MurrayM
Guru
Don't forget the "thin in the hips" (8.5' beam) 32' Nimble Wanderer.
http://nimbleboatworks.com/wanderer/
http://nimbleboatworks.com/wanderer/
Last edited:
TT35 at the Annapolis Boat Show
- Thread starter HenryD
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone who enjoys boating.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
danderer
Guru
We walked by the boat yesterday. Didn't go on because we weren't really interested in it for ourselves. But a few observations from the dock:
Definitely. Even in Annapolis Harbor water was entering.
The boat being Med-moored was also hard to get a good overall vision of. All you could really see was the cockpit which wasn't all that inviting.
This view did emphasize how far at the end of the boat the outboards are and gave a good view of their props which didn't seem all that deep. (Do they make kong-shaft OB's in this size?) Anyway I can imagine conditions even on the Chesapeake where it might be tough to keep the props in the water. For river or inland lakes it'd probably be fine.
I got that impression too.
I heard someone on the dock say the boat looked "Cheap." I don't know about that but I do think that just seeing the transom and cockpit in the Med-moor didn't show it off very well.
Definitely. Even in Annapolis Harbor water was entering.
The boat being Med-moored was also hard to get a good overall vision of. All you could really see was the cockpit which wasn't all that inviting.
This view did emphasize how far at the end of the boat the outboards are and gave a good view of their props which didn't seem all that deep. (Do they make kong-shaft OB's in this size?) Anyway I can imagine conditions even on the Chesapeake where it might be tough to keep the props in the water. For river or inland lakes it'd probably be fine.
I got that impression too.
I heard someone on the dock say the boat looked "Cheap." I don't know about that but I do think that just seeing the transom and cockpit in the Med-moor didn't show it off very well.
Nomad Willy
Guru
Sea Piper looks like a far better mousetrap to me at this point. And for what it's worth it can actually be called a trawler.
Ranger boats seem kinda one of a kind. Odd looking but w classy details. I don't know why they have a trawler house on them. The hull design, power all else seems about as untrawler as you can get. But for protected waters they look OK and are well concieved for cabin space. To many that's very important.
Re the comment on the word "transportable" I think that may be more spot on that most may be thinking. But I agree the boat dosn't fit "trailerable" well at all.
Ranger boats seem kinda one of a kind. Odd looking but w classy details. I don't know why they have a trawler house on them. The hull design, power all else seems about as untrawler as you can get. But for protected waters they look OK and are well concieved for cabin space. To many that's very important.
Re the comment on the word "transportable" I think that may be more spot on that most may be thinking. But I agree the boat dosn't fit "trailerable" well at all.
Last edited:
Nomad Willy
Guru
MurrayM
Guru
Apparently the Nomad has a draft of 1'4" and the Wanderer is 2'10" (same as the Seapiper)
Last edited:
Wifey B:
Per their website, Great Harbour's Trailerable Trawler.
It should, but doesn't. I picture the family trailering it to the lake every weekend.
Let me make the case for a trailerable trawler, given my experience towing RVs, where we live- Connecticut and where I would like to boat for several weeks at a time- Florida and Maine:
The TT35 will probably weigh at least 8,000 lbs with fluids and gear. The aluminum three axle trailer will weigh about 1,500 lbs. So you have a total tow weight of 9,500 lbs. Some newer 1/2 ton pickups have 10,000 lbs or greater tow ratings, but I would go with at least a 3/4 ton. Diesel would be nice but not essential. Some big SUVs can also tow it.
We would keep the boat and trailer in a local RV storage lot- It won't fit in the garage and all COAs and many HOAs don't allow something like that in your driveway. If you lived in the country and had the space then you might be able to store it at home. That cost in our area is about $1,000 annually.
I would tow the rig to Maine in the summer and Florida in the winter, both for 3-4 weeks at a time, maybe longer to Florida to get away in the winter. Each trip would require about 4 state permits north and 9 south each way. I am guessing $150 north and $300 south each way for a total of $900 (most state one time permits are about $30) plus maybe $100 for tolls.
The rig would get about 10 miles per gallon with a gasser and maybe 13-14 with a diesel. That would cost a total of about $800 for the two round trips for the gasser.
So the total cost for year round storage, permits and tolls plus gas for two round trips to Florida and Maine is about $3,000 in round numbers. That is about what a year round slip would cost in many areas.
For that you get to boat where you want to, in my case Florida and Maine. Plus in between the boat is dry, not in sea water and is located nearby for maintenance.
The alternative, still using the TT35 as the example, is to take the boat to Florida and Maine on its own bottom each year. That would take at least two hard weeks at 15 kts going to Florida and three days to Maine and burn much more fuel than towing. If you were to do it in a "conventional" 35' trawler at hull speed it would take twice as long. You would still have about $3,000 per year of slip costs.
And I can use the TT35 during nice days in Connecticut just by paying $30 for a one time permit, and hauling the boat to a boat ramp.
So the concept of a trailerable trawler with moderately comfortable living accommodations is appealing. The price of about $300K when fully fitted out isn't so appealing.
Maybe in five years when the bugs are worked out (that low aft deck height is scary) and the price has depreciated for used ones, it might make sense for me.
David
The TT35 will probably weigh at least 8,000 lbs with fluids and gear. The aluminum three axle trailer will weigh about 1,500 lbs. So you have a total tow weight of 9,500 lbs. Some newer 1/2 ton pickups have 10,000 lbs or greater tow ratings, but I would go with at least a 3/4 ton. Diesel would be nice but not essential. Some big SUVs can also tow it.
We would keep the boat and trailer in a local RV storage lot- It won't fit in the garage and all COAs and many HOAs don't allow something like that in your driveway. If you lived in the country and had the space then you might be able to store it at home. That cost in our area is about $1,000 annually.
I would tow the rig to Maine in the summer and Florida in the winter, both for 3-4 weeks at a time, maybe longer to Florida to get away in the winter. Each trip would require about 4 state permits north and 9 south each way. I am guessing $150 north and $300 south each way for a total of $900 (most state one time permits are about $30) plus maybe $100 for tolls.
The rig would get about 10 miles per gallon with a gasser and maybe 13-14 with a diesel. That would cost a total of about $800 for the two round trips for the gasser.
So the total cost for year round storage, permits and tolls plus gas for two round trips to Florida and Maine is about $3,000 in round numbers. That is about what a year round slip would cost in many areas.
For that you get to boat where you want to, in my case Florida and Maine. Plus in between the boat is dry, not in sea water and is located nearby for maintenance.
The alternative, still using the TT35 as the example, is to take the boat to Florida and Maine on its own bottom each year. That would take at least two hard weeks at 15 kts going to Florida and three days to Maine and burn much more fuel than towing. If you were to do it in a "conventional" 35' trawler at hull speed it would take twice as long. You would still have about $3,000 per year of slip costs.
And I can use the TT35 during nice days in Connecticut just by paying $30 for a one time permit, and hauling the boat to a boat ramp.
So the concept of a trailerable trawler with moderately comfortable living accommodations is appealing. The price of about $300K when fully fitted out isn't so appealing.
Maybe in five years when the bugs are worked out (that low aft deck height is scary) and the price has depreciated for used ones, it might make sense for me.
David
Last edited:
Benthic2
Guru
The Seapiper looks interesting....I've never seen them before. I don't like having to go outside to get to the head from the salon though. That might be a deal breaker for me. The fact that its a new design is would definitely be a deal breaker. I want a boat with a hull number over 50, at least. And some 5 year old versions around to see how they hold up. I'm just not an early adopter I guess.
The $169k price tag looks a lot better than the Ranger and TT though. That could make up for a lot of other shortcomings.
..and slightly off topic... Whenever I see a picture of the Nimble Nomad....I just imagine burrying the bow once, and it never coming back up. That design just looks dangerous to me.
The $169k price tag looks a lot better than the Ranger and TT though. That could make up for a lot of other shortcomings.
..and slightly off topic... Whenever I see a picture of the Nimble Nomad....I just imagine burrying the bow once, and it never coming back up. That design just looks dangerous to me.
Last edited:
ben2go
Guru
The reason I am planning to build Caroliner is for trailerability. The desiged dimensions are 30ft x 8'6". Finished, it will be 36 feet. The boat will be on the trailer and ready to go. I can make repairs or upgrades at home by myself.
I have many large lakes around me with in one to two hours drive. I can do weekenders, long weekenders, and one to two week vactions. Then when I am ready, I can put in down in the lowlands and do the loop. Which is the whole reason I want to build the boat anyway. Then if things pan out, I can travel west visiting lakes until I hit the coast. I'm 40 years old so I have some years and life left in me to make it happen.
I have many large lakes around me with in one to two hours drive. I can do weekenders, long weekenders, and one to two week vactions. Then when I am ready, I can put in down in the lowlands and do the loop. Which is the whole reason I want to build the boat anyway. Then if things pan out, I can travel west visiting lakes until I hit the coast. I'm 40 years old so I have some years and life left in me to make it happen.
sean9c
Guru
Sea Piper is interesting since it's different. It's going to be a really small interior for its length. I doubt if TT or GH is getting rich selling their boats, the SP at $100k less just isn't realistic.
boathealer
Guru
Possibly because of weight. The new Yanmar 50hp diesel O/B would be 365lbs ---- EACH.
ranger58sb
Guru
Maybe that'd be enough HP to run this TT thing -- as a "trawler" -- on a single?
-Chris
sunchaser
Guru
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2008
- Messages
- 10,194
- Location
- usa
- Vessel Name
- sunchaser V
- Vessel Make
- DeFever 48 (sold)
I have been, by accident, at two Ranger Tug rendevouz. One in Nanaimo and one last month at Roche Harbor. The following on these boats is huge. I've seen them all over. They can easily do Alaska if one picks the weather and lack only a washer and dryer to make them 100% livable when cruising.
They are the real deal and resale is good. Argue price, looks, comfort or sea worthiness all you want. But some very nice, smart and capable people own them. The interesting part is the purchasing audience for these vessels includes SeaRay and clones. Old, slow, staid trawler folks like us, maybe not.
They are the real deal and resale is good. Argue price, looks, comfort or sea worthiness all you want. But some very nice, smart and capable people own them. The interesting part is the purchasing audience for these vessels includes SeaRay and clones. Old, slow, staid trawler folks like us, maybe not.
Last edited:
Nomad Willy
Guru
Sunchaser,
There's nothing very different about them except their looks. They are cute and new and different looking. That's all it takes in boat marketing. The only problem is that soon they become obsolete kinda like the unique cars. If they were the rage of 10 years ago they will be poision as a fad of the past. Even when the past was just yesterday .. so to speak.
If there was something new and better about them they would go on to become a successful design over several decades. But I fail to see the better in these boats. They appear to be just good boats w a flare that is a unique look. Product identy is good untill they are quickly dated and fall from prominence.
There's nothing very different about them except their looks. They are cute and new and different looking. That's all it takes in boat marketing. The only problem is that soon they become obsolete kinda like the unique cars. If they were the rage of 10 years ago they will be poision as a fad of the past. Even when the past was just yesterday .. so to speak.
If there was something new and better about them they would go on to become a successful design over several decades. But I fail to see the better in these boats. They appear to be just good boats w a flare that is a unique look. Product identy is good untill they are quickly dated and fall from prominence.
sunchaser
Guru
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2008
- Messages
- 10,194
- Location
- usa
- Vessel Name
- sunchaser V
- Vessel Make
- DeFever 48 (sold)
Eric
No argument that their popularity may wane. Thus far their answer has been bigger and fancier. The reality is though, hundreds have been sold and order books are full. Their competition is sparse, surprising given the demand.
Good quality, fast cruise, fuel efficient and comfortable - sells. The figures don't lie. And, no hurricane worries.
OldDan1943
Guru
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2017
- Messages
- 10,595
- Location
- USA
- Vessel Name
- Kinja
- Vessel Make
- American Tug 34 #116 2008
A. I already have a boat, American Tug 34.
B. Reviewing the specs and the pictures, I conclude, this is not the boat for me.
I wish them great success with their design and I hope they sell lots of boats.
B. Reviewing the specs and the pictures, I conclude, this is not the boat for me.
I wish them great success with their design and I hope they sell lots of boats.
Woodland Hills
Guru
At a 10' beam one can trailer in all 50 states from sunup to sundown without an escort vehicle, only "Oversize Load" signs need be hung front and rear. You will need a cheap permit, renewable yearly, for each state you transit.
Over 10' and you need trip permits and an escort vehicle and the cost goes up.
Wifey B: Look at the link I posted and you'll see it's not quite as simple as you described, however. Some cities have permits. Some states require bonds or proof of insurance. A lot of variables, but companies that can do it all for you.
Towing a Big Boat on the Road? BoatUS Trailering Club Offers Discount Wide-Load Permit Service : BoatUS Press Room
Woodland Hills
Guru
Because they are heavy, expensive and vibrate like paint shakers?
IronZebra
Senior Member
The torque of the new 50hp diesel Yanmar Dtorque 111 looks like it may push this as good as the 60hp gas Suzuki. The two-counter-rotating crankshafts are very interesting design.
Here is a really good article on the Yanmar published couple weeks ago. https://newatlas.com/yanmar-dtorque-111-turbo-diesel-50hp-outboard/51675/
Yanmar description.
YANMAR LAUNCHES THE DTORQUE 111 TURBO DIESEL OUTBOARD - Yanmar Marine
Here is a really good article on the Yanmar published couple weeks ago. https://newatlas.com/yanmar-dtorque-111-turbo-diesel-50hp-outboard/51675/
Yanmar description.
YANMAR LAUNCHES THE DTORQUE 111 TURBO DIESEL OUTBOARD - Yanmar Marine
Attachments
Last edited:
I read the article and I guess I can buy most of Yanmar's claims for this engine, except for being lighter than an equivalent gas outboard. Unless they mean equivalent being a 90 hp 2 cycle O/B to produce the same torque as the 50 hp Yanmar at 2,500 rpm. But gearing on a 50 hp gasser solves that easily and saves about 100 lbs.
David
David
ben2go
Guru
Interesting design for sure but not anything new. If I remember some of the engine histories correctly, there was some testing of gas engines using the same dual crankshaft set up between WWI and WWII. I don't really see how it could be lighter unless they are comparing torque specs at certain RPMs. The diesel will have a lot more torque lower in the rev range that any gasser, 2 or 4 stroke. As mentioned by djmarchand, it wouldn't be fair to compare weights based strictly on max horsepower ratings. Comparing weights based on torque ratings may bring them inline a little better. I still feel the same as djmarchand, I think the new efficient two strokes would be a better engine as far as weight to HP ratio goes.
Nomad Willy
Guru
A very interesting aspect of this design is that the significant side load on the piston is basically gone .. nada.
However one can’t get away from the torsional vibration of a two cylinder engine. This vibration is prominent at low revs but quickly disappears as rpm increases.
Another source of vibration occurs from what the engineers call a “rocking couple”. That is a result of one piston (+ rods and crankpin) in the vicinity of BDC is pushing the crankshaft down while the other cylinder near TDC is feeling a strong upward force as that cylinder reaches TDC. One end of the crank up .. the other down .. and attempting to rock the crankshaft this way and that or back and forth. Counterweights can only danpen out some to most of this vibration input depending on other aspects of the design. So one can’t escape all of this source of vibration.
A friend of mine reports a small dual crank (sailboat) BMW engine that runs very smooth. More evidence of the fact that it’s not new. But I’m fine w old stuff and it’s anything but that.
However one can’t get away from the torsional vibration of a two cylinder engine. This vibration is prominent at low revs but quickly disappears as rpm increases.
Another source of vibration occurs from what the engineers call a “rocking couple”. That is a result of one piston (+ rods and crankpin) in the vicinity of BDC is pushing the crankshaft down while the other cylinder near TDC is feeling a strong upward force as that cylinder reaches TDC. One end of the crank up .. the other down .. and attempting to rock the crankshaft this way and that or back and forth. Counterweights can only danpen out some to most of this vibration input depending on other aspects of the design. So one can’t escape all of this source of vibration.
A friend of mine reports a small dual crank (sailboat) BMW engine that runs very smooth. More evidence of the fact that it’s not new. But I’m fine w old stuff and it’s anything but that.
Last edited:
ben2go
Guru
In the motorcycle world, the parallel twins are getting offset crankshafts instead of being true 180 degree crankshafts they are getting some offset to help with the one up one down vibration syndrome. I think my 2014 Honda CB500X uses this type of crankshaft. It is exceptionally smooth through out the rev range and I think Honda uses it in the outboards as well.
Nomad Willy
Guru
Ben,
Yes Honda is an innovator to be sure. I liked their offset crank outboards.
Wonder how many degrees off 180 degrees they are .. like a little or a lot. On the old Brit bikes the rocking couple presented a heavy buzz like vibration at hwy speeds. But were smooth at lower rpm. The Honda 180 degree cranks of the 60's were (predictably) more like a single than a twin. On a boat I think I"d like the 180 crank. Spend about 95% of our time on boats at cruise rpm.
Yes Honda is an innovator to be sure. I liked their offset crank outboards.
Wonder how many degrees off 180 degrees they are .. like a little or a lot. On the old Brit bikes the rocking couple presented a heavy buzz like vibration at hwy speeds. But were smooth at lower rpm. The Honda 180 degree cranks of the 60's were (predictably) more like a single than a twin. On a boat I think I"d like the 180 crank. Spend about 95% of our time on boats at cruise rpm.
ben2go
Guru
I'm not sure how much off they are. I don't think it has to be much, 10 degrees or there abouts.
Nomad Willy
Guru
OK Ben it soulds like they are close to a 180 crank. The only succesful 180 crank engines I know of are the old Brit bikes. They all had massive crankshafts (to ballance the counterweights to the pistons) so I’m going to guess this new engine will pay a weight penalty w a heavy crank. Looks like the pistons and rods are heavier too. And there’s two wrist pins on the piston and that adds to the weight but if it were a single wrist pin it may be about the same total weight ? So the chance of this engine being comparatively light is low or less.
But the high torque they get from only two cylinders is golden. I see it’s 50/50 bore/stroke. Makes for a compact engine too. I see the chain driven cam drive in-between the cylinders adds to the compactness. Many motorcycles are driven thusly.
Makes me wonder if a boxer engine w the two crank arrangement would have even more advantages. Food for thought.
But the high torque they get from only two cylinders is golden. I see it’s 50/50 bore/stroke. Makes for a compact engine too. I see the chain driven cam drive in-between the cylinders adds to the compactness. Many motorcycles are driven thusly.
Makes me wonder if a boxer engine w the two crank arrangement would have even more advantages. Food for thought.
