Trawler vs Motor Yacht Running Gear

The friendliest place on the web for anyone who enjoys boating.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
I have talked to some Sea Ray and Carver owners that love their boats because they can go slow for economy, but have the option of going fast if needed. Its an appealing argument.

I've got a buddy with a 29' Sundancer (SeaRay), single 7.4 carb, Bravo3 I/O. I put a FloScan on for him. He gets about 1.5mpg at displacement speed and about the same just up on step (~28mph) - he can go 40mph but no data at that speed except the mpg is well into fractions.
558876_4503369471353_1214347177_n.jpg



Big Duck is 28' w/ Chevy 350 carb, single prop I/O and I often see better than 3mpg at 6 - 8 mph. We're supposed to be able to go 30, but never had the urge to go that fast.

DUCK-POWELL.jpg


Bigger boats, MPI's, twins and diesels may be different?

BTW - You see each of the boats in it's natural habitat - the 'bubble boat' likes marina cleats, Big Duck likes anchors/beaches.
 
Pluto,
Back to the original question and notwithstanding the jokes about my father-in-law's old boat having no rudders. Rudders come in different sizes and effectivenesses. I was only suggesting that running on one engine should be part of a seatrial for your prospective boat b/4 you count on it as a get home device.
 
Since the propwash is going backwards at high speed and blasting over the rudder trying to push it backwards and the rudder is attached to the boat the propwash is pushing the boat backwards. But of course the prop is pushing the boat forward more so the boat goes fwd but I wonder how much better the boat would go forward w/o the rudders pulling the boat backwards.
 
Great! Hope you first trip is a good one. I recommend the Abaco area for a first trip or any other trip for that matter to the Bahamas. Depending on speed you will have one or two days to Ft. Pierce. When the weather is right, hang a left and head over to the Little Bahama Bank. Enjoy.:socool:

We're thinking about keeping it south during the winter so we can do a few trips to some different places each year.
 
Since the propwash is going backwards at high speed and blasting over the rudder trying to push it backwards and the rudder is attached to the boat the propwash is pushing the boat backwards. But of course the prop is pushing the boat forward more so the boat goes fwd but I wonder how much better the boat would go forward w/o the rudders pulling the boat backwards.

In an earlier discussion we had about rudders, we discussed a plate type rudder split along the propeller shaftline with each section aligned with the spiral propeller race for minimum resistance. Unfortunately, when I tried this on my boat I did not have the instrumentation to measure any small gains I may have acheived.
But my feeling, after trying both the above configuration and the opposite(called a contra-rudder) as used on the Liberty Ships, was that very little gain was to be had either way for vessels our size. One type lessens drag by aligning better with propeller race, the other attempts to straighten the race spiral giving more thrust.
 
Pluto,
Back to the original question and notwithstanding the jokes about my father-in-law's old boat having no rudders. Rudders come in different sizes and effectivenesses. I was only suggesting that running on one engine should be part of a seatrial for your prospective boat b/4 you count on it as a get home device.

I have never heard anyone with a twin regardless of make say there was insufficient rudder authority when running on one engine. On our own boat the wheel needs to be held perhaps five degrees off centered--if that-- to maintain a straight course on one engine. Our wheel is three turns lock to lock so the effect on steering by running on one is negligable.

I would say that a twin engine boat that goes in circles on one engine despite the best efforts with the rudders is a horribly designed boat, to the point I can't imagine a company even making one let alone anyone buying one.
 
Most of the pleasure, trawler and motor yachts, twin screw are exposed. Please understand the word trawler has become another term for a displacement and/or semi displacement motor yacht. The word trawler today is more about the look of the super structure above the water line, not below the water line. Many brands use the same hull and running gear on both their trawler and motor yacht models. So to me most of this discussion is not very informative as most are pleasure. If you really want to see the difference take a walk though a marine yard that has commercial trawler, pleasure trawler, pleasure motor yachts, and you will see a the difference.:socool:


I tend to follow what the commercial do, while keeping in mind the Eagle is a pleasure wantabe commercial. :thumb: I know of several larger twin screws pleasure on one engine will not steer worth a darn, and most do not have a deep draft or a keel.
 
The term/expression "exposed" re the propellers (mostly) on trawlers is fine or safe if you kiss the bottom but the real issue is when you are "hard" on the bottom and can't move or even more typically you anchor and find the water far from your boat at low tide.

At any event when your boat is laying on the bottom most all trawlers here will heel considerably pushing their props into the sand, rocks or mud if it's a twin engined boat.

If you're on a really flat bottom and in a lake your'e in luck.

The only time I accidentally struck bottom w Willy it was a very big rock or extension of bedrock. We hit w a loud bang. I was out on the bow in my shorts in less than a minute. The boat including her prop was not damaged.
 
At any event when your boat is laying on the bottom most all trawlers here will heel considerably pushing their props into the sand, rocks or mud if it's a twin engined boat.

That's the nice thing about the GB hull (and maybe the IG hull, too). I know of a few twin GBs that were driven aground or ended up aground when the tide went out and in these cases there was no damage to the running gear at all when the boats went over onto their sides. The keel of a GB is quite deep and extends a fair distance below the props and rudders (compared to many other boats of this type) and the wide, afterbody and hard chine keeps the boat from going over far enough to endanger the running gear.

Not that we anticipate ever going aground, but it's nice to know that if we did and the tide went out and the boat leaned over the expensive-to-repair running gear would be protected.

The much greater worry would be what would happen when the tide came back in. Would the boat start to float and right itself before the water got high enough on the downside of the boat to flood it. In one case I know of-- a GB42 woody (single) that went aground at high tide at the north end of the Swinomish Channel and was left high and dry when the tide went out-- the boat did not begin to right itself soon enough and the rising water flooded the boat and it was declared a total loss. The Vessel Assist operator in the marina at Cornet Bay on Whidbey salvaged and rebuilt it.
 
Last edited:
Trawler vs. Motor Yacht

I can't speak for most MY's because I am not familiar with them.
I can speak about the 36 Mainship MY because that is what I have.

So to answer your question "Can you run one at 8 kts and hold a heading?" Yes.
Can you make tight turns or quick turns at 8 Kts? No.
At about 4-6 kts coming out from my slip, down the fairway and into the channel requires using the two engines for steering. At this speed, the rudders are useless and I rarely even use the wheel for this maneuvering. Trust me, I know the difference. I'm used to a single engine sailboat drifting into my slip and being able to make a turn with almost no forward speed.

Keep in mind that to me personally, there is a big difference between a MotorYacht Hull and a Trawler Hull. A true displacement hull almost like a sailboat hull from the waterline down. My MY is considered a semi-displacement hull - to me, it is a planning hull. It is designed to go fast and the rudders are downsized accordingly. MY steering wheel has 5 full turns from stop to stop. Most displacement hulls I am used to only have around two full turn from stop to stop.

You generally cant have high speed and economy/efficiency at the same time.
The idea that you can go faster to get out of trouble sounds good in theory. In practice, with a slow going full displacement, the owners usually keep weather in mind all of the time. While the go fast guys are speeding back to the dock, the go slow guys are looking for an anchorage. Difference in attitude I guess. Which is safer? I dunno. Most displacement hulls are made for rough weather. Most semi-displacement hulls are not. When it comes to design, you generally want light weight for speed and heavy weight for comfort.
Which design is better? That depends on how you want to travel and play.
 
At about 4-6 kts coming out from my slip, down the fairway and into the channel requires using the two engines for steering. At this speed, the rudders are useless and I rarely even use the wheel for this maneuvering.

While I think the term "Motoryacht" is being used incorrectly here to differentiate fast boats from slow ones (Grand Banks boats with full-width aft cabins are called motoryachts, for example) the notion that the rudders on fast boats can be nearly useless for slow-speed maneuvering is valid and is not a new problem. I've been told more stories by WWII PT boat vets about the pathetic maneuverability and subsequent accidents, some funny, some not, of these boats at slow speeds than stories about any other aspect of the boats.

The 80' Elco was the worst with its tiny spade rudders placed behind each of the three props. At speed I've been told by the guys that drove them that the boats handled beautifully. At idle they were an absolute bitch. As Tony describes above, steering was done with the outboard engines, the center engine being used only in the event they had to stop or back the boat away from a collision with something.

The problem was compounded by the fact that all three props on a PT turned the same way. So there was a degree of prop walk that had to be contened with as well.

Most diesel cruisers--- like GBs for example--- have rudders sized to be effective at speeds from dead idle to 15 knots or so. Faster than that and the spade GB rudders are probably getting way too draggy and dangerously influential. The photo is of our boat. This shape and size of rudder is common to most of the GB line other than the current models. They were made of bronze but at some point they changed to fiberglass. Ours are bronze.



image-973773786.jpg
 
Last edited:
Hijacked Posting!!

Why does every posting having to devolve into a discussion of twin versus single.
The never ending debate. Ok I get it. The poor guy actually asked some very good questions that many of you have so much experitise, but instead bla, bla bla.

OK, so my two cents and it have nothing to do with twin vs single, well sort of nothing.:)

When I finally decided on our 42' krogen, it was because I realized we needed the efficiency of the hull and engine. I needed a boat that could be BELOW 2 gal an hour, otherwise I would not be able to afford to go anyplace on my pension and the whole point was to blow this Popsicle stand.

My 42' Krogen will do 6 knots at 1 gal per hour; 7 knots at 1.5 gal/hr and 8 knots at 1.8 and hull speed (8.3 kts) at just above 2.

This clearly is a function of the hull design (more than just full displacement) and the engine sizing (no un-useful horsepower).

In reading most posts in this forum the last few months, many of you have some really nice and affordable boats. i find myself thinking, did I check that boat out??

But it always gets back to the fuel and design efficiency.

If yo have an engine that will push the boat at 15 to 20 kts, it will not be as efficient at 7 knots. AND then if you have two of them, let's talk about twins vs singles.

feeling feisty now


Now answer the rest of his questions. i would love to hear the debate.



Richard
 
Why does every posting having to devolve into a discussion of twin versus single. The never ending debate..... The poor guy actually asked some very good questions...

Re-reading Pluto's original post it seems he had two basic questions. Paraphrased, they were how vulnerable in reality is the running gear on the so-called go-fast boats, and can a go-fast boat be controlled accurately and safely at slow speeds?

My short answers are "very" and "it depends."

Having never run a V-bottom go fast boat other than our Arima fishing boat, I can only say that the Arima slides all over the place at slow speeds while maneuvering. At slow speeds, by which I mean the 4 knots that is so often the speed limit in harbors, the boat "wanders" in terms of heading and requires ongoing helm corrections although they are not serious. I assume a larger boat of the same no-keel, V-hull configuration will be somewhat similar.

The friends we boat with have a 36' lobsterboat. Commercial lobsterboat hull with a larger house and forecabin on it for cruising. It is a semi-planing hull made to go about 15 knots with 420 hp. With fuel prices the way they are, they run the boat these days at about 8-9 knots. The boat seems to be quite steady at that speed in terms of holding a heading.

But..... being a lobsterboat hull it has a fairly substantial keel. So it tracks well at any speed.

When the water gets rough, however, they kick it up to 12 to 15 knots because at slow speeds in rougher water the hull really wallows around despite the keel. So speed is the solution to smoothing out the ride and tracking accurately in his boat.

In our heavy (30,000 pound), deep keel (comparatively speaking), boat, the tracking in rough water is just as good as the tracking in smooth water unless the waves are coming from astern and trying to knock the boat into a broach. But where we get knocked around constantly by following waves, our friend simply speeds up to where he is going faster than the waves. End of problem.

The exposed running gear on a twin and the risk thereoff is a question that relates only to twins--- it's not a single vs twin question. To that, the only answer can be, "It depends on the boat and the waters the owner is cruising in." Up here, there is a lot of stuff in the water. I know that in our Arima at 30 mph, we have to be pretty alert to what's out ahead of us. We bought the boat new in 1987 and haven't hit anything damaging yet but we've had to do a few hard (sliding) turns to avoid something that got past our distance scan.

The GB at 8 knots is a much easier platform to see what's out there and have plenty of time to avoid it. And there is no slide to its turns and the rudders are big so it's easy to maneuver precisely in tight quarters or to thread one's way through a crab pot float field or miss the deadhead Mark illustrated on the first page of this thread.

In the end I think Pluto has to decide what kind of boating he wants to do. Fast, slow, or somewhere in between. GBs can be run fast (like 15, 16 knots) if you put enough engine power in them but the fuel consumption goes thorugh the roof. A late model GB42 with the stock 400-plus hp Cats in it burns about 6-7 gph to go about 9 knots. These engines will push the hull up to a continuous cruising speed of 15 knots or so very comfortably, but now the fuel burn is 23-24 gph. So not quite twice the speed for almost four times the fuel burn.
 
Last edited:
Marin - can you do 25 words or less?
 
Sure. But I'd rather answer all the follow-on questions up front rather than have to keep explaining myself later.
 
Marin's answer:

"My short answers are "very" and "it depends."


That sums it up pretty neatly. So, I guess this thread should be over if other comments are not allowed.

I didn't miss the significance of Marin's number. Marin while 10.000 is a milestone there is nothing magic about it. It's not the number but the content that matters.
 
I don't believe it: not until every boater has replaced their Bruce/Claw anchor, has acquired a dual-engined boat, and shunned forward-leaning pilothouse windows.

Contrary to Marin, I'm the antithesis of those philosophies.

Prediction: Marin will aim for at least 100,000 posts, or more.
 
Last edited:
Prediction: Marin will aim for at least 100,000 posts, or more.

Nope. 9,999. It's a promise I made to myself several years ago to not break 10,000. I mean, come on. Ten thousand posts to an Internet forum? That borders on sick.:(

It remains to be seen if I can do it but I'm sure as hell going to try. The GB owners forum should take care of any Internet connection I want to the boating world. And I only post there a couple of times a month on average.

So just 101 posts to go. I'll try to use them wisely.

I suspect the only thing I'll really miss is sharing photos because we occasionally get some nice ones on our halibut fishing trips up the north end of Vancouver Island and cruises into lower BC.
 
Last edited:
Nope. 9,999. It's a promise I made to myself several years ago to not break 10,000. I mean, come on. Ten thousand posts to an Internet forum? That borders on sick.:)

It remains to be seen if I can do it but I'm sure as hell going to try.

Borders???? :facepalm: :thumb:

Crap - Don't do it Marin!! You'll have cold sweats and headaches! Every Forum deserves to experience/have the ying and yang of contributors... You're always one or the other... usually the other - LOL! :lol:
 
Nope. 9,999. It's a promise I made to myself several years ago to not break 10,000. I mean, come on. Ten thousand posts to an Internet forum? That borders on sick.:(

It remains to be seen if I can do it but I'm sure as hell going to try. The GB owners forum should take care of any Internet connection I want to the boating world. And I only post there a couple of times a month on average.

So just 101 posts to go. I'll try to use them wisely.

I suspect the only thing I'll really miss is sharing photos because we occasionally get some nice ones on our halibut fishing trips up the north end of Vancouver Island and cruises into lower BC.

10k posts on an internet forum is nothing.

On other forums many posters have 100k +
 
Should this actually happen (and I think it will) I, for one, will miss his writings as they are well thought out and always informative. I have learned from his travels but won't go to the GB Forum to continue the process.

I can say the same for Moonstruck, Flywright, dwhatty, and a few others that escape me at the moment. Marin's posts are somewhat lengthy at times but don't most of us wish we had a little more length? :)oops)
 
We're thinking about keeping it south during the winter so we can do a few trips to some different places each year.

Good idea.:thumb: You are only a couple or 3 hours drive from most anywhere in south Florida. Cars are much more economical to run than boats. Moonstruck has no permanent "home port". We leave her in various area for several months to explore before moving on. Living in Florida, you can do both.:socool:
 
Thank you all for your comments. Since our "mission" will be to live aboard for a few months at a time, and our cruising area will be the Bahamas and the Loop, I think we will be better off with a heavy displacement type boat that can take some licks. I have been boating long enough to know that **** WILL happen. I do like the modern interiors of some of the Sea Ray, Baytliner types though.
Now, would you suggest a single or a twin engine?
JUST KIDDING!
 
Good idea.:thumb: You are only a couple or 3 hours drive from most anywhere in south Florida. Cars are much more economical to run than boats. Moonstruck has no permanent "home port". We leave her in various area for several months to explore before moving on. Living in Florida, you can do both.:socool:

We are excited about the prospect of doing the same. Pretty much anywhere on the St John's River is within a 40-60 minute drive, so that's on the agenda!
 
Nope. 9,999. It's a promise I made to myself several years ago to not break 10,000. I mean, come on. Ten thousand posts to an Internet forum? That borders on sick.:(

We'll drink to that. ;)

img_155795_0_d40490c9b9fdbb0f4ebd161dd2a47149.jpg
 
Back
Top Bottom