which is best: Nordhavn vs. Kadey Krogen

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
but a 75ft boat is more than i need for just me. I often go alone have done so al my life. Shoot, a 30 ft grady white does a fine job but not comfortable for extended stays and sucks fuel. 40 ft is about right and i likely will never do even as much with it as you have planned. If you sail to Alaska you should stop in Winchester Bay Oregon and I'll show you around...or Coo's Bay.
 
chuckle...I have owned bigger then smaller then bigger never ever owning less than two boats at any given time for the reasons you stated. No one boat can do it all it will only excell at the task its designers speced.
I've learned much from everyones pots and greatly appreciate the input. Thanks all
 
Codger2 said:
So far you've indicated that 100% of the time you'll either be fishing offshore or gunk holing. So the question you've asked, is the wrong question! A huge number of boats Will do what you've indicated you want to do!
Click to expand...

But if caught in extreme seas will they all survive equally well? I picked Nordhavn and KK because of owner stories of what they have survived. Both brands seem to me to be at the top of the chart for survivability
 
Nomad Willy said:
Nordhavn.

The 46 is one of my favorite boats .. even the style except for the stern hull shape. The stern is fine functionally but lacks graceful lines. The 46 was featured in "voyaging under Power" and the design was slanted heavily toward passagemaking. Probably the only 100% FD Nordhavn. Others are 98 to 99% FD IMO. We just went aboard one at Anacortes Trawler Fest. Was an old boat and the cap rails are wood as evidenced by missing sections of the outer coating. I had always thought the CR was plastic. What a chore that would be to refinish! My favorite boat though.


THE 43 was was praised heavily for being better than the 46 w a longer WLL so may be a bit faster than the 46 but may burn a bit more fuel. Don't like the chunky looks but the 43 is probably a very good boat.

But if I had a Seaton boat to choose from I'd probably go for that. Steel and heavy full displacement.
Click to expand...

I waffle back and forth but i also tend to like the looks of the Nord 46 but like the range of the kk 39, 44. But the fact of the matter is they are all very expensive for occasional use. I could never live on a boat no room for my toys...well part time aboard is ok
Seaton huh? Thanks I'll look them up
 
Nordhavn's and KK's are both great boats. In the end it's personal preference as they're both very capable boats, we liked what the Nordhavn had to offer in comparison to the KK. For what you're talking, the Nordhavn 75EYF is what you need, just maybe not all 75ft of it lol.
 
Read all of these and believe I will stick with my Romsdal. More fuel, more water, greater range, and well proven in the blue. Easily did New Orleans to Belize and back without thinking too much about fuel. Comfy well proven ride.
 
ulysses said:
Read all of these and believe I will stick with my Romsdal. More fuel, more water, greater range, and well proven in the blue. Easily did New Orleans to Belize and back without thinking too much about fuel. Comfy well proven ride.
Click to expand...
Romsdal??....thanks for bringing these to my attention i have never heard of them before. How many gph is your burn and at what speed?
 
There are a couple of them on here. The Delphin and mine (Ulysses), my burn is about 3 gph on a single Volvo TMD 102A @ 8 kph. Norwegian built. Might want to google them. They are steel hull true blue water LRC proven performers.
 
Everything involves compromise and there's no free lunch. Basing decisions on how you will use a boat sounds smart but isn't going to work for most people because most, including me, have desires and ideas, hopefully informed by experience, when picking the vessel. Plans come later. To me that suggests that the prudent approach is to pick the most capable boat you can manage. Of course there are exceptions. Some people do start with very concrete plans and buy the boat to suit, but I suspect that's rare. Otherwise there wouldn't be so many sitting around unused. That said, both are great boats. I only ended up with a N46 because I couldn't find a KK42 in decent condition at what I felt was a fair price.
 
bfloyd4445 said:
But if caught in extreme seas will they all survive equally well? I picked Nordhavn and KK because of owner stories of what they have survived. Both brands seem to me to be at the top of the chart for survivability
Click to expand...

Art DeFever, the Monks etc (the list is very long) designed most of their boats for off shore work lasting days on end. The trick is to avoid those bad conditions you are so concerned about. Very doable if you are not more than say 200 miles from safe harbor and have a modicum of communications.

Look at the boats that leave Coos Bay on a daily basis to go fishing. Certainly not Ns or KKs. Codgers point is a good one, you are describing a vessel that need not have blue water range.
 
Possibly The Wrong Search?

I was planning to sit this one out but couldn't resist. Based on the primary purpose (Offshore Fishing and anchoring out a few days) it appears your search for proper boat may be a little off course. Reaching offshore fishing grounds at 6 knots will use up a large part of your day and why would you want to be offshore fishing in poor weather (not much fun) only to realize at 6 knots it going to take you awhile to get back to port. Why a Nordy or KK for this mission? Something is not adding up.

Why not a 40 something boat designed to fish offshore with creature comforts which would allow you to anchor out for a few nights in a quiet protected cove? Regardless of the boat you choose you should only need to look for quality and the weather. I would look at the boats people use in the PNW for trips up to Alaska which would likely cover everything you are looking to do "90% of the time". Just my two cents.


John
Nordhavn 4050, 4061, 3522 - Former Owners
Helmsman 38E - Under Construction
 
sunchaser said:
...Look at the boats that leave Coos Bay on a daily basis to go fishing. Certainly not Ns or KKs..
Click to expand...

Yup. We fish when ever we're under way and the KK is difficult. From the fly bridge, you can't see the angler on the back deck. Trying to stay stern to a fish is a lot of yelling. A single engine boat doesn't back up worth a sh.. in flat water let a lone in big seas. Driving from the pilot house is even worse. All the boats I've been off shore on that are set up for fishing, have 2 engines, with good visibility between the upper helm and cockpit plus good forward visibility. Some even have a third, aft, lower station.

We didn't buy our KK to fish from but we make do. :)
 

Attachments

  • Picture 266.jpg
    Picture 266.jpg
    74.5 KB · Views: 115
  • 013a.jpg
    013a.jpg
    112.9 KB · Views: 108
I'm Back

It's always interesting (and fun) to read how owners of different boats feel about their boats. As with cars people have their opinion and some are more passionate then others. When we started our trawler journey we read everything we could including Nordhavn owners adventures (yes, there was some good marketing also taking place at the time) and we came to the conclusion they were the best "recreational trawler".

Were we very young - yes (likely one of the youngest owners), was our boating experience limited - yes (coastal fishing), was I safety concerned - yes (pilot / mechanic experience), did I appreciate well engineered and high quality - yes (stacks the odds in our favor). The list goes on but I did study KK and Selene to degree that many would not and in the end we took the Nordhavn route (ok maybe more than once) but I am a big fan of KK. In fact we tried a few times to build a new KK 39 after sea trials and realizing how smooth the boat was running compared to the N40. I went as far as writing a detailed comparison (pro's & con's) of each boat which I posted some time ago either here on TF or the Nordhavn Dreamers site. While we never had the opportunity to go the KK route I will always be a big fan and believe their new KK50 will be a big hit with a its more modern design and open floor plan.

I don't think anyone can wrong with either builder, it all depends on what your mission is for the boat. This being said there are other builders who offer comparable if not "greater value" in a boat which any of us can explore. It all comes down to personal choice in the end. As long as the buyer stays with a reputable builder (talk with owners on how they used their boats and study resale values - this has worked well for us) you should be able to make a smart decision. Again, just my two cents.

John

N4050, N4061, N3522 - Former Owner
Helmsman 38E - Under Construction
 
rating types

Just recieved an email from Greenline boats which included boat ratings that i thought may be of interest to you all..Now i wonder which tating applies to Hordhavn and KK vessels. My guess is B

Dear Britt,

Here is the explanation regarding the different categories of built boats:
A: OCEAN,
Designed for extended voyages where conditions may exceed wind force 8 (Beaufort scale) and significant wave heights of 4 m and above but excluding abnormal conditions, and vessels largely self-sufficient.
B: OFFSHORE,
Designed for offshore voyages where conditions up to, and including, wind force 8 and significant wave heights up to, and including, 4 m may be experienced.
C: INSHORE,
Designed for voyages in coastal waters, large bays, estuaries, lakes and rivers where conditions up to, and including, wind force 6 and significant wave heights up to, and including, 2 m may be experienced.
D: SHELTERED WATERS,
Designed for voyages on sheltered coastal waters, small bays, small lakes, rivers and canals when conditions up to, and including, wind force 4 and significant wave heights up to, and including, 0,3 m may be experienced, with occasional waves of 0,5 m maximum height, for example from passing vessels.
 
Daveo said:
Everything involves compromise and there's no free lunch. Basing decisions on how you will use a boat sounds smart but isn't going to work for most people because most, including me, have desires and ideas, hopefully informed by experience, when picking the vessel. Plans come later. To me that suggests that the prudent approach is to pick the most capable boat you can manage. Of course there are exceptions. Some people do start with very concrete plans and buy the boat to suit, but I suspect that's rare. Otherwise there wouldn't be so many sitting around unused. That said, both are great boats. I only ended up with a N46 because I couldn't find a KK42 in decent condition at what I felt was a fair price.
Click to expand...

You sir sound like me, your thoughts are also mine and you own one of my favorite veesls the n46. I keep stalling because i would like one closer to 40 than 46 but the n46 keep beckoning me. That said i also an attracted to the kk39 and 44. I do like the idea of dual cabins and heads like my old Downeast Defever 40 but i really don't need those features for mostly just me
Thanks for youyr comment
 
Larry M said:
Yup. We fish when ever we're under way and the KK is difficult. From the fly bridge, you can't see the angler on the back deck. Trying to stay stern to a fish is a lot of yelling. A single engine boat doesn't back up worth a sh.. in flat water let a lone in big seas. Driving from the pilot house is even worse. All the boats I've been off shore on that are set up for fishing, have 2 engines, with good visibility between the upper helm and cockpit plus good forward visibility. Some even have a third, aft, lower station.

We didn't buy our KK to fish from but we make do. :)
Click to expand...

:thumb: Nice catch and you confirm what i suspected of the kk's thank you very much. I've had gas guzzling go fast sportfishers which were great for fishing but not much on comfort if your going to be out for a couple of weeks. None of them carried enough fuel to last for a couple of weeks but they could hit 50+mph. That said the Nord's i suspect suffer from the same problems for fishing but i can make either work just as you did. They are both much more comfortable than a sportfisher for gunkholing and extended cruises. Thanks
 
bligh said:
More like months... 120 odd days from sf to American Samoa.
Click to expand...


True. I followed that train wreck on the spot tracker and Facebook when I used to have a fb account. Stopped following it when he jumped ship in AS.
 
bfloyd4445 said:
Just recieved an email from Greenline boats which included boat ratings that i thought may be of interest to you all..Now i wonder which tating applies to Hordhavn and KK vessels. My guess is B

Categories is the best term. These are European design categories. Here is a link to some recent information. Technical

The important thing is to remember they are not ratings of any specific completed boat but of the design of a model.

All current KK's are available as CE Category A Ocean for EU Import. So that's not automatic. I don't know what changes or adjustments they make for that category.

I imagine Nordhavn is similar if they choose to build to Category A.

Now older ones may well not be categorized if they're in the US. I would however think more Nordhavn's and KK's in the size ranges you're talking about would be for all practical purposes equivalent to Category A. There may be certain features that wouldn't meet it, but I'd think the basic hull and structure would.

The vast majority of boats under 50' are Category B with a few A's and a few B's. A Beneteau ST 50 is Category B for 14 people and C for 18 people. So that shows you the impact of load. A ST 44 is B for 12 people and C for 14. A ST 34 is B for 8, C for 10, D for 11. A ST 30 is B for 8 and not certified for any other number of people.

There are quite a few boats in the 50' to 75' range that are only Category B.
Click to expand...
 
BandB said:
bfloyd4445 said:
Just recieved an email from Greenline boats which included boat ratings that i thought may be of interest to you all..Now i wonder which tating applies to Hordhavn and KK vessels. My guess is B

Categories is the best term. These are European design categories. Here is a link to some recent information. Technical

The important thing is to remember they are not ratings of any specific completed boat but of the design of a model.

All current KK's are available as CE Category A Ocean for EU Import. So that's not automatic. I don't know what changes or adjustments they make for that category.

I imagine Nordhavn is similar if they choose to build to Category A.

Now older ones may well not be categorized if they're in the US. I would however think more Nordhavn's and KK's in the size ranges you're talking about would be for all practical purposes equivalent to Category A. There may be certain features that wouldn't meet it, but I'd think the basic hull and structure would.

The vast majority of boats under 50' are Category B with a few A's and a few B's. A Beneteau ST 50 is Category B for 14 people and C for 18 people. So that shows you the impact of load. A ST 44 is B for 12 people and C for 14. A ST 34 is B for 8, C for 10, D for 11. A ST 30 is B for 8 and not certified for any other number of people.

There are quite a few boats in the 50' to 75' range that are only Category B.
Click to expand...

thanks BandB. I was hoping someone that knew would read my post and clarify the classes. Hummm....my guess, interpertation of A would have been a class of vessels with tooling capabilities to make repairs at sea requiring milling turning etc. while class B was a boat that carried spare parts but not manufacture parts on board. Just my guess as to the diference between A,B, based upon my extremly limited knowledge.
opps, almoet forgot to thank you for the link:thumb:
Click to expand...
 
bfloyd4445 said:
BandB said:
thanks BandB. I was hoping someone that knew would read my post and clarify the classes. Hummm....my guess, interpertation of A would have been a class of vessels with tooling capabilities to make repairs at sea requiring milling turning etc. while class B was a boat that carried spare parts but not manufacture parts on board. Just my guess as to the diference between A,B, based upon my extremly limited knowledge.
opps, almoet forgot to thank you for the link:thumb:
Click to expand...

No, has nothing to do with tooling or spare parts. It's boat design.

This is not like a classification society classifying a boat as Unlimited Ocean.
Click to expand...
 
Generally, length, beam, draft, tonnage, determines the center of gravity and the center of buoyancy which then determine the meta-centric height. The interaction of these forces can provide a brief definition of stability and resistance to capsize.

The resistance to capsize or stability, happens to be what is what the classification is about, that's why you have differing ratings based on load.

See here:

When you want to get technical you can starting adding things like tank volume and baffle spacing for fuel and water for free surface effect, compartment cubic area for liquid volume if flooded, moveable deck and hold loads and their positioning, then toss in wind and sea state and their direction for fun. If you do, you can find out why you occasionally see a container ship on their side.

It's simply physics. Hope that helps a bit.
 
Last edited:
MRRiley said:
Generally, length, beam, draft, tonnage, determines the center of gravity and the center of buoyancy which then determine the meta-centric height. The interaction of these forces can provide a brief definition of stability and resistance to capsize.

The resistance to capsize or stability, happens to be what is what the classification is about, that's why you have differing ratings based on load.

See here:

When you want to get technical you can starting adding things like tank volume and baffle spacing for fuel and water for free surface effect, compartment cubic area for liquid volume if flooded, moveable deck and hold loads and their positioning for fun. If you do, you can find out why you occasionally see a container ship on their side.

It's simply physics. Hope that helps a bit.
Click to expand...

all a matter of physics for sure. My question was in regards to manufacturers ratings and what they rally mean. a class A vessel should be able to handle most seas if properly loaded and so should a class B
So if you applied these classes to boats like a westsail 32 it would have to have a class A rating but a much larger vessel may feel safer but actually be a B or C vessel
 
The EU classification, as I understand them, are based on the physics.

So yes, the size of vessel is not as important as the interaction of the forces on that vessel, as your example points out.

There is a reason physics is called the silent killer....
 
MRRiley said:
The EU classification, as I understand them, are based on the physics.

So yes, the size of vessel is not as important as the interaction of the forces on that vessel, as your example points out.

There is a reason physics is called the silent killer....
Click to expand...

Actually size comes very much into play, while not a direct factor. However, you will definitely see A's coming into play far more as the boat increases in size. That doesn't mean it's the main factor but it plays into the entire picture and meeting of the standards.
 
I think the correlation you are referring to, the ability of a larger vessel to meet the standards is correct, in general.

It is also the reason why you see more small sailboats in a class A rating then small power boats.

Generating the separation between buoyancy and gravity is tougher on smaller hulls. Small sailboats get to use the keel in their calculations.

I'm getting a bit out of my wheelhouse here. Perhaps we'll get one of the Naval Architects to weigh in on the topic.
 
bfloyd4445 said:
all a matter of physics for sure. My question was in regards to manufacturers ratings and what they rally mean. a class A vessel should be able to handle most seas if properly loaded and so should a class B
So if you applied these classes to boats like a westsail 32 it would have to have a class A rating but a much larger vessel may feel safer but actually be a B or C vessel
Click to expand...

I doubt very much that a Westsail 32 would have a class A rating. On the other hand, I'm not familiar with any boat over 75' with less than an A rating, although I'm sure there are some exceptions.

What the ratings mean is that the design of the boat meets criteria established by the EU for the purposes described in each of the categories. It's that simple. It doesn't mean you're going to be safe or unsafe in various conditions, just that the boat meets the basic design criteria to handle those conditions. However, there are many other factors to being safe on the water. The classification societies do address far more factors. ABS though, as an example, doesn't class anything under 79'.

Nordhavn has a very good write up on this subject.

Welcome to Nordhavn.com - Power Thats Oceans Apart
 
MRRiley said:
I think the correlation you are referring to, the ability of a larger vessel to meet the standards is correct, in general.

It is also the reason why you see more small sailboats in a class A rating then small power boats.

Generating the separation between buoyancy and gravity is tougher on smaller hulls. Small sailboats get to use the keel in their calculations.

I'm getting a bit out of my wheelhouse here. Perhaps we'll get one of the Naval Architects to weigh in on the topic.
Click to expand...

There are so many factors. Look at a 44' Rivarama, open boat, and it's Category A.
 
BandB said:
I doubt very much that a Westsail 32 would have a class A rating. On the other hand, I'm not familiar with any boat over 75' with less than an A rating, although I'm sure there are some exceptions.
Click to expand...

I'm honestly not trying to be contrary here, but here is a hull lay out schematic for a Westsail 32

WESTSAIL 32 sailboat specifications and details on sailboatdata.com

Even a brief glance can allow one to determine that generally, they have aprox. half of their volume submerged with their full keel.

When determining the buoyancy and gravity calculations, which then determine meta-centic height, it's not tough to see why they in fact, may have a class A certification.

Of course it's not as easy as a quick glance at a line drawing, but the principle of the mathematics demonstrated in the video above remain valid.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
Nordhavn 40...lack of side decks
2 3
Replies
76
Views
6K
Bravo
B
J
Small boat cruising SE U.S.
Replies
9
Views
1K
mvweebles
mvweebles
mvweebles
5-mos Cruising Pacific Mexico Q&A
Replies
11
Views
1K
PNW
PNW
Adopo
Stability and righting ability
Replies
19
Views
3K
Hippocampus
H
slowgoesit
"The "average" boat in the Sea of Cortez"
Replies
3
Views
3K
ksanders
ksanders

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom