starting over - basic question

[Lois]

Delfin...oops. You have identified one of my weaknesses...I'm not really a slipper kind of gal! I really do appreciate you sharing your opinions....they are like signposts for me so thanks very much.
Lois

[sunchaser]

Lois

Seeing you are located in the UK, insure you choose a vessel that is:

• seaworthy for your waters,
• sized to match your budget and slip space,
• instrument equipped to handle channel and crowded waters traffic,
• no leaky teak decks or side windows,
• space to install diesel heat,
• a mechanical setup that can be serviced locally,
• decent following for resale,
• flat foredeck, accessible sidedecks and a decent cockpit for ease of line handling and
• not a Florida or San Francisco Bay nice weather design.

[Art]

Originally Posted by Lois

Hi Art - Clark sends regards!

Regarding Trawlers:
1. What size, creature comforts and cruising capabilities you seeking to locate? was thinking around 40', capable of doing the loop, Caribbean and then through the Canal north to the PNW
2. Specific age range or price points? - like the look of older models (maybe because that's because I am an older model!) price in the $70-90K mark
3. Single or twin screw preference? - open
4. Diesel or gas preference? Diesel
5. Full displacement, Semi displacement/planing, Full plane hull? full displacement
6. Single or twin pilot stations, i.e. flybridge/salon or... ?? as I am solo, I am more concerned about access from the wheel to my ropes for berthing, etc...also tend to think flybridge models look unbalanced somehow..too much structure, too high
7. Boat material; FG, Wood, Steel, Aluminum... ?? FG -
8. Any makes/models/years you already have your eyes on? Hatteras, DeFever, Grand Banks Classic...

Was also going to consider a Tolleycraft, Art. How do you like yours?
Thanks for your response and kind welcome.
Lois

Hi Lois!

Glad to hear your Clark is doing well... Did he ever tell you?? He and I lifted weights in World Gym for years, Arnie Schwarzenegger would let Clark, me, and our good buddy William (Bily) Markakis try his new design w/o equipment. Bily is best trainer in the U.S.! (Bily's a good friend of mine - google him - you'll learn his weight lifting / personal training qualifications) I tried to get Clark into the fine art of pugilism, but, he just kept hitting other boxers (unfortunate heavy weight contenders) so hard on first punch they immediately flew over the ropes and into the viewing public’s seats! Judges refused to count that as anything they could score. Clark never could get the hang of it. Too bad, he and I could have made some BIG $$$$ together. What's Clark doing as a reporter or Superman for that matter these days... not working for Rupert Murdoch I hope? Saving lost cats / stranded dogs would please him... I'll never forget his compassion for all life forms i.e. Truth, Justice, and The American Way! lol

Now, Back to boats!

Having decades (not all in a row) of power boating experience (with some sail boating mixed in) on New England east coast and Mid Cal west coast U.S., as well as many years when young working with shipwrights in boat yards in NY and a new boat builder in Maine, I can confidently say that the three boat brands you mention are some of the best constructed production craft on the market. There are others too... i.e. Bertram, Uniflite, Chris Craft... Of course as with any builder of production craft there are best years, models, and sequences to chose from.

Regarding Tollycraft: We were lucky to find our 34’ tri cabin Tolly in such well cared for condition at her classic age of 31 years when we purchased. We were looking in the 34’ to 38’ boat range of a fully self contained inland and near-shore cruising-craft due to conditions where we plan to dock and play for years. Having quickly and fully become “one” with our Tolly I became amazed at Tollycraft’s build-out quality and rock-solid construction techniques. The Monk naval architects, Ed Sr. and Jr., are top of the line; they along with Tollycraft founder Robert Merland Tollefson (affectionately called Tolly) designed some of the best boats I’ve encountered. As with any boat that has decades of use on its bones it is much the condition of the craft from diligent care of PO’s that counts a whole lot regarding its condition and value. We are 2nd owner on this one That said, I’d take a Tolly as top choice over nearly any other production boat maker if it has been kept-up correctly. From what you say... My recommendation to you is a 48’ Tolly... I’m looking at one with 6-71 nats for our eventual Pacific coast cruises using SF Bay Area as home port. North in summer / south in winter... Gotta Luv It! We'd be 2nd owner on this Tolly too... but... she does have a few items needing tending, cause her 90+ year 1st owner had let some things slide for a quite few years. Also, unlike our 34' Tolly living under covered berth for most of her life, this Tolly 48 was never covered and there are deck problems that make me hesitate... still contemplating on possible purchase of this boat-baby!

Good luck in your boat search - - > !!!

Cheers! - Art

[Phil Fill]

So what is wrong with bunny slippers? If there was no other choice the bear ones might due but the fur would have brushed with maybe some blink, and the toe nails would definitely have to be manicured/shaped and painted. However, if you are not into slippers then at least have a boat to keep your pedicure/painted toes warm and dry. My wife is not into slippers either but she has thick blink socks that are very warm.




If you are thinking of coming up the Pacific Coast to the PNW, you will want a capable coastal blue water boat/trawler. Might be better to look/buy a boat/trawler in the colder northern climates as most of the boats/trawler are designed and already have the basics. The Eagle was a California boat and the first couple of year we dump/invest a lot to make her PNW live aboard ready.

[Art]

Buy Cheep - Sell High! err... OK, that was in previous years.

Buy Cheep - Improve to your liking - Don't Sell! - That's in these years!!

[Lois]

Thanks to you all for your kind responses...lots of good meaty stuff to mull over and to delve deeper into....although I confess I am beginning to regard this more as a Slipper Forum!
Lois

[Art]

Originally Posted by Lois

Thanks ....although I confess I am beginning to regard this more as a Slipper Forum! Lois

OMG - NOOOOO - - > Not that!!

[Rambler]

Originally Posted by Lois

Thanks to you all for your kind responses...lots of good meaty stuff to mull over and to delve deeper into....although I confess I am beginning to regard this more as a Slipper Forum!
Lois

Oh no. You'll never see me in pink fuzzy slippers. Unless that is, you peek in the blinds.

[Ataraxia]

Good question I also always wondered what describes a "trawler" I personally do not think my boat qualifies as a trawler. Trawler are (again in my opinion) derived from trawler fishing vessels who need a lot of payload to carry tons of fish. Later when companies such as Nordhavn decided to design "recreational" trawlers they were obviously based on these fishing trawlers which is great if you are into ballroom dancing because you can really exercise your hobby on those boats. Nothing wrong with space of course it is just that I would not like to pay the fuel build that comes with a heavy displacement trawler.
Peter

[Delfin]

Originally Posted by Ataraxia

Good question I also always wondered what describes a "trawler" I personally do not think my boat qualifies as a trawler. Trawler are (again in my opinion) derived from trawler fishing vessels who need a lot of payload to carry tons of fish. Later when companies such as Nordhavn decided to design "recreational" trawlers they were obviously based on these fishing trawlers which is great if you are into ballroom dancing because you can really exercise your hobby on those boats. Nothing wrong with space of course it is just that I would not like to pay the fuel build that comes with a heavy displacement trawler.
Peter

Peter, full displacement hulls are extremely efficient when moving through the water at something less than hull speed. Delfin weighs 65 tons, draws almost 8 ft and at a little over 7 knots burns a little over 3 gph. You can get fuel efficiency with a very light boat as well, but heavy displacement does not necessarily mean fuel inefficiency.

[Ataraxia]

Originally Posted by Delfin

Peter, full displacement hulls are extremely efficient when moving through the water at something less than hull speed. Delfin weighs 65 tons, draws almost 8 ft and at a little over 7 knots burns a little over 3 gph. You can get fuel efficiency with a very light boat as well, but heavy displacement does not necessarily mean fuel inefficiency.

Of course everything is relative: what you consider fuel efficient at 3gph is a big drinker compared to Idlewild at 1.3 gph which is what I consider as fuel efficient but you are right it is not necessarly the weight but rather the hull shape which makes a boat more or less fuel efficient.
Saying so I love the real sturdy look of Delfin, she is very nice.

[Delfin]

Originally Posted by Ataraxia

Of course everything is relative: what you consider fuel efficient at 3gph is a big drinker compared to Idlewild at 1.3 gph which is what I consider as fuel efficient but you are right it is not necessarly the weight but rather the hull shape which makes a boat more or less fuel efficient.
Saying so I love the real sturdy look of Delfin, she is very nice.

Idlewild is a very cool boat, and I really like that design - especially the 'garage' for the tender in the stern. I expect they will show some decrease in boat speed or slight increase in fuel consumption now that they have fitted paravanes on her, but at least she won't be rolling 40 degrees. Those Albertans are tough customers! Not to push the point too hard, but if I slow Delfin down to the 6.4 knots they crossed from Africa to Australia, we would burn around 2.3 gph. Still more, but not too inefficient especially considering we outweigh Idlewild by 100,000 pounds, although I would have to burn more fuel to blow out the slobber after running at 1100 rpm using 40 hp for days at a time.....

[LA Wannabe]

What I wanna know is why this, obviously likes the term "salty" and sea worthy, Lady is going "solo"??

[Art]

Originally Posted by Delfin
Peter, full displacement hulls are extremely efficient when moving through the water at something less than hull speed. Delfin weighs 65 tons, draws almost 8 ft and at a little over 7 knots burns a little over 3 gph. You can get fuel efficiency with a very light boat as well, but heavy displacement does not necessarily mean fuel inefficiency.

Originally Posted by Ataraxia

Of course everything is relative: what you consider fuel efficient at 3gph is a big drinker compared to Idlewild at 1.3 gph which is what I consider as fuel efficient but you are right it is not necessarily the weight but rather the hull shape which makes a boat more or less fuel efficient.

Originally Posted by Ataraxia

Saying so I love the real sturdy look of Delfin, she is very nice.

Gents: What you both portray is quite true... That said, it is not only the hull shape or weight of a craft comprised of a particular hull design moving through the water that enables higher fuel-efficiencies, but also the speed traveled in direct coordination with properly matched propulsion method/device (engine(s) used) and water-moving-apparatus (props/jets... etc). There appears to be a substantial (pre planing) nmpg fuel-efficiency increase regarding nearly any hull design or propulsion-device when as Delfin mentions above “...moving through the water at something less than hull speed.” In regard to weight of water pushed and somewhat the friction/suction of hull surface to contacted water... “less than hull speed.” Is the operative term, with less being the root word. Even our planing hull, 21K wet lbs, twin screw gasser, 34 LWA / 32 LWL Tollycraft can approach 3 nmpg by cruising 6 to 6.5 knots (7.58 is calced hull speed) on one screw at a time. Although I’ve never tried it I bet at 4.5 to 5 knots I may be able to increase her nmpg fuel efficiency even a bit more.

Sooo... to my point: Water-weight moved, in correlation to friction/suction increase, incorrelation to propulsion method/device employed, and in correlation to water-moving-apparatus used are the four symbiotically primary concerns regarding diminished or increased fuel efficiency of nearly any well designed motor driven water object; at their respective designed speed capabilities. Although my little Tollycraft has ample power to easily cruise on plane at 16 to 17 knots (1 nmpg at best) or to push her at some 22 knots WOT (OMG nmpg usage!), I believe that if her hull was powered by the correct propulsion method/device and water-moving-apparatus that at some 6 to 6.5 knots it could approach fuel efficiency of 1 gph (i.e. 6 to 6.5 nmpg), and, at planing speeds her current nmpg stats could also be notably increased.

With sub-plane speeds, kept well below hull speed, the friction of water contact to hull is relatively negligible. As speed is increased toward reaching hull speed, above and beyond slightly increased friction, it is the weight of additional water moved (pushed) that demands energy increase. Until a displacement hull virtually refuses faster movement due to ever increasing water weight being pushed by inability to climb over its bow wave. When a planning hull climbs over its bow wave and rides atop the water the need of energy for pushing water is considerably transferred for energy needs to overcome the then considerably increasing hull surface to water friction and suction. The less water contact that a planning hull design enables at higher speeds results in the better fuel efficiency, so long as the propulsion method/device and water-moving-apparatus used is correctly correlated to the hull’s designed speeds. Stepped bottoms became the rage in speed boats due to their less bottom-surface to water contact. High pressure through hull emitted water bubbles are now helping to further reduce surface contact and stippling bottom textures (with certain distances between each and contours per stipple) also offer hull-to-water contact reductions for efficiency increase. The high pressure under hull bubbles incorporated into stippling and coordinated with stepps further reduce friction and suction which can therefore increase efficiency of planing hulls. I believe that eventually high speed hull bottoms will be designed to actually float upon a cloud of air some 1/32" to 1/16” above the water’s surface for greatly reduced friction and suction occurrences.

[Delfin]

Good points, Art. I recognize that flat bottomed vessels capable of planing, but powered at low speed can be very, very efficient. Wind Horse is very efficient, about the same as Delfin, but not as good as Idelwild. Wind Horse, however, can get about the same fuel economy as Delfin at a much faster speed and is much longer if not that much more voluminous, so I suspect she would mimic Idlewild's performance if the speeds were the same. My experience is mostly with heavy displacement sail and power. My preference for heavy, full displacement is based on sea keeping capability. Wind Horse probably equals Delfin's comfort at sea, but only at higher speeds of 11+ knots, and at those speeds I really have to wonder about pounding. They say it is not a problem, and it probably isn't most of the time, but what about when the seas get to 20 ft or so? Don't know, but I wonder. As efficient as Idlewild is, I have a hard time believing that she would be that comfortable in the deep blue, given her very light weight. I think from the owner's website, they were only able to cook about 1/3rd of the time on their crossing to Aus, but that was probably why they decided to add stabilization.

Bottom line, a full displacement boat at slow speeds can be very slippery, and is only slightly less efficient, IMHO, than a skimmer even if it might take an extra day to get where you're going.

[Art]

Originally Posted by Delfin

Good points, Art. I recognize that flat bottomed vessels capable of planing, but powered at low speed can be very, very efficient. Wind Horse is very efficient, about the same as Delfin, but not as good as Idelwild. Wind Horse, however, can get about the same fuel economy as Delfin at a much faster speed and is much longer if not that much more voluminous, so I suspect she would mimic Idlewild's performance if the speeds were the same. My experience is mostly with heavy displacement sail and power. My preference for heavy, full displacement is based on sea keeping capability. Wind Horse probably equals Delfin's comfort at sea, but only at higher speeds of 11+ knots, and at those speeds I really have to wonder about pounding. They say it is not a problem, and it probably isn't most of the time, but what about when the seas get to 20 ft or so? Don't know, but I wonder. As efficient as Idlewild is, I have a hard time believing that she would be that comfortable in the deep blue, given her very light weight. I think from the owner's website, they were only able to cook about 1/3rd of the time on their crossing to Aus, but that was probably why they decided to add stabilization.

Bottom line, a full displacement boat at slow speeds can be very slippery, and is only slightly less efficient, IMHO, than a skimmer even if it might take an extra day to get where you're going.

I much agree with you, Delfin. And, I feel there is little to nothing (I know of) that can substitute for good sea keeping hull design, sheer bulk, and slower speeds with plenty of back-up power when necessary if BIG-Waves/High-winds are encountered. If I were to choose my boat for open ocean, cross continent power boat cruising yours is the one I'd want to pilot or simply be aboard. Water and air in their movements and needs for interaction with solid objects have uncanny and vast similarities. I design utility scale apparatus that works with extreme solar heated air temps utilizing the airflow buoyancy that is created. Also, I really do love boats!

[sunchaser]

Lois

Around 40' and blue water capable limits the search to only a few newer design vessels, namely Krogen and Nordhavn. Both are proven economical passagemakers with many out there and good resale. On this Forum the Krogen Hobo is the go to guy and vessel for current live aboard and world cruising. Both the Nordhavn and Krogen sites can provide much information and would allow you to have some good chats with active world cruisers.

A well kept DeFever, GB, American Tug or Nordic Tug could come into the choices too. Check out Rene Hemingway's/Don Douglas's cruising guides - they went with a Nordic Tug and then moved up to a 40' Nordhavn for their travels.

First and foremost though are your skills, not just your dreams. Marinas around the world are filled with very nice lightly used vessels where the owner's ambitions fell flat once the magnitude of ability, time, costs, distances and waves increased.

[Delfin]

Originally Posted by Art

I much agree with you, Delfin. And, I feel there is little to nothing (I know of) that can substitute for good sea keeping hull design, sheer bulk, and slower speeds with plenty of back-up power when necessary if BIG-Waves/High-winds are encountered. If I were to choose my boat for open ocean, cross continent power boat cruising yours is the one I'd want to pilot or simply be aboard. Water and air in their movements and needs for interaction with solid objects have uncanny and vast similarities. I design utility scale apparatus that works with extreme solar heated air temps utilizing the airflow buoyancy that is created. Also, I really do love boats!

I'm re-reading Hal Roth's "Chasing the Long Rainbow" about an early BOC single handed circumnavigation race. I think 4 of the 18 boats hit "something" during the race that caused damage and one fatality. Suspects included submerged shipping containers, submarines and whales. Having hit a sleeping whale in pitch black darkness myself in the Pacific, I appreciate the desirability of a very stout hull that can hit something with much reduced chances of holing, which is why I like steel and bilge tankage. I often wonder what would happen to Wind Horse's aluminum hull if it hit a lost cargo container in the middle of the night at 11 knots. I read that 10,000 such containers are lost annually.

[Lois]

Gosh, have I ever lucked out with all of your responses....a rich and diverse range of opinions and information...topped off with a very cerebral last set of posts....not just food for thought, but a feast...and very courteously expressed. Wow what a forum...slippers and all.
Lois

[Art]

Originally Posted by Lois

Gosh, have I ever lucked out with all of your responses....a rich and diverse range of opinions and information...topped off with a very cerebral last set of posts....not just food for thought, but a feast...and very courteously expressed. Wow what a forum...slippers and all.
Lois

Again - - > WELCOME Lois! U B Cool... slippers and all!! Art