What would you do?

Marin wrote:Art wrote:
-***** Get a really good condition 48' Tollycraft Tri Cabin with a super strong, low hour, fully up-graded*drive train already*in her

PS: Re some of your past posts: Did a kid bite you or something??* Draw any blood??? LOL

Click to expand...

I think Tollycrafts are very well made boats but none of their models appeal to us aesthetically.* So we wouldn't swap a GB for a Tollycraft but I an understand why Tollycraft lovers would.

No, a kid has never bitten me.* I just find them all to be a pain in the a*s and not worth wasting time on.* My time on. Their parents must feel differently, I guess, although it baffles me as to why since they get nothing but grief from the little bastards.

Marin - Thanks for nice words on Tollycraft.* They are bullet proof... comfortable, good handling and easy to care for too! *I also give you good words toward GB.* My other option, in answer to what would I do, that I didn't mention,*would be to purchase a larger GB!* They are a boat that stands in their own superior class.* 1960s 70s when I was young on and around New England waters Grand Banks were thought of as*tip-top of the pleasure boating world.* There werent too many around there back then but when one was sighted high complement discussions would ensue.*

BTW you too*were a kid too at one time, in Sausalito... were you as you mention of kids.* Your distain for kids appears over the top!* We have two sons and a daughter (36 to 42 now... hardly kids anymore lol), three grand kids (four to eleven years), and another in the hopper to arrive beginning of April.* If it werent for KIDS there would be NO ADULTS... you and me included.* Therefore there would be no Tollycraft or Grand Banks or other great craft Which would be a REAL bummer!* *

*

*

I was taught by my parents that taking care and maintaining what you got is better and cheaper in the long ran than buy new.** However, there is a limit!*
*
*
It would be 1) keeping the wife/SO happy and 2) comparing total dollar amount.* I can not afford another devours.* *At least if the wife/SO is happy I still get the use/own the boat.* So its not really my decision!** I am lucky my wife is down home country and reasonable.
*
If my wife does not care it would be 1) the dollar amount and 2) the dollar amount.* I bought the boat because my wife wanted it and we got a good deal. Even in today down market after 16 years we could still break even on the money invested.
*
Completing the Eagle would cost 50 grand, but buying a newer Pacific Marina 65 ft that my wife would like is 750+ grand. **So 50 grand sunk back into the Eagle would probable be cheaper in the long run.* *****
*
I had a second childhood raising our children, and having a third childhood help raising our grandchildren.* **
*
*
Tollycraft as built in Longview Washington where I grew up. First met Mr Tolly when I was child as he started in a garage by the Cowlitze River which I use to ride my bike and play.* They had a huge plant by the Longview/Kelso airport.* The molds were bought several companies, so there might be some boats being built from the molds.* I heard most went to Mexico?*

Marin: *Interesting and provocative question, I must say. *I've been thinking about it since yesterday morning. *Just a few days ago, I was at the Ft. Lauderdale Boat show looking at some pretty dreamy machines, but like you, I feel that our boat has the size and features that work pretty well for us. *When I dream about a better machine, I usually think of how I'd want to change our boat to facilitate our style of cruising. *Of course, I get the old Photoshop out and play with those ideas (much more affordable making the virtual changes). *But the question was a very good one to point out how satisfied one may be with the status-quo. *In the end, I'm not sure I want to go to another platform where "other" compromises are bound to appear. *Here, with my current boat, I know the ones that I have, and I could even do something about most of them in the future. *

**I say, if you love your boat, keep loving it in whatever way would please you most. *I mean, what the heck is money for anyway?

Art wrote:*If it werent for KIDS there would be NO ADULTS...

Click to expand...

*That would certainly solve the overpopulation problem that Eric frequently speaks of.

JohnP wrote:
*

What I would really perfer to do is sell the 36 and buy a*newer 42 Europa, with a single engine!

*

Click to expand...

The GB42 is a great boat--- I believe more were built than any other GB model.* I've been on a few and it's impressive how much more room one gets with just a six foot increase in length over the 36.* Particularly in the main cabin.* And if one gets a GB Europa version of any of the GB models, the* main cabin will be significantly longer than the cabin on a Classic (tri-cabin) of the same length.

Were we starting out in boating now and wanted a GB (questionable) the 42 would most likely be our focus.* But it doesn't represent a significant enough change from the 36 to warrant buying six more feet to get a boat that will take another bunch of years to troubleshoot, upgrade, fix, etc.

We will never own a single engine boat.* We've run single engine boats (narrowboats in the UK and a charter GB36) and I have no issue with them in terms of handling and maneuverability.* The extra room in the engine space is nice, and the service and maintenance costs-- in money and in time--- are half that of a twin.* But as I've stated many times before I like operating multiple engines and my wife--- who has no problem flying to God-knows-where deep ih the Coast Range behind a singe engine made durring WWII--- is much more confident and relaxed with two engines under the sole in the boat.* And that alone trumps any advantages offereed by one engine over two.* We've needed the spare engine four times in the past 13 years and it was nice to be able to come home on the other engine instead of on the end of a very expensive rope.

Sea Tow is cheaper than running a second engine...

For an eye opener, check out the wood maintenance costs on an older*Fleming 55. I talked to my yard about this yesterday and was staggered as to what one owner spends per year. In the PNW unless you are in a boat house DIY is tough to schedule. Of course you can let it go to the dogs and lose your investment.

psneeld wrote:
Sea Tow is cheaper than running a second engine...

Click to expand...

*Not when you boat up where there are no towing services or they have to run 50-100 miles or more to get to you.

not true totally...they pay up to $5000 in towing from anyone that can do it.

yes..there are places that it might be a stretch...but not many.

I*was stationed on* Kodiak and for that kind of*money... it usually got* done...plus...it's still rare that a properly maintainrd diesel totally fails without warning...mostly the aux parts that you carry spares for.

I know I'll never convince some that sigles are the way to go so I'll end it on that....

Please don't make me tell the story of going to the North Pole with a single engine...

psneeld wrote:plus...it's still rare that a properly maintainrd diesel totally fails without warning...mostly the aux parts that you carry spares for.

Click to expand...

We've never had an engine itself fail.* Nor has anyone else we know who has had to complete a trip--- a few of several hundred miles--- on one or on a rope.* The issues for us have been cooling problems and in one case my letting an engine get a slug of air during a fuel transfer and I didn't want to bleed the engine while bobbing around in rough water.* Other peple we know-- power and sail--- have had to shut an engine (or the engine) down for cooling problems, an exhaust leak, and in one fairly dramatic instance a log barfed up by a whirlpool that jammed between a prop and the rudder behind it.* The log finally came free on its own minutes before the boat went onto the rocks, but while the engine on that side was fine, the driveline and strut were severely damaged.

Up here where we are frequently boating in relatively narrow bodies of water with currents that can be very strong, the time between having to shut the engine down and being carried into shallow water or onto a rock or reef is sometimes measured in minutes, not hours.* There are a few things one can do to try to ward off the grounding, like let your anchor all the way out and hope it grabs onto something.* But relying on a tow service which may have to run for an hour or maybe much more to get to you is not something we want to add to our list of risks.* This plus the other reasons I listed earlier takes single-engine boats off our list of "we'd like to have" even though there are several single-engine boats we like very* much as boats--- Krogen, lobsterboats, etc.* If we were boating in San Francisco Bay or the ICW where help is never very far away, we would probably consider a single-engine boat to be a more viable option for us. But not up here.


-- Edited by Marin on Friday 4th of November 2011 01:47:30 PM

You made me do it...started a high arctic trip with a twin screw icebreaker but lost one main before we even hit Iceland.* captain said he started his career on single screw buoy tenders so why not finish the rest of the 5 month long*mission on one engine.* we did...got to within 400 miles of the North Pole and returned to US via europe.*

Remote?...the Pacific Northwest is urban compared to many places I've been...I understand the twin concern...but I'm also a Sea Tow guy with a single engine boat that rescues twin engine boats all the time.* Sorry....you'll never sell me on the NEED of a second engine...they are nice but only a convenience.* Ask about a million commercial fishermen around the world.

And as I said...I don't expect to sell you or any other twin fan on singles...so I can sleep at night knowing I stopped right here


-- Edited by psneeld on Friday 4th of November 2011 02:00:09 PM

The fishermen here go out in groups together and frequently use each others support. When I say on the floats here in town I'm going out for a few days they almost always say "who are you going with?". I'd have a twin if I could afford it.

A fully agree a twin is not NEEDED on a boat, unless it's a big ship that wants to go fast (aircraft carrier, cruise ship, etc.). Having two engines in a recreational boat is indeed, a convenience. So is owning a car. I don't NEED it--- I could walk the 35 miles to work every day or spend three hours taking buses. Everybody's experience is different, but having benefited greatly from having a second engine on the boat four times (so far) while I certainly don't say people with single-engine boats are taking a chance or are wrong, I would never want one myself anymore. Even on our little Arima fishing boat, I'd never given a thought to it being a single engine boat for the past 24 years until this past spring when the 90hp Yamaha quit some 22 miles from our base in an area up in BC with zip-zero-nada radio or phone coverage. It was very nice to be able to fire up the kicker motor and go home, albeit slowly. And as it turned out, the reason the big motor quit was far beyond any sort of on-board repair. So it was either come home on some other source of power or drift around hoping another boat would pass by (very rare in these particular waters) before the wind and current put the boat on the rocks.

So you're right--- you or anyone else will never convince me that a single-engine boat is anything I want a part of. And people with single-engine boats who have not experienced a shutdown and subsequent grounding because a tow didn't arrive soon enough will never be convinced of the value of a twin.

The icebreaker story simply proves my point.* Had it been a single screw vessel, the trip would have been over when the ship lost the engine unless they'd been able to fix it.* As it was, they were able to continue the voyage on the other engine.* Sounds like a pretty ringing endorsement for having more than one engine to me


-- Edited by Marin on Friday 4th of November 2011 02:36:47 PM

Having ungrounded hundreds of boats, towed several thousand, assisted plenty more for various reasons*in my current job...NEVER in the last ten years has a single put a boat in greater danger because it was a single...the skipper might have been at fault for being inexperienced...but in each and every case the single disablds was ONLY an inconvenience.*

After 50 years of owning/running all kinds of boats including singles and twins myself...I've had the same experience.* There's never been a situation where a second engine was anything more than a convenience and a second engine was never necessary to stay ungrounded or safe.

I could care less if people want twins...I know what I want...and just the truth be known...what people WANT is one thing and*why they want it is up to them...but to cast dispersion that singles by nature are more likely to put you in harms way...without taking into consideration a LOT of other things just ain't true...for the inexperienced...yeah maybe..but for people who understand a singles limitations...just ain't so....


-- Edited by psneeld on Friday 4th of November 2011 02:45:44 PM

I'm a single.*A cat 3208 n.a.

Could be because you are just a bit more prepared with a single

If you only have one shot you better make it count.

I'm* kind of particular about my motor. I watch it like a hawk.

I carry a spare for most anything that could break on my boat and I know how to fix things as per my signature.

if it can't be repaired maybe it shouldn't be on the boat.

SD

*

please...this is not a single vs twin

*thread..

I wanted to kill it a while back...just some people like to make it more than it is...


-- Edited by psneeld on Friday 4th of November 2011 03:12:34 PM

Sorry. Never been in on that debate. I alway figured it was a personal choice.

Sort of like dark hulls vs*light.

SD*

1967 I was aboard a single screw that was towed in. * 2009 I was aboard a twin screw that got towed in. * Anything can happen!*

Taint necessarily the number of screws that determines if you may get screwed!! *

I do'nt see how this conversation can be happening. The safety advantage of a twin is super obvious.

Do engines sometimes quit?

Can a twin engine boat proceed on it's other engine?*

Duhhhh

It just costs more money.

But it should'nt take a rocket scientist to see that a twin engine yacht is safer.

*

Marin,* I knew that single engine 42 would get a rise out of you!

Not to worry there are probably 100 twin 42s for every single out there.

I think the extra 6 feet is a pretty big deal, and the volume of the boat is a lot more than the 36.

Plenty of boat for two people and still managable size, you might get to take it out once and a while.

Nothing wrong with the 50' plus boats, but hopefully extended cruising is in the cards as that is what they do best.

JohnP

*

psneeld wrote:
but I'm also a Sea Tow guy with a single engine boat that rescues twin engine boats all the time.

Click to expand...

*I'm curious about this.* Not debating singles vs twins but I'm*puzzled by*this specific comment.* Why are you finding yourself towing in twin engine boats with such frequency?

The only times I have ever heard about (on the radio or second hand) a twin-engine boat being hauled in by a tow service is in one instance the skipper had a medical emergency that prevented him from continuing to operate the boat and nobody else on board could, and running out of fuel (which happens a surprising amount up here on all sorts of boats).* Other than that, everyone I know or have heard about who had a precautionary engine shutdown (or*failure) in a twin has come home on the other engine.

So I'm curious why you tow so many twins home?* If they ran aground that can happen no matter how many engines one has.* If bad fuel in your area is often*the cause of both engines in a twin shutting down that's certainly a reason for a tow.*

But I'm curious why so many twin engine boat owers in your area are apparently unable to continue on their second engine if, in fact, they are losing only one engine.


-- Edited by Marin on Friday 4th of November 2011 06:02:32 PM

psneeld wrote:
NEVER in the last ten years has a single put a boat in greater danger because it was a single...the skipper might have been at fault for being inexperienced...but in each and every case the single disablds was ONLY an inconvenience.*

I've had the same experience.* There's never been a situation where a second engine was anything more than a convenience and a second engine was never necessary to stay ungrounded or safe.

Click to expand...

That's been YOUR experience, and as such it's valid for you.* However I could introduce you to several people up here I know personally, plus a few more I have*heard about,*who still have their boats because when one engine or set of running gear was disabled, they had the other engine or running gear to keep them off the rocks.* In one case the difference was between the boat sinking and getting to port and a Travelift.

And never say never--- it can be shaky ground.* There is a YouTube video taken here a few years ago of a sailboat that lost it's only engine and was blown onto the rocks on the south side of Lopez (I think) Island.* The footage was taken from the helicopter that pulled the crew off.* My guess is that they felt the loss of their one engine was a wee bit more than an inconvenience.


-- Edited by Marin on Friday 4th of November 2011 06:15:23 PM

charles wrote:
Late to the party but, the two boats that you mention have a cost of operation WAY MORE than the 36.

Click to expand...

You are absolutely correct and this has to be a major factor in our decision if we are put in the position to make one.* The money put into* refitting the GB36, while it would be well in excess of $100,000, perhaps closer to $200,000, particularly if the boat was re-engined, is a "one time" expenditure.* The operating cost of the boat would not change unless we put in new engines in which case the fuel cost might go down a wee bit but even then it would not be by enough to be any sort of consideration.

A lot of boaters overlook operating costs in their eagerness to get into boating or buy a different boat, and while we are well aware of this you are wise to point this out.

Marin wrote:
So here's an interesting dilema.* I'm not looking for suggestions for us, but using us as an example for the question.

*(and we are not considering any more so don't offer any suggestions ). *

*

So here's the question to discuss.....* if the money became available*to completely rework your current boat, fix everything that needs fixing, replace everything that you'd like to replace-- be they big ticket items like engines or small ticket items like anchors---*would you do this?* Or would you put the same amount of money toward a different boat?

I guess this is a sort of "how much do you like your boat?" question.



-- Edited by Marin on Tuesday 1st of November 2011 11:08:42 PM

Click to expand...

*My appologies but I was confused by the single verses twin debate. Returned to the original post and re-read it in light of the other information that was contributed. If I may be so bold as to edit out the parts that seem to confuse the issue.*

*

Marin wrote:

"Interestingly enough, we are both leaning toward the total rebuild of our existing boat.* The reasons are too numerous to list here, other than we feel the GB36 is the ideal size for what we do and ever will do*with a boat."

*

After reading the discourse of this thread and if the above statement was how*we*felt about our boat, re-fitting would be the only option on the table. Regardless of cost.

Yes, coming back to the original question...upgrade or go newer/bigger..?* I was at the Gold Coast Marine Expo just this morning. I went on quite a few boats. The GB Aleutian 53 was a boat to die for in many ways, but I'd never get the use out of it to justify it. The Clipper 48 and 45 were also lovely boats, but really, still bigger than we need. The new Clipper 36, which is the new version of our 34 but stretched a wee bit, although has the island double, is still a bit too cramped, and no second stateroom, so not enough better than ours to change for. The Clipper 40 however is perfect. Sedan or Europa layout. Lovely covered aft cockpit. Large second stateroom. Comes with choice of single or twin. (Marin would like that) Not a pilothouse design, (Marin would not like that so much), but in every other way, just like baby bear's porridge for mine. Even if money was no object I doubt I would go bigger.

http://www.clippermotoryachts.com.au/models/heritage-40/


-- Edited by Peter B on Saturday 5th of November 2011 06:10:01 AM

Marin wrote:charles wrote:
Late to the party but, the two boats that you mention have a cost of operation WAY MORE than the 36.

Click to expand...

You are absolutely correct and this has to be a major factor in our decision if we are put in the position to make one.* The money put into* refitting the GB36, while it would be well in excess of $100,000, perhaps closer to $200,000, particularly if the boat was re-engined, is a "one time" expenditure.* The operating cost of the boat would not change unless we put in new engines in which case the fuel cost might go down a wee bit but even then it would not be by enough to be any sort of consideration.

A lot of boaters overlook operating costs in their eagerness to get into boating or buy a different boat, and while we are well aware of this you are wise to point this out.

*Although I don't know the specifics of your potential refit, I suspect that your maintenance costs would go down quite noticeably due to the improved reliability and efficiencies of modern systems. Even aside from new engines.

The Clipper looks very nice. "Going bigger" can be quite a quandary unless you really need more room or decide to live aboard (which we have no interest in doing). In changing boats it's almost an automatic practice among boat buyers to go bigger. I assume this is because going the same size, or going smaller, seems "wrong." Why change boats if you're not going to get a bigger one?

The Fleming is one of our two alternatives to refitting our own boat not because it's 55' long but because we REALLY like Flemings. I don't know who drew Tony's lines--- it's basically a deFever design--- but to our way of thinking whoever did it got everything just right aesthetically. We think they even look better than the original deFevers that inspired it. But 55' is a lot of boat and a lot of operating cost-- moorage, insurance, etc. If Tony had made a 42' boat with the same lines and proportions as the 55, then the "refit or buy another boat question" would be simpler.

Conrad wrote:

Click to expand...

*Although I don't know the specifics of your potential refit, I suspect that your maintenance costs would go down quite noticeably due to the improved reliability and efficiencies of modern systems. Even aside from new engines.

They would for awhile, you're right.* But as the owner of the 120' corporate yacht I was associated with for awhile told me in response to my question of was it more expensive to maintain his 1966 boat or the brand new 150-footer in the next slip, he said it was about the same.* His reason--- everything that's wearing out on an older boat is wearing out on a new one.* The only difference he said is that with a new boat you start out with everyhing new.* With an older boat, you start out somewhere in the middle of the "wearing out" process.

If there was a GB person on the GB forum or elsewhere that has already done a "total refit" on a 36 GB it would be MUCH cheaper to just buy their boat if it was for sale. Ther'es lots of 36 GBs out there. The whole refit idea is going to be really very expensive because you'll sell the boat for less than half what you've got into it. You may loose $150000. or more. I think if you crunch the numbers enough you'll sell and buy. Too many people sink a ton of money in an old boat and leave the old engine and fuel tanks in place. We had a bad fuel tank so while we had the old engine out we just got a new one. But when we sell the boat it will hardly be worth any more than it was. A 70s 30' Willard is only worth so much. But I'm think'in a little like you and am about ready to totally stop looking at other boats and give Willy another 10 to $25K so who am I to advise you otherwise.*

nomadwilly wrote:
I think if you crunch the numbers enough you'll sell and buy. Too many people sink a ton of money in an old boat and leave the old engine and fuel tanks in place.

Click to expand...

No, we wouldn't if we decide to stick with the GB36.* This is the whole point of this option.* Buying another boat means buying another set of problems to learn about and deal with.* But we know all the problems with our boat, so if we do a total refit we will know that everything that needs addressing will have been addressed.

The fuel tanks in our boat were brand new from the previous owner when we bought the boat.* So while we would most likely have the tanks removed along with everything else in the engine room, as long as they proved out to be sound there would be no reason to replace them.

If we do the refit, what to do about the engines is a question.* I don't like Lehmans, but ours have only 2500 hours or so on them.* So the decision would be do we have the engines pulled, totally cleaned up and repainted, and put back in with money set aside to replace them should it become necessary in the future, or do we pull the Lehmans and replace them with something new, the only really viable candidate being the 150 hp N/A Lugger if they still make that engine.

We're not interested in simply exchanging GB36s.* One big advantage of the boat we have now is it has a Howard Abbey hull, which by all accounts are the best fiberglass hulls ever used on a Grand Banks boat.* Abbey designed and made the original molds in 1973 and personally supervised and participated in the layup of every GB fiberglass hull from the outset to mid-1974 or thereabouts.

Fortunately none of this is anything we need to make decisions about now (or maybe ever).* But if the opportunity does in fact present itself to upgrade our boating one way or the other, we want to have thought about it as carefully and thoroughly as possible.