Is a sailboat really "cheaper" than a trawler?

twistedtree said:

Good points. I'd summarize by saying that if you want to go minimalist, boating is much cheaper. And it's easier to go more minimalist with a sail boat. But in this case I think the savings come from being minimalist more than anything. I've seen plenty of power boats that are clearly operated on a shoe string, and there is nothing wrong with that. I'm not trying to suggest a boa needs to be outfitting any particular way. I'm just looking for an objective attribution of the savings.

Click to expand...

good points, yes. I don't fault anybody's style of boating, in fact i was kind of jealous of those boats and how often the one went out!

Something else, since we are trying to figure out whats cheaper. . .can we define cheaper? The costs mentioned in this thread tend to be just various levels of expensive :lol:

I see this as such a loaded question. Are we talking two boats with an equivalent level of equipment and comfort? Are we talking two boats with equivalent seaworthiness? Or the average sail boat vs the average trawler.

I would say this, that the average sailboat owner spends less maintaining their boat than the average trawler owner. However, the average sailboat isn't equipped anything like the average trawler.

If you want equivalent living comforts then the sailboat is going to grow in size and require far more equipment than the average powerboat. At some point you're paying to maintain everything on the sailboat that you do on the powerboat plus the sails and eventually taking this to completion the sailboat can become more expensive. However, most sailboat owners don't do that. You see it on the major sail yachts though. Still a 45' sailboat doesn't come close to the comfort and space of a 45' trawler and 95% of the time has far less equipment.

Now if you're talking seaworthiness, there is a contention that sailboats are more seaworthy than power boats. I think that's true to a point only. If you're talking about crossing the Atlantic, you're going to see more 45' sailboats doing it than 45' powerboats. So, the argument might be to match the 45' sailboat in seaworthiness you need an 80' powerboat. I think seaworthiness of sail over power is rather exaggerated. Is Richard's 42' KK less seaworthy than the average 42'sailboat? I sure see a lot of sailboats have issues offshore. Wind can be very much a problem for them. Sails can get ripped. While perhaps many trawlers are not designed for passagemaking, others are quite capable but lack the range.

Ultimately generalizations in answering the OP's question are only partially true. The only real answers are if you select a sailboat and a powerboat and then ask is Sailboat A less expensive to operate than Powerboat B.

Let's face it. Modern fiberglass boats sail or power will be able to float around almost forever regardless of the condition of their sails or engines. I know people with both kinds that use their boats as weekend condos rather than sail or power around. I asked one friend who lives aboard when was the last time he fired his motors, he couldn't remember, it had been years. I've had both sail and power, they cost as much as you want or allow them to. It's up to you.

I didn't mean it to be a loaded question. My thesis is that there is nothing inherently less expensive about a boat because its a sail boat vs a power boat. And that what DOES impact cost is the amount of equipment, level of fit and finish, space, strength of construction, quality of components, etc. Power and sail boats alike, one can dial up or dial down the cost just the same. More stuff and better stuff drives the cost up. It does seem that sail boats tend to be less equipped compared to power boats, and that might feed the simplification that "sail is cheaper".

twistedtree said:

If you compare two comparably sized and equipped boats, one sail and one a trawler,mis one really less expensive to buy? And to operate?

Click to expand...

The key question as stated by TT is not too complicated. Like many on TF, I've seen both sides. As posted by Rickized, Dashew has a great compare of large sailing vessels with sails and rigging kept to a high standard vs a blue water similar sized power vessel.

Let's compare for a moment a 60 foot Hinkley or Beneteau to a 60' Nordhavn. If the sail boats are maintained in blue water ready condition with a full complement set of sails, it is likely more expensive to buy and maintain than the Nordhavn.

If the question is what is the cheapest way to travel by water from Port Angeles to Ketchikan, I saw the answer two days ago - two guys on paddle boards who by then were already in Sidney. Amazing story but not the question posed by TT.

dhays said:

FWIW, I own two boats, a Catalina 400 MkII that I'm trying to sell and my North Pacific 43. So far, the power boat is a LOT more expensive to own. This is with roughly equal amount and types of use. As Eric pointed out, even with similar lengths, there is a LOT more boat with a power boat. My Catalina 400 has been a relatively inexpensive boat to own, but it is a relatively simple boat. No inverter, no thrusters, manual raw water heads, etc... The biggest differences come with the basic maintenance. I could buy a raw water impeller for my sailboat for about $30-40. MUCH more expensive for my Cummins 5.9. Lot more expense with the larger engine.

Click to expand...

Apples and oranges.
One is half the boat than the other, is it any wonder one is more expensive to maintain?

I have a sailing background as well.

If we were looking for the sailing version of what we have it would have to be big to carry the weight of household appliances and batteries/inverters to run them.
It would need massive internal volume for the dedicated laundry and king size bed.
The hull area would be similar in size and cost to maintain.
It would need a larger genset or at least run the genset often as it would not be able carry the solar we do due to sail shading issues.
Controlling sails and rig of that size would need hydraulic or electric winches adding to cost.
They would use more power requiring bigger battery banks therefore weight, unless going lithium at more expense again.
It would still have a hefty size diesel engine and reality would be, it would get used a lot as sails on a boat this size are hard.
Mooring fees would be similar.
Insurance would be more due to cost of vessel.

I can guarantee you that the sailing boat would cost 5x what we paid for what we have.
For us its no contest.

"Do sails wear out from sitting in the hold or use and abuse?"

Sunshine eats at fabric , chafe rubs the stitching and fabric and flogging breaks down the material.

The big question is what is mere volume "worth".

Inshore the volume in a motor cruiser can be filled with goodies like dishwashers , washing machines , trash compactors, ice makers etc.

And a service tech is just a phone call away.

Sailboats excel in passage making , where inshore boats can not go.

Which is "better" really depends on your cruising goals and wallet.

When I was shopping for a boat, I had a limited budget to find a boat that was capable of handling blue water conditions of the Southern Ocean. This requirement was non-negotiable. Originally, I didn't want a sail boat as I find them too claustrophobic.

In the end/, I found that any power boat capable of handling the conditions would cost double what a sailboat would. The boat would require some type of roll stabilzation, and the only type of stabilization that comes cheap are sails.

Operating and maintenance costs costs are probably similar, but it depends more on boat condition, engine size, and cruise speed than sail or power.

Are trawlers more expensive to own/operate than passagemaking sailboats? This question has interested me over the last ten years and I have asked a good number of sailboaters I have met in the eastern Caribbean about their expenses. A couple of things were obvious from the start and continue today. Few sailboats were comparably equipped to our Kadey Krogen 42. Refrigeration, electricity generation and clothes washing are among the chief differences. I have run across sailboats with the same main motor we have (Lehman 135) and the same generator (Westerbeke 8kw) but these boats were all 10 feet or more longer than our Krogen. The monohulls don't have the same space we have until they are much much longer than our 42 feet. The cats start seeming similar at around 48 feet with a wide cat with two engines.

What have I found in terms of costs? The trawlers fuel over a decent period of time (5 years plus) is offset by the cost of replacing sails, canvas, rigging and eisenglass. Fuel use is not exclusive to trawlers as the sailboaters admit to doing a lot of motoring and also use fuel for electricity generation. Many of the sailboats I have asked about have higher engine hours than we do because they use the main to charge the batteries. Whereas I in my trawler fill up not more than once at year at a spot selected for low prices. I have repeatedly seen sailboats fill up their smaller tanks in places like the French islands were the diesel is at European prices.

Marina and storage charges. The greater size of the comparable sailboats whether mono or cat cost more in a slip or even more importantly in storage.

Conclusion. I have seen no justification to say that sailboats of a comparable interior size and similarly equipped are cheaper to own and operate over a multiyear period than a single engine full displacement trawler. Individual boats will vary but the same is true within sailboats as a class and trawlers as a class.

For sail to be a cheaper cruiser the power hog, refrigeration , should be eutetic , not electric.

Our cruise NYC , Bermuda , St Barts and back only required engine operation for 2 hours every 3rd day, fuel was no big deal .Maybe 50-60 gallons all season.

Operating in the AICW it IS 99% power as most bridges wont let one sail thru , and milling around waiting for the slowest boat in a pack to catch up is a PIA under sail.

Here a fully battened main is a blessing as it does not flog when stalled.

FF said:

Our cruise NYC , Bermuda , St Barts and back only required engine operation for 2 hours every 3rd day, fuel was no big deal .Maybe 50-60 gallons all season.

Click to expand...

Your description is the most efficient type of voyage for a sailboat a real passage. We island hopped with a group of eight sailboats and two trawlers from the Bahamas to Grenada. From the Bahamas to St. Martin the sailboats were motorsailing. Once in the Eastern Caribbean the distances were small and more fuel is used in generating electricity then in moving.

Bay Pelican said:

I have run across sailboats with the same main motor we have (Lehman 135) and the same generator (Westerbeke 8kw) but these boats were all 10 feet or more longer than our Krogen. The monohulls don't have the same space we have until they are much much longer than our 42 feet. The cats start seeming similar at around 48 feet with a wide cat with two engines.

.

Click to expand...

It just reemphasizes that length of boat is a lousy comparative factor period. You can't compare a 45' Catamaran to a 45' Monohull. You can't compare a 45' Passagemaker with Flybridge to a 45' Day Express. Yet people always focus on length. So, let's compare a 42' Center Console to a 42' KK. I know the first thought is that would be stupid, but then we turn right around and try to compare a narrow beam, little interior space, lightly equipped sail boat to that same 42' KK and it is just as poor a comparison.

I'll toss a little sailboat in for comparison if one thinks sailboats are always less expensive. Lurssen EOS.



It's a sailboat. 305' long, 45' beam, draft of 18' so probably not for the ICW. Small auxiliary engines for when sails aren't enough, twin 2332 hp. Max speed 16 knots. Accommodates up to 16 guests with all amenities and a crew of 21. Now that it matters but I'm sure it has all the costs of a 305' powerboat plus all the costs related to the sails.

having done sail and power for over 50 years often owning at least one of each. Including some partial live aboard gunk holing. My conclusion is that sail has the potential of being considerably cheaper depending on how you do it. I found sailboats easier to do my own repair and did the mechanical rigging sail repair and even sail making myself. Many sail boats used coastal and inland go very long times on the original rigging and sails that are not flogged or over exposed to sun when not hoisted also with occasional repair go a long way.Most sailboats are very fuel efficient under power and more so motor sailing. The general nature of motor boats leads itself to dependence on fuel costs and more system complication not essential but prevalent. I think power especially in mid to larger trawlers many heavy on the cottage on the water side of the boating equation, often attracts people who would go for the extras and not get that personally involved driving the costs up. During the past 15 years I have noticed the same cottaging up sort of thing happening with mid to larger sail boats. This is not universal but by my observation more common than not. If cut to the bare essentials I think sail is the economy winner by a fair margin. Any other attempts at comparison get pretty muddy.

eyschulman said:

having done sail and power for over 50 years often owning at least one of each. Including some partial live aboard gunk holing. My conclusion is that sail has the potential of being considerably cheaper depending on how you do it.

Click to expand...

And rowboat has the potential of being considerably cheaper than sail.

When I did the comparison it was between Hobo and Allons'y, our Slocum 43. The purchase price was ~20% less but we're about equal on putting money back into them. The fit and finish was better on the sailboat with engineering/design about equal.

One of the wild cards for cost is how the boat is used. The other is how it's being or has been maintained. I see a lot of boats sail and power, which are total wrecks. Those are pretty cheap to own.

presenting s/v Allons'y: a Semi-Custom Slocum 43

That Slocum is a beautiful boat, Larry.

Jim

BandB said:

And rowboat has the potential of being considerably cheaper than sail.

Click to expand...

Quite right. The OP asked us to compare apples to oranges thus a muddy set of answers. Rowboat and kayak cruising is done and very popular in the PNW and yes very economical. The cottage stays home with most of the home comforts the adventure is included at no extra cost. My take on the cost is that there are two areas that call for a lot of the extra $. One area unrelated to the type of boat is the Gold Platting effect. The other area is the degree of cottage comfort one demands of their craft.

I think sailboats are definitely cheaper on average to run than trawlers, mostly for the reasons already mentioned, that they have simpler, smaller systems, are much more fuel efficient under power due to design, and less interior volume. To try and compare them apples to apples is folly as they are different things and experiences. Three other areas I have not seen mentioned are along the same lines, but they make a big difference.

1. Because sailboats have two completely separate propulsion systems, they can be operated in a much higher state of neglect. It is not that dangerous to take off with few spares for the engine, questionable fuel, old crappy sails, etc, because you can almost always limp in to safety on the other system.

2. Most sail boats have no place to store a nice dingy, so instead of a 12' center console with a 40hp outboard for $25,000, you end up with something much smaller and cheaper.

3. There is much less temptation to drop huge amounts of money on electronics on a sail boat. They don't have the power to drive huge open array radars, satellite tv, multiple large displays at helm, and flybridge, fancy fish finders etc.

Snapdragon III said:

I think sailboats are definitely cheaper on average to run than trawlers, mostly for the reasons already mentioned, that they have simpler, smaller systems, are much more fuel efficient under power due to design, and less interior volume. To try and compare them apples to apples is folly as they are different things and experiences. Three other areas I have not seen mentioned are along the same lines, but they make a big difference.

1. Because sailboats have two completely separate propulsion systems, they can be operated in a much higher state of neglect. It is not that dangerous to take off with few spares for the engine, questionable fuel, old crappy sails, etc, because you can almost always limp in to safety on the other system.

2. Most sail boats have no place to store a nice dingy, so instead of a 12' center console with a 40hp outboard for $25,000, you end up with something much smaller and cheaper.

3. There is much less temptation to drop huge amounts of money on electronics on a sail boat. They don't have the power to drive huge open array radars, satellite tv, multiple large displays at helm, and flybridge, fancy fish finders etc.

Click to expand...

Well said you put my thoughts on the matter together in a succinct and orderly fashion.

My 40' sailboat was plenty comfortable - A/C, nice galley, comfy bed. But while the two past times involve water, traveling, marinas, weather, electronics, etc, they are really completely different. I would submit that between the two, comparable sailboats are significantly cheaper to buy and operate than a powerboat, but those costs have to be taken in the context of what a person actually likes to do. Underway, under sail, sailboats aren't level, they often cant go directly where you want to go, and they typically aren't as "easy" as a powerboat. On the other hand, they're far more seaworthy in very bad conditions and they are pretty much unlimited in terms of distance. People who like to sail from place to place seem to like it for the "art" of sailing - they aren't as concerned about all the comforts of home as they are with the whole act of getting there by using the wind. It's certainly more work, and sailing is probably closer to a "sport" than traveling by trawler but that doesn't make one choice better than the other. It's like asking "Which is cheaper...golf or tennis?" If you like tennis better, it doesn't really matter.

My friend,Ola, have a 40 ft ketch sailyatch, after every 8 years he need new sails, and that cost him 13500$ every time.That's in Sweden, and above that he burn about 250-300 liters of diesel a year, 2,$ per liter, we are still in Sweden. Me and my wife have our Bestway 42 with twin tamd 41 Volvo.we will burn about, 1100 liters of diesel a year, as above 2,$per liter. So in Sweden, I prefer my Bestway, as long as I'm not forced to travel the world around. What I mean is, I can stay in dock and save fuel, but my friend, can't turn of the sun, that's killing his sails,and rigging. So, in Sweden at least, I am the winner.

Snapdragon III said:

I think sailboats are definitely cheaper on average to run than trawlers........

Click to expand...

Once again you have compared an apple with an orange
Try comparing like with like and try again.

sorry, what do you mean. I have compared, the cost, nothing else. please tell me what do you mean.

Lady soft said:

sorry, what do you mean. I have compared, the cost, nothing else. please tell me what do you mean.

Click to expand...

If you are talking to me my response was to snapdragon.

What I mean is if your trawler has large space, large appliances, comfortable lounge and dining, household bed, large tender, comprehensive electronics then it is pretty silly comparing it to a 30 ft sailboat with limited comforts and claiming sailboats are cheaper.

Lady soft said:

sorry, what do you mean. I have compared, the cost, nothing else. please tell me what do you mean.

Click to expand...

He was commenting on Snapdragon's post as quoted.

Funny story for Snapdragon
-
A few years ago we made a crossing of Georgia Strait to Pender Harbour in 25 - 30 knot winds. When we arrived at the marina a few boaters on the docks asked how the crossing was, my wife replied not too bad.

About 30 minutes later a 40 something sailboat departed for Nanaimo, I advised him of sizeable breaking seas and head winds for him. He puffed his chest out saying how much better a sea boat a sail boat like his was as compared to our DeFever. Four hours later they returned, everybody soaked and looking bedraggled. No more was said about how seaworthy his sail boat was.

For comparing the seaworthiness of the two vessel types, a careful read of Setsail may dispel a few notions.

"From the Bahamas to St. Martin the sailboats were motorsailing."

With the wind usually 120deg at 15 K, most sailors would rather power than beat to windward .

Sailors with better boats will sail although this increases the distance and time.

With a good Self Steering gear its no big deal, unless one wanted to stop on the way.

57 posts later what I have been reading is that many posters hold that sailboats are cheaper because you have less interior space and don't need/want/buy all of the extras such as large refrigeration, electronics, washing machines, large dinghies etc.

Well OK if you have a lesser item it should cost less. I have compared our Kadey Krogen 42 to sailboats for years. Two examples of sailboats which I find comparable in size and equipment are a 54 ft Amel and a 48 ft cat (24 ft wide). Both have comparable interior volume and are equipped fairly closely to Bay Pelican. Watermakers, washing machines, generators, tv systems, at least three cubic feet of freezer and four cubic feet of refrigerator, 10.5 ft rib with 9.9 or 15 hp outboard, and full electronics at the helm.

These examples are comparing apples to apples. I have known the owners of both boats long enough to have a feel for the expenses and my gut is the differences in costs over a multi-year period are more a reflection of the owners' style than the boat. The owners of neither of these boats spend less that I do on Bay Pelican.

But if all three of you started traveling year round thousands of miles?

john61ct said:

But if all three of you started traveling year round thousands of miles?

Click to expand...

Good issue. But each year we are in St. Lucia for the arrival of the ARC which is a Med to Eastern Caribbean sailboat rally. Also we frequently see the end of the World ARC which is a 14 month around the world rally.

The Atlantic Rally is perhaps 2,500 miles. For Bay Pelican that would be 625 US gallons of diesel, more or less. At $3.50 per gallon that would be $2,200, plus two oil changes on the main engine for another $200. An additional $100 for the stabilizer filter. While it is possible that some repairs could be needed because of the 400 hours on the engine it is not a sure thing.

My experience with the sailboats coming in from the Atlantic crossing is that frequently there is need to replace some sail, some rigging, or some eisenglass. This is a major source of income for the sailmakers and riggers in St. Lucia, Martinique and Grenada each year. The organizers of the rally discuss these costs and advise the cruisers to be prepared for them. I can't estimate what the average is but it doesn't take much to spend $2,500 on any one of these items for a sailboat.