Your next boat?

No Greater Passion for the Craft: LAYLA, a Take On John Alden's "Miniature Ocean-Going Tug"

Probably not enough sail to actually sail, but pretty!!

If we EVER sell our 4788 Bayliner, which is a great costal cruiser, it will be to buy a...

62 Nordhavn

How many times have we discussed motor sailor trawler with sail. With the price of fuel going up the increase demand for full displacement with the option of sails. Some of the trawlers offer sails as an option. Diesel Duch Krogan Nordhavn and others. Sails where added to a 58 Roughwater to increase the range and reduce fuel. I love the old classic motor sailers with tall solon house that looked like a cross between a sail boat and a trawler. The 58 RW originally came with a bow front mast so adding masts would not be that difficult. One of the options to cross oceans.

There will be no next boat.

At my age, and with all the personal effort I've put into my boat, I can't see ever having a "next boat".

Now that I'm back down south moorage is the big expense and the're will be no "next boat" that needs to be moored. I'll keep my short boat thanks.

Motor sailers are better for range, and are more stable but are false economy for the reason that a 2nd engine is far cheaper than all that rigging. Going to windward under power is anything but economical. If one is far out to sea w a heavy rig I think I'd rather have sail (motor sailer) but along the coast I see the twin diesel boat as best.

A second engine just doubbles the maint and increases the fuel burn 50% to 100% as many builders offer the same boat with single or twin using the same engine selection.

This practice guarentees the twins will almost always suffer from under loading almost 100% of the operational time.

Twice the complexity , weight , fuel burn and poorer longevity, half the ER space, , no thanks.

To be a real as defined by windward ability , the proverbial ability to beat off a lee shore , insurance co's had a rule of thumb.

In Skeenes "If the boat has at least the sail area of her load water line squared , divided by two, she qualifies as a motorsailor and gets an insurance cost reduction of 10%."

A 40 ft lwl squared is 1600 , divided by 2 and with 800 sq ft it is a MOTORSAILOR.

Our 90/90 is 28 LWL, and carries 737sq ft of ordinary working canvass.

That's where the first 90 comes from.

FF

Here's Burma, my favorite motorsailer in our area.

FF said:

No Greater Passion for the Craft: LAYLA, a Take On John Alden's "Miniature Ocean-Going Tug"

Probably not enough sail to actually sail, but pretty!!

Click to expand...

Fred – Early 70's I lived in Rockport ME. Built, owned and operated a restaurant & tavern in adjacent town, Camden. Thanks for posting the link, very cool! – Art

FF said:

This practice guarentees the twins will almost always suffer from under loading almost 100% of the operational time.

Click to expand...

Suffer? How has the twin GB (or any other boat) built in the late 1960s, early 1970s and racked up thousands of hours on its engines over the ensuing decades "suffered?" Assuming proper operation and maintenance, the engines in these boats (we have one) burn no more oil and run just as well as they did when they were installed in the boat.

I can see how running at combustion chamber temperatures that are too low can cause problems, but if the combustion temperature is where it should be, the engine could care less about its loading. I agree one is somewhat tied to the other, but once the proper combustion chamber temperature is reached the engine's happy no matter whether the loading is optimal or not.

Overloading can run the engine temperature up too high, and severe underloading can cause the engine to run too cool, both of which can be damaging. But the specified engine cruise rpm range and prop specifications of a twin--- at least a properly designed and equipped twin--- are such that in the normal cruise range the combustion temperatures are where they should be for proper operation. Twenty, thirty, even forty years of operation in thousands of twin engine boats would seem to bear this out.

I don't think there's any "suffering" involved here at all.

My Next Boat and it's associated mooring.

Yes I drained the bottle first. . . very. . . very . . . Carefully!!

I can see how running at combustion chamber temperatures that are too low can cause problems

Actually its the combustion pressure , not temperature that can cause problems.

Rings seal because the combustion pressure gets BEHIND them , forcing them into the proper contact pressure.

This seals the bore , does not allow too much blowby and the higher pressure keeps the cylinders from being burnished , a polishing action that removes the cylinders hone marks, your oil control.

Twins are great for some , but they can not be the same size as a single for an identical boat.

If the single runs 80% to 90% rated power the twins will be under 50% all the time.

Many singles cruise under 50% of rated power , which leaves same sized twins forever loafing.

Twins used at high power do not suffer , the simplest method is smaller engines on the twin.

Base engine Selection from a taxi or tractor source , rather than an industrial diesel, is a big help to both cost and light load longevity.

But don't EVER try for full rated power for hours on end,with a lawn implement diesel ,

Just an occasional prop check , no more.

FF

FF said:

A second engine just doubbles the maint and increases the fuel burn 50% to 100% as many builders offer the same boat with single or twin using the same engine selection.

This practice guarentees the twins will almost always suffer from under loading almost 100% of the operational time.

FF

Click to expand...

Well not quite FF. Perhaps in some applications, but in my boat it would not achieve the performance promised by the builder without 2 engines. No problem underloading. Overloading due to improperly pitched or sized props is a distinct possibility however. You did not touch on the safety aspect of 2 engines.

My next boat; a land yacht.

FF said:

Twins are great for some , but they can not be the same size as a single for an identical boat.



FF

Click to expand...

Really? Perhaps someone should tell Grand Banks as they and the original company, American Marine, have been doing exactly this with staggering success on a worldwide basis since 1966. And I know the owners of a few of those 1960s twins and guess what? Their original engines are cooking along just fine in 2012.

I've found there is generally a major disconnect between armchair theory and reality.

Phil Fill said:

Next boat? Shoot I am not done with the present boat. The up grades and additions/changes I would like to do on the Eagle I will be broke and will not be able to afford another boat. 10 grand inside passage, 20 grand coastal cruising, 30+ grand to cross the ocean.

Click to expand...

Ditto.

I do have dreams of a Defever with joystick controls that allow me to move any which way from anywhere on the boat.

Our next boat will be a sail assisted Diesel Duck. The 46-2 seems to be the one that fits our needs. I like her lines and appointments. I am working on a model to see the effect of bilge keels. I don't care for the look, or the work of using Parevene type stabilizers or thru-hull's either. Bilge keels work great for roll on larger ships, and the increased drag is negligable on a displacement hull, so I hope this holds true when scaling down.

A few things:

According to Steve Dashew it is a myth that costs are less for blue water intended and well maintained sailboats vs his design of a power boat. Check out his website for the details.

There are several late model diesel ducks for sale, they are not cheap. Given their antiquated (I didn't say bad) design and high build cost I'd guess a well cared for late model Nordhavn would be a better investment and a lot more fun.

FF, the underloaded diesel problem you so often raise is a figment of your DD 2 stroke imagination. Substitute "underused and poorly maintained" for "underloaded" and I agree with you 100%. And please take your theories to Tony Athens, not me, on this issue.

FF, Marin,
On the twins I agree w you FF. Marin's going to be fine though as I think he loads them both to 3 gph each. But FF you're right a twin where they use the same engine in the single and the twin like the GB in this day and age the twin will be very underloaded w most boat operators. When I looked at boats this past winter I looked at single engined GBs only for this reason. Only because I could'nt afford to feed two engines. And of course I do'nt like underloading. We've had this discussion several times before and I'm sure GB marketed the boat like 50s and 60s cars. A six cylinder wagon for the family man and a 4 barrel V8 hard top for the single dude about town. A properly designed FD or SD boat should have enough power to drive it to it's operational speed w about 50 to 75% engine load. That is a narrow range of power and a 100% difference in engine power is way beyond the range of power required. Of course it's much closer to good practice in the GBs than it would be in a FD boat. And I'm not condemning GB completely as fuel was much cheaper then and one could stretch a bit and imagine GB selling boats to people that wanted to cruise at 7 knots and others at 10 knots. Kinda like the 6 and V8 cars. But the power requirement is much much wider for cars. The fact that GB sold many more twins than singles shows that buyers wanted speed, extra power and they probably considered the twin as a deluxe model and sought after. But to be sure (in my opinion) the single engined 36 and especially the 42 should have been sold w a FD hull. And the GBs have a hull that is closer to planing than FD. In GBs defense two different hulls would have been expensive but if they were selling them today and offered the FD hull I'll bet it would outsell the twin by at least as wide a margin as the twin outsold the single in the 60s and 70s. I really like the GBs but I'd want to have the pilothouse further aft and change the stern to FD w twin 40 hp engines like my Mitsu.

Really? Perhaps someone should tell Grand Banks as they and the original company, American Marine, have been doing exactly this with staggering success on a worldwide basis since 1966

No question , the REASON for the "staggering success"is very simple ,
the engines installed, Ford Econo-Power marinizations or Perkins which have an remarkably high rated power compared to their actual output capability.

No one in their right mind would consider using a tractor or taxi or light truck engine suitable for a constant rated load.

Like your car , it might say 455hp on the air cleaner , but in an earth mover it wouldn't last the day. In your car 200,000+ miles .

Same with tractor or lawn implement takeouts . FAB! for an hour or two on the pin, followed by weeks of plodding at 3 GPH.

A real industrial engine IS useful at 100% load factor , DD's and others do it for tens of thousands of hours in the oil patch hooked to big pumps.24/7/365

For lower noise and good service life , most pleasure boat assemblers use engines that are comfortable at about 75% power , or less.

Genset builders prefer 80% load at 90% RPM, again for longer service life.

Single or twin if 70 hp moves the boat , 135 rated making 70 great , 5 gph and not too much noise , with 2 engines is only 40hp each , not great but still at 3 gph ,not that all that far from what they were built for.

The method of success was engine selection , of an engine with great low power ability to run almost forever.

FF

sunchaser said:

A few things:

According to Steve Dashew it is a myth that costs are less for blue water intended and well maintained sailboats vs his design of a power boat. Check out his website for the details.

There are several late model diesel ducks for sale, they are not cheap. Given their antiquated (I didn't say bad) design and high build cost I'd guess a well cared for late model Nordhavn would be a better investment and a lot more fun.

FF, the underloaded diesel problem you so often raise is a figment of your DD 2 stroke imagination. Substitute "underused and poorly maintained" for "underloaded" and I agree with you 100%. And please take your theories to Tony Athens, not me, on this issue.

Click to expand...

Sunchaser, I am not sure I understand why you think Nordhavn's are a better investment. If you are comparing fiberglass to steel, well, I say it depends. Good steel, if well taken care of, will last a long time in saltwater. Using the proper bottom coatings at the right intervals will assure that. Fiberglass that is taken care of will produce similiar results.The 47 Nordhavn has a displacement of 85,000, the 46-2 Duck is 67,500, so the Duck needs less machinery or sail to move her through the water. As I would think any boat owner would know, the purchase of a boat is a large expense, so I value all opinions earnestly. I am not trying to be argumentative, just looking for insight into all schools of thought that will help me decide on the right boat for me. Thanks for the input and insight.

manyboats said:

FF, Marin,
On the twins I agree w you FF. Marin's going to be fine though as I think he loads them both to 3 gph each. But FF you're right a twin where they use the same engine in the single and the twin like the GB in this day and age the twin will be very underloaded w most boat operators.

Click to expand...

Eric-- I don't argue the fact that a couple of FL120s in a boat like ours are not going to taxed very much. I'm not sure I'd use the term "under-loaded" but I suppose one could. I'm only saying that it's not bad for them. A bazillion GBs (and other makes) have pretty much been proving this since the mid-60s. Now I don't think an FL120 should be cruised at anything under 1500rpm because at that point and slower the engine can start running cooler than it should. We cruise at about 1650. I say "about" because the old SW tachs are nothing to write home about in terms of accuracy..

In talking to old-timers with a ton of experience with the Ford Dorset diesel-- in boats and in industrial/agricultural service in the US and UK-- they all say that engine is happiest in the 1500-1800 rpm band. Faster they say shortens their life and slower runs them too cool.

AnthonyD

You said it, steel. The issue is not are steel vessels good or bad, the issue is people tend to steer away from buying used steel vessels in the 50' range thus the poorer investment potential. (One of the nicest trawlers out there is Delfin, a steel vessel in the PNW). With over 60 Nordhavn 48's plying the world's oceans, the standard has been set for blue water trawler style MVs under 50', in fact not too many years ago the N46 was every bit as popular.

One of a kinds and few built are a very hard re-sell, and that is the Diesel Duck. I have been on both them and the N47. I give my nod to Nordhavn for design, fit, finish, equipment, comfort and fun. Plus the N47 has a capable get home engine.

In no way do I denigrate the Diesel Duck. They are a purpose built boat for serious blue water voyagers. Their start was "you could build it your backyard" and some did. So no argument from me on what you choose to buy, but for me keeping popularity and resale time in mind is important.

There's more than a few out there that think once a 4-stroke diesel is broken in, underloading is running it at any RPM not in gear. But if the engine is IN gear...even at idle...there's enough of a load on it it won't be harmed if you ran it like that forever.

Disagree if you want...get in line and there are two lines of thought on the subject....

Sunchaser, thanks for the input. I completely agree with you about the steel. If I had the cash and was looking to maximize every penny back out of it, I would make the boat aluminum. Strength to weight ratio is the best. The expense however would be through the roof and most don't like the ride or sound of aluminum. I also agree with you about custom jobs. I generally don't even consider them. The Duck seems to be gaining a little ground though. More are built each year. Defever was our first choice until the wife and I thought we should try to get something better suited for Bluewater. We'll see, maybe I'll be able to sort through all the great information when we are ready to buy. Thanks again.

Has anybody actually experienced engine failure do to under loading. I personally haven't heard of anybody having this kind of failure. I've seen engines ruined with improperly designed exhaust systems, cooling issues , oil pump failure, spring plate failure, contaminated fuel and injector problems, I haven't heard of any dieing from chronic under loading. There is so much written about this it must of happened sometime. On the subject of twins vrs singles. I have lost an engine at sea and I was damn thankful I had two, it was rough and I can't even imagine trying to make repairs without the stability of one engine maintaining almost cruising speed while crawling around in the bilge replacing a lower cooling hose. I was a big advocate of single engine efficiency until then. You may have noticed Kadey Krogen, Salene , and Sea Horse are all offering and showing twins. Get home engines only work in calm conditions with little current, a band aid concession to not have a second engine. I personally want redundant security, two engines , two generators, four fuel tanks and three water tanks. Because no matter how old or new your boat sometime somewhere something is going to fail. It's no big thing if Vessel Assist is an hour away, but what if it isn't.

Scary said:

Has anybody actually experienced engine failure do to under loading. I personally haven't heard of anybody having this kind of failure. I've seen engines ruined with improperly designed exhaust systems, cooling issues , oil pump failure, spring plate failure, contaminated fuel and injector problems, I haven't heard of any dieing from chronic under loading. There is so much written about this it must of happened sometime. On the subject of twins vrs singles. I have lost an engine at sea and I was damn thankful I had two, it was rough and I can't even imagine trying to make repairs without the stability of one engine maintaining almost cruising speed while crawling around in the bilge replacing a lower cooling hose. I was a big advocate of single engine efficiency until then. You may have noticed Kadey Krogen, Salene , and Sea Horse are all offering and showing twins. Get home engines only work in calm conditions with little current, a band aid concession to not have a second engine. I personally want redundant security, two engines , two generators, four fuel tanks and three water tanks. Because no matter how old or new your boat sometime somewhere something is going to fail. It's no big thing if Vessel Assist is an hour away, but what if it isn't.

Click to expand...

I'M NO EXPERT...just been hanging around boats for the last 50+ years..both recreationally and professionally.

Here's my cut...Gensets die from underloading...but that's because they run at higher RPM for the right cycles...but can be severely underloaded for that RPM.

Main engines...as long as they are in gear...are loaded proportionately with the rise in RPM (generally). There's always talk of temps and pressures...but like RickB writes...it's hard to accurately measure those in reality.

So I'm going with the be careful of your genset...but worry less about your main as long as it's broken in and you are putting some proportinal load on it.

Greetings,
OK, so where is Rick B? I miss his acerbic wit or at least half of it...

sunchaser said:

(One of the nicest trawlers out there is Delfin, a steel vessel in the PNW).

Click to expand...

And it just went on the market this weekend for $1.6m:
1965 Romsdal Romsdahl North Sea Trawler Power Boat For Sale - www.yachtworld.com

I see that the 100' Romsdal is still for sale...5 years?...I forget. And it appears that Ulysses may be for sale (again?):
1963 53' Rabco 53' Romsdal Trawler LRC | Boating Life 360

I owned a smaller Romsdal about 30 years ago. Steel hull, aluminum superstructure, Volvo with CPP - I sure wish I could afford one of these refurbished ones!

FF said:

No one in their right mind would consider using a tractor or taxi or light truck engine suitable for a constant rated load.

Click to expand...

I'm quite happy with my Volvo TMD100A, and I'm pretty sure I'm in my "right mind".

FF said:

No one in their right mind would consider using a tractor or taxi or light truck engine suitable for a constant rated...

Click to expand...

Really? Because that's what the Ford engines were that are the base engines for the FL120 and FL135. The Dorset engine-- base for the FL120-- was designed in the late 50s as a truck engine. I believe the Cummins engine used in so many boats is based on a light truck engine. John Deere marine diesels are all based on their agricultural diesels (tractors, etc.). Lugger marine diesels are based on John Deere, Japanese, and German light truck and automotive diesels. And I suspect the folks at Lehman, Deere, Cummins, and Nothern Lights/Lugger are in their right minds, particularly since the marinzed diesels from all these companies have racked up enviable records of success in boats around the world for many decades.