A Selene Convert?

The friendliest place on the web for anyone who enjoys boating.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If they made a 68 Nordy with a bulbous bow, that would be my version of a "perfect trawler". I've seen some Selene's around, their woodwork is great. But not a super fan of the laid back FB.
 
Boydski:
A bit confused by your post. The Nordhavn published specs for the N46 / N47 are respectively LOA 45'9" / 47'8" and LWL 38'4" / 43'4". I did notice a significant increase in displacement (85K vs 60K lbs)) between the 2 vessels. No doubt theses are great vessels. Just could not get my average size body into the ER on the N46!!
 
Boydski:
A bit confused by your post. The Nordhavn published specs for the N46 / N47 are respectively LOA 45'9" / 47'8" and LWL 38'4" / 43'4". Just could not get my average size body into the ER on the N46!!


Hi Chris,

The N46 is the passagemaker hull from Robert Beebe's book. It is very different from the N47 hull. You'd have no trouble squeezing into the engine room on a N47. (see the photo below - stand up engine room). :D

The LOA difference depends on how the vessel's are outfitted (anchor pulpit and swim step adds to LOA - which is why mine is 51'). I find the N47 engine room pretty easy to work in and I'm VERY jealous of your Lazarette! Mine is tiny....



bc482b44b2ad248177e5e5c04fe5890f.jpg
 
Nice art work!!! Did they come with the boat??

Yes, they did and the previous owner made me promise not to take them down (like that was going to happen). :thumb:
 
I am constantly amazed that there not only seem to be no standard to relate a model size, i.e. a Selene 66, to some standard hull measurement. Every builder seems to do in differently. Looking at the detailed specs for different models, Nordy seems to match the model to the LOA, i.e. a N65 will be 65' LOA. I have yet to see a Selene where any hull measurement equals any hull dimension. i.e. the S66 is 72' 6" LOA, 68'3" LOH (don't even know what this one is!), 64' 3" LOD and 61'6"LWL. So where does 66 come from? Krogen consistently uses LOD, our 58 is 58' LOD and 63'3" LOA and 52'3" LWL. Although Nordy and KK use a different measurement, at least they are consistent and make sense.

As to the Fleming-while they are built for long ocean passages, it is still a bit of apples to oranges comparisons as they are SD hulls. the 72' mentioned carries 3,600 gallons because it ahs twin 3412's with about 1300 hp each. Not the most efficient ocean crossing setup.
 
As to the Fleming-while they are built for long ocean passages, it is still a bit of apples to oranges comparisons as they are SD hulls. the 72' mentioned carries 3,600 gallons because it ahs twin 3412's with about 1300 hp each. Not the most efficient ocean crossing setup.

Tony Flemings Atlantic and Pacific well documented travels should dispel any doubts as to blue capability of the F65 at a steady 8.5 knots with big diesels.
 
Sun-I don't question the blue water capability of the Fleming. Tony is famous for his proposition that a SD hull can be efficient at FD speeds. His boats are very well built and very attractive boats. I was just pointing out that his concepts are different than the FD hulls of Selene, Nord and KK.
 
to paul hana,i took the info right off of yachtworld,and im surprised you didn't know this!
 
to all,i was simply replying to the comment about costs,nothing else factored in.
 
As to the Fleming-while they are built for long ocean passages, it is still a bit of apples to oranges comparisons as they are SD hulls. the 72' mentioned carries 3,600 gallons because it ahs twin 3412's with about 1300 hp each. Not the most efficient ocean crossing setup.[/QUOTE]

I agree somewhat with your statement on the Fleming 72 vs this Selene being apples to oranges but the fact of the matter is, the so called experts would place both of these vessel in the same class in the trawler family.

Tony Fleming himself would say his vessels are not trawlers (he calls them motor yachts.) But yet the experts places them in the trawler family at any boat show or Trawler fest. So taking that into account, I would say it is apples to apples when comparing these 2 vessels in the over scale of things because the are in the same class, even though one is full and the other is semi displacement.

As far as the F-72 having 3,600 gal of fuel because of the big cats, that is not the case. When this vessel as built (Like all other Flemings) you have a choice in power plants. You could get twin 800 hp as well but the fuel tank stayed the same at 3,600 gals, unless you wanted smaller tanks which some people did.

In most cases, most of the owners wanted speed if needed, so they place 1500 hp Mans or Big Cats in the vessel. Even with the lager power plants, the Flemings range at the lower speed (Like 7 or 8 Knots) is really great, I believe 2,800 nm or so. But that is open for debate as we all know because of the many factors.

If I would buy this F-72, I would remove the 3412s and replace them with C-18s which would give me better GPH on long cruises with the 3,600 gal tanks and plus do some other things to her to help the GPH.

In any case. Apples to apples comes down to many different thing in someone eyes. To me it is apples to apples, to you it is not and I am cool with that. But for me I like having more fuel then most people but I do hate the fill ups though! :facepalm:

Happy cruising

H. Foster
 
Just found this thread!

What a breath of fresh Air. All very nice boats. Hopefully in a few weeks I'll have mine. Not wanting to Jinx anything, so I'll remain positive and hope this one works out.
Wish me luck!
Crusty
 
Back
Top Bottom