'm not talking about extreme cases that are not relevant to this question such as the one Marin cited but it was interesting and I always feel like "why can't I fall into stuff like that".