Bayliner "trawler" vs Mainship

The friendliest place on the web for anyone who enjoys boating.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Pau Hana said:
It's be a war only if the elite element takes offense.
Click to expand...

Pau
You miss the statement boatpoker made which is - Bayliner quality RIVALS ANY OTHER TOP LINE PRODUCIION BOAT

This is simply not the case. Elite element you say, hardly. I have owned many Bayliner quality boats, know them well and appreciate them for what they are. This is not about you, me or Bayliner owners, it is about the above statement a boat surveyor (no, not Pascoe) made
 
Getting back to the OP's question, there is a little confusion here. Mainship made two different series of 34 trawlers (they are semi-planing but were built and advertized as trawlers that run 8 kts and burn 2 gph.) the first ones were the MS I II and III built in the late 70's and early 80's had an 11' beam (+-) and a 34' loa. This is the boat the original poster was comparing to the Bayliner. In space and size the Bayliner wins hands down as it has a 13' plus beam and a 38 lwl. It is a much larger boat and as I said earlier it is a really good looking boat. The recent Mainship 34 T is much larger than the original 34 I II or III with a 14' 2" beam and a loa of about 36' and I feel would be a better livaboard than the Bayliner. They did not start making these until the mid 2000's and they are a lot more money than the Bayliner.

John
MS390
 
Call it what you will, but get the boat that fits your needs and wants. Now when I bought my trawler . . . . . . .:hide:
 
sunchaser said:
The fact that a capable skipper like Kevin can take a Bayliner to Alaska speaks for the skipper and not the boat.
Click to expand...

In my opinion this is the only statement that's relevant across the board here. To me a trawler is and always will be a boat that fishes using trawl gear: nets, spreaders, otter doors, etc.. Period.

I know all the marketing hype reasons why everything from a Grand Banks to a Sea Ray gets called a "trawler" and I don't buy into any of it. The production boats almost everyone on this forum have are simply cabin cruisers as far as I'm concerned. If Eric wants to call them "heavy cruisers" that's a fair description to.

Tom's statement applies to every type of boat on this forum. GBs and Great Harbors have gone to or from Hawaii on their own bottoms. They were stunts in each case,but they made it. Nordhavns have gone around the world without fanfare. The same model Nordhavns have spent most of their days sitting at a dock or putzing around local waters from marina to marina. We have met people with a 34' Bayliner who have made multiple five-month trips up the Inside Passage to SE Alaska and back. This in a boat some people feel is barely qualified to cross Puget Sound on a nice day.

So what's the determining factor in defining the capabilities of a boat? Sure, the design, construction, and quality will make a boat better suited for some uses than others. But rigidly limiting it? No. The operator is the defining factor.

Saying a Bayliner is of equal quality to a Fleming or a Nordhavn or a GB or an Eastbay is simply not true regardless of how much the Bayliner fan wishes or believes it is.

But saying a Bayliner or Sea Ray or high-rise Carver sundeck monstrosity is flat out not capable of doing this, that or the other thing is also not true. What it can or can't do is dependent almost entirely on the skill, judgement, and experience of the operator.

In that respect, a Bayliner or Mainship or GB or your-boat-here can do anything you are capable of making it do. It can give you a great voyage and it can also get you killed. But I firmly believe the outcome is in our hands, not the boat's.

Bottom line is that I believe a Bayliner is every bit as viable a purchase choice as a Grand Banks or a Nordhavn or a Mainship. The only thing that counts is what the boater wants to do and is capable of doing or learning to do.
 
Last edited:
The word Trawler describes a concept, the name of our full displacement round bilge "trawlers" is cutter.
 
Last edited:
Here a drawing of an old fish cutter design, see my boat.
 

Attachments

  • 17mKutter Plan.jpg
    17mKutter Plan.jpg
    146.7 KB · Views: 287
Reiziger said:
The word Trawler describes a concept, the name of our full displacement round bilge "trawlers" is cutter.
Click to expand...
Not in America...sort using "trawler" on any boat for sale site and see what comes up most frequently.
 
Marin said:
In my opinion this is the only statement that's relevant across the board here. To me a trawler is and always will be a boat that fishes using trawl gear: nets, spreaders, otter doors, etc.. Period.

I know all the marketing hype reasons why everything from a Grand Banks to a Sea Ray gets called a "trawler" and I don't buy into any of it. The production boats almost everyone on this forum have are simply cabin cruisers as far as I'm concerned. If Eric wants to call them "heavy cruisers" that's a fair description to.

Tom's statement applies to every type of boat on this forum. GBs and Great Harbors have gone to or from Hawaii on their own bottoms. They were stunts in each case,but they made it. Nordhavns have gone around the world without fanfare. The same model Nordhavns have spent most of their days sitting at a dock or putzing around local waters from marina to marina. We have met people with a 34' Bayliner who have made multiple five-month trips up the Inside Passage to SE Alaska and back. This in a boat some people feel is barely qualified to cross Puget Sound on a nice day.

So what's the determining factor in defining the capabilities of a boat? Sure, the design, construction, and quality will make a boat better suited for some uses than others. But rigidly limiting it? No. The operator is the defining factor.

Saying a Bayliner is of equal quality to a Fleming or a Nordhavn or a GB or an Eastbay is simply not true regardless of how much the Bayliner fan wishes or believes it is.

But saying a Bayliner or Sea Ray or high-rise Carver sundeck monstrosity is flat out not capable of doing this, that or the other thing is also not true. What it can or can't do is dependent almost entirely on the skill, judgement, and experience of the operator.

In that respect, a Bayliner or Mainship or GB or your-boat-here can do anything you are capable of making it do. It can give you a great voyage and it can also get you killed. But I firmly believe the outcome is in our hands, not the boat's.

Bottom line is that I believe a Bayliner is every bit as viable a purchase choice as a Grand Banks or a Nordhavn or a Mainship. The only thing that counts is what the boater wants to do and is capable of doing or learning to do.
Click to expand...

Excellent post!

A Bayliner is a production boat. They, were purchased by dealers and sat at the dealers dock untill sold.

They are not, and never will be a custom boat. They do not and never will have the "fanciness" or the fit and finish of a Grand Banks level boat.

What people seem to fail to realize sometimes is that just because a Bayliner or a Mainship is not as fancy, or have as detailed jointery that they are not less seaworthy. They are just less fancy.

A Bayliner or a Mainship is just as seaworthy as any other boat having a similar hull form. They are coastal cruisers, plain and simple. To compare them to a passagemaker for example, any passagemaker would not be fair to either boat.
 
There is a shrimp boat(looks just like any other shrimp boat) here in Galveston Bay that uses "trawl gear" to catch it's shrimp...and it is quite a sight and literally baffles my mind every time I see it head for the "house" after shrimping doing 20 knots ON PLANE!!!!

BUT................
 
I'll just pile on and agree with Marin and Kevin. Spot on.

If you poke around the web enough you'll find a blog or account by a couple who took a Bayliner 32 (maybe 34?) up and down the entire Pacific Coast, then down through Mexico, and through the canal ad up to Rio Dulce last I heard. They were well prepared and had a blast.
 
Baker said:
I see it head for the "house" after shrimping doing 20 knots ON PLANE!!!!
Click to expand...

Same in BC and Alaska, especially with the crabbers, with the Al hulls dominating on the newer builds. The sport and charter fishers with their planing hulls provide a wonderful ride in snotty conditions - plus with a weather savvy skipper can avoid the squalls and gales.
 
I don't see Bayliners as true trawlers, but they certainly can be successfully operated like one. They don't have the weight, keel depth, rudder area, range, etc.

But... I can't get home at 16 knots either. :)

I think it's more a choice to operate in trawler style that makes a trawler at heart. I cruised with a friend of mine last summer and he did the whole week with us at 6-8 knots in a 4588 Bayliner Pilothouse. He was every bit as much a trawler as I was.
 
SomeSailor said:
I don't see Bayliners as true trawlers, but they certainly can be successfully operated like one. They don't have the weight, keel depth, rudder area, range, etc.
Click to expand...

I agree with the above statement but, again, they're a lot of bang for the buck. They will, operated with caution, deliver a great on the water experience and as I've posted before, have a terrific layout for cruising.
 
I had a Bayliner 3488 which I often ran like a trawler at about 8 kts. I was seriously looking at a 3988 when I began to notice the Mainship 350/390/400
models. Ended up with a single diesel 400 - a great boat. Not capable of the speeds I was used to, the 3488 could get over 20 kts WOT. But now I have more room, less engine maintenance cost having shed one engine, and the safety factor of diesel fuel. I'm not sure I could still be on the water with what has happened to the cost of fuel. My first tankful on the Mainship was at $1.80 gal. Now it's $3.99 a gallon. That's over a 100% rise in fuel cost in just over four years. If it doubles again in the next four years, I guess I will have to swallow the anchor. Just wanted to say that I like Bayliners - and Mainships! Maybe I just love boats; yeah, I think that's it.

Here is a rare snapshot from when I owned both boats (yeah I was too dumb to sell one before I bought the other). Spring 2009.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0152[1].jpg
    IMG_0152[1].jpg
    124.7 KB · Views: 422
I look at fuel this way. It's among the SMALLEST of expenditures of boating.
 
If you are looking to liveaboard, even if only part time, I'd go for the 38 bayliner over the 34 Mainship. The 38 Bayliner has a great layout and spacious for her size and at least to me, decent classic lines for a sedan. The 34 Mainship is a nice boat but way more space on the 38. The hino diesels are great engines as well. We own a 45 bayliner right now and she gets remarkable fuel economy at hull speed and as mentioned previously a very good layout for her size. The same goes for the 38. The newer the boat the better and the larger she is the more comfortable she will be for you. either will cruise the same waters just fine if in good repair.
 
I cannot understand why the same people keep argueing about the same stuff on here ove and over and over.A TRUE TRAWLER IS A COMMERCIAL FISHING BOAT .What those of you on here are calling trawlers are jusr displacement hull pleasure boats no matter what size they are.Now move on.:)
 
expat said:
I cannot understand why the same people keep argueing about the same stuff on here ove and over and over.A TRUE TRAWLER IS A COMMERCIAL FISHING BOAT .What those of you on here are calling trawlers are jusr displacement hull pleasure boats no matter what size they are.Now move on.:)
Click to expand...

Funny...those arguing the terminology on the "Trawler Forum"...seems like some have a hard time with sandbox rues....:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
 
SeaHorse II said:
:iagree:way too much is made about gph, mpg, etc. :hide:
Click to expand...

Yep. No one complains about the cost of zincs... or the cheapest way to haul out... or the cheapest paint & varnish. I spend much more on these items each year. :)
 
Yep....if the cost of fuel stings, then you cannot afford the boat. I was even going to make an (arguably) offensive statement and say....If the cost of fuel stings, then you likely will not properly maintain the boat.
 
SomeSailor said:
Yep. No one complains about the cost of zincs... or the cheapest way to haul out... or the cheapest paint & varnish. I spend much more on these items each year. :)
Click to expand...

Perhaps you're not taking your boat out often/long enough. :)

I pay much more in property taxes (about $2500) as well as berthage (about $4000 a year) than fuel (about $1000) each year. (And then there is maintenance and the purchasing of "goodies" such as a dinghy.) Nevertheless, operating my boat efficiently is interesting even if fuel is a relatively small cost. Of course, that's because I've been operating the boat only about 125 hours a year. :flowers:
 
I dunno... they're pretty proud of my moorage ($745/mo) so I'm in nearly $10,000 a year just for the privilege of a hole in the water (electricity is extra).

I do try to operate as economically as possible, but it's such a small part of what boating is from an expense point of view... I tend not to worry about it much.
 
expat said:
I cannot understand why the same people keep argueing about the same stuff on here ove and over and over.A TRUE TRAWLER IS A COMMERCIAL FISHING BOAT .What those of you on here are calling trawlers are jusr displacement hull pleasure boats no matter what size they are.Now move on.:)
Click to expand...

I'll see if I can help you to understand.

These boats (like mine) are adverised and sold as trawlers. They may not suit your personal definition of a trawler, but language changes over time and when I tell people I own a trawler, a boat similar to mine comes to their mind. Never once have I been asked if I am a commercial fisherman.

Perhaps you can answer this question for me:

Why do we have a Department of Motor Vehicles when everyone knows they are powered by engines, not motors? ;)
 
I love thread drift. Adds zest. Bayliner in answer to the OP. As to fuel, always remember that an inexpensive bottle of red wine costs about $10 per 750ml. Fuel is a bargain, though it still hurts in the moment when the numbers ($$$) are spinning on the pump. As to what is a trawler or not, ya'll are both correct, and like a former post referenced, it just as much about how you use your boat. I run my old boat at displacement speed, hence I crawl like a trawler. See ya on the water.
 
rwidman said:
Why do we have a Department of Motor Vehicles when everyone knows they are powered by engines, not motors? ;)
Click to expand...

Because this country is at heart part of England and they call them motors over there.:)
 
SomeSailor said:
I dunno... they're pretty proud of my moorage ($745/mo) so I'm in nearly $10,000 a year just for the privilege of a hole in the water (electricity is extra).
Click to expand...

Me too! (About the same price) And my property taxes are through the roof!
 
Last edited:
Marin said:
Because this country is at heart part of England and they call them motors over there.:)
Click to expand...

An engine generates motion by burning fuel - gasoline engine, diesel engine, etc.

A motor produces motion using energy supplied to it by an outside source - electric motor, water motor, etc.
 
rwidman said:
An engine generates motion by burning fuel - gasoline engine, diesel engine, etc.

A motor produces motion using energy supplied to it by an outside source - electric motor, water motor, etc.
Click to expand...

You'll have to take that up with the British. They not only call "engines" motors, they call the whole damn vehicle a "motor." Although that particular use of the word has dropped off considerably in recent years. But all the Brits and Scotts I know call the things that burn gasoline or diesel to power a vehicle a "motor."

Hence the term even we in the US use, "motorboat."
 
Leading Edge said:
Hello all,

We are old sailors who are looking at buying a trawler to live aboard in the warm south during our cold winter months. The budget isn't high, so we (think) we have narrowed it down to either a Mark 111 Mainship 34(1984) or a 1988 Bayliner 3870. Apart from the obvious difference in fuel consumption, what other comments do people have about the pros and cons of each of these boats?

We appreciate any and all input.
Cheers,
Alison
Click to expand...

Bayliner - wider, longer, twins versus the single in the mainship.

Have you considered older motor yachts? These are extremely livable boats, more creature comfort spaces. Bertram, Hatteras, uniflight, pacemaker, Trojan are all good options for livability. What part of the country are you in? The Florida market is full of these kinds...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
New to the forum, looking to take the plunge soon. Endless boat searching currently
Replies
5
Views
642
Comodave
Comodave

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom