Selene 36 or 37 Nordic Tug

My wife and I are getting ready to put our 1992 Marine Trader Double cabin up for sale and are looking to upgrade to either a 37 NT or a 36 Selene. We have therally enjoyed our trawler on Lake Michigan for the last 12 years and have been fortunate to get to spend a couple weeks cruising each summer with our two young children. We really love the layout of the double cabin and the two bathrooms but we just toured a 2007 37 NT and really liked the boat. Our biggest concern is the access to the fly bridge via a ladder and engine room. After touring the NT I don’t have any issues with the engine room other then the Selene is still an AMAZING setup. If anybody has any personal experience with either good or bad we would love to hear about it. I know I love the layout of the Selene but we also really like the looks interior and exterior of the NT fly bridge. With the kids getting older (now 6 & 8) a little more speed may come in handy in the years to come with everyone’s schedules getting busier. I also felt pretty cool in the pilot house?. Any comments on seaworthiness would be great. Currently we don’t cruise for fun if Lake Michigan forecast is greater than 1-3 foot. With new boat I am hopping 2-4 would still be tolerable if we wanted to get to the next port.

Just a general and anecdotal comment from someone who doesn't own either brand. The NT owners I know really like their boats. Really like them. I'm sure a NT owner or two will have something to say on specifics.

They are two different types of boats. The NT is semi displacement hull that is fast(ish) and made for coastal cruising. The Selene is a full displacement hull that is slow but is made to handle blue water travel.

I have only heard good things about the NT's. I can't say the same for the Selene's.

Personally, I don't like the looks or the layout of the NT but that's just personal preference. I have always wanted a Selene. The mechanic that works on my boat told me that Selene's don't hold up when you take a close look under the covers. He's seen goofy factory wiring, etc. Another fellow told me that the fit and finish is not as good as it could be, at least not for the prices that they charge. I still really like Selene's.

If I ever decide to go full displacement I'll probably go with Nordhavn. Probably a 2000+ N46. Hell, I'd take any Nordhavn. I wouldn't turn down a Selene or Nordic Tug either. All good boats.

Good Luck

I have had the pleasure of speaking with both NT and Selene owners & Captains. The personalities are different. the vessels are both quality and have equal quality seen in performance and resale. Fit & finish both quality. NT owners often would like more room and counter space for entertaining, Selene owners are more intimate. I am partial to the Beneteau Swift trawler 35, 44 and 47. Great value, space and performance. Full displacement and semi-displacement at hull speed. Consider a review of the boattest.com on the Beneteau models.
Enjoy your journey - and forthcoming passages.

Check out one other option, the Corvette 340, called the smallest large yacht out there. Very roomy. Senior executives from the well known Fleming brand bought out the Corvette brand, brought one of the senior managers with the transaction from the old Corvette company, and moved production to the same yard the Flemings are manufactured.

So it isn't a Fleming but it kind of is and you just know the workers in the yard and some other Fleming types had input into the newest Corvette 340's.

Hi,

I will take delivery of my new Selene very soon, I am also very familiar with Nordhavn and in terms of quality of engineering and craftsmanship the Selene are at least comparable to the Nordhavn, customisation is much easier with the Selene factory and at more affordable costs. Opinions such as the one from your mechanic are probably based on a bad experience, we all have had bad experiences with one builder or another but it would be nice to have such opinion based on facts rather than a general negative comment...

dirtdoc1 said:

They are two different types of boats. The NT is semi displacement hull that is fast(ish) and made for coastal cruising. The Selene is a full displacement hull that is slow but is made to handle blue water travel.

I have only heard good things about the NT's. I can't say the same for the Selene's.

Personally, I don't like the looks or the layout of the NT but that's just personal preference. I have always wanted a Selene. The mechanic that works on my boat told me that Selene's don't hold up when you take a close look under the covers. He's seen goofy factory wiring, etc. Another fellow told me that the fit and finish is not as good as it could be, at least not for the prices that they charge. I still really like Selene's.

If I ever decide to go full displacement I'll probably go with Nordhavn. Probably a 2000+ N46. Hell, I'd take any Nordhavn. I wouldn't turn down a Selene or Nordic Tug either. All good boats.

Good Luck

Click to expand...

Reelalure,
My wife and I have owned our Nordic Tug 37 (2002) for 2.5 years now. Like many others, we are former sailboaters. We are very pleased with our boat. She is very comfortable for 2 people and the occasional guest with a good layout and use of space. My wife loves the galley and counter space and we definitely prefer having a pilothouse as compared to having the "steering station" as part of the salon/galley.
Both my mechanic and marine electrician comment on how well made all aspects of the boat are! The electrician states that "this is how a boat should be wired, but it is rare to see it".
We go out on our boat for at least 3 months at a time, and last summer travelled over 1500 nautical miles to the Alaska border and back, crossing areas of open ocean several times. Most of the trip is in "relatively" protected waters called the inside passage. Many of the long inlets get reversing winds regularly and we were out in 35 knot winds (gusts) several times and the boat handled that easily and comfortably.

We did experience a rough ride crossing Georgia Strait (Salish Sea) on the way home with very confused seas, 25 knot winds (that were not predicted) and at least 4 foot seas (some 6 foot). The boat handled it very well, it was just not as comfortable a ride as I usually prefer! Having the "extra" power available to "match" the conditions is a good feature and allows for some experimenting to "find" the most comfortable ride possible under the conditions. We don't have a flybridge and did not want one as we wanted to keep windage to a minimum (but each to his own).
I have no first hand experience with Selene's but I like the "look" of them and they seem like good boats. However, good friends of mine who own a larger Kadey Krogan, know several Selene owners who have had several "build" problems with their Selene's. Some models are "supposed" to be somewhat prone to "leaks" from the exterior (so I have heard). However, I would not base a purchase decision on that "information" as it is only anecdotal.
We looked at many boats (different makes and models) prior to our purchase (at least 50) and did a lot of research. We do not regret our decision to go with Nordic Tug and would buy another. However, there are several changes that have been made in the last few years, that I feel are not in the best interest of the brand and are "lessening" the "name", so I would only look at boats from a few years ago and older. Condition and maintenance are the keys to finding a "good boat".
If you have specific questions or just want to chat more, send me a PM.
Good luck with your decision, and remember, all boats are a compromise, it is unlikely you will find one with everything you would like,
Tom

Build issues, or not, aside - on an older boat the hope is that good ongoing maintenance has fixed any original defects. The S36 morphed into the S40 and stretched things out a bit. The S36 can accommodate two couples comfortably. We chartered one in 2005 for a week. The only issues we had were with a balky side door and a less than responsive helm at slow speeds.

Good question but tough to compare. They are very different boats based upon running both.

We had a 2000 NT 32 and moved up to a 2008 NT 37 in September. As Tom said above, they are stout boats and build quality is excellent in older models. For many reasons, including Volvo, I would not consider a new NT. We cruise at about 7.5 knots and burn 1.8 GPH. It is nice to have the reserve speed to use when needed. We can do 17 knots but burn 20 GPH to do it at WOT. I find the engine room to be well laid out and easy to access most service points. Resale is solid with NT. We owned our NT32 for six years and sold it for $2K less than we paid for it. Hope that helps.

Thanks for all the great info!

We appreciate all the feed back and are getting excited about our search!

CaptainSEA said:

Hi,

I will take delivery of my new Selene very soon, I am also very familiar with Nordhavn and in terms of quality of engineering and craftsmanship the Selene are at least comparable to the Nordhavn, customisation is much easier with the Selene factory and at more affordable costs. Opinions such as the one from your mechanic are probably based on a bad experience, we all have had bad experiences with one builder or another but it would be nice to have such opinion based on facts rather than a general negative comment...

Click to expand...

I did also say that I like Selenes and think they are quality boats. You are correct in saying that all builders have issues now and then. Let me know how it works out for you.

dirtdoc1 said:

They are two different types of boats. The NT is semi displacement hull that is fast(ish) and made for coastal cruising. The Selene is a full displacement hull that is slow but is made to handle blue water travel.

I have only heard good things about the NT's. I can't say the same for the Selene's.

Personally, I don't like the looks or the layout of the NT but that's just personal preference. I have always wanted a Selene. The mechanic that works on my boat told me that Selene's don't hold up when you take a close look under the covers. He's seen goofy factory wiring, etc. Another fellow told me that the fit and finish is not as good as it could be, at least not for the prices that they charge. I still really like Selene's.

If I ever decide to go full displacement I'll probably go with Nordhavn. Probably a 2000+ N46. Hell, I'd take any Nordhavn. I wouldn't turn down a Selene or Nordic Tug either. All good boats.

Good Luck

Click to expand...

Hi, Selene 36, 40, 42 are just a certified CE-B category like Nordic Tug 34, 37 and 42. These smaller Selene trawlers are not better "Blue water" boats than NT because the manufacturer did not apply for CE-A certification from Europe, It would be better in marketing sense here, Any reason for preventing them from registering with CE-A, in fact, their stability curve is too poor vs exaple SD hull Elling E3/E4


CE category:

Category A – Ocean: covers largely self-sufficient boats designed for extended voyages with winds of over Beaufort Force 8 (over 40 knots), and significant wave heights above 13 feet, but excluding abnormal conditions such as hurricanes.
Category B – Offshore: includes boats operating offshore with winds to 40 knots and significant seas to 13 feet.
Category C – Inshore: is for boats operating in coastal waters and large bays and lakes with winds to Force 6, up to 27 knots, and significant seas 7 feet high.
Category D – Inland or sheltered coastal waters: is for boats in small lakes and rivers with winds to Force 4 and significant wave heights to 18 inches.




NBs

North Baltic sea said:

Hi, Selene 36, 40, 42 are just a certified CE-B category like Nordic Tug 34, 37 and 42. These smaller Selene trawlers are not better "Blue water" boats than NT because the manufacturer did not apply for CE-A certification from Europe, It would be better in marketing sense here, Any reason for preventing them from registering with CE-A, in fact, their stability curve is too poor vs exaple SD hull Elling E3/E4


CE category:

Category A – Ocean: covers largely self-sufficient boats designed for extended voyages with winds of over Beaufort Force 8 (over 40 knots), and significant wave heights above 13 feet, but excluding abnormal conditions such as hurricanes.
Category B – Offshore: includes boats operating offshore with winds to 40 knots and significant seas to 13 feet.
Category C – Inshore: is for boats operating in coastal waters and large bays and lakes with winds to Force 6, up to 27 knots, and significant seas 7 feet high.
Category D – Inland or sheltered coastal waters: is for boats in small lakes and rivers with winds to Force 4 and significant wave heights to 18 inches.




NBs

Click to expand...

Regardless of the CE rating. A full displacement hull is going to perform better than a semi displacement hull in heavy seas. My boat has a semi displacement hull and is considered a coastal cruiser because of that. I'm not going to be offended if someone states that it's not a blue water boat - because it isn't. I didn't mean to imply that the NT was lacking in any way because of the hull design. Am I incorrect when I state that the NT has a SD hull and the Selene has a FD hull? If I am incorrect about that then I will stand corrected, otherwise I stand by my statement.

I've been checking out the Selene 36, 40, now 42 Archer and Sedan models. They even make a "Kiwi" model of this hull which is basically the Sedan model less the flybridge. Nice boats but I feel they may be a wet boat due to the low freeboard at the bow. I found it strange that they would build this boat on a FD platform, generally associated with blue water cruiser, and not have a more substantial freeboard forward at the bow. Having such large staterooms at opposite ends in the Archer model may persuade me to accept the low freeboard issue...if the deck and windows don't leak!

Jim Cooper said:

I've been checking out the Selene 36, 40, now 42 Archer and Sedan models. They even make a "Kiwi" model of this hull which is basically the Sedan model less the flybridge. Nice boats but I feel they may be a wet boat due to the low freeboard at the bow. I found it strange that they would build this boat on a FD platform, generally associated with blue water cruiser, and not have a more substantial freeboard forward at the bow. Having such large staterooms at opposite ends in the Archer model may persuade me to accept the low freeboard issue...if the deck and windows don't leak!

Click to expand...

I've been trying to find info on the smaller Selene models. The 42 on down. They refer to the 42 as a coastal cruiser so I assume that it is not a FD hull. I believe all of the models from the 43 on up are full displacement hulls. I stand corrected.

dirtdoc1 said:

They refer to the 42 as a coastal cruiser so I assume that it is not a FD hull. I believe all of the models from the 43 on up are full displacement hulls. I stand corrected.

Click to expand...

Dirt - the 42 is absolutely a FD hull, and carries a substantial weight for her size! She is really a 40 ft. vessel but like many builders, they are calling the model a 42 because they extended the hull under the swim platform. I hate when builders use that marketing ploy but it seems many do nowadays.

Jim Cooper said:

Dirt - the 42 is absolutely a FD hull, and carries a substantial weight for her size! She is really a 40 ft. vessel but like many builders, they are calling the model a 42 because they extended the hull under the swim platform. I hate when builders use that marketing ploy but it seems many do nowadays.

Click to expand...

Yea I thought it was a bit heavy for a SD hull. 40,000 lbs for a 42 (45' LOA) boat is a lot. The 2220 lbs of ballast adds to that. Do any SD hulls come with a ballasted keel? I guess they refer to it in their literature as a "coastal cruiser" because of the CE B rating.

So many things can keep a boat in the CE B category. Windows too big, not enough drainage in the cockpit, etc.. The Selene 42 is a stout little boat! I'm impressed.

By the way - my name is David Cooper.

North Baltic sea said:

Click to expand...

If you look at the Selene 40 Acher (LWL 38") hull line and compare Nordic Tug 37 (LWL 37"4') so the difference between FD vs SD hull profil is so small that I can't see it.

Secondly, I am sea trial Selene 40 archer who had twins (qsb 230hp) and his speed was about +14 knots, and it is more than a FD hull speed about 8,3kn LWL 38" ...

Selene 40 is the exquisite and spacious boat, but the fuel consumption of a large vs NT37 and here in diesel costs a lot, that's why my choice was NT37 which proved to be very stable in difficult sea conditions here, even with SD.

NBs

North Baltic sea said:

If you look at the Selene 40 Acher frame line and compare Nordic Tug 37 so the difference between FD vs SD is so small that I can't see it.

Secondly, I am sea trial Selene 40 who had twins and his speed was approximately 14 knots, and it is more than a hull speed ...

Selene 40 is the exquisite and spacious boat, but the fuel consumption of a large vs NT37 and here in diesel costs a lot, that's why my choice was NT37 which proved to be very stable in difficult sea conditions here, even with SD.

NBs

Click to expand...

I haven't been able to find any literature that states that the Selene 42 has a full displacement hull. It doesn't look like a FD hull to me but it does have 2020lbs of ballast. I assume it's in the keel. My guess is that the Selene has a softer chine along with the ballast and probably a steeper deadrise but that still doesn't make it a FD hull. If you compare it with a Nordhavn the Nordhavn has a much more rounded (bulbous) and deeper hull. I think that's why Selene does not call it a full displacement hull.

OK NBs I give. You win!

dirtdoc1 said:

I haven't been able to find any literature that states that the Selene 42 has a full displacement hull. It doesn't look like a FD hull to me but it does have 2020lbs of ballast. I assume it's in the keel. My guess is that the Selene has a softer chine along with the ballast and probably a steeper deadrise but that still doesn't make it a FD hull. If you compare it with a Nordhavn the Nordhavn has a much more rounded (bulbous) and deeper hull. I think that's why Selene does not call it a full displacement hull.

OK NBs I give. You win!

Click to expand...

Hi, no winners or loss. FD vs SD is sometimes just a line drawn in water, and the engine choice can make it anyway. I 100% agree with the actual FD is plump over the water, but also stern.

NBs

The S36 and S40 share the same basic FD hull. Without stabilizers they roll a lot. The N37 may well have the advantage in this regard.

Dirtdoc, it is not a given that a FD hull will perform better in heavy seas than a SD. There are many design factors that go into defining seaworthiness beyond substituting an F for an S.

Reelalure said:

We appreciate all the feed back and are getting excited about our search!

Click to expand...

Dont over look the American Tug 34/36 or the 41/?
VERY comfortable except for closet space. The 34/36 ..... well if you put in a washer/dryer you lose a bit of storage space. Personally, I like my washer dryer
I found a way to add 5 small cabinets allowing me to store "important" stuff.
If the next owner doesn't like all the additions...... dont buy my boat. LOL

I put some hydraulic assists for access under the forward berth.... that opened up a big new world, yet to be filled ..... More on that later.

To be honest, the cabinet makers I use are expensive but we go way back.....
I only have little jobs compared the the much larger boat he now works on

This quote taken from Selene's website under "The Selene Advantage" tab...


Knowing that a Selene Yacht owner often has to be both the captain and engineer of the vessel, we have invested a lot of time in the design of our engine rooms, which are regarded in the industry as best in their class with good access, plenty of room to work around the systems, with ease of maintenance and service in mind.
We install only first class electrical brands for batteries, generators, inverters, chargers, light fixtures, etc. Our engineering team is always ready to assist our owners in the sizing of their yacht’s electrical system with the desired level of redundancy depending on how the yacht is going to be used.

The design incorporates the fuel efficiency of a full-displacement hull. A full-displacement hull is designed to remain fully in the water throughout its entire range of speed. This requires a fraction of the horsepower that semi-displacement or planing hull requires to attain optimum speed. A full-displacement hull will be capable of maintaining speeds in the 7- to l2-knot range while burning a minimum of fuel.




Seem all Selene hulls are FD.

To the OP: I can't say anything good or bad about Selene as i have not been aboard one, but i've spent time on Nordics including under way. The Nordic is a great and sturdy boat and from what I saw; very easy to work on with logical plumbing, wiring, and a commanding pilot house with very good sight lines both forward and aft. Its also nice having the pilot house side doors on both sides and (IMHO) nice to have a little extra power whenever you want it but sipping diesel the rest of the time.


As someone else mentioned, if you're considering a Nordic, it would definitely make sense to compare it to an American Tug. Good luck!

dirtdoc1 said:

Regardless of the CE rating. A full displacement hull is going to perform better than a semi displacement hull in heavy seas. My boat has a semi displacement hull and is considered a coastal cruiser because of that. I'm not going to be offended if someone states that it's not a blue water boat - because it isn't. I didn't mean to imply that the NT was lacking in any way because of the hull design. Am I incorrect when I state that the NT has a SD hull and the Selene has a FD hull? If I am incorrect about that then I will stand corrected, otherwise I stand by my statement.

Click to expand...

The connection of CE rating to FD vs. SD is just not right, no more than implying only one type hull is seaworthy or capable of being a CE-A. There are a lot of factors in that and even more in seaworthiness. There are many FD boats that are truly coastal cruisers but then most of what is done by people here is coastal cruising. Just for the record and to destroy the stereotype, we have a 44 foot planing boat that will run just over 40 knots and it is CE-A. Quite seaworthy. Only problem is range is only about 210 nm.

I wish a naval architect would get in on the conversation. It's actually turned out to be pretty interesting.

I doubt any boats/ships that are designed to cross oceans have semi displacement hulls.

dirtdoc1 said:

I wish a naval architect would get in on the conversation. It's actually turned out to be pretty interesting.

I doubt any boats/ships that are designed to cross oceans have semi displacement hulls.

Click to expand...

I could point to hundreds of yachts that do. Some even with planing hulls. Clearly larger boats. In smaller, I'd point to Fleming and Elling as sea worthy but without perhaps the range in the smaller ones. Outer Reef is designed for crossing oceans. Then we have Catamarans from several builders. Cheoy Lee, Horizon, and Selene have produced many different hull designs for passagemaking.

I have to point out the new Selene.


And what about sailboats? Most of them would not qualify as full displacement and more of them cross than trawlers do.

The point is that there are plenty of seaworthy boats of various hull designs. Most who do long ocean crosses in smaller boats do have full displacement, but there are many other reasons they choose to have it.

BandB said:

I could point to hundreds of yachts that do. Some even with planing hulls. Clearly larger boats. In smaller, I'd point to Fleming and Elling as sea worthy but without perhaps the range in the smaller ones. Outer Reef is designed for crossing oceans. Then we have Catamarans from several builders. Cheoy Lee, Horizon, and Selene have produced many different hull designs for passagemaking.

I have to point out the new Selene.

The new Selene 59 Ocean Clipper is the very latest iteration of Howard Chen’s talent… Designed for a Selene repeat customer in Europe who wanted a yacht as beautiful and safe as any Selene, but faster in order to explore the Mediterranean Sea without sacrificing any of the ocean-going capability of the Selene Ocean Trawlers. Howard Chen’s design team took on the challenge, working with the renowned Dutch designer Guido de Groot, and the new Ocean Clipper semi-displacement line was born !​

And what about sailboats? Most of them would not qualify as full displacement and more of them cross than trawlers do.

The point is that there are plenty of seaworthy boats of various hull designs. Most who do long ocean crosses in smaller boats do have full displacement, but there are many other reasons they choose to have it.

Click to expand...

Hmmm..

BandB said:

I could point to hundreds of yachts that do. Some even with planing hulls. Clearly larger boats. In smaller, I'd point to Fleming and Elling as sea worthy but without perhaps the range in the smaller ones. Outer Reef is designed for crossing oceans. Then we have Catamarans from several builders. Cheoy Lee, Horizon, and Selene have produced many different hull designs for passagemaking.

I have to point out the new Selene.

The new Selene 59 Ocean Clipper is the very latest iteration of Howard Chen’s talent… Designed for a Selene repeat customer in Europe who wanted a yacht as beautiful and safe as any Selene, but faster in order to explore the Mediterranean Sea without sacrificing any of the ocean-going capability of the Selene Ocean Trawlers. Howard Chen’s design team took on the challenge, working with the renowned Dutch designer Guido de Groot, and the new Ocean Clipper semi-displacement line was born !​

And what about sailboats? Most of them would not qualify as full displacement and more of them cross than trawlers do.

The point is that there are plenty of seaworthy boats of various hull designs. Most who do long ocean crosses in smaller boats do have full displacement, but there are many other reasons they choose to have it.

Click to expand...

OK, Have to ask this. There has been fun reading on FD/SD/Planing on another thread. I'm just the reader here so here goes.


Barring Cat hulls (which can be displacement or SD/Planing I believe) Are there sail boats that are not FD hulls that can plane or go faster than the 1.?? times the waterline length?

Plane Nauti said:

Barring Cat hulls (which can be displacement or SD/Planing I believe) Are there sail boats that are not FD hulls that can plane or go faster than the 1.?? times the waterline length?

Click to expand...

Yes.