Change electric stove, install gas stove

The friendliest place on the web for anyone who enjoys boating.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
O C Diver said:
Is the boat a prototype, 2 or 3 units built, or an actual production model with a boat builder producing them?

In case this is unfamiliar to you, a man named Howard Hughes had his company (Hughes Aicraft Company) build a wood seaplane with 8 engines with the intent to sell them to the war department for transatlantic transports during WWII. While the prototype did fly once, it was never put into production.

The point is that the boat you're describing is feasible as a prototype. Whether it's anything more than that is usually measured by it going into production by a boat builder as opposed to customer fabrication.



Some have already been built, and apparently the company says theyll make as many as people want to buy. At least one I know of has already crossed the Atlantic. I know all about Howard Hughes, and also about concept and prototype programs. Nobody can know how many of any sort of boat or aeroplane, or car will pan out commercially. In fact we recently discussed one of the best trawlers ive ever seen...the Cape Horn ones.....yet very few out there.
Click to expand...
 
rslifkin said:
I've never used more than 2 burners at a time on the boat, although I have at home. On the boat, it's partly due to cooking simpler meals, and partly because unless you're using fairly small pots, it's hard to actually make good use of all 3 burners on the boat stove.


An induction stove would use less power over time than mine (due to higher efficiency and better control), making it easier to power from batteries. But maximum peak power while heating things up or boiling water wouldn't be any less. In terms of size of inverter, generator, or shore power hookup needed, there's no real difference. As an example, one of the only 120v 3 burner induction cooktops I can find (from TrueInduction) draws 3300 watts max, same as my stove. Only difference is how the power is controlled and distributed per burner.
Click to expand...
If you haven't tried one of the single hobb induction hot plates, pickup one up. They're under $80 or so and I found them to be really incredible. There is virtually no wasted energy so even if the rating is same as your coil stove, the actual energy draw is less than half, probably a lot less.

Mine shows either temperature or watts. I found watts is more intuitive than temperature as it corresponds to high medium low. Rice and stew simmer nicely at 100 watts for example.

If I were to rip out my gas, I'd put in a two burner induction and keep the hot plate did oddball use. Maybe cooking outside or something.

Peter
 
My Force 10 propane stove has one 2.4 kw burner, two 1 kw burners, and the oven is 1.6 kw for a total of 6 kw. Yes they've all been running at once. Really hard to beat the energy density of hydrocarbons. The Force 10 electric that it replaced could not do that, from the genset or the dock power.
 
David Ess said:
O C Diver said:
Is the boat a prototype, 2 or 3 units built, or an actual production model with a boat builder producing them?

In case this is unfamiliar to you, a man named Howard Hughes had his company (Hughes Aicraft Company) build a wood seaplane with 8 engines with the intent to sell them to the war department for transatlantic transports during WWII. While the prototype did fly once, it was never put into production.

The point is that the boat you're describing is feasible as a prototype. Whether it's anything more than that is usually measured by it going into production by a boat builder as opposed to customer fabrication.



Some have already been built, and apparently the company says theyll make as many as people want to buy. At least one I know of has already crossed the Atlantic. I know all about Howard Hughes, and also about concept and prototype programs. Nobody can know how many of any sort of boat or aeroplane, or car will pan out commercially. In fact we recently discussed one of the best trawlers ive ever seen...the Cape Horn ones.....yet very few out there.
Click to expand...
Still waiting on the link for the one that crossed the Atlantic.
Click to expand...
 
David Ess said:
rslifkin.......I dont question your figures but wonder if anyone on your boat has ever used 3X 1100 watt burners at the same time. In my life I dont think ive ever seen that done in a house kitchen. Then...if the stove was induction....how much less power?
Click to expand...

Really? Guess you've never been to a real Thanksgiving dinner with a serious cook.

Better yet, the Trawler Forum Rendezvous each February in Fort Pierce. You haven't seen a galley in action until you've seen Watfa cooking.

Ted
 
mvweebles said:
If you haven't tried one of the single hobb induction hot plates, pickup one up. They're under $80 or so and I found them to be really incredible. There is virtually no wasted energy so even if the rating is same as your coil stove, the actual energy draw is less than half, probably a lot less.

Mine shows either temperature or watts. I found watts is more intuitive than temperature as it corresponds to high medium low. Rice and stew simmer nicely at 100 watts for example.

If I were to rip out my gas, I'd put in a two burner induction and keep the hot plate did oddball use. Maybe cooking outside or something.

Peter
Click to expand...


If I were planning to use it on battery power, I'd absolutely pick one of those up. At least for now, I expect to stick to running the generator to use the stove away from the dock, so I'm probably better off saving the storage space for something more useful. My galley is a pretty decent layout for its size, but unfortunately a bit lacking in storage.
 
rslifkin said:
I've never used more than 2 burners at a time on the boat, although I have at home. On the boat, it's partly due to cooking simpler meals, and partly because unless you're using fairly small pots, it's hard to actually make good use of all 3 burners on the boat stove.


An induction stove would use less power over time than mine (due to higher efficiency and better control), making it easier to power from batteries. But maximum peak power while heating things up or boiling water wouldn't be any less. In terms of size of inverter, generator, or shore power hookup needed, there's no real difference. As an example, one of the only 120v 3 burner induction cooktops I can find (from TrueInduction) draws 3300 watts max, same as my stove. Only difference is how the power is controlled and distributed per burner.
Click to expand...

Just so. And on the raging controversy over whether an eiectric induction stove is safer than a propane stove on a boat, where do you side on that? Me...I hold the bold and controversial position that ei is safer(and boy...did some of the resident trolls here ever go hysterical over that!)
 
A Silent 64 (the only Silent 64) did cross the Atlantic (by the shortest possible route) in 2018. According to the captain, they only used 340 gallons of diesel (in their electric boat) to do it.
 
David - boats you're looking at would have household electric ranges in them that run of generator. The exception is the electric albatross that has a 15kva inverter to power everything. Larger boats do not run gas because they carrying that much propane would be damn inconvenient. The smaller ranges like rslifkins (I assume it's a classic Princess with the bi-fold cover/cutting board) are now a rarity.

I wouldn't read anything more into new boats having electric ranges than that. Propane in 20-lb bottles (15 lb actual) is not practical for a household sized stove.

Peter
 
DDW said:
A Silent 64 (the only Silent 64) did cross the Atlantic (by the shortest possible route) in 2018. According to the captain, they only used 340 gallons of diesel (in their electric boat) to do it.
Click to expand...
Interesting. A Willard 36 went from San Diego to Hawaii and burned 335 gallons. 2400 nms. The longest leg of a circumnavigation of so inclined.

Would be an interesting story. Any citation? Would be interested in speed and weather conditions and such.

340 gallons sounds like a lot, but that boat runs a 150 kw generator (not a typo!!!). Has to devour diesel at 20 gph or more.
 
DDW said:
A Silent 64 (the only Silent 64) did cross the Atlantic (by the shortest possible route) in 2018. According to the captain, they only used 340 gallons of diesel (in their electric boat) to do it.
Click to expand...

Thanks for corroborating that: they exist....and one crossed the Atlantic in really stormy weather with no sun. Some of the resident trolls swore neither was true.
 
DDW.....Did you get that, even though you corroborated those two facts, the resident troll still doesnt accept it! ( I wouldnt be surprised if he also accepts the 'fine people hoax')
 
Here's the problem with a simple "crossed the Atlantic" statement. Sounds like something like London to NYC or something, probably 1800 nms or so. Impressive. But shortest possible route? That might mean something like Teneriffe to Newfoundland. Probably 1000 nms. Still impressive, but a lot different than 1800 nms. 340 gals diesel could drive a long slender catamaran at least 400 miles at 4 kts, maybe 500. So now you're down to 500 nm range under solar.....maybe. Still impressive, but a long way from cross-oceanic range under solar.

So that's why the rest of the story would be interesting. This is just conjecture of how, as an ex delivery skipper, I'd approach it.
 
David Ess said:
DDW.....Did you get that, even though you corroborated those two facts, the resident troll still doesnt accept it! ( I wouldnt be surprised if he also accepts the 'fine people hoax')
Click to expand...
Still waiting for a citation.
 
David Ess said:
I dont remember anybody saying hybrid boats are 'the answer', to long distance cruising. But I made the bold and controversial comment that a 110 KwH litium battery pack can fit into a 55 foot boat. Some denied it, I proved such boats already exist, some denied that too.
Click to expand...

I did find a YouTube video of the 64' version of the boat doing a hopscotch crossing of the Atlantic.


I'm at a loss for why a Hybrid crossing has any significance. It's basically a diesel electric boat with energy storage that can be supplemented with solar. From the captain's description, it's pretty obvious that the crossing wasn't possible without fossil fuel providing a significant amount of the energy.

If the objective is to reduce the consumption of fossil fuel, a sailboat is clearly a better choice.

This reminds me of Toyota's first years with the Prius. It's a Hybrid! The problem was it had worse fuel economy than their equivalent non Hybrid car. I'm guessing the same would be true here if you didn't have the solar to offset some of the electrical conversion loss.

Ted
 
DDW said:
A Silent 64 (the only Silent 64) did cross the Atlantic (by the shortest possible route) in 2018. According to the captain, they only used 340 gallons of diesel (in their electric boat) to do it.
Click to expand...

They also said they did it with lots of sun, something David ESS insists is not required on a solar powered vessel.

David Ess said:
.and one crossed the Atlantic in really stormy weather with no sun. .
Click to expand...

Zero evidence to support his claim though.
 
Last edited:
O C Diver said:
I did find a YouTube video of the 64' version of the boat doing a hopscotch crossing of the Atlantic.


I'm at a loss for why a Hybrid crossing has any significance. It's basically a diesel electric boat with energy storage that can be supplemented with solar. From the captain's description, it's pretty obvious that the crossing wasn't possible without fossil fuel providing a significant amount of the energy.

If the objective is to reduce the consumption of fossil fuel, a sailboat is clearly a better choice.

This reminds me of Toyota's first years with the Prius. It's a Hybrid! The problem was it had worse fuel economy than their equivalent non Hybrid car. I'm guessing the same would be true here if you didn't have the solar to offset some of the electrical conversion loss.

Ted
Click to expand...
I dunno, I'm impressed. 2200 nms and 340 gals diesel for a 64 footer. Granted he had following seas so not sure he could return, but would probably figure it out. I couldn't quote understand how long it took him - I heard 17 days but not sure if that was just the long leg from azores to Barbados. If so, that's pretty slow going. About 5-1/4 kts with a push from following seas.

Thanks for finding this and sharing.
 
O C Diver said:
I did find a YouTube video of the 64' version of the boat doing a hopscotch crossing of the Atlantic.


I'm at a loss for why a Hybrid crossing has any significance. It's basically a diesel electric boat with energy storage that can be supplemented with solar. From the captain's description, it's pretty obvious that the crossing wasn't possible without fossil fuel providing a significant amount of the energy.

If the objective is to reduce the consumption of fossil fuel, a sailboat is clearly a better choice.

This reminds me of Toyota's first years with the Prius. It's a Hybrid! The problem was it had worse fuel economy than their equivalent non Hybrid car. I'm guessing the same would be true here if you didn't have the solar to offset some of the electrical conversion loss.

Ted
Click to expand...

First it was a matter that nobody said hybrids were the answer to cruising, now you cannt see any significance in corroborating what some here said wasnt true,.....that they exist,,,that at least one has crossed the atlantic(ive recently discover at leastvone more has). How do you think the above one would have done had it been sunny instead of stormy without sun? Some even doubted they could put such battery packs in these boats. That some have learned that it has been done means their l earning that here is significant.
 
Simi 60 said:
They also said they did it with lots of sun, something David ESS insists is not required on a solar powered vessel.



Zero evidence to support his claim though.
Click to expand...

The capt said one week of solid rain, no sun.
 
David Ess said:
First it was a matter that nobody said hybrids were the answer to cruising, now you cannt see any significance in corroborating what some here said wasnt true,.....that they exist,,,that at least one has crossed the atlantic(ive recently discover at leastvone more has). How do you think the above one would have done had it been sunny instead of stormy without sun? Some even doubted they could put such battery packs in these boats. That some have learned that it has been done means their l earning that here is significant.
Click to expand...
Nobody said it wasn't true. They asked for a citation. What you were saying was all over the map and didn't have the ring of truth. You got lucky. After 100 posts, someone finally bailed you out and did what you should have done in the first place. You want people to believe you? Post a citation.

BTW - still no takers telling me i portrayed you inaccurately.
 
David Ess said:
First it was a matter that nobody said hybrids were the answer to cruising, now you cannt see any significance in corroborating what some here said wasnt true,.....that they exist,,,that at least one has crossed the atlantic(ive recently discover at leastvone more has). How do you think the above one would have done had it been sunny instead of stormy without sun? Some even doubted they could put such battery packs in these boats. That some have learned that it has been done means their l earning that here is significant.
Click to expand...

I never said they didn't exist, and I thought the original point was that they weren't commercially viable as a production boat, kind of like the Spruce Goose.

It would be interesting to see if you took the same boat and optimized it for small diesel engines and 5 knot cruise speed, if the fuel consumption would be even double. As a point of comparison, my inefficient hull with way to big an engine for a 5 knot cruise, gets about 7 miles to the gallon at 5 knots.

Ted
 
O C Diver said:
I never said they didn't exist, and I thought the original point was that they weren't commercially viable as a production boat, kind of like the Spruce Goose.

It would be interesting to see if you took the same boat and optimized it for small diesel engines and 5 knot cruise speed, if the fuel consumption would be even double. As a point of comparison, my inefficient hull with way to big an engine for a 5 knot cruise, gets about 7 miles to the gallon at 5 knots.

Ted
Click to expand...

You cant know how "commercially viable"...anything will be.....boat plame, car, bicycle. Electric boats like those aforementioned are optimized for solar power, and have gensets as backups, which they mostly dont need in sunny places, where most boaters prefer to be.
 
David Ess said:
The capt said one week of solid rain, no sun.
Click to expand...
Did he?

How do you explain this?

attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • Annotation 2020-12-24 132603.jpg
    Annotation 2020-12-24 132603.jpg
    75.2 KB · Views: 43
I'm not really seeing D.E. responses as he is now on Ignore, but:

2000 miles in 17 days is a bit under 5 knots. In trades with a following wind and sea. Burning 340 gallons. Certainly doesn't qualify as an electric crossing. That particular crossing has been done many times on beach cats, wind surfers, kayaks, and boats as small as 6'. That cat had a lot of superstructure and windage, I wonder how many more days it would have been with no motor at all. In the ARC rally, the faster sailboats cross from the Canaries to the Windwards (a considerably longer passage) in 8 days when conditions are good, as they have appeared to have been, using zero gallons.
 
Yea, I've put him on ignore too. Didn't know the feature existed. Never had a slightest need before

However, I wish this Silent 64 boat had come up on its own thread without the wildly accusational, confrontational and condescending attitude of the gleefully fact-free Mr. Ess. Sure, there are many holes to be poked into the crossing (including the startling lack of video given its 2018 and a self-proclaimed "world record" promotional event), and I'd sure like to see her go the other direction across the Atlantic, but there is much that grabs my interest in this boat. There was recently an owner of a Hatt 65-ish foot boat seeking to cross from Europe to the US with 1200 gals diesel and felt need for bladder and still wasn't perfectly comfortable with range, and rightfully so. 340 gallons for a 64 foot boat on a 2200 nm crossing impresses me. This is not an end, but a beginning, and not a bad one at that. It's a good looking boat with a nice minimalist style that many like.

Eventually, boats like this will find a market. They won't be passagemakers anytime soon, but will occasionally do PR stunt passages to allay range anxiety fears in the general market of boaters, the vast majority of whom rarely go more than 50 nms in a day. Might be an interesting choice for a Looper.

Too bad this got mired in a death-of-a-thousand-papercuts thread that meandered from gas or electric cooker, to gas is dangerous, to electric is great, to all the great builders are installing electric, and so on.

Oh well. At least I learned some valuable information. "Ignore" button being chief amongst them.

Happy holidays to all who are still around on this thread.

Peter
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Jerry formally Epoxy Lady
1986, 43', Albin Classic, Boston MA, $101,000.
Replies
10
Views
4K
Pete Meisinger
Pete Meisinger
S
  • Locked
1974 Willard Nomad $31,500.
Replies
20
Views
5K
delirious duo
D
P
Benmar Course Setter 21 autopilot
Replies
13
Views
1K
Matt_H
M
B
Mainship 34 HT 2008 for sale $195,000 Marco Island, FL
Replies
10
Views
5K
BellaDonna
B
Adopo
Stability and righting ability
Replies
19
Views
3K
Hippocampus
H

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom