Best Trawler Type (or brand) for Off Shore

[Capt Bly]

Hey all, I have been searching for a boat for about 3 months for a trip retracing my younger foot steps up the inland passageway as well as for fishing off the Oregon Coast. People on board would be two adults, a couple dogs, a guest here and there for a week maybe. The trip to the Great Land pushes me towards 38-42 foot trawlers, I like models with twin diesels as I recall the pain of docking a 34 foot single screw troller years ago. Also, I am a working stiff and not interested in buying a new boat, used Nordhavn or other expensive boats, just dont want that much debit. So ...

I have been looking at 36-42 foot Ocean Alexanders, Other Taiwanese trawlers (aka performance trawlers) as well as grand banks classics, Marine Traders, a bristol trawler or two etc.

With the summer time open ocean fishing plan in mind as well as living aboard for a couple months a year, what boats do you think would meet those goals? Years ago, I recall some excitement off Egg Island as well as Cape Chacon, but we were commercial fishing so we went out even it was not perfect.

I am guessing that sport fishing off the Oregon Coast will be more of a determinate than the inside passage. I would like something that is stable in the standard summer conditions (20-30 knot out of the NW winds, wind waves). Im not interested in winter ocean conditions on the Pacific, im in it for fun, not a job.

Thanks for your opinions

 

[backinblue]

Welcome Capt. I'm sure you will get plenty of opinions here, everyone has one. There are others more qualified than me to recommend a boat for the specific boating you want to do. I will comment on 1 thing. When it comes to docking and maneuverability, I would take a single screw with bow and stern thrusters over twin screws without them. If you are on a budget, a single engine boat may be less expensive to buy, but also less expensive to maintain (theoretically). Good luck with your search and welcome aboard!

 

[Comodave]

Welcome aboard and good luck with your search.

 

[Constellation1]

Oh boy, I’m going to get some popcorn for this ?

 

[rsn48]

Where's Riddle?

 

[gsholz]

Not a typical trawler but the 37' and 40' Tolly sedans have a good reputation for seaworthiness and offshore fishing.

http://www.tolly-classified.com/pics/ad156pic2.jpg

Just an example, not my boat

 

[IRENE]

Welcome.

Have you looked at the Hatteras 42 LRC (Long Range Cruiser)?

They have a MkI and MkII version. Great lines and Hatteras quality.

https://www.hatteraslrc.com/Fleet/fleet1.htm

Good Luck

 

[RyanK]

I'm no expert in the sea state or conditions over there but seeing how a 15 kt nw wind is producing 8+ ft seas, I'd hate to think of what a 20-30kt NW wind would produce, much less be out in those seas in a smallish trawler.
We've crossed the Atlantic and cirumnavigated the caribbean in a Catamaran. We did not see that many trawlers beyond the bahamas, I dont believe it is just the range issue but rough water suitability of most under 50' trawlers. This isnt a knock against trawlers, they can handle the conditions far better then our bodies can.
When we find our next boat (a Trawler) We will certainly be looking at the weather windows differently then we currently do.

 

[rsn48]

The last time I got sea sick (about 25 years ago) was off of Depoe Bay whale watching. Did it twice, first time I was fine. Second time, those swells that can come in while riding in a boat doing about two knots created the magic combination to get me sick. I know the Vic/Maui sailboat race heads out to sea about 100 miles off the Oregon coast to avoid those swells.

How is the fishing in those swells?

 

[Capt Bly]

You can tell i am new to the mechanics of posting ... been trying to edit this ever since I wrote it. The weather windows I am looking at for fishing and recreational cruising off the Or coast are NOT SCA's and 20-30 kt NW winds, thats what they make 100 L Sailboards and 4.2 m sails for. A better choice of words would have been "how do trawler designs handle exposed to the open ocean swell conditions, quartering seas and do any models stand out for stability more than others?" Obviously to get to the inland passage or Baja from southern Or takes more than a day or two exposed to the ocean as well. Bar conditions are one of the bigger go no go things here, not just SCA's and winds with long fetches creating unpleasant wind waves.

 

[OldDan1943]

My best recommendation is a Nordavn, hyd. stabilized, at least a significant bow thruster.
Take look at American Tugs too. They are coastal boats. Bow and stern thruster.
Any boat you look at must have 2 staterooms, 2 heads not only for guests but also additional storage space if you are going to take 'long, time away from shore,' trips.

That being said, I suggest the length should be from the low 40 feet and greater.

 

[AusCan]

The "best" trawler is always a matter of opinion. There are always trade offs.

If you want a comfortable ride in less than perfect conditions offshore, then you need to think about stabilization. Does a stabilized boat fit into your budget?

My opinion would be to find a Willard 40 with paravanes.

 

[Benthic2]

How far off shore do you envision going for fish ? I know this is an over simplification, but I tend to think of trawlers as "turtles" and fishing boats as "hares". The ideal boat for both fishing and long range cruising might be a nautical unicorn.

 

[OldDan1943]

How far off shore do you envision going for fish ? I know this is an over simplification, but I tend to think of trawlers as "turtles" and fishing boats as "hares". The ideal boat for both fishing and long range cruising might be a nautical unicorn.

LOL Hence the term 'fast trawlers'?

We as humans, cannot be all things to all people so why should we expect more out of our boats??
While it is possible to drive a 'fast boat' slow, it is not possible to drive a 'slow boat' fast.

 

[magna 6882]

I think this is a tough question since most trawlers will handle the sea and will likely not sink but what can the people on board take?

 

[OldDan1943]

I think this is a tough question since most trawlers will handle the sea and will likely not sink but what can the people on board take?

Like dried peas in a tin can.
How come seat belts are not provided for the person helm, at least?

 

[Capt Bly]

Good commentary Gents, When I started looking at trawlers I started thinking ... "this feels like a marine (but pretty) Winnebago". The unicorn comment and others were right on, probably a poor fit for fishing. Off shore angling probably is in the 5- 50 miles off shore, closer in for local fish, further out for tuna, the only way I could think about making it work for far out was a multi day fishing trip with 4 people doing watches and jogging at night as the water is deep and there is no shelter. Trawlers might be the wrong tool for the job. Probably dont want tuna slime on (in) a boat I am planning on sleeping on for two months either. The troller I worked on years back had stabilizers which calmed things down a bit, not sure what adding fish and poles would add to the cost of a boat but that might make a trip up north or down south a little less of a "chum fest" as well. Will look up the suggested boats also. Thanks guys for the thoughts.

 

[mvweebles]

Assuming the boat is reasonably designed with at least a modicum of freeboard and form stability (wedding-cake boats need not apply), there are only a few criteria that are generic for coastal cruising.
1. Water-tight. Will the boat resist spray?
2. Stabilized. Others will argue, but stabilizers are a must-have for most who have owned a stabilized boat
3. Range. Can the boat get from A to B without unnecessary and route-distracting fuel stops?

After that, it gets down to personal preference. Some folks like pilothouse boats, some like sedans, some like full-width aft-cabin boats, some hate full-width aft cabins because it's difficult to launch a dinghy (might be important to OP since he has dogs). Etc. But in the end, there are a lot of options. I knew a guy who cruised a Uniflite 42 motoryacht from San Francisco to El Salvador and back over 18-months and had a great time. I did the Baja Ha Ha on a friend's Willard 40 in 2004 and met a couple on a Defever 37 who were headed to Florida - they paid around $70k and did some work on it such as adding a watermaker. Last year, on TF's sister-forum CruisersForum, a couple sold their Devever 40 with single Ford Lehman 120 after cruising it from Seattle to Florida (sold for $50k). TF Member Larry recently sold his KK42 Hobo on which he cruised from east coast to west coast.

Consider this: I have no evidence except observation and common sense, but i'd wager good money that the most common recreational boat under 60-feet or so to transit the Panama Canal is not a sailboat, not a trawler. But a sport-fisher. Those guys use the crap out of their boats and think nothing of doing tourneys in Costa Rica, then Isla Mujeres.

Several different types of boats. All completed comfortable cruises of decent distance in similar/same waters are OP is considering.

Don't get too hung-up on the boat. Needs some basic design attributes, but after that, there's a broad range of boats that will suffice.

Good luck and welcome to TF

Peter

 

[ksanders]

The key concept here is fishing.

Ypou are not going to be out on the deck fishing in rough weather in any boat.

Pick the boat you like and you will be fine.

BTW my Bayliner 4788 was based out of Newport Oregon for it's first decade of life and it's owner documented a decade of Albacore fishing a long ways offshore.

I'm not touting that brand or model, what I'm emphasizing is for you to pick the boat design you like for what you want to do and not worry so much about rough weather capability because you are not going to test it.

 

[Fish53]

Most "pleasure" trawlers have too much window and too much windage to operate safely offshore. If you want to really go offshore in a boat that can't do much over 10kts you need something that can take unexpected conditions because you won't have the speed to run from it. Stabilization is fine for crew comfort and rest but adds little else to the seakeeping ability of a boat. Whatever you get you will want to prepare it for unpleasant conditions and have adequate safety equipment, raft, survival suits, EPIRB etc. It would be wise to consult someone experienced in what you propose to gain a little guidance.

 

[HTurner]

Most "pleasure" trawlers have too much window and too much windage to operate safely offshore. If you want to really go offshore in a boat that can't do much over 10kts you need something that can take unexpected conditions because you won't have the speed to run from it. Stabilization is fine for crew comfort and rest but adds little else to the seakeeping ability of a boat. Whatever you get you will want to prepare it for unpleasant conditions and have adequate safety equipment, raft, survival suits, EPIRB etc. It would be wise to consult someone experienced in what you propose to gain a little guidance.

This is so very well said.



Also, remember that gear adrift within a boat is dangerous. That pot or -- heaven forbid -- flower pot will give you a concussion. Those induction stove tops or any non gimbal stove will also do you little good in a seaway.

 

[Fish53]

The general idea is you pick and prepare your boat for what you intend it to be capable of. There's a tremendous difference between a basically inshore craft and one designed, prepared and the operator skilled enough for true offshore work. Certainly many boats both small and ill prepared have made impressive voyages, just look at the one made by Captain Bly in the Bounty's ships boat or Ernest Shackleton's rescue from Whale Island after the voyage by there lifeboat for help. Fact is there's vastly more that you've never heard of because they disappeared at sea with no story to tell. All I'm trying to say is offshore in truly bad weather is not a place for amateurs or the ill prepared, both in ability and equipment. I've spent years in places notorious for bad weather and big seas yet although I take my little boat out when most won't I'm not attempting a trans Atlantic just yet either, she's not set up for it and I'm not as young as I once was, but it is on the bucket list.

 

[OldDan1943]

Fish53, I do hope you have a boat larger than the one display.

 

[Fish53]

Fish53, I do hope you have a boat larger than the one display.

That's it, it's an ex USCG motor whaleboat used for rescue, as a lifeboat and at sea boardings. For it's size it's a very able boat, I've had it out in an 8 foot sea and aside from needing larger scuppers she took it fine. Size is not the arbiter of seaworthiness and neither is horsepower, as evidenced by the numerous smaller size sailboats that have successfully circumnavigated. Again, having the right equipment and the right skill set is key to going offshore. You will have noticed the limitations of my boat I mentioned in my post I assume?

 

[rslifkin]

In general, for this kind of usage, I'd tend to look away from a lot of the typical SD trawlers. Most of them don't have the power to plane well (if at all), yet don't have enough rudder, etc. to handle well in bad conditions at low speeds.

I'd either tend towards something sturdy, slow, and optimized for those slow speeds (think full displacement), or something more like a sport fish with a well designed planing hull and enough power to get up and go. A good planing hull will handle some pretty hasty conditions provided you don't care about fuel burn.

In the planing hull case, I'd also intend to plan fuel range offshore based on running up on plane the whole time unless you know you've got good conditions for the whole run. Many planing hulls aren't at their best at low speeds once the water gets rough, so it's good to have enough fuel that you can run at whatever speed produces the best ride and handling rather than trying to stay slow to save fuel.

 

[Fish53]

In general, for this kind of usage, I'd tend to look away from a lot of the typical SD trawlers. Most of them don't have the power to plane well (if at all), yet don't have enough rudder, etc. to handle well in bad conditions at low speeds.

I'd either tend towards something sturdy, slow, and optimized for those slow speeds (think full displacement), or something more like a sport fish with a well designed planing hull and enough power to get up and go. A good planing hull will handle some pretty hasty conditions provided you don't care about fuel burn.

In the planing hull case, I'd also intend to plan fuel range offshore based on running up on plane the whole time unless you know you've got good conditions for the whole run. Many planing hulls aren't at their best at low speeds once the water gets rough, so it's good to have enough fuel that you can run at whatever speed produces the best ride and handling rather than trying to stay slow to save fuel.

The seaworthiness of a planing hull is it's ability to find shelter before it gets unpleasant. One of the worst hulls to be in if speed becomes impossible to utilize, or god forbid lose propulsion is a deep vee, especially one with too much windage. I once saw two guys in a 22ft rigid inflatable literally picked up by the wind and tossed several hundred feet like a paper plate. Admittedly it was blowing well over fifty but in a slip or on a trailer was the appropriate location for that boat. The seaworthiness I've been referencing is the ability to survive at extremis in open water, if you can guarantee that you'll never experience that then you can adjust your standards appropriately.

 

[rslifkin]

The seaworthiness of a planing hull is it's ability to find shelter before it gets unpleasant. One of the worst hulls to be in if speed becomes impossible to utilize, or god forbid lose propulsion is a deep vee, especially one with too much windage. I once saw two guys in a 22ft rigid inflatable literally picked up by the wind and tossed several hundred feet like a paper plate. Admittedly it was blowing well over fifty but in a slip or on a trailer was the appropriate location for that boat. The seaworthiness I've been referencing is the ability to survive at extremis in open water, if you can guarantee that you'll never experience that then you can adjust your standards appropriately.

Small planing hulls are definitely a problem in heavy weather, as they're too light for their windage. This becomes less of an issue as you go bigger (boats get heavier with size faster than they gain windage regardless of hull type). I also agree that a deep V isn't ideal. A well designed modified V with a bit of keel is typically best for heavy weather handling (and this is what many sport fishes have for good reason).

And you don't want or need a super light planing hull meant to cruise at 25+ kts. A sturdy, heavier, well built design that's meant to cruise in the high teens, maybe low 20s is a far better choice. The deep V is only needed if you want to fly at high speeds into a head sea. If you're ok with slowing down a bit in a head sea, then lower deadrise aft works better (better roll stability, lower fuel consumption, etc.). The slower, heavier planing hulls will tend to have more keel, a deeper forefoot, bigger rudders, etc. for better tracking in conditions where you can't run at really high speeds (compared to a fast hull with a cut back forefoot, no keel, tiny rudders, etc.).

In my own boat I've been whacked broadside by 30+ kt gusts (offshore wind, so the sea state was reasonably mild) while up on plane. I wouldn't even call the situation concerning, let alone dangerous. The boat heels a bit, but it would take a lot more than that to be a problem from wind alone. And while my boat doesn't have the rough weather capability of an old Hatteras or some of the other good sport fish hulls, I'd say it's lightyears ahead of any express style, or a lightweight super-fast sportfish (of similar size) in all but flat water.

 

[Fish53]

Small planing hulls are definitely a problem in heavy weather, as they're too light for their windage. This becomes less of an issue as you go bigger (boats get heavier with size faster than they gain windage regardless of hull type). I also agree that a deep V isn't ideal. A well designed modified V with a bit of keel is typically best for heavy weather handling (and this is what many sport fishes have for good reason).

And you don't want or need a super light planing hull meant to cruise at 25+ kts. A sturdy, heavier, well built design that's meant to cruise in the high teens, maybe low 20s is a far better choice. The deep V is only needed if you want to fly at high speeds into a head sea. If you're ok with slowing down a bit in a head sea, then lower deadrise aft works better (better roll stability, lower fuel consumption, etc.). The slower, heavier planing hulls will tend to have more keel, a deeper forefoot, bigger rudders, etc. for better tracking in conditions where you can't run at really high speeds (compared to a fast hull with a cut back forefoot, no keel, tiny rudders, etc.).

In my own boat I've been whacked broadside by 30+ kt gusts (offshore wind, so the sea state was reasonably mild) while up on plane. I wouldn't even call the situation concerning, let alone dangerous. The boat heels a bit, but it would take a lot more than that to be a problem from wind alone. And while my boat doesn't have the rough weather capability of an old Hatteras or some of the other good sport fish hulls, I'd say it's lightyears ahead of any express style, or a lightweight super-fast sportfish (of similar size) in all but flat water.

Bigger sportfisherman you refer to are OK headed into it but running much off the wind exposes their weak points which are the broad transom and large cockpit. It's very hard to prevent a broach with that type of transom and if you take any appreciable water aboard in the cockpit, especially as most have glass doors leading into the cockpit from the salon, you'd not be having a nice day. There's a reason most of them don't have windows on the front of the deck cabin

 

[rslifkin]

Bigger sportfisherman you refer to are OK headed into it but running much off the wind exposes their weak points which are the broad transom and large cockpit. It's very hard to prevent a broach with that type of transom and if you take any appreciable water aboard in the cockpit, especially as most have glass doors leading into the cockpit from the salon, you'd not be having a nice day. There's a reason most of them don't have windows on the front of the deck cabin

Yes, water against those doors would worry me. But handling downwind is only an issue if you're going too slowly. That's the biggest reason I'd say for offshore work, unless you know the weather is going to be good the whole time you're out, plan enough fuel to run on plane as much as needed. If you can keep up with or out-run the seas, following seas are no problem at all (and can be a very comfy ride). But if you get too slow, a flat transom and small rudders become a problem.

My own boat is of the non-cockpit variety, so no concerns about taking water over the transom. If I'm in steep, confused 4 footers, for example, I'd much rather be running downwind than going into it. Going into that crap is slower and very wet. Going downwind is just a series of "climb, pitch over, surf, repeat". Get it right and it's fast, smooth, and comfy. As the seas get bigger, you just slow down a bit to pace them rather than running over the tops. It's not like handling following seas in a slow boat where you handle it with steering authority and hull design. In a planing hull, you handle following seas with power. It's one of those times where you don't run the speed you want, you run at the speed the boat needs.

It's definitely one of those cases where you can easily have a few similar looking boats that are very different in capability. Even if you have the right hull shape, if you have windows that are easy to take water against and aren't super strong, it's the wrong boat. If you've got poorly placed vents that'll cause downflooding in rough seas, it's the wrong boat. If the cockpit can't drain a ton of water quickly (and without dumping any into the bilge), it's the wrong boat. But if you can avoid those shortfalls, you can get a very capable boat within the range constraints that a planing hull brings. Some of the decent size sport fishers out there run in some pretty awful conditions on a regular basis.

 

[Fish53]

Yes, water against those doors would worry me. But handling downwind is only an issue if you're going too slowly. That's the biggest reason I'd say for offshore work, unless you know the weather is going to be good the whole time you're out, plan enough fuel to run on plane as much as needed. If you can keep up with or out-run the seas, following seas are no problem at all (and can be a very comfy ride). But if you get too slow, a flat transom and small rudders become a problem.

My own boat is of the non-cockpit variety, so no concerns about taking water over the transom. If I'm in steep, confused 4 footers, for example, I'd much rather be running downwind than going into it. Going into that crap is slower and very wet. Going downwind is just a series of "climb, pitch over, surf, repeat". Get it right and it's fast, smooth, and comfy. As the seas get bigger, you just slow down a bit to pace them rather than running over the tops. It's not like handling following seas in a slow boat where you handle it with steering authority and hull design. In a planing hull, you handle following seas with power. It's one of those times where you don't run the speed you want, you run at the speed the boat needs.

It's definitely one of those cases where you can easily have a few similar looking boats that are very different in capability. Even if you have the right hull shape, if you have windows that are easy to take water against and aren't super strong, it's the wrong boat. If you've got poorly placed vents that'll cause downflooding in rough seas, it's the wrong boat. If the cockpit can't drain a ton of water quickly (and without dumping any into the bilge), it's the wrong boat. But if you can avoid those shortfalls, you can get a very capable boat within the range constraints that a planing hull brings. Some of the decent size sport fishers out there run in some pretty awful conditions on a regular basis.

I'm going to apologize in advance for what I'm about to say. Thinking you could run at planing speed downwind in a big sea is an interesting form of suicide. Sure with judicious use of throttle and gears you might hang on for a few hours staying at 12 to 15kts and steering a zig zag pattern but you'd never really be out of danger. At planing speed on any course off the wind would, after you crested one sea slam you into the back of the next or worse into the trough where that splendid flared bow would prove a severe liability. If you filled the cockpit and because now you're stopped, the next sea if it's breaking would smash into you like a freight train throwing the stern sideways and probably inverting the boat at best, at worst it would would turn your boat into fiberglass ocean litter. After that all there is to do is notify the next of kin. Headed into the wind is a different story but not at planing speed. Assuming taking a reciprocal, or nearly so course of the wind takes you where you need to go. Probably your best bet would be to head into it and take it nice and easy until things moderate, even better would be to have a decent sea anchor and put the flared bow to work by letting you get some sleep while one person at a time stands watch. I have to reiterate, I'm talking about being caught in open water away from shelter in a fully developed sea exceeding 15 feet, not all that unusual where I live. As approximately 5% of seas in a given hour will exceed the average by twice their height and every fifth to eighth sea will exceed the average by 25%, we're getting into serious conditions, and it can and does happen in a hurry. Not a good place to find your boat doesn't measure up.