Pilothouse Trawlers

[O C Diver]

Baker wrote:

They are rare, but Marine Trader made a 34 Pilothouse....pretty damn neat boat. I just searched YW and did not see any available. But at one point a while back, there were 3 on there. They are "widebodies" so no side decks.

A boat I have been watching for a couple of years now is this one...and IG36 Europa. Don't know what is wrong with it because it hasn't sold and they keep dropping the price.....but it sure looks nice on paper.

http://www.yachtworld.com/boats/199...pa-2250876/Punta-Gorda-Isles/FL/United-States

Was looking at that boat wondering the same thing. Looks like a Krylon make over in the engine room. For those not familiar with the concept, it's using cans of spray paint to cover rust and corrosion instead of properly cleaning and repainting. The Galley looks really small. Then there is the twin 135 Lehmans in a 36' boat. Will be heading to FL in January. May have to go take a look.

Ted

*


-- Edited by O C Diver on Wednesday 29th of December 2010 06:18:16 PM

 

[Baker]

Ted, let me know what you find if you do. I have been tempted to call the broker and ask "what's up". But not at that stage yet.

 

[koliver]

What Bob said. But Peter was my shelter neighbour for about the last 10 years, where he kept his Bayliner. He definitely practiced what he preached. All of his boats were "Billabong" acknowledging his down under roots. When I first met him, Billabong was a GB 36, as his brokerage had just acquired the GB brokerage. He moved up in GBs, and sold a ton of them. When he retired, he sold his Oceanis 44 and bought the Bayliner. He has retired from boating now, having sold the Bayliner in 2010.

 

[Marin]

O C Diver wrote:Then there is the twin 135 Lehmans in a 36' boat.

Can't answer the twins vs singles question for you as that's a decision you'll have to make based on your own requirements.* But the one thing the FL120s and 135s have going for them is they are pretty narrow engines.* We have two FL120s in the engine room of our GB36, plus an Onan MDJE,which is not a small generator, but while things are tight they are not unmanageable in terms of access.* There is sufficient room outboard of the engines for even me, at 6'3" and 250 pounds, to sit.* The issue is more in the getting there than in the being there.* There are battery boxes to get over and the space outboard of the starboard engine has some holding tank plumbing in it that makes it tricky to get around the front of the engine.

A single engine in anything makes for pretty nice engine access unless the engine space is really cramped to begin with.* But if a 36' boat has a decent size engine compartment, and if the plumbing, batteries, seacocks, etc. are laid out in such a way as to not be in the way, a pair of Lehman straight-sixes don't take up as much room as one might think.



*

 

[Woodsong]

Baker wrote:

They are rare, but Marine Trader made a 34 Pilothouse....pretty damn neat boat. I just searched YW and did not see any available. But at one point a while back, there were 3 on there. They are "widebodies" so no side decks.

A boat I have been watching for a couple of years now is this one...and IG36 Europa. Don't know what is wrong with it because it hasn't sold and they keep dropping the price.....but it sure looks nice on paper.

http://www.yachtworld.com/boats/199...pa-2250876/Punta-Gorda-Isles/FL/United-States

I agree- very nice looking Europa design trawler/sedan based on internet pictures.

 

[O C Diver]

Marin wrote:

*
O C Diver wrote:Then there is the twin 135 Lehmans in a 36' boat.

Can't answer the twins vs singles question for you as that's a decision you'll have to make based on your own requirements. But the one thing the FL120s and 135s have going for them is they are pretty narrow engines. We have two FL120s in the engine room of our GB36, plus an Onan MDJE,which is not a small generator, but while things are tight they are not unmanageable in terms of access. There is sufficient room outboard of the engines for even me, at 6'3" and 250 pounds, to sit. The issue is more in the getting there than in the being there. There are battery boxes to get over and the space outboard of the starboard engine has some holding tank plumbing in it that makes it tricky to get around the front of the engine.

A single engine in anything makes for pretty nice engine access unless the engine space is really cramped to begin with. But if a 36' boat has a decent size engine compartment, and if the plumbing, batteries, seacocks, etc. are laid out in such a way as to not be in the way, a pair of Lehman straight-sixes don't take up as much room as one might think.



*

*

Hi* Marin, I am definitely a single engine guy. That said, I look at a 36 sedan trawler and can see it with a small pair of diesels.

Instead this particular boat with a pair of Lehman 135s, weighs 4,000+ pounds (20%) more, draws 5" more water, has to carry an extra 100 gallons of fuel, and appears to have Bennet trim tabs to get the* boat to trim, as compared to an equivalent 36 Marine Trader Sedan on the same site.

IMO, a pair of 60 HP yanmars (or equivolent) would weigh about the same as a single Lehman, be more than enough HP to cruise at 8 knotts without all the extra weight and trim issues.

If your going to put twins in a boat, doubling the same engine you use in a single engine boat, is at best lazy engineering and at worst ......could create a dog.

But this is just my opinion.
Ted

*

 

[Woodsong]

O C Diver wrote:

*

If your going to put twins in a boat, doubling the same engine you use in a single engine boat, is at best lazy engineering and at worst ......could create a dog.

But this is just my opinion.
Ted

*

*



Out of all the boats out there that are available as twin OR single screw configurations, how many actually see a decrease in individual hp for the twin vs. single hp set up???? *99.999% of the time, twin set up is merely a duplication of the single engine power plant. *I agree with previous posts....makes no sense to have twin 120-135 hp engines on a 36-38' trawler when single screw has one 120-135hp engine!

 

[Baker]

Woodsong wrote:

*
Baker wrote:

They are rare, but Marine Trader made a 34 Pilothouse....pretty damn neat boat. I just searched YW and did not see any available. But at one point a while back, there were 3 on there. They are "widebodies" so no side decks.

A boat I have been watching for a couple of years now is this one...and IG36 Europa. Don't know what is wrong with it because it hasn't sold and they keep dropping the price.....but it sure looks nice on paper.

http://www.yachtworld.com/boats/199...pa-2250876/Punta-Gorda-Isles/FL/United-States

I agree- very nice looking Europa design trawler/sedan based on internet pictures.

*

Woodsong, I am not referring to the Europa design. *They actually built a true pilothouse designed boat....I hate to call it a raised pilothouse but I guess it really is. *There is a salong and galley and then a step(s) up to the pilothouse area. *I don't remember if it was open to the salon of if it is bulkheaded off. *It is a really neat boat and haven't seen many of them. *I just tried a google search and got nothing....I might have even got a virus for visiting some arcane website. *Anyway, do some looking around. *They are really cool boats....obviously suffering all of the ills of other MTs. *And Like I said above, they are widebodies so there are no side decks but it does make for a very roomy boat for a 34 footer. * It has a cockpit and then it has pilothouse doors to the forward side decks and bow.

*

 

[Marin]

O C Diver wrote:

If your going to put twins in a boat, doubling the same engine you use in a single engine boat, is at best lazy engineering and at worst ......could create a dog.

This is a point that Eric keeps making and I think he's right with regards to displacement boat or any boat where the owner is NEVER going to want to cruise faster than about displacement speed.

BUT---- a lot of boaters want to go fast when they want to go fast and go slow economically when they want to go slow.* Best example I can give for our waters is the fellow who wants to get up to Desolation Sound in a day, then spend a week mucking about the various anchorages and harbors up there, and then run back here in a day.* At seven or eight knots it's a two or three day trip.

The only way to do what our guy wants to do at all efficiently is to use a boat with a semi-planing hull and sufficient power to run the boat at 15-18 knots or whatever, but then have engines that are happy enough to chug along at relatively low power settings using not much fuel for the rest of the week.* The ony way to get that is to put a couple of fairly powerful engines in that hull.

Hence the trend in GBs to put two of the "standard" engines in their semi-planing boats.* They can go fast(er) when the owner wants to and slow when he wants to.* Can't do that with a pair of little engines that together generate just enough power to move the boat efficiently at or near hull speed.

 

[Codger2]

Marin wrote:"Hence the trend in GBs to put two of the "standard" engines in their semi-planing boats.* They can go fast(er) when the owner wants to and slow when he wants to.* Can't do that with a pair of little engines that together generate just enough power to move the boat efficiently at or near hull speed."

And that pretty much sums up my philosophy in picking the right boat. Everything
else is fluff.

*

 

[Nomad Willy]

O C,
No it's not just your opinion. I think mostly the same way. On most slower boats there is a narrow range of how much power should be installed. The slower the boat the narrower the range gets until almost no deviation is best. If a boat requires 240hp your choice is one 240h, two 120hp, three 80hp or four 60hp engines. Any more than about 30% deviation results in an undesirable boat. A 42' GB w 120hp is such a boat. The GB will require about 80% power to go 7 knots. If it were a full disp hull it would require about 50% of the 120 hp to push the boat at the speed it was designed for. Most of the under loading and other undesirable propulsion practices are the fault of manufacturers, builders and the demands of buyers. If the 42' GB was a full disp hull 120hp would be about right and if the 42'GB had a full disp hull and 240 hp it would be again an undesirable boat**** ....unless it displaced twice as much as it does. This bad and sad state of undesirable power loading is the fault of uneducated buyers (mostly) builders and designers. The latter are all to egar to go along w the buyers misconceptions. There was a 36' GB repowered w two 55hp Yanmars (something that I told Marin he should do mostly in fun) on Yacht World and it sold even though it was wood. I looked at a C & L 37 recently and it was running bow down in a picture and I'm wondering if the boat was designed for two 120 engines instead of one. When boat builders make boats w engines way too big the owners down through the years have no choice (once they buy the boat) but to over drive their hull or under load their engine/s.

Marin you were posting when I was. Yes that does put the twin engine GB boats about where they should be** ..BUT that does not justify the single unless they were to offer it w a full disp stern design.

Walt ,* YES. Once the designer matches the power to the hull the "design" is over 50% done.





-- Edited by nomadwilly on Wednesday 29th of December 2010 10:21:47 PM

 

[markpierce]

Being a former sailor of 20-to-30-foot sailboats, I see a consistent 7 knots to be expeditious.* And I thought you NW sailors (operating in Seattle-Vancouver-Ketchikan and similar waters) were always having to maneuver among logs and crab-pot lines, so I don't see how high speed is consistent with that worry.

 

[Moondance]

Couple more to look at-

1979 Marine Trader 38 DC Trawler - 38' Trawler Yacht for Sale in Locust, New Jersey

http://www.olx.com/1973-gulfstar-diesels-must-see-iid-144130687

 

[Marin]

nomadwilly wrote:

Marin you were posting when I was. Yes that does put the twin engine GB boats about where they should be** ..BUT that does not justify the single unless they were to offer it w a full disp stern design.

Yes, the production of singles was justified as there were enough buyers who wanted the simplicity of a single engine boat, the economy of a single engine boat, the lower service and maintenance costs of a single engine boat, the lower purchase price of a single, and so on.* However with regards to GBs, fewer and fewer single engine boats were made as time went by because more and more GB buyers wanted the option to go fast when they wanted to.

But single-engine GBs, even single-engine FL120 GBs, can generate enough power to cruise above displacement speed if the owner really wants to.* And once the engines in single GBs began exceeding 200 hp, while they couldn't run along at 15-16 knots, they could do 10 or 12 or more in the case of the GB36, which still gives the owner the ability to get somewhere faster than at 7 or 8 knots.

When it comes to GB and the other "trawlers" like them, you've got to forget about dsplacement speed efficiency and the relatively low power required to achieve it because that was not what American Marine was interested in when they started the GB line.* Even Spray, the prototype for the GB line, could thump along at a pretty good clip with her one engine and semi-planing hull.* And that's what American Marine wanted in their new line of b boats.* Efficiency, but not at the price of trapping the owner at or below displacement speed.

Ths photo is of Spray at speed in 1962.

 

[markpierce]

Theoretically, the Coot could go 9 knots at nearly 70 gallons an hour, if the engine was large enough, compared to about a half-gallon at 7 knots.

Per its designer: "Heres her projected requirements in calm and off the weather conditions. Obviously, fighting the tide or a blow requires more RPM, hence HP, to maintain speed. But these numbers give a rough guide. A typical diesel will develop almost 20 HP for an hour on one gallon of fuel. Id tend to cruise at about 1.2 or so speed/length ratio. 6 1/2 to 7 knots is a good clip, and the engine will easily do it. Notice the difference between 7.6 knots and 9; that translates to 1.2 gallons an hour to over 70 an hour.....

*
<center></center>

-- Edited by markpierce on Thursday 30th of December 2010 01:53:28 AM

 

[Marin]

markpierce wrote:

And I thought you NW sailors (operating in Seattle-Vancouver-Ketchikan and similar waters) were always having to maneuver among logs and crab-pot lines, so I don't see how high speed is consistent with that worry.

We do constantly have to maneuver around debris, eel grass mats, crab pot floats, etc.* If you have a fast boat, you have to be on your toes that much more.* My friend Carey used to run his lobsterboat at about 15-16 knots when fuel prices were lower.* So far as I know, he never hit anything.* But both he and his wife kept a full-time vigil for stuff in the water at that speed.

We run our Arima at 30 mph to and from where we want to fish if the water conditions permit. Same thing--- we keep a sharp lookout for stuff in the water.

But interestingly, even at 30 mph, it's not all that hard to see the stuff out ahead of you.* In the waters we fish in we're making a heading change what seems like every 30 seconds or so to avoid something, but it's not like suddenly it's there and you have to panic-turn to avoid it.* When we're running at 30 mph in the Arima we still see whales and eagles and all the interesting stuff around us.* We just look farther ahead at what's out ahead than we do in the GB.

I drive my car at 60 to 80 mph on my daily commute.* Compared to that, 30 mph is pretty slow even when you're just a few feet above the water.* And 8 knots, that's just crawling.* So we never have a problem seeing the stuff in the water unless the light direction and surface conditions tend to mask it at which point it can get a bit tricky.* But most of the time the stuff's pretty easy to see.* That doesn't change the fact that, fast or slow, we are almsot constantly altering heading slightly to miss something we don't want to hit or run through.

 

[Navigator]

markpierce wrote:

Notice the difference between 7.6 knots and 9; that translates to 1.2 gallons an hour to over 70 an hour.....

Hi Mark,* I think that is a typo on the designer's part. Should probably read " to over 7 an hour"

*

 

[O C Diver]

markpierce wrote:

Theoretically, the Coot could go 9 knots at nearly 70 gallons an hour, if the engine was large enough, compared to about a half-gallon at 7 knots.

Per its designer: "Heres her projected requirements in calm and off the weather conditions. Obviously, fighting the tide or a blow requires more RPM, hence HP, to maintain speed. But these numbers give a rough guide. A typical diesel will develop almost 20 HP for an hour on one gallon of fuel. Id tend to cruise at about 1.2 or so speed/length ratio. 6 1/2 to 7 knots is a good clip, and the engine will easily do it. Notice the difference between 7.6 knots and 9; that translates to 1.2 gallons an hour to over 70 an hour.....


*
<center></center>

-- Edited by markpierce on Thursday 30th of December 2010 01:53:28 AM
*

Hi Mark, as already mentioned, the 70 gallon per hour number is clearly wrong unless you are putting 1,400 HP in the boat. Also it say 1/2 gallon per hour at 7 knots. Don't think you are pushing that boat at 7 knots at less than 1 GPH. What will it draw?

Ted

*

 

[markpierce]

*S/L Ratio..... Knots..... HP
1 ...... ..........5.63........ 3.9
1.1............... 6.19....... 6.0
1.2 ...............6.75....... 9.5
1.25............. 7.03...... 12.8
1.3............... 7.32...... 17.3
1.35.............. 7.6........ 23.5
1.6................ 9.0 ...... 149.3

Yup, at one gallon per hour per 20 horsepower equates to about 7 gallons an our at 149 horsepower.* Someone should tell George.

 

[Carey]

O C Diver wrote:

Need some suggestions for boats to look for.

Ok, so I'm looking for a sedan or a pilothouse trawler. My budgets is <$150,000; need to be able to cruise solo; and think I want to be between 34' and 45'. Seen lots of sedans that are doable, but still looking.

Then I started looking hard at the 42' Krogens. Really like them, but the 2 that I have seen in (near) my price range have been project boats (bottom jobs or exterior cosmetic nightmares). Like the pictures that I have seen of the Willards, but I'm on the wrong coast for the few in my size range. Saw a Transpac Eagle 32 that I liked but am afraid it's to small. Really liked it's big brother (Eagle 40), but there out of my price range.

So, what pilothouse trawlers am I missing? Would like to be around 40', fiberglass, preferably single screw, and hopefully minimal exterior wood.

Appreciate any suggestions.

Ted

TedHere is the first boat I would look at if I were in the market. Sunnfjord is a quality boat built by long time fishing boat builders in Tacoma, WA.
http://discoveryyachts.net/ Look at the 38' Sunnfjord Pilothouse.
Carey

*

 

[Marin]

Carey---

I think the website you meant to post is http://www.sunnfjordboats.com/

If one wants a raised pilothouse, the only two in the current Sunnfjord line are the 36' and the 48' models.* The 38' and the 42' are "normal" cabin configurations like GBs--- the lower helm station is not raised any higher than the main cabin.

-- Edited by Marin on Thursday 30th of December 2010 07:08:21 PM

 

[markpierce]

Marin wrote:

If one wants a raised pilothouse, ...

If the pilothouse floor isn't raised, it's not a pilothouse IMHO

*

 

[Carey]

Marin wrote:

Carey---

I think the website you meant to post is http://www.sunnfjordboats.com/

If one wants a raised pilothouse, the only two in the current Sunnfjord line are the 36' and the 48' models.* The 38' and the 42' are "normal" cabin configurations like GBs--- the lower helm station is not raised any higher than the main cabin.

-- Edited by Marin on Thursday 30th of December 2010 07:08:21 PM

MarinNo, I meant to post the link that I posted. There is a used 38' Sunnfjord Pilothouse Trawler listed with Discovery Yachts for $150k.

*

 

[Marin]

Missed that one on the link. It has a raised pilothouse, too.

 

[CaptKrunch]

this one looks a bit like a mini K K Whale... nice looking boat

http://www.yachtworld.com/boats/200...rawler-2043360/Port-Townsend/WA/United-States

 

[Carey]

CaptKrunch wrote:

this one looks a bit like a mini K K Whale... nice looking boat

http://www.yachtworld.com/boats/200...rawler-2043360/Port-Townsend/WA/United-States

NO, NO, NO. I could make a long list of what looks wrong with that boat. Sorry! It truly looks like Captain Crunches or Popeye's boat.*

*


-- Edited by Carey on Thursday 30th of December 2010 10:25:41 PM

 

[hollywood8118]

Carey wrote:CaptKrunch wrote:

this one looks a bit like a mini K K Whale... nice looking boat

http://www.yachtworld.com/boats/200...rawler-2043360/Port-Townsend/WA/United-States

NO, NO, NO. I could make a long list of what looks wrong with that boat. Sorry! It truly looks like Captain Crunches or Popeye's boat.
-- Edited by Carey on Thursday 30th of December 2010 10:25:41 PM
Carey,
I totally will side with you on that comment... I know that boat and I am totally unimpressed with it.. so is the owner, he bought a GB36 to replace it!. The inside is worse than the outside ( I know that is hard to imagine! ) we have a word for a boat that looks like that one... FUGLY!
HOLLYWOOD

*

 

[sunchaser]

I am breathless with anticipation to see the final selection.

-- Edited by sunchaser on Thursday 30th of December 2010 10:50:54 PM

 

[Carey]

hollywood8118 wrote:

*
Carey wrote:CaptKrunch wrote:
this one looks a bit like a mini K K Whale... nice looking boat

http://www.yachtworld.com/boats/200...rawler-2043360/Port-Townsend/WA/United-States

NO, NO, NO. I could make a long list of what looks wrong with that boat. Sorry! It truly looks like Captain Crunches or Popeye's boat.
-- Edited by Carey on Thursday 30th of December 2010 10:25:41 PM
Carey,
I totally will side with you on that comment... I know that boat and I am totally unimpressed with it.. so is the owner, he bought a GB36 to replace it!. The inside is worse than the outside ( I know that is hard to imagine! ) we have a word for a boat that looks like that one... FUGLY!
HOLLYWOODHollywoodI may have to steal that word, or at least appropriate it from time to time.


We have a local boatbuilder who came out with a line of aluminum boats that forced us to use the name UFB (ugly f---king boats). They just went out of business, in part because only the military could put up with the looks. It's unfortunate, but not all boat designers have an eye for it. i recognize a good looking boat, but find mysel unable to design one from scratch.

*

 

[Tidahapah]

As my boat builder always said , if it looks right it most probably is.
Thats from the eye of a boat builder mind you some people just have ugly sight.

Benn