Building a Nordhavn - again

N4061 said:

You are in the big leagues compared to us. The cost of your new boat is more than our three Nordies and Helmsman added together. Looking forward to following your journey. Can you expand on what you don't like about the dry stack exhaust design besides the warmer ER? Having owned boats with both designs I actually appreciated the dry stack exhaust being up high and no exhaust fumes. I don't like the warmer ER. Best of luck.

John T.

Click to expand...

I actually think dry exhaust has little to no effect on ER temps vs wet exhaust, assuming the dry exhaust is properly insulated.


See earlier posts for most answers/opinions. But in summary:


- It's easier to clean soot off the side of the boat that the stack and all the instruments


- It's easier to do maintenance from inside the boat than from underwater.


- It's easier to make a quiet boat with wet exhaust.


- Less interior living space is consumed by wet exhaust.


My opinions, and others come down on the issues differently, which is fine.

Wow! Bob Conconi is a real &@$hole!

I mean really! He’s got enough money to buy that yacht but still has enough time to waste putting up a Google ad to deliberately screw Nordhavn. Does he realize there are many workers who rely on that company for a paycheck. And they’re not wealthy like him.

And all of this AFTER he lost the lawsuits.

The only thing that makes me feel good is I doubt his smear campaign works. Anyone spending on a Nordhavn will do some research and realize Robert L Conconi is a jerk.

I’m sorry for my rant. Please don’t throw me off the forum. But really!

So any more pics?

Alaskan Sea-Duction said:

So any more pics?

Click to expand...

I’ll be at the yard in about 2hrs.

Best of luck with the new build Twisted. Enjoyed your website, looking at your Alaska pictures was nostalgic of my own trip in 2016.

djmarchand said:

Docking will be the major constraint for two. Surprised they don't build many of the big ones with twin engines. That would make bringing the boat up to the dock smoothly much easier so tying off would be less of a problem.


Underway it is a matter of comfort and sharing the watch. Its not like you need one at the helm and another in the engine room all of the time. Once away from shipping, you should be able to do it with two ok.


David

Click to expand...

I would differ on this. Honestly, even single-handed, it's not an issue - especially on boats with "fancy" technology (thrusters, wing controls, wireless control, etc.). I single-hand my 62ft boat without issue fairly routinely and I don't have thrusters. With thrusters, aft controls, and easy dock access I'd feel quite comfortable single-handing twice that size.

Where the issue is, is cleaning, maintenance, and operating equipment. I totally agree with Twister on "get the biggest boat you can". But, if you're going on a world cruise without crew, I think that much bigger than 70ft and you're going to feel like you're working a full-time job to keep the boat running smoothly. Not an issue if you're just operating locally, or for a few weeks at a time with access to civilization and services. But, on a long cruise to remote regions need to have the capability on-board so it's either you or your crew.

On the last point, in regards to equipment, need to avoid stuff that was designed with crew in mind - ie: equipment that is very labor-intensive or takes multiple people to operate. Easily engineered around, but important to design correctly for owner-operator use. Especially ground-tackle handling equipment and tender handling equipment.

Alaskan Sea-Duction said:

So any more pics?

Click to expand...

twistedtree said:

I’ll be at the yard in about 2hrs.

Click to expand...

Saw the pics on the blog!! Man that thing is BIG!!! So when the hull is laid does it use the vaccum method?

Alaskan Sea-Duction said:

Saw the pics on the blog!! Man that thing is BIG!!! So when the hull is laid does it use the vaccum method?

Click to expand...

No on the vacuum method. I think that might only be used for cored laminates, but I'm not sure. The Nordhavn hulls are all laid up by hand with successive layers of matting and resin, matting and resin. I'll try to get another blog entry done over the next day or so.

RE: dry vs. wet.

I originally asked the question two pages back (or more). I sat silent since I had no opinion on the matter but wanted to learn. I really appreciate TT and others who joined in with detailed responses. Despite having read pros/cons on this issue in other threads and forums, I had not heard so much about how it fouled the mast and neighbors. Those are valuable comments, and also very conscious of others. Personally, I fall in the "less seawater through the hull" camp to begin with, but this makes some compelling arguments, especially as TT laid out. Thanks for your thoughts and time.

Civilitas said:

RE: dry vs. wet.

I originally asked the question two pages back (or more). I sat silent since I had no opinion on the matter but wanted to learn. I really appreciate TT and others who joined in with detailed responses. Despite having read pros/cons on this issue in other threads and forums, I had not heard so much about how it fouled the mast and neighbors. Those are valuable comments, and also very conscious of others. Personally, I fall in the "less seawater through the hull" camp to begin with, but this makes some compelling arguments, especially as TT laid out. Thanks for your thoughts and time.

Click to expand...

Re "sea water through the hull", just keep in mind what other sea water might be running thorough the hull, and just how much of a difference eliminating it for one engine will actually make. Unless EVERYTHING is keel cooled, you will still have a lot of sea water running through the boat. On the 68 we have:


1) Wing engine


2) 25kw generator


3) 12kw generator


4) HVAC cooling


5) Hydraulic cooling


6) Anchor wash


7) Water maker



8) Cooling for dripless shaft seals that needs to come from somewhere if not the attached engine.


So adding or subtracting the main engine from that list is the difference between 8 sources or 9. It makes a difference, but not much.

So adding or subtracting the main engine from that list is the difference between 8 sources or 9. It makes a difference, but not much.

Click to expand...

Yep, got it. The fact you had a 60 and then (re)designed your own 68 is really instrumental on a lot of theoretical points for the rest of us. Thanks for your willingness to share.

I am not in the market for a new Nordhavn - more like a used Defever 49 or used GB 49my. A used Nordhavn 62 in a few more years would be a (possible) dream for me. But this is really valuable. This thread has run to four pages in a week, so clearly valuable to many.

There is a tri-chotomy of:

a) what designers want to build (think of Dave Gerr's more fanciful designs),
b) what sells (anything super-swoopy, with a shiny gel coat), and
c) what people actually find practical two years after point b).

Somewhere in the muddled-middle is what is best. Really thoughtful buyers with deep pockets and experience can distill it down and figure it out. Most of us aren't there, so it's neat to hear from experience and someone given some latitude in construction.

twistedtree said:

No on the vacuum method. I think that might only be used for cored laminates, but I'm not sure. The Nordhavn hulls are all laid up by hand with successive layers of matting and resin, matting and resin. I'll try to get another blog entry done over the next day or so.

Click to expand...

WOW! That is a surprise. I thought all the main manufactures was using vacuum infused resin instead of hand laid.

Alaskan Sea-Duction said:

WOW! That is a surprise. I thought all the main manufactures was using vacuum infused resin instead of hand laid.

Click to expand...

I know very little about boat manufacturing, but I am fairly sure no one is vacuum bagging these big hulls? Someone can set me straight here if I am wrong.

The only vacuum bagging I have seen is high tech parts for aerospace, etc and my carbon fiber outriggers and surf ski's which are 20 plus ft long and weigh about 20 lbs.

Fletcher500 said:

I know very little about boat manufacturing, but I am fairly sure no one is vacuum bagging these big hulls? Someone can set me straight here if I am wrong.

The only vacuum bagging I have seen is high tech parts for aerospace, etc and my carbon fiber outriggers and surf ski's which are 20 plus ft long and weigh about 20 lbs.

Click to expand...

Here is an example of a large yacht:

https://www.boattest.com/review/hatteras/3708_m90-panacera_rel2966

I visited the Christianson yard in Vancouver WA many years ago and they were vacuum infusing their hulls. But my recollection is that it’s because of the coring material that is porous and needs to become saturated with resin. I’m no expert in boat construction, but that’s what made me thing vacuuming is related to cored hull material. Hopefully someone who actually knows will chime in

Fletcher500 said:

I know very little about boat manufacturing, but I am fairly sure no one is vacuum bagging these big hulls? Someone can set me straight here if I am wrong.

The only vacuum bagging I have seen is high tech parts for aerospace, etc and my carbon fiber outriggers and surf ski's which are 20 plus ft long and weigh about 20 lbs.

Click to expand...

MJM Yachts and some others use vacuum bag fiberglass layup. It really can reduce the weight of a hull by letting you precisely control the resin to glass ratio.


But whereas a 20% hull layup weight savings might translate to 10% overall weight savings on a 34' boat, on a 68' boat it becomes almost meaningless. And the cost, time, material and labor skill requirements would be huge for the big boat, err... ship.


David

On this boat, weight is a virtue, not a liability. If only the same were true of my waistline.

twistedtree said:

Re "sea water through the hull", just keep in mind what other sea water might be running thorough the hull, and just how much of a difference eliminating it for one engine will actually make. Unless EVERYTHING is keel cooled, you will still have a lot of sea water running through the boat. On the 68 we have:


1) Wing engine


2) 25kw generator


3) 12kw generator


4) HVAC cooling


5) Hydraulic cooling


6) Anchor wash


7) Water maker



8) Cooling for dripless shaft seals that needs to come from somewhere if not the attached engine.


So adding or subtracting the main engine from that list is the difference between 8 sources or 9. It makes a difference, but not much.

Click to expand...

Probably more important is how many thru hulls one has. A water chest and a single through hull is a different issue than 9 thru hulls.

Incidentally, I think there is a pretty good argument for keel cooling HVAC and hydraulics. Closed systems with coolant are a lot easier to maintain than otherwise. We were lucky in that there were the old half pipes keel coolers on Delfin that I repurposed for HVAC and hydraulics, but if they weren't there, I'd put a keel cooler on for them without hesitation.

TT great pics on the blog.... Thanks for sharing

Just got back from Taiwan and my first yard visit. Here's the first of a few update articles Adventures of Tanglewood: More Molds, More Progress

Greetings,
Mr. Saint tt. You're my new best friend!


Had you ever considered a VPP for the wing engine instead of the folding prop?

Thanks...

RT Firefly said:

Had you ever considered a VPP for the wing engine instead of the folding prop?

Click to expand...

I haven't. I suspect it would be way too expensive. From what I've heard, I think the prop would be more than the engine and grear

Thanks for the updated pictures. Interesting. me personally, I have never liked boats that store their dink on the bow. Just my preference.

Question regarding windows. Are your windows set in a frame or are they the new design of frame-less windows that I am seeing on RVs and some new boats?

Nice revisions, especially the bigger ER door. Wonder if pop out handles would work for the side access and some Stainless steel step protectors would be a classy touch.

Crusty Chief said:

Nice revisions, especially the bigger ER door. Wonder if pop out handles would work for the side access and some Stainless steel step protectors would be a classy touch.

Click to expand...

Time to drop your drool towel....

New post on the engine selection Adventures of Tanglewood: Mirror, Mirror, on the Wall, What's the Fairest Engine of All

Alaskan Sea-Duction said:

Thanks for the updated pictures. Interesting. me personally, I have never liked boats that store their dink on the bow. Just my preference.

Question regarding windows. Are your windows set in a frame or are they the new design of frame-less windows that I am seeing on RVs and some new boats?

Click to expand...

I had some reservations about the forward tender storage too. But in the end favored my own comfort so went with the aft pilot house.


The windows are all "bonded" glass, set right into the fiber glass mold. It's the same as car windshields, and get rid of the aluminum frames that inevitably corrode.

Crusty Chief said:

Nice revisions, especially the bigger ER door. Wonder if pop out handles would work for the side access and some Stainless steel step protectors would be a classy touch.

Click to expand...

I'm getting lots of good ideas on handles for the molded "ladder".

Just saw your latest blog post on the step handles, so I'll chime in here on my thought...

I pictured the hand holds oriented as you have them, parallel to the steps, but positioned at the lower edge of every other toe hold. This has the effect of allowing the handle to be used to extend the toe hold with a place to rest the heel of your foot as you progress up and down the hull. It may also make it easier for your foot to 'find' the hole as you descend the hull.

FlyWright said:

Just saw your latest blog post on the step handles, so I'll chime in here on my thought...

I pictured the hand holds oriented as you have them, parallel to the steps, but positioned at the lower edge of every other toe hold. This has the effect of allowing the handle to be used to extend the toe hold with a place to rest the heel of your foot as you progress up and down the hull. It may also make it easier for your foot to 'find' the hole as you descend the hull.

Click to expand...

My wife and I were discussing this same idea earlier today. The up-side, as you say, is perhaps a bit more to put your foot on. The down side is that the grab bars will have to carry a lot more weight, and be more subject to working loose.


It's likely going to be a while before I settle on anything. Perhaps not even until the boat is state-side and I can actually pull along side in a tender.... But by all means keep the ideas coming...

I've got a metal step mounted between my swimstep and my rail gate on my transom. (no transom door on Hull #1) It's been there for 41 years and is still going strong. I've had some big boys use that over the years!

If Marshall Boats can do it, no doubt Nordhavn can, too.