trawler vs powercat

currently i'm very interested in a 33' american tug. i feel it has the rugged, functional quality, that fits my needs; light fishing, short cruising and mostly living aboard. i've seen some wonderful powercats, but all leave me with the impression that they may be more boat than i need. perhaps some pros & cons could help me know better what work for me?

the small wrinkle to my plans is, i'm trying to do my mooring in the philippines. the marinas there are quite limited. would the abundance of coral reef and shallow regions in the region also be a factor in my choice of hull? do i want a powercat for it's shallow displacement, making some areas more accessible? would a trawler vessel be a safer bet for it's sea worthiness, as well as not having a beam that could add to my problem in finding already limited berthing? performance not a comparison factor for me. safety, mooring and ease of use and economic upkeep over time, are what comes to mind as my concerns. does anyone know what vessel best suits my needs?

Thanks for posting. Similar questions that I have had. I look forward to reading and the answers.

I'm in the same boat....sorry couldn't resist....but I haven't gotten past steel vs fiberglass. It seems from the few other discussions on this fourm, that there are some unique motions (hobby horsing, air/water being expelled between hulls, ect) that are "undesirable".
But when I see a hull design that routinely involves a discussion about stabilizers, as a novice, it makes me wonder if one can truly get an unbiased opinion. It may just be a matter of getting comfortable with and experience with the chosen hull design.
The living space offered by a cat certainly keeps me on the fence, but every time I see a Diesel Duck I fall in love with it, so one can pretty much discount my opinion at this point LOL!

This Diesel Duck (see link below) spent about a year in the Philippines and based upon many conversations I had with the owner he didn't experience any problems with depth. Note: His draft is 5' 10" (1.8 meters). If you check out his blog you'll see that he also spent some time along side another Diesel Duck while in the Philippines so my guess is there are no serious issues about the draft of these little ships around the Philippine islands. An American Tug should have no problems based upon it's much shallower draft than the DD's.

Home - Blog Summary View

.

I rather like cruising cats. I cruised full time for the better part of a year on a sailing cat, an Island Packet 35, but I probably ran the engines 80% of the time, so it was more of a power cat than sail boat.


Power cats seem to be of two types: the lightweight, fast but limited cruising amenities boats like the Glacier Bays and World Cats or heavier and slower but with nice cruising amenities like the Fountaine Pajots.


Two more of the second type which seem to be well priced are the Endeavor TrawlerCat 36 and the PDQ 34.


The heavier types really are not significantly more fuel efficient than a monohull, but they do have more room inside than an equivalent monohull. And with twin engines which would be unusual in a 34-36' monohull, they have good access for maintenance and the dock handling of a twin can't be beat.


I would check out these latter two boats. They are available in the low $100s in early 2000s models. If your budget is $200+, the Fountaine Pajot can't be beat.


David

Engine access on many power cats is not too good. I chartered a Fountaine Pajot Summerland 40 and was glad I didn't have to do any maintenance-- very tight in there. I think the PDQ 34 engine access is a bit better, but they are under the beds IIRC.

Take my advice with a grain of salt because I am a complete novice. A well read novice, but a novice with no practical experience none the less.


The Diesel Ducks speak to me as a lay person. Durable, efficient and safe. Built with a cruising couple in mind with a moderate draft (subject to boat size but the smaller ducks are less than 4 feet.). The get home sail option with the added benefit of dampening motion. You should check out the diesel duck website and just read Mr. Buehler's philosophy on blue water cruisers.


common sense things like full size showers and ample size engine rooms for easy maintenance are big positives in my mind.


Certainly not the most elegant boat on the water and she won't win any beauty contests. However I would rather be surrounded by an ugly sturdy boat that meets my needs then a pretty, less capable craft.

Watch out everyone, the Ducks are out tonight

scott2640 said:

The get home sail option with the added benefit of dampening motion.

Click to expand...

Do you really think that sail will get you home? some would beg to differ.

"safety, mooring and ease of use and economic upkeep over time,"

These are not issues that are exclusive to either catamarans or monohulls. How a boat is designed, built, equipped, maintained, and (most of all) crewed, will impact those issues.

Some cats are really wide and that will impact mooring, but you need to be specific because some cats are not that wide. Most modern cats are higher speed vessels and if that is not required then you need to look elsewhere.

Something like one of these Armstrong cats will be stronger/safer, and have lower maintenance on the hull than a fiberglass production "tug". But it has twin outboards vs a single big diesel. The dependability and maintenance between the two systems will depend on how they are operated and cared for, either can be good or bad.

i've been looking at small steel trawlers, mostly from germany and netherlands. they build good stuff there too. we've both read drawbacks on each, so i don't think steel vs fiberglass can be answered without considering manufacturer track record? also, an owners intended use? my logic says, if i'm the type of owner that's more a risk taker, sail in bad weather, more likely to explore uncharted paths, scrape bottom, then i want integrity of steel. if i'm parked at the marina 24/7, migrating from port A to port B in my mobile condo, i want a surface that holds up best to the elements, fiberglass. the area i'll be living in is prone to typhoons, so if anyone needs a steel hull, it could be me? think i'm still going fiberglass. i won't exactly be alone in my choice. i am a novice, but i think my logic is right?

Cervelo said:

I'm in the same boat....sorry couldn't resist....but I haven't gotten past steel vs fiberglass. It seems from the few other discussions on this fourm, that there are some unique motions (hobby horsing, air/water being expelled between hulls, ect) that are "undesirable".
But when I see a hull design that routinely involves a discussion about stabilizers, as a novice, it makes me wonder if one can truly get an unbiased opinion. It may just be a matter of getting comfortable with and experience with the chosen hull design.
The living space offered by a cat certainly keeps me on the fence, but every time I see a Diesel Duck I fall in love with it, so one can pretty much discount my opinion at this point LOL!

Click to expand...

..only reason I not jump in a trawler cat (like the bamba) it's there are seriously pricey.
Like other member pointed out, big ones are not necessarily less expensive on gas.
But the horizontal space it's something to considerer.
I still waiting for an affordable, medium price 50', long range catamaran... Kurth Hughes hage a couple interesting design but nothing commercial yet...

wow tad,
you really sparked my interest with this one. i've never been a tig welder, so i wasn't really thinking aluminum, but armstrongs certainly look TOUGH (and that's what i like) i'm going to have to deal with typhoons from time to time, so just getting wowwed in a showroom over a much bigger, cheaper, fancy fiberglass boat is my wife's mindset, not mine. i'm a mechanic too, so twins not a factor. this 28' armstrong is a bit more "spartan" than even the 34' tugs i've been looking at, but it looks like armstrong is definitely on my radar.

Tad Roberts said:

"safety, mooring and ease of use and economic upkeep over time,"

These are not issues that are exclusive to either catamarans or monohulls. How a boat is designed, built, equipped, maintained, and (most of all) crewed, will impact those issues.

Some cats are really wide and that will impact mooring, but you need to be specific because some cats are not that wide. Most modern cats are higher speed vessels and if that is not required then you need to look elsewhere.

Something like one of these Armstrong cats will be stronger/safer, and have lower maintenance on the hull than a fiberglass production "tug". But it has twin outboards vs a single big diesel. The dependability and maintenance between the two systems will depend on how they are operated and cared for, either can be good or bad.

View attachment 57675

View attachment 57676

Click to expand...

The current issue of Passagemaker has a picture of Griffin, a custom (mostly owner built) Bering 50 on the cover.

I was in the Hinckley boat yard in Stuart, FL yesterday and there it was on the hard. No need for blocks...it just sat there. Wide keel and two fin keels reaching all the way to the ground (OK, there were a couple of pieces of wood under it)

That to me is the ideal trawler.

i think i really need to take a vacation in florida and try to charter, or at least board a FP greenland 34. i'll probably fall in love (a frame of mind never good in prudent decisions) still trying to keep my feet grounded, focussing on the long term maintenance and durability, something not so plush and spacious, but may be the winner in the long run, a tug. or bette yet, a workhorse like the the armstrong cat. after i experience my 1st PH typhoon, it would be nice to say, "this little piggy was smart enough to pick aluminum" plus having all those spare bedrooms in a big trawler cat, means the in-laws will never leave.

djmarchand said:

I rather like cruising cats. I cruised full time for the better part of a year on a sailing cat, an Island Packet 35, but I probably ran the engines 80% of the time, so it was more of a power cat than sail boat.


Power cats seem to be of two types: the lightweight, fast but limited cruising amenities boats like the Glacier Bays and World Cats or heavier and slower but with nice cruising amenities like the Fountaine Pajots.


Two more of the second type which seem to be well priced are the Endeavor TrawlerCat 36 and the PDQ 34.


The heavier types really are not significantly more fuel efficient than a monohull, but they do have more room inside than an equivalent monohull. And with twin engines which would be unusual in a 34-36' monohull, they have good access for maintenance and the dock handling of a twin can't be beat.


I would check out these latter two boats. They are available in the low $100s in early 2000s models. If your budget is $200+, the Fountaine Pajot can't be beat.


David

Click to expand...

david,
you definitely sparked my interest in the FP power cats. the greenland is about the extreme in size of what i'm considering with a few other more modest choices in mind. i was originally looking more at 34' tug trawlers, but the shallow displacement of the cats has become a big incentive to have in the philippines, even more so than fuel efficiency or space. i've also been looking at robertson & craine cats as comparable to the FB, thoughts on those?

and if money were no object, my choice would be an armstrong 34' cat. as nice as having an aluminum hulled cat in a typhoon region, there's quite a hefty premium on this feature. to swing that choice, i'd not only be sacrificing all the beautiful interior and amenities of a fiberglass model, i'd also be looking at a 15 yr older vessel, just to get within the same $200k budget. since you've been so helpful in getting me on board cats, i'd love your input on these other choices?

djmarchand said:

I rather like cruising cats. I cruised full time for the better part of a year on a sailing cat, an Island Packet 35, but I probably ran the engines 80% of the time, so it was more of a power cat than sail boat.


Power cats seem to be of two types: the lightweight, fast but limited cruising amenities boats like the Glacier Bays and World Cats or heavier and slower but with nice cruising amenities like the Fountaine Pajots.


Two more of the second type which seem to be well priced are the Endeavor TrawlerCat 36 and the PDQ 34.


The heavier types really are not significantly more fuel efficient than a monohull, but they do have more room inside than an equivalent monohull. And with twin engines which would be unusual in a 34-36' monohull, they have good access for maintenance and the dock handling of a twin can't be beat.


I would check out these latter two boats. They are available in the low $100s in early 2000s models. If your budget is $200+, the Fountaine Pajot can't be beat.


David

Click to expand...

nuccifilms said:

i've been looking at small steel trawlers, mostly from germany and netherlands. they build good stuff there too. we've both read drawbacks on each, so i don't think steel vs fiberglass can be answered without considering manufacturer track record? also, an owners intended use? my logic says, if i'm the type of owner that's more a risk taker, sail in bad weather, more likely to explore uncharted paths, scrape bottom, then i want integrity of steel. if i'm parked at the marina 24/7, migrating from port A to port B in my mobile condo, i want a surface that holds up best to the elements, fiberglass. the area i'll be living in is prone to typhoons, so if anyone needs a steel hull, it could be me? think i'm still going fiberglass. i won't exactly be alone in my choice. i am a novice, but i think my logic is right?

Click to expand...

Exactly my sediment 4 years ago. I would have loved to have the Krogen 42 in steel.

Now, from what I have experienced, my view is vastly different. Two significant issues:

1. Dauntless has virtually no condensation inside the boat, above or below the water line.

2. A few people who looked at the damage from my rock encounter(s) last year said had the boat been steel, it is likely I would have had a 5 foot slice in the side of the boat, much like a can opener, and I may have lost the boat.

Cored GRP provides an insulation and different shear properties that may or may not be advantageous.

Simply put, it's not a no brainer to me anymore and both show advantages and disadvantages.

sooooo glad for that valuable insight1 maybe with your frame of mind 4 yrs ago, i've been considering the added expense and hassle of getting a steel or aluminum vessel in some of the northern regions of the globe; the baltic states in europe, alaska, USA, where these seem popular. after hearing your story it definitely takes me off the path. the less insulative property of metal in a tropical region, means more issues with temperature control. then there's metal corrosion that's always lurking. i'm sure the armstrong 34' would be the piece of mind i'd want in a typhoon, but the premium of having such a vessel... i could almost afford 2 fiberglass boats of equal stature. last point is that hitting rocks is a bad thing no matter what your vessel. going with a shallow displacement multi-hull (that also saves on fuel) may be the one no-brainer safeguard choice. as far as metal hulls, spending a ton more money for a different set of trade-offs, hardly seems to have me coming out ahead.

Wxx3 said:

Exactly my sediment 4 years ago. I would have loved to have the Krogen 42 in steel.

Now, from what I have experienced, my view is vastly different. Two significant issues:

1. Dauntless has virtually no condensation inside the boat, above or below the water line.

2. A few people who looked at the damage from my rock encounter(s) last year said had the boat been steel, it is likely I would have had a 5 foot slice in the side of the boat, much like a can opener, and I may have lost the boat.

Cored GRP provides an insulation and different shear properties that may or may not be advantageous.

Simply put, it's not a no brainer to me anymore and both show advantages and disadvantages.

Click to expand...

Wxx3 said:

Exactly my sediment 4 years ago. I would have loved to have the Krogen 42 in steel.

Now, from what I have experienced, my view is vastly different. Two significant issues:

1. Dauntless has virtually no condensation inside the boat, above or below the water line.

2. A few people who looked at the damage from my rock encounter(s) last year said had the boat been steel, it is likely I would have had a 5 foot slice in the side of the boat, much like a can opener, and I may have lost the boat.

Cored GRP provides an insulation and different shear properties that may or may not be advantageous.

Simply put, it's not a no brainer to me anymore and both show advantages and disadvantages.

Click to expand...

This a very interesting discussion. I started my research looking at aluminum hulled craft- single and twin hulls and have just recently looked more seriously at fiberglass trawlers. I'm curious as to what you think might have happened if your boat was aluminum, not steel or fiberglass. My thought is that maybe it would have dented with no puncture and could perhaps have carried on to be repaired later.
I started out with the thought that in the PNW aluminum was for me, so boats like the Armstrong caught my eye, but the trawler design fits the space, comfort, speed, reliability requirement.
Aluminum trawlers are rare and custom made and expensive, but they are out there. Check out Rozema in Wa. Wow!

leeman

given the choice, it would be an aluminum hull all the way. regardless of isolated claims, i don't believe there'd be anything better to hold up in harsh conditions and to also stand the test of time. not to mention, they do a much better job of holding their value over time. (believe me, all i'm doing is looking al 10-15 year models) i could tolerate the hotter surfaces, metal sweating, their spartan furnishing, etc. HOWEVER, i'm 51, looking forward to my early retirement in 2 years. not looking to put it off another 5+ years for a WAY more expensive boat of the same standing, and that's what this amounts to for me. plus, there's such a thing as boaters insurance.

leeman said:

This a very interesting discussion. I started my research looking at aluminum hulled craft- single and twin hulls and have just recently looked more seriously at fiberglass trawlers. I'm curious as to what you think might have happened if your boat was aluminum, not steel or fiberglass. My thought is that maybe it would have dented with no puncture and could perhaps have carried on to be repaired later.
I started out with the thought that in the PNW aluminum was for me, so boats like the Armstrong caught my eye, but the trawler design fits the space, comfort, speed, reliability requirement.
Aluminum trawlers are rare and custom made and expensive, but they are out there. Check out Rozema in Wa. Wow!

leeman

Click to expand...

Greetings,
I am quite taken with the idea of a cat as well BUT, and here's the killer that's already been mentioned: Minuscule engine spaces. Now, I was unfamiliar with Motorcats with narrower beam than usual and OB's but not made any more...

inboard, outboard or any kind of space, i'm a mechanic that can pull and fix any engine blindfolded, so i can't share in that concern.

plus, i'm looking at building a stand alone electric powered vessel, via oceanvolt or elco motor yachts. it takes a fraction of my know-how to DIY retrofitting an existing diesel guzzler to go from dollars to pennies in running costs. plus, a pure electric boat has near zero mechanical maintenance, and your range all depends on how many big lithiums you want to shell out for and and allot the storage space for.

RT Firefly said:

Greetings,
I am quite taken with the idea of a cat as well BUT, and here's the killer that's already been mentioned: Minuscule engine spaces. Now, I was unfamiliar with Motorcats with narrower beam than usual and OB's but not made any more...

Click to expand...

Some aluminum hulls have been condemned in a matter of weeks after launch due to stray current corrosion....pick carefully..... as no materiel wins all the battles.

I've watched three aluminum hulled boats age over the past 20 years.
During that time, we have owned fiberglass hulled sailboats.
There have been groundings of both types with the asssociated repairs...Both types were maintained to "nice" standards.
You couldn't talk me into an aluminum hull for any reason.
Just not something I'd ever buy into...
Bruce

won't speak for all aluminum hulls, but in my opinion, the armstrong cats are built like tanks on the water. comparing apples to apples aluminum is double the cost of a fiberglass of equal stature. so unlless cost doesn't matter, that is the nail in the coffin.

Bruce B said:

I've watched three aluminum hulled boats age over the past 20 years.
During that time, we have owned fiberglass hulled sailboats.
There have been groundings of both types with the asssociated repairs...Both types were maintained to "nice" standards.
You couldn't talk me into an aluminum hull for any reason.
Just not something I'd ever buy into...
Bruce

Click to expand...

Wow...not a clue what you are saying....

If built great out of the best alloys...yet still subject to a bad electrical situation...you just built a couple hundred thousand dollars of scrap.

I have personally seen the results and the tears of the owner.

It would not be as big of a disaster out of other materials.

just to be clear, i did say i would not buy one? if i don't have a clue maybe for thinking thst aluminum has it's merrit, i guess i'm in the company of the coast guard and alaskan fishermen, who have the most demanding environments. your best sports car is a pile of scrap when it hits a tree. i think that role falls under insurance?

psneeld said:

Wow...not a clue what you are saying....

If built great out of the best alloys...yet still subject to a bad electrical situation...you just built a couple hundred thousand dollars of scrap.

I have personally seen the results and the tears of the owner.

It would not be as big of a disaster out of other materials.

Click to expand...

nuccifilms said:

just to be clear, i did say i would not buy one? if i don't have a clue maybe for thinking thst aluminum has it's merrit, i guess i'm in the company of the coast guard and alaskan fishermen, who have the most demanding environments. your best sports car is a pile of scrap when it hits a tree. i think that role falls under insurance?

Click to expand...

I didn't say you didn't have a clue...I said I didn't have one about your statements.

I was an engineering officer when the USCG started buying aluminum boats...so don't believe everything you see, hear or read....obviously there are other influences than reason.

Also I didn't say aluminum isn't a good material, I pointed out it has a serious flaw that one needs to be careful of.

It isn't better or worse than other materials, it is what it is......read carefully if you are expecting to get anything out of these forums. Some people here have experience with the best...we just haven't written books or are currently employed by a certain corp, or hold a certain title. Investigate all posts and you will get close to where you want to be, but there is always more to learn.

I just want to set the record straight. There has been a lot of talk disparaging engine room space on cats. On every cat I have seen there has been full access on all sides to the engine. In every instance you could walk right up to the front of the engine standing up.


In most cases there is lots of room behind the engine for gensets, water makers, etc. with stand up or almost stand up headroom.


No it won't be like a Nordhavn 54, but what trawler is.


David

Referring to the original post, if as you say, performance really wasn't an issue for you, I can't think of any reason (save perhaps the shallow draft) that a powercat would be a better choice than a monohull. On the other hand, you did say living aboard was, so at least one sub-40 powercat offers exceptional living-aboard space, namely the aforementioned Endeavour 36. Three staterooms, great salon, huge head with separate shower, and decent engine access under the aft stateroom bunks. Nice semi-enclosed helm with plenty of seating. Enough deck and walkway space to fish from anywhere. It's low profile and a 16 ft. beam give it a low center of gravity and favorable windage but not so wide that slips are impossible. It's a function over form design (ugly), but about the only real negative is that the bridge deck height is pretty low, and she does slam a bit in head seas. They can be bought for around 150K.

The PDQ 34 is surely the efficiency king among the lot. Better design, less interior space (although very good), and handles like a sports car from either the strategically centered interior helm or a very spacious flybridge. I love it and would probably have one if I wasn't so big and stiff. Stepping into the hulls is difficult and climbing into the queen bunks are negatives for me, but fine for lesser, more elastic frames. Engine access is also tight but doable. I have to lay on the engines and change the impellers blind. 16 ft. beam, decent windage,... really a wonderful boat.

If it were my money, I wouldn't spend it on a Fontaine Pajot in any length under the 37 foot Maryland. Good Maryland's are available within your budget and the extra length gives some better maintenance access, decent heads, larger salon, and if you can live with the creeking and groaning, the design does pretty good in heavy water too. Windage is not as good as the other two but still OK, and the beam won't kill you.

There's a host of different livable cats around Australia, South Africa and Thailand by the way, and shipping from there would likely be much cheaper. Best of luck.