Choosing my Ocean Crossing Home - advice needed

[BandB]

Going by what I have witnessed, and anecdotes - not only by some boaters, but professional fisherman, tool manufacturers, and other parts suppliers - Chinese made products using Stainless Steel have more tarnishing issues. A friend is a sportfisher captain working a 90' charter, a professional fisherman - he pulls apart the reels for maintenance and the ones produced in China have rust on the stainless. These are high dollar reels mind you.

Might be that the yard sourced the stainless from a less reputable producer, or a vendor was called in to fab the rails and they choose a lower quality SS, or a less reputable vendor for their parts.

Could this happen in Taiwan, or Turkey - yes, but I have specific and anecdotal evidence of it in China.

That, and unless you haven't been following the news, I'd rather as few dollars go to China as possible. Part of my personal ESG.
Buying anything new from China also carries a Tariff. My recommendation to any manufacturer is setup shop elsewhere.

But my point is that stainless on boats produced in Turkey and in much of Europe comes from China. You don't escape it by not buying a Chinese boat. I could name a British and an Italian brand with horrible stainless, from China.

And, yes, quality varies by producer, even among Chinese metal manufacturers. I'm just pointing out that you face the same issue with boats built throughout Europe.

 

[BandB]

Ok you win. I'll ignore all the other anecdotes regarding this, even those from people I know and trust personally.



That Aside - underwater hull shape on the N52 is a detractor. I don't care to support the Chinese. Manufacturers should find alternate friendly countries. That is purely my ESG on it.


Done discussing this point.

So does this mean KK for you or a Turkey built Nordhavn? That would be back to your original two poll choices? And living with Chinese Stainless.

Edited because I was unclear in earlier post.

 

[KnotYet]

edit

That Aside - underwater hull shape on the N52 is a detractor. I don't care to support the Chinese. Manufacturers should find alternate friendly countries. That is purely my ESG on it.


Done discussing this point.

Did you ever read what Nordhavn stated about the bilge modification?
IIRC, the hull was tank simulated both with and without mods and the
modified hull tested as more efficient.

 

[leeman]

I have to say, I like almost everything about the KK 52. I would re-utilize the office as some here have already said.
Your comments on the Chinese are to me very valid. Why give them your money when you can give it to the Taiwanese, for example. Also what, exactly, is our trade relationship with the Chinese going to look like in five or ten years?
You are going to be very happy either way, but there's my two cents CAD.

 

[BGodlis]

I have heard many good arguments for either boat.
The KK52 is a proven design, much more space, additional features ( Portuguese bridge, wing stations, third room/office/whatever, better galley, central hallway/simpler layout, factory customization,and more). Many pluses to the KK52 over the N51. There are other issues though - cost, delivery date. KK52 would actually be delivered/commissioned before I could use her, by as much 6 months, and about $500k more, netting it out.

The N51 was advertised as $1.5M delivered, a year ago when I was ready to go to contract. Turkish yard was behind on N41 production - this was during Covid, so N put a hold on more contracts for the N51, even had to reorganize hull numbers to meet the current contracts, which moved me form #8 to #9. A year later they resumed getting contracts out - the new delivery date is not meeting my desired plans, and the price went to $1.7M without delivery - about an 18% increase in price in 1 year. That is why i started looking at other N's, used N's, and at KK. The N51 Production Yacht is not such the great deal (price wise) that it was a year ago - in fact the 'deal' part of it is almost gone at the new pricing. A KK48AE is now a better price - and is semi custom. BTW 48AE is more in line with the N51 for size/space and length overall - but lacks twin engines, and full redundancy in the drive-train. Maybe no big deal, but makes me uncomfortable.

The original plan with N51 is to take delivery in Turkey, in the spring, commission, outfit, then Med and canals over the summer. Cross Atlantic to Carib for the late fall/winter. Saves ~ $75k in delivery costs, plus get some med and euro canals, and the Atlantic crossing is an adventure, not a chore.

I am sticking with the N51 for now and waiting to see if N can change my hull number - they are waiting for earlier hulls to sign contracts and I might be able to move up. If not, then I have to have a family meeting and see if we can still make this boat work for us. If not, then I will either continue with the KK52 plan, or re-evaluate the 48AE - it really has a good price and feature set, or scrap all of it and hope a good used boat is available late '23/early '24.
Thanks for all the input.
Any more suggestions are appreciated.

 

[Airstream345]

Two more cents…

We looked at used KKs and Ns and found that any Nordhavn below the N55 felt cramped in the salon and lacked good indoor/outdoor spaces. The N47 comes close but it still felt tight.

The Krogens down to the 42 seemed at least to us to be more focused on being livable with lots of useable indoor/outdoor space and storage.

Since our mission profile is living aboard and costal cruising 99% of the time and possibly crossing an ocean the other 1% of the time we gravitated toward the Krogens.

Our KK54 lives larger than it’s LOA and the wide open salon fits a residential sectional, chairs and high/low expandable table. We often get comments from owners of much larger boats about how much room we have to live.

We also have a combo office/bunks open to the hallway instead of a third stateroom and have considered converting it an office only given I’m working remotely (I use the Pilothouse now which can be distracting)

 

[BGodlis]

MVFortitude is beautiful classic example! I hadn't looked at the 'classic' KKs. Reminds me of the Diesel Ducks that I was interested in for a while. Not many folks want the combination of sail rig + trawler = too much effort, but it pays dividends too.

Do you use the sail rig much?
Is it your stabilization as well?

 

[BGodlis]

Leeman - I had the same thoughts on the "office". Another member brought that up too, and I should have responded to them, but a very good idea to make that into a utility space. I already spoke to KK and they have walled that off then built out many options there. I was thinking a smaller desk/storage for office, then workbench and tool storage. Could put extra freezer and/or beverage fridge. Lots of possibilities.
Your 2c Canadian is worth vastly more to me!

 

[BGodlis]

Did you ever read what Nordhavn stated about the bilge modification?
IIRC, the hull was tank simulated both with and without mods and the
modified hull tested as more efficient.

I have heard of that, but cannot find that report. Others have refuted that claim - including KK. Can't argue with science, unless it is flawed science (poor testing). Perhaps at slow enough speeds the detriment is neglibible but builds as you push towards hull speed? If you could send me a link, I'd appreciate it.

 

[CarlF]

I think you should research the European canal idea. We have done several canal trips in France on chartered LeBoat vessels. These are much narrower and lower than the ocean going boats you are looking at. You may find that many of the more popular and scenic canals are closed to you.

 

[BandB]

I think you should research the European canal idea. We have done several canal trips in France on chartered LeBoat vessels. These are much narrower and lower than the ocean going boats you are looking at. You may find that many of the more popular and scenic canals are closed to you.

Wifey B: It's a mixed bag. Some of the canals can handle most any boat and others are limited to narrow canal boats. We went to both London and Paris via the Thames and Seine in a 116' boat though. Many rivers in Europe to be enjoyed in larger boat, but then many small limited canals as well.

 

[BGodlis]

I think you should research the European canal idea. We have done several canal trips in France on chartered LeBoat vessels. These are much narrower and lower than the ocean going boats you are looking at. You may find that many of the more popular and scenic canals are closed to you.

Europe, and Canada too - I have looked. 10 weeks is only $20k. Hmm, that is pretty good, you are definitely onto something.


I have that weird affliction where I feel the need to own my own boat. It is irrational and makes no sense fiscally, time wise, or by almost any other metric I can think of, but then that's most boat owners.


And trust, I still consider forgoing owning and just jet hop the world to destinations with charter yachts available. Would be cheaper and save time. There I go chasing my tail again.

 

[omoore]

Ocean Crossing Advice

I don't normally like to identify myself. But in this case, I believe you need to know the qualifications of the advice givers. I am the retired publishing director of yachting. As a result I have had the experience of touring the plants of major boat builders as well as publishing the experience of many blue water cruisers.



I owned a Hat 58 MY for over a decade and we cruised safely and comfortably every years between New England and the Bahamas. It was not an ocean crossing boat--too much glass and superstructure which rules out the KK. Yachts are not lost because of a failure of hull or deck. The Nordhavens of various sizes are proven passagemakers.

Powered by a commercially rated diesel you do not need twin engines. Bruce Kessler's Delta 70 went back and forth to Mexico and Alaska and circumnavigated on one engine.Long range commercial fishermen like the West Coast tuna boats have a single engine.+

Read Beebe's Voyaging Under Power for an understanding of the basic requirements. The book was updated by Jim Leishman of Nordhaven fame. Obviously his boats meet the passagemaking requirement but that doesn't disqualify him.
But I caution you that passagemakers are not ideal for canals and the Loop. For those cruises I would opt for lots of glass and open space. Since fuel is readily available more speed is nice as well. Finally remember an Italian circumnavigated in a 6.5 meter sailboat. And two brothers set a record in an open single outboard boat from Florida to Germany.

Have fun shopping the specs. Excuse the typos.

 

[Mac2]

Both will be great boats. Both can cross an ocean. I think Nordhavn has done a great marketing job, which does not translate to being a better boat. In my opinion, it is what's under the water that counts the most. The Krogen's stern section underwater is superior to the Nordhavn. The upsweep at the stern will make it a much smoother and safer boat in a following sea. I would look next at how well the rudder's and prop are protected for when (not if) you hit something. Next I would look at the underwater construction of the hull. Safety is number one in my opinion. Do the fuel/water/holding tanks create a double bottom in case the hull is holed. How are the windows? Are they built to take the hit of green water? Can you add storm windows? I know a lot of Nordhavn's have the windows pre drilled for storm windows. Was the boat built with the idea of a knockdown? Next would be engine comparison. Are they continuous duty rated? Better be. History of long service life? Easy to get to for maintenance? What is the backup propulsion? If both are twins, which I think they are, you are good. Otherwise I would compare the backup propulsion system.
Once you've gone over the above (and more), only then, would I start to look at amenities/layout. Until you've been in conditions that make your best friend go into a fetal position and start screaming like a child, do you understand how important the build of a boat is and how important it is to keep that engine running.
My feeling is that the Krogen has the better hull/ride, but the Nordhavn is built with worst case scenario in mind.

 

[omoore]

Mac2 all good thoughts. What I do know for a fact is that a majority of ocean crossing disaster are caused by glass blowing out.I can't recall a single offshore sinking because of a hull being holed. In a real survival situation the stern shape doesn't matter because you turn into the seas. Storm windows can be fitted to any boat. The tuna clippers which run from California to South America don't have backup propulsion. Comfort and layout do matter because you will spend a majority of time dockside or at anchor. Finally because you have a good private weather service you should never be in a survival storm.

 

[CarlF]

There is so much wonderful cruising in the Baltic, UK, Norway, Med and larger European rivers that I would not constrain your choice with canal cruising. Just charter for the canals. Three week long trips will be plenty.

 

[CarlF]

Finally because you have a good private weather service you should never be in a survival storm.

Yes. Even crossing the Atlantic you are usually within 3 days of shelter should the forecast turn bad. Plan your crossings for the mild weather seasons and you are unlikely to ever see 40kt sustained.

 

[Airstream345]

MVFortitude is beautiful classic example! I hadn't looked at the 'classic' KKs. Reminds me of the Diesel Ducks that I was interested in for a while. Not many folks want the combination of sail rig + trawler = too much effort, but it pays dividends too.

Do you use the sail rig much?
Is it your stabilization as well?

Thanks! She certainly is easy to find in the anchorage.

We don't use the rig for propulsion (another member here with a 54 on the east coast does fiddle with them underway) but we have used it for stabilization and it works surprisingly well in a beam sea state but it pretty worthless downwind in following seas. Fortunately she loves a following sea.

We are in the process of designing paravanes with an NA from Port Townsend and hope to fabricate and install them this year. That's really the last of our big two year refit we need before we go offshore.

 

[Mac2]

I have heard of that, but cannot find that report. Others have refuted that claim - including KK. Can't argue with science, unless it is flawed science (poor testing). Perhaps at slow enough speeds the detriment is neglibible but builds as you push towards hull speed? If you could send me a link, I'd appreciate it.

I have seen this study as well. It doesn't take into account all sea conditions. Any protrusion coming out from the hull has to produce drag. I'm not a naval architect, so I look to nature. Until I see a fish with these protrusions, I'm not going to put any faith in them.

 

[Mac2]

Mac2 all good thoughts. What I do know for a fact is that a majority of ocean crossing disaster are caused by glass blowing out.I can't recall a single offshore sinking because of a hull being holed. In a real survival situation the stern shape doesn't matter because you turn into the seas. Storm windows can be fitted to any boat. The tuna clippers which run from California to South America don't have backup propulsion. Comfort and layout do matter because you will spend a majority of time dockside or at anchor. Finally because you have a good private weather service you should never be in a survival storm.

omoore: The glass blowing out is a huge issue. One thing I never considered until I talked to the owner of a Northern Marine that was getting ready to cross to Hawaii, is the structure around the window. He said it didn't matter if you put storm windows on if the framework around the window was weak. You make valid points for sure. I'm of the opinion that everything will fail and you should prepare for that failure. Either by a secondary system, or spare parts that can be replaced in the worst of conditions.

Comfort and layout are huge. Especially if you liveaboard. My comment on amenities was in reference to the two boats the poster was talking about. You couldn't go wrong with either one.

 

[BGodlis]

I don't normally like to identify myself. But in this case, I believe you need to know the qualifications of the advice givers. I am the retired publishing director of yachting. As a result I have had the experience of touring the plants of major boat builders as well as publishing the experience of many blue water cruisers.



I owned a Hat 58 MY for over a decade and we cruised safely and comfortably every years between New England and the Bahamas. It was not an ocean crossing boat--too much glass and superstructure which rules out the KK. Yachts are not lost because of a failure of hull or deck. The Nordhavens of various sizes are proven passagemakers.

Powered by a commercially rated diesel you do not need twin engines. Bruce Kessler's Delta 70 went back and forth to Mexico and Alaska and circumnavigated on one engine.Long range commercial fishermen like the West Coast tuna boats have a single engine.+

Read Beebe's Voyaging Under Power for an understanding of the basic requirements. The book was updated by Jim Leishman of Nordhaven fame. Obviously his boats meet the passagemaking requirement but that doesn't disqualify him.
But I caution you that passagemakers are not ideal for canals and the Loop. For those cruises I would opt for lots of glass and open space. Since fuel is readily available more speed is nice as well. Finally remember an Italian circumnavigated in a 6.5 meter sailboat. And two brothers set a record in an open single outboard boat from Florida to Germany.

Have fun shopping the specs. Excuse the typos.

Oliver - thank you for your input. Very good point on the windows. KK says the boat would come with the fittings and plexiglass to protect the windows when needed. I will be in discussion with them regarding stability, resistance to wind and waves and such - knockdown will be brought up. Oddly, I have not had this discussion with Nordhavn. Perhaps I am just being trusting that they have already accounted for all that. Hull #1 hasn't gotten wet yet, so they will be testing, calculating, ballasting, etc. to meet their requirements, and getting CE-A cert on the first hull. KK says they are CE-A/ABYC with a few easy mods and I can hand over ~12 boat units to make it official with 2 inspections, certificate and such. Rather have the mods and skip the cost for a pretty piece of paper though.


I've read Beebe's work, Leishman's, Ken Williams, and others.



Single engine - I agree, however, most would caution that there should be redundancy. Either twin, sail, wing engine, or maybe the hydraulic get home that the smaller KK's have (though prop/shaft/transmission is not redundant). Twin seems to be the most recommended option. Ships, commercial fisherman, and outboard ocean crossing enthusiasts certainly make it happen, frequently, but does that mean we should too? Weather routing, not being on a schedule, proper training, provisions, technical know how, and redundancy - that is my plan. The KK48AE is on the table too.


Curious why you rule out the KK? Was that a reference to the glass?


My last 'trawler' was 1999 GB 42 Classic. My grandfather had a 1970's woodie 42. So much maintenance!

 

[Fletcher500]

Generally speaking, when someone posts about "ocean crossing", they post for awhile then disappear. Your boating background appears to be fairly solid, and more than others on here including a guy who was driving bass boats on a lake, before asking which ocean crosser should they get.

 

[BGodlis]

omoore: The glass blowing out is a huge issue. One thing I never considered until I talked to the owner of a Northern Marine that was getting ready to cross to Hawaii, is the structure around the window. He said it didn't matter if you put storm windows on if the framework around the window was weak. You make valid points for sure. I'm of the opinion that everything will fail and you should prepare for that failure. Either by a secondary system, or spare parts that can be replaced in the worst of conditions.

Comfort and layout are huge. Especially if you liveaboard. My comment on amenities was in reference to the two boats the poster was talking about. You couldn't go wrong with either one.

Mac2 - Thanks. As far as structure - I am presuming that N and KK are building sufficient to the task. The N51 has added large windows in the hull (staterooms and head), replacing portholes, like some euro vessels - another item i need to discuss with them. While the glass is ~ 3/8", how to protect those during a crossing/heavy weather. I think since they are closer to WL they may not be in a position to take a big hit from a wave.

 

[KnotYet]

I have seen this study as well. It doesn't take into account all sea conditions. Any protrusion coming out from the hull has to produce drag. I'm not a naval architect, so I look to nature. Until I see a fish with these protrusions, I'm not going to put any faith in them.

I doubt Nordhavn is in need of your faith since they have decades of data on them.

The term used by Nordhavn for these hull mods is 'maintenance strakes'.
They have been putting them on their hulls since the N40 both to increase the
ease of engine access and to physically lower the engine in the hull, flattening the
propeller shaft angle. This alone could increase the overall efficiency of the hull.

In fact, your assumption that 'any protrusion coming out from the hull has to
produce drag' is not factual either. No hull is a continuous straight line from bow
to stern and such a strake could reduce drag if it's the right bit in the right place.
Also, you will see fish with any number of body bumps if their biology calls for it.
I haven't seen one shaped like a featureless cylinder or teardrop without bumps yet.

 

[Simi 60]

Neither would be my choice
Fiddler VI would have been

55 ft of stabilised steel
13000 litres of fuel - 15 litres/h @ 8 knots so 6900nm range in theory
6lxb Gardner
$699k AUD

Wish we had the liquidity at the time.

 

[guy with a boat]

I have heard of that, but cannot find that report. Others have refuted that claim - including KK. Can't argue with science, unless it is flawed science (poor testing). Perhaps at slow enough speeds the detriment is neglibible but builds as you push towards hull speed? If you could send me a link, I'd appreciate it.

There is no need to analyze and second guess specific design details if your concern is efficiency. Compare the speed and efficiency of the two completed designs and let the naval architects figure out the design details.

 

[BGodlis]

Fiddler VI looks so much larger than 55'.

 

[danderer]

Speaking of hull forms...

Previous power boats and a "fast trawler" we've had really, really didn't like the seas behind them. They'd get shoved all over the place and it quickly got old trying to hand-steer, and even some APs weren't happy. Very different from the sailboats we had.

KK advertises their hull form is better, Specifically:

Symmetrical forms track better in a following sea. The V-shaped sections aft slice following seas rather than surfing them, making for a safer and more comfortable ride.

Just marketing stuff I assumed. I was quite surprised to find out there was truth here. Our boat handles following seas with aplomb, must more akin to a sailboat. I've found this to a a big quality of life issue - following seas are no longer a significant no-go item in our decision tree.

 

[Mac2]

I doubt Nordhavn is in need of your faith since they have decades of data on them.

The term used by Nordhavn for these hull mods is 'maintenance strakes'.
They have been putting them on their hulls since the N40 both to increase the
ease of engine access and to physically lower the engine in the hull, flattening the
propeller shaft angle. This alone could increase the overall efficiency of the hull.

In fact, your assumption that 'any protrusion coming out from the hull has to
produce drag' is not factual either. No hull is a continuous straight line from bow
to stern and such a strake could reduce drag if it's the right bit in the right place.
Also, you will see fish with any number of body bumps if their biology calls for it.
I haven't seen one shaped like a featureless cylinder or teardrop without bumps yet.

Maintenance strake says it all.
No protrusion will always be more efficient than a protrusion. Weather it makes a difference in shaft angle is a great point. I've only seen the picture of the schematic showing a man sitting next to the engine. I had the impression the maintenance strake was just that-for working around the engine. This is the first time I've heard the maintenance strake created a more efficient shaft angle.

 

[BGodlis]

Danderer - I have heard the KK hull form benefits mentioned/touted quite a bit. And my understanding of hull forms would agree - I started as a sailor.

I have to wonder why Nordhavn flattens the hull as they head aft, and in more recent builds/designs add integrated swimsteps?

Is it just to increase waterline?

If it really makes the N boats handle poorly in following seas, as well as create more roll (another detriment mentioned to the flattening of the hull form aft), then why do they do it?
I am sincerely asking that question - answers?