TT35 at the Annapolis Boat Show

[ssobol]

The multiple engine set up also can get you the new joystick control of the boat to make docking and maneuvering a piece of cake.

The guy with the TT35 is working to get this system set up on his boat.

 

[BandB]

On the loop, you don’t cross Lake Michigan in most cases but hug the western shore of Michigan and almost all loopers wait for good weather windows. Getting across the Gulf of Mexico will be more of a problem if a traditional crossing is attempted but with its shallow draft, the TT35 should be able to hug the west coast of Florida and visit ports other loopers bypass.

Looking forward to reading the blog of Spirit Song on how it works out on the loop.

If you choose not to cross Lake Ontario, only to do the south bank of Lake Erie, not to cross Huron, not to cross Michigan, and not to go to Lake Superior, then you've still done the loop technically, but sure missed a lot of it.

 

[JLD]

P.S. Ranger Tug has come out with a couple of new versions of their boats that are outboard powered, the 23, 27, and 29. In the past these have been a diesel inboard boats. I hear the the 27 is quite popular. Maybe there is something to this outboard thing after all.

The 29 I saw at the MIBS had twin outboards and a separate conventional marine generator.

While I agree with you general premise that OB's are moving into larger boats (there are many 30+ fishing boats with dual, triple, or even quad OBs), I'm not sure the Ranger Tug example is accurate.

When Ranger Tugs announced the R23 two years ago, it was a brand new boat that had a 200 hp outboard as the the standard engine. You could also opt for a sterndrive in place of the OB. I think most customers picked the OB and it looks like the sterndrive option may have been discontinued for this model.

The R27 had traditionally been an inboard boat. With the redesign on the R27 it now sports a 300 hp outboard.

I don't believe the R29 has an outboard option and it comes with a 300 hp inboard. Perhaps the boat you saw at the show was the new, redesigned R27?

Interesting, the same factory also make the Cutwater line of boats as well. Within the last year or two, they announced a 30' Cutwater (C-302) that is powered by two 300 hp outboards.

I was pretty active for a while on the tugnuts forum (until I decided that I could get a much larger, non-trailerable boat for the same money! ). There had been talk about a new 36 footer under secret development. One area of speculation was whether this new boat would also have a pair of large OBs?

Jim

 

[Donsan]

If you choose not to cross Lake Ontario, only to do the south bank of Lake Erie, not to cross Huron, not to cross Michigan, and not to go to Lake Superior, then you've still done the loop technically, but sure missed a lot of it.

Think you are misreading the comment. It was meant to address what Portager stated in post 175.

 

[JLD]

As for those who are uncomfortable towing an oversized load, I'd say just hire professional boat movers to move it for you. Most people would only move their transportable boat twice a year, and the cost of transporting on land will be lower than in the water.

This is an interesting statement that I agree with. I wonder how many people buy a trailerable boat only to move it once or twice a year, maybe even relatively short distances?

Having the option of relatively easy hauling of a boat (for me, meaning not having to take off a flybridge) is one factor that keeps the Nordic Tug 32 on my short list. I could see maybe doing a three month cruise (from the Chesapeake Bay) up the NJ coast, the Hudson, across the Erie Canal, the Trent-Severn waterway, Georgia Bay, over to Mackinac Island, down to Chicago. They maybe placing the Tug on a trailer and having a hauler ship it home!

Jim

 

[BandB]

Think you are misreading the comment. It was meant to address what Portager stated in post 175.

No, I know what it was addressing and think Portager's point may be valid. I don't know yet the seakeeping ability of the TT35. Perhaps one day we will.

Now, I'm not sure why one has chosen a TT35 thread to promote another unknown and unproven boat. Saying the Enavigo 39 and TT35 are very similar boats or even at all comparable is absurd to me.

 

[sunchaser]

As we all know, largish boats and outboards have been around for a very long time. There are many reasons. The TT35 is doing nothing more than joining a long parade for propulsion considerations. Sure, diesels in a big heavy boat are a good choice. But cannot see it as rational in smaller lighter vessels like the TT except for the diehards.

Had a relative with a 30' Osprey and twin diesels. What a mistake and maintenance headache. That boat, for fishing, is a lot better off with twin 350 OBs, as practiced by Grady White and a slew of others.

 

[MRRiley]

While perhaps a bit of a "hijack" Portager does introduce an interesting concept in my mind, of transportable vice trailer-able.

I can see some similarities in terms of size, overland-ability, and intended use despite the differences in draft, weight, propulsion and likely livability.

I know which one SWMBO would rather spend time on if the design were not "euro-ized" and everything else, read price point, were equal.

 

[Benthic2]

Both interesting boats, but they aren't in the same category...nor even close.

The TT has half the weight, and gets twice the mileage ( at least ), and a considerably higher top speed as well.

I am sure the price of the Enavigo will be twice that of the TT.

The cost to tow the TT will be considerably less when you think of the cost of the vehicle required and the fuel to feed it as well.


I am very confident that no one will be cross shopping these two vessels.

 

[BandB]

While perhaps a bit of a "hijack" Portager does introduce an interesting concept in my mind, of transportable vice trailer-able.

I can see some similarities in terms of size, overland-ability, and intended use despite the differences in draft, weight, propulsion and likely livability.

I know which one SWMBO would rather spend time on if the design were not "euro-ized" and everything else, read price point, were equal.

The entire topic of trailerable or moveable options might be good for a thread of it's own.

I'm still a proponent of the potential of outboards in 35-45' cruising boats, even though not of the execution of the TT35 by GH. Sea Ray now has a 32' Sundancer with outboards and I've seen the world of center consoles as people looked for cheaper alternatives to small SF's. I'd never owned an outboard in my life until a couple of years ago when we purchased a center console for employees to use. My wife still gets upset that it can outrun our fastest boat and that brings the desire for more speed back to the surface as they pass us in it.

 

[ssobol]

... I don't believe the R29 has an outboard option and it comes with a 300 hp inboard. Perhaps the boat you saw at the show was the new, redesigned R27?

Interesting, the same factory also make the Cutwater line of boats as well. Within the last year or two, they announced a 30' Cutwater (C-302) that is powered by two 300 hp outboards. ...

It could have been the C-302. Since Cutwater and Ranger joined forces they are often displayed together at boat shows. In addition the newer Rangers and Cutwaters are starting to look kind of the same.

 

[portager]

... The TT has half the weight, and gets twice the mileage ( at least ), and a considerably higher top speed as well. ...

The TT35 Great Harbour N37 trawler: spacious, stable, unsinkable claims - Fuel: 135 gallons, Cruising Speed: 8-16 mph, Range: 400 - 1000 miles. That is 6.95 to 13.9 knots. Assuming the 400 mile range is at 13.9 knots that is 2.47 mpg at 13.9 knots and 7.4 mpg at 6.95 knots.

The Enavigo Enavigo 39 Classic Motor Yacht ~ Power Boat Designs by Tad Roberts has Fuel: 900Lt (237 gal), Top Speed: 17 knots, Cruising Speed: 14-15 knots, Range at cruising speed: 630 kilometres @ 14 knots with 20% reserve. Milage is 2 mpg.

So the Enavigo is slightly faster but mileage at high cruise speed is 20% worse.

I apologize for hijacking this thread.

 

[Benthic2]

I figured the Enavigo was getting 1.7 miles per gallon based on its cruising range, and the TT35 gets 3.85 mpg at 15. 3.85 is greater than 2 times 1.7

The TT35's top speed is quoted as 26 mph on the GH website. Enavigo top speed is 17 knots ( = 19.5 mph )

I think 26 is considerably more than 19. I suppose we could debate the definition of "considerably"....but its 33% more.

Why do you say the Enavigo is slightly faster than the TT ??

 

[portager]

I figured the Enavigo was getting 1.7 miles per gallon based on its cruising range, and the TT35 gets 3.85 mpg at 15. 3.85 is greater than 2 times 1.7

The TT35's top speed is quoted as 26 mph on the GH website. Enavigo top speed is 17 knots ( = 19.5 mph )

Why do you say the Enavigo is slightly faster than the TT ??

It never occured to me to look at "top speed". Top speed is the imaginary speed that the vessel approaches at WOT without any payload onboard in perfect conditions. This speed is never achieved in the real world and couldn't be maintained for long without damaging the engines. However, I should have said the Enavigo is slightly faster CRUISING speed but mileage at high cruise speed is slightly worse.

The fuel capacity and range numbers don't match between the intro page and the performance page. Fuel capacity changes between 130 gallons and 130 and ranges changes from 400 to 450. That combined with overlooking the 10% reserve accounts for the difference in our numbers.

 

[Benthic2]

The big number that we don't know is price.

If we were able to compare the boats on price, I'm sure we would see, that the boats are not competitors for the same customers. Therefore their head to head numbers don't matter all that much.

Its like a Citizen vs a Rolex. If you are happy with a Citizen, you will never be able to justify the cost of a Rolex. If you want a Rolex, you'll never appreciate the value of the Citizen.

 

[ssobol]

... Top speed is the imaginary speed that the vessel approaches at WOT without any payload onboard in perfect conditions. This speed is never achieved in the real world and couldn't be maintained for long without damaging the engines. ...

I agree that while the top speed may be influenced by a number of factors and can change, it is not an imaginary number. It is determined by calculations by the boat designer and by actual testing. Not least of which to determine if the boat is safe to operate at whatever the top speed is.

However, I disagree with the second statement. Granted that running at WOT increases the stresses on/in an engine and may wear it out faster, said engine should be able to run at WOT for pretty much as long as the operator wants it to. Running at WOT is a good check on the condition of the engine and whether it is propped correctly or not. While I generally cruise at mid speeds, when water conditions allow I have no concern running my boat at WOT for as long as I want.

 

[portager]

When it comes to operation at WOT, I follow my engined Manufacturer's guidelines explicitly. My owners manual says, "... engines are designed to be
operated at maximum throttle (3000 - 3200 rpm) for less than 5% of total engine time (30 minutes out of every 10 hours) and cruising speed (2800 rpm or less) for less than 90% of total engine time (9 hours out of every 10 hours)." Therefore, I never run at WOT for more than 30 minutes at a time. Generally I operate at less than 2800 to conserve fuel and provide a more comfortable ride.

I suggest you look at your engine manufacturer's recommendations.

 

[Benthic2]

Top speed was a number provided by each manufacturer, so while you may not reach that speed, they can be compared with each other. Kind of like the MPG information on a new car.

 

[ssobol]

... I suggest you look at your engine manufacturer's recommendations.

I checked my owner's manual. The only limitations listed are not to run at full throttle for more than 5 minutes during the first 8 hours of operation (the break-in period), and it also says not to run at full power until the engine has warmed up.

 

[Spottsville]

Another article on the TT35!

Norm

https://www.soundingsonline.com/fea...tent=textlink&utm_campaign=enewsletter-030618

 

[john61ct]

For some reason I thought designed to go into a 40' conex, but obviously way too wide a beam.

What am I mixing it up with?

 

[Plane Nauti]

For some reason I thought designed to go into a 40' conex, but obviously way too wide a beam.

What am I mixing it up with?

SeaPiper maybe?

 

[Karlheinz51]

I have the same boat as Portager, 99 Wanderer Motorsailer, 75 hp yanmar turbo engine - 4hje something. 74 gals fuel, I run normally at 24-2500 rpms, rarely ever at WOT. I get about 1 gal/hr fuel use for avg 6 kts. Ran my boat from North Carolina to Elkton, Md. in the spring of '15 and then Elkton, Md. to Fort Myers, Fl. in the fall of the same year. Big water for me was the lower chesapeake - I can tell you for sure the Wanderer really does not like big beam seas.

 

[Donsan]

TT35 at Palatka Municipal Docks

On the way to grocery shopping yesterday, I noticed a TT35 at the Palatka Municipal docks. On the way home, it had departed.

Today on the way to Home Cheapo, noticed it again so we stopped by to take a look. It didn't have a name so I am assuming it is hull #4 which is being used for marketing and potential customer sea trials. No one was on the boat (it is a rainy day).

A few observations. First, the top of the boat was covered by 6 solar panels. The Palatka docks lack power so that is probably a good thing. Secondly, the boat was powered by two Honda outboards which I assume were BFP60s. Have not previously heard Great Harbour was switching from Suzuki to Honda but have heard at least one complaint about Suzuki support to their dealers. Anyone who knows more about this, please chime in. Third, the boat was completely clorox which isn't pleasing at all. Certainly, they plan to sell it to a customer later for personal embellishments but don't think many admirals will be impressed with a clorox boat.

 

[cardude01]

Is a “Clorox boat” an all white boat?

If so, I agree. Those TT35s look a little bland and slab-sided in all white. Not pretty like my brown boat. [emoji41]

 

[Donsan]

Is a “Clorox boat” an all white boat?

If so, I agree. Those TT35s look a little bland and slab-sided in all white. Not pretty like my brown boat. [emoji41]

Yep, almost all white.

 

[South of Heaven]

Ha! I always thought "Clorox" referred to the shape of certain boats, not the color. Like this style. ie; a clorox bleach bottle.

 

[sunchaser]

I've no issue with white boats, prefer them in fact. Have a white car too. For some, a white Christmas is special. Mrs. White and I head to the Caribbean today, the vessel is not white but still very seaworthy. Now that is important