ideal ocean crossing trawler yacht

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
FCJ:

I know that you've mentioned you're not heading in the direction of a custom built boat but have you considered the fact that when your boat does finally find you it will most likely not be equipped the way you want her and she will most likely need a retrofit? Depending upon what you want done this could take many many months.

Also, in one of your earlier comments you mentioned that you were considering a Bering yacht (Steel the Best). That being said, might I suggest you have George Buehler (designer of the Diesel Ducks and many other ocean crossing capable vessels) design the perfect FCJ boat and take that design to Bering and have them build it for you. I'm willing to bet a company like Bering would be eager to build you a boat and with their team and experience you'd end up with one helluva ship. Something to consider...?

Oh, regarding stabilizers.... Go with active stabilizers, fins, as opposed to a gyro if you don't want to constantly run your generator to supply power to the gyro.
 
Last edited:
I'm new to all of this but this whole stabilization issue is confounding.
Please feel free to direct me to the "Stabilization for Dummies" section.

But if it's that big a deal why are the vessels not designed to mitigate the use of stabilization too begin with?
Why would you not want stabilization in open water?
Why isn't it just standard equipment?
My list of ignorant questions is endless on just this one issue!!
This is one complicated dream, maybe I'll just go back to racing cars as my retirement dream LOL!
 
Cervelo said:
I'm new to all of this but this whole stabilization issue is confounding.
Please feel free to direct me to the "Stabilization for Dummies" section.

But if it's that big a deal why are the vessels not designed to mitigate the use of stabilization too begin with?
Click to expand...

Because the "market" demands tons of living space with all kinds of "amenities" which makes for boats with way too much weight (in my opinion) above the waterline. To avoid excessive moorage rates all this stuff gets crammed into as little length as possible, which makes for fat, wide, & tall boats.

Having said that, if I wanted a boat to travel across oceans (even a low profiled sensible one) I'd want paravanes anyways for comfort and to reduce the risk of injuries in heavy seas.
 
Last edited:
Cervelo said:
I'm new to all of this but this whole stabilization issue is confounding.
Please feel free to direct me to the "Stabilization for Dummies" section.

But if it's that big a deal why are the vessels not designed to mitigate the use of stabilization too begin with?
Why would you not want stabilization in open water?
Why isn't it just standard equipment?
My list of ignorant questions is endless on just this one issue!!
This is one complicated dream, maybe I'll just go back to racing cars as my retirement dream LOL!
Click to expand...

If you check out Dickey Boats, the LRC 58 is exactly what you are talking about. There is a short video on there website that explains the designing required to eliminate the need for stabilization and redundancy...it makes perfect sense and creates a very stable ultra efficient vessel. The drawback as pointed out is living space, for me, the trade off well worth it, for crossing oceans safely and efficiently I think the LRC 58 would make a great choice..I did try to contact them for some follow up questions, but they did not respond to my emails, unfortunate...
 
Genecop said:
If you check out Dickey Boats, the LRC 58 is exactly what you are talking about. There is a short video on there website that explains the designing required to eliminate the need for stabilization and redundancy...it makes perfect sense and creates a very stable ultra efficient vessel. The drawback as pointed out is living space, for me, the trade off well worth it, for crossing oceans safely and efficiently I think the LRC 58 would make a great choice..I did try to contact them for some follow up questions, but they did not respond to my emails, unfortunate...
Click to expand...

Ahhh...now that's a boat designed for crossing oceans, not for "amenities"!

 
MurrayM said:
Ahhh...now that's a boat designed for crossing oceans, not for "amenities"!

Click to expand...


true, very efficient under way...

when you get there you get to hang out in a salon that is about as comfortable and looks like it came out of a truck camper.

And when you go into a slip you pay for a long boat with very little livability.

The Nordhavns are slower and not as fuel efficient but you can live in a 50' one really comfortably.

Boats are like planes.. want to go fast.. long and skinny.. want comfort they need to get beamy.

Want to do a fast circumnavigation.. get a Dashew... want to enjoy hanging out at all the places you go on a round the world cruise get a Nordhavn.

HOLLYWOOD
 
Paravanes are uncommon above the mid 40 foot range. Virtually if not all blue water intended FD recreational vessels built today utilize active stabilizers. There is a reason. Sure you can get a vessel without them. One ocean voyage will convince you as to advantages.

The boating world has progressed, whether active stabilizers, newfangled instruments, AC or mechanicals. But, your money and your choices.
 
Cervelo said:
I'm new to all of this but this whole stabilization issue is confounding.
Please feel free to direct me to the "Stabilization for Dummies" section.

But if it's that big a deal why are the vessels not designed to mitigate the use of stabilization too begin with?
Why would you not want stabilization in open water?
Why isn't it just standard equipment?
My list of ignorant questions is endless on just this one issue!!
This is one complicated dream, maybe I'll just go back to racing cars as my retirement dream LOL!
Click to expand...

Stabilization is standard on many boats. Almost all cruising boats over 50' have it, except some die hard brands like Nordhavn which make it optional still as many of their owners would rather go with paravanes. I want stabilization anchored and in open water, in all conditions.

20 years ago, stabilizers still seemed to give some trouble. 10 years ago, I know at least one builder that couldn't get them right. Now, they're more perfected, more dependable.

I can't imagine an ocean crossing vessel without stabilization, at least paravanes.
 
Folks quite often confuse stability with stabilizers. One is a condition of design and calculable the other is an appliance used to attenuate motion. Stabilizers do not improve stability. It may seem like a fine point but it leads to much of the confusion on the subjects.
 
hollywood8118 said:
true, very efficient under way...

when you get there you get to hang out in a salon that is about as comfortable and looks like it came out of a truck camper.

And when you go into a slip you pay for a long boat with very little livability.

The Nordhavns are slower and not as fuel efficient but you can live in a 50' one really comfortably.

Boats are like planes.. want to go fast.. long and skinny.. want comfort they need to get beamy.

Want to do a fast circumnavigation.. get a Dashew... want to enjoy hanging out at all the places you go on a round the world cruise get a Nordhavn.

HOLLYWOOD
Click to expand...

True 'nuff, for some.

We boat to get places, then go ashore for hiking, exploration and photographing, not to hang out on the boat. The boat for us is a tool to reach otherwise inaccessible and relatively untouched areas, not as a moveable destination in and of itself.

Peoples "needs" vary, and that boats fills ours perfectly :thumb:
 
Last edited:
CPseudonym said:
Eric, go back to post 2 and click on the Watson 72 link. Then look for the 58' project they are working on and look up its propulsion options, Watson offers 3 options for all its boats. Option 3 is twin engines half the size of the single and they are showing as 60.5% efficient as opposed to the single being about 55% efficient.

I actually thought about our conversations last night while I was reading those specs.
Click to expand...

"55% efficient"

What does this mean? 55% or 60.5% of what?
 
hollywood8118 said:
when you get there you get to hang out in a salon that is about as comfortable and looks like it came out of a truck camper. HOLLYWOOD
Click to expand...

Humm, the Dashews I've been in are built for comfort and luxury. But, can't knock the Nordhavn's success nor will I try.

At about 1/2 the cost of a Dashew, Nordhavns are deservedly popular. But all too many N owners are dock sitters or Coastal at best, something well satisfied by an Outer Reef, OA, Horizon, DeFever or Fleming that still have ocean chops. Competition abounds.
 
On the stabilization issue:

If I ever get a bigger boat for long range cruising, I'm still leaning towards paravanes. Mostly because active fin systems seem complicated to me-- something I couldn't repair myself underway. I think I could repair a paravane system underway or in a far off place. Also I think ongoing maintenance for paravanes will be less money. Plus paravanes are cheaper initially.

The trade off is paravanes are obliviously harder to deploy, and they create some clutter on deck that my wife doesn't like. Also, most boats are not built with paravanes other than Ducks and some Nordhavns and a few custom boats, and many boats might not be able to be retrofitted for paravanes, so this limits my choices.

What else am I missing in this comparison? Active fins probably control roll a bit better than paravanes, and the speed reduction might not be as bad with active fins.
 
sunchaser said:
... Nordhavns are deservedly popular. But all too many N owners are dock sitters or Coastal at best, something well satisfied by an Outer Reef, OA, Horizon, DeFever or Fleming that still have ocean chops...
Click to expand...

This is where ego enters into the equation. Not saying that's necessarily a bad thing, just acknowledging the elephant in the room.
 
Dashews are more expensive than Norhavn's?
Can't be per foot of OAL. Per ton?

Wxx3,
Went back and looked. Watson calles it Propulsion Efficiency. Not clear what that is but re other text on their site it looks like it takes in other considerations .. not just fuel burn. Like perhaps fuel burnt for a given weight vessel over a given distance. Maybe someone else can elaborate.
It's in the "54' Project".
 
Last edited:
Fish Catcher Jim said:
Many Boats,
We have been thinking about a custom build alot lately
and yet when I know the time is right to make the purchase, well just not sure I want to wait another year or so for thee trawler.

Sure would enjoy finding something like this 60 foot pilot house ( indendance shipwrights ltd )(LeCleark hull )in steel and not glass. Thank you for the confirmation
Jim
Click to expand...

Hey there Jim; I was given a tour of the Independent Shipwright's vessel in 2010 while it was still under construction. The owner (not the builder) owned a cabinet making business and during slow times had his craftsmen do the interior. Beautiful workmanship.
 
hollywood8118 said:
true, very efficient under way...

when you get there you get to hang out in a salon that is about as comfortable and looks like it came out of a truck camper.

And when you go into a slip you pay for a long boat with very little livability.

The Nordhavns are slower and not as fuel efficient but you can live in a 50' one really comfortably.

Boats are like planes.. want to go fast.. long and skinny.. want comfort they need to get beamy.

Want to do a fast circumnavigation.. get a Dashew... want to enjoy hanging out at all the places you go on a round the world cruise get a Nordhavn.

HOLLYWOOD
Click to expand...

Been in many truck campers over the years, while it's true the LRC 58 has less living space, the quality looks to far exceed a truck camper..
 
Genecop said:
Been in many truck campers over the years, while it's true the LRC 58 has less living space, the quality looks to far exceed a truck camper..
Click to expand...

I guess I wasn't specific enough.. for a boat this size I want the comfort of furniture.. not a dinette that looks like it belongs in a camper

HOLLYWOOD
 
I tried to look at those ocean going vessels but my wallet jumped out of my pocket and b*t$& -slapped me.
 
Genecop said:
If you check out Dickey Boats, the LRC 58 is exactly what you are talking about. There is a short video on there website that explains the designing required to eliminate the need for stabilization and redundancy...it makes perfect sense and creates a very stable ultra efficient vessel. The drawback as pointed out is living space, for me, the trade off well worth it, for crossing oceans safely and efficiently I think the LRC 58 would make a great choice..I did try to contact them for some follow up questions, but they did not respond to my emails, unfortunate...
Click to expand...

By the way - if you don't get any email response from Dickey yachts - I'd recommend you contact the designer directly. I have emailed him last year and he always responded pretty quickly. Not sure what's wrong with Dickey - seems like they don't like selling boats.

Here is the designer's email address:

Dennis Harjamaa
dennis_harjamaa@hotmail.com
 
Wxx3 said:
"55% efficient"

What does this mean? 55% or 60.5% of what?
Click to expand...

I'm fairly sure they are talking about propellor efficiency, and minimising prop slip. 50% would mean the boat moves ahead only half of what your prop pitch is per revolution.

For full displacement boats high efficiency tends to mean large diameter props and low rpm.
 
Stornoway,
Really do like the Choy Lee 66. Saw your boat at anchor when I was down in tassie last year.
Looking a few up on the net and saw one for sale in Spain with a pair of 6LXB Gardners, now that would really get me going, if only I was looking for a new boat.
Back in Tassie next year for the Wooden Boat Festival but this time on a mates boat.
 
CPseudonym said:
Reality for perhaps 98+% of boat owners is they will never spend more than $50K on a single boat in their life.
Click to expand...

I'm kind of curious where you came up with this statistic? Go to any marina and it is chock full of boats that someone spent more than 50k on. You are saying for every one of these boats, there are 49 boats that cost less than 50k sitting around? Like I guess family ski boats/day sailers in garages and such?

$50k doesn't go very far in boating.
 
JustBob said:
Like I guess family ski boats/day sailers in garages and such?
Click to expand...

Are they not boats? Do those owners not qualify to be called boaters?

I admit that was a made up statistic but if anything I bet it was low. Murray on this forum used to travel with his wife via sea kayak, am willing to bet he traveled more distance on those kayaks than most folks will in larger cruising boats.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
insuring a trawler cruising trawler
Replies
18
Views
2K
Capt Ray
C
Roger Long
Rolling, rolling.
Replies
12
Views
2K
Kit_L
Kit_L
mvweebles
5-mos Cruising Pacific Mexico Q&A
Replies
11
Views
1K
PNW
PNW
slowgoesit
Loss of SV Rum Truffle, Bahia del Sol bar, El Salvador
2
Replies
45
Views
5K
slowgoesit
slowgoesit
Nocanvas
12,500 miles still going
Replies
10
Views
2K
Nocanvas
Nocanvas

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom