42' Bristol Trawler

The friendliest place on the web for anyone who enjoys boating.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

stevensibs

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2011
Messages
172
Location
USA
Vessel Name
Still Sibsie
Vessel Make
42' Bristol Trawler
As I said before, I was going to be asking a lot of questions of you fine people while I am in the process of restoring my Bristol trawler. My question of the day is: Does anyone here know how the Bristol rides in a seaway and also at anchor? With its full displacement and round bilges, I have been reading lots of conflicting statements. I admire the vessel's shape and weighted keel, and my life's experience has been with sportfish planing hulls which can be no picnic in beam and following seas. Any feedback is always greatly appreciated.

Steve
 
I own a similar Bristol Trawler - have taken it from Canada to the Keys. She is a LOT more stable than a semi-displacement hull beyond 10-15 degrees of roll which is when the going is gtting rough. On her mooring, I occasionally find stuff on the cabin sole which is the result of lobster boats blowing by at WOT creating large wakes that catch her on the beam.

The Bristol is a very heavily built boat. I have the plugs removed from the various thru hull locations and they are impressively thick. Our boat handles well but there will be a learning curve. With a single engine and no thruster, you will quickly learn to use your spring lines to advantage.

Check out maineislandadventures.com for some pix of our boat and contact me offline for addn'l info

Kevin O
 

Attachments

  • dscf0564.jpg
    dscf0564.jpg
    93.7 KB · Views: 416
your boat is beautiful Kevin...mine will be like that in a couple of years. The transport company is getting ready to ship the boat from Jacksonville up here to Mass and they are removing the bridge. They ask, "is it through bolted to the cabin roof or screwed; from the top or sides?; My email is sjemery@gmail.com

Thanks v much.
 
Well the Bristol has arrived at my boatyard. My first question (many more coming) is what wood are the rubrails made of? They are 2 1/2" at the base where they attach to the hull with 1/4 - 20 s.s. machine screws and have half round s.s. caps. The caps are sound but the wood is all rotted so I am replacing them. *

P.S. love having a trawler.
 
Steve,
Rub rails on our Marine Trader were teak. I bought a 2" thick plank up in Berwick Maine (near Kittery) and cut 2 new ones from that.

Can't wait to hear more of your progress and adventures. Where is your yard?

Jim
 
Hi Jim...the yard where she will stay on the hard for the next 4 years is in Weymouth, MA. I suspected they were teak so I will start looking for a source for 2 1/2" by 2 1/2" rough cut. Hull bottom is being soda blasted next week, then I'm gutting the engine room....cummins, yan-mar, fuel tanks, etc. all coming out. Lots od work ahead but I love it.
Steve
 
Take lots of photos so you have the before and after. Some of us here don't read too well, but we like pictures, so feel free to post lots of 'em!
 
Haha....well I sure will post some pics!
 
I have an older Bristol. The cap and rub rails are of mahogany. I have replaced most with a Brazilian hardwood called Ipe. Its is more durable and rot resistant than mahogany and teak. However, I painted it white since I am adverse to spending hours with:dance: varnish.
 
Can anyone give me info on a Detroit 6-71 diesel in a 1969 Bristol 42. Pros-cons, Good Bad and the Ugly. Why did Bristol change to duel power plants in the following years? Any and all info would be appreciated....
 
Pros: Easy to work on.
Parts are easy to source (Napa or truck shops)
Low tech, easy to get or keep running.

Cons: Uses a relatively larger amount of fuel (2 stroke)
Noisy.
Dirty/ leaky (oil)
Heavy
 
Windless,

To address your second question; somewhere in the early'80s, despite the price of oil, some folks thought that if you flattened the bottom of the hull somewhat and added a second engine that you could get a Trawler to (semi) plane above hull speed. There are a Lot of diesel gussling trawlers out there from that era still.

Not wanting to start another "food fight" over singles and twins, I would say you have a good start with just the single Detroit in your Bristol - go make the best of it.
 
Okay, Thank you all for your replies, next question.
1. A Bristol 42 with a Detroit 6-71N, what is the fuel consumption at cruising (gph) and what is average cruising speed (knots and RPM)?
2. Is the Bristol 42 with a 6-71 underpowered?
3. Were there any technical problems with the 1969 Bristol 42 (manufacture defects etc.) that would make this boat a bad purchase today?
4. Compare the Bristol 42 with a Grand Banks 42 (same year range 1969).
5. Anything else I should know about the Bristol 42 before I plunge into the deep blue money pit of no return, and have to listen to my wife constantly say, "I know how much you love that boat, but I TOLD YOU SO."
 
Last edited:
Windless,

To address your second question; somewhere in the early'80s, despite the price of oil, some folks thought that if you flattened the bottom of the hull somewhat and added a second engine that you could get a Trawler to (semi) plane above hull speed. There are a Lot of diesel gussling trawlers out there from that era still.

Not wanting to start another "food fight" over singles and twins, I would say you have a good start with just the single Detroit in your Bristol - go make the best of it.
Could you please take a stab at the other questions I asked. TY.....
 
Reads a lot to me like I'm being assigned a homework assignment. No thanks!

 
Windless, only a pretender would answer all your questions. The engine ones might be better asked on boatdiesel.com, but you could PM "manyboats" (Eric) and ask him about power adequacy and fuel consumption. I doubt tech problems in 1969 have much significance 45 years later, after various owners and modifications. The comparison is likely to be highly subjective in any event.You must have looked at a Bristol and a GB to get this far, if not, you should. And while I utterly distrust the concept of a "buyers broker" who gets paid by the seller (!), maybe consult one.What do you see as the + & - of each? Write them down, in + & - columns, for each boat. Faults not obvious after 45 years must be insignificant. And, good luck, it is nerve racking, but we`ve all been there.
 
Answer to question 4.

1969 Bristol is fiberglass. 1969 Grand Banks is wood.
 
1969 Bristol 42, 36K lb. Displacement. One of the earlier Bristol 42s built on Papasquash Road in Bristol, RI. Detroit 6-71, 2 cycle diesel with 185HP. Engine designed for landing craft in WWII and later used in GM Buses and trucks. Estimated fuel consumption is around 3-4 GPH at around 1800rpm. Hull speed app. 9 knts around 2000 rpm. Parts ready available and engine is simple to work on considering size. In good shape (compression etc) 185 HP, there should be plenty of power to displacement. Particular problems common to 6-71. Nothing out of the normal for an old 2 cycle diesel. (Info from forum on Boatdiesel.com). Anything else to add or dispute would be appreciated.
 
Bristol 42 with Palmer Diesels

Hello. Anybody have information on a 1969/1970 Bristol 42 trawler with Palmer/ International diesels? Model number MD-301 with 110 hp?
Thanks,
Undersea
 
Hello Windless I'm new to the forum. Can you tell me where are the fuel and water tanks are located and the capacity of each? Also is there any place to find brochures on the Bristol 42 trawler?
Thanks
 
"Cons: (DD) Uses a relatively larger amount of fuel (2 stroke).

The DD use about the same fuel burn as other engines except the DD need to be operated within their efficient range.

About 60% of built power up to 1800RPM works well, about 16hp per gal of fuel.

Smaller injectors can be installed to lower built power , about $35.00 each plus install.

The danger with the B- 42 is hulls were sold for home completion.

Some came out great , some were first time attempts by backyard folks.

Be sure you know what you are getting.
 
"Cons: (DD) Uses a relatively larger amount of fuel (2 stroke).

The DD use about the same fuel burn as other engines except the DD need to be operated within their efficient range.

About 60% of built power up to 1800RPM works well, about 16hp per gal of fuel.

I don't understand what that means. 16hp per gallon of fuel?
 
I'm terrible at math. So at 1800 rpm .whatever hp the DD is producing ,it would be divided by 16 to get the GPH?
 
From what I have read about the Bristol 42 trawler, the early hulls were all American work, but with hulls at Bristol and the house and interior done there or at several other yards. Later boats were made in eastern India, supervised by the American Bristol lead supervisors working there. The Indian boats are said to have used 1 inch teak plywood where ply was called for.
The two we looked at seemed solid , simple, and well laid out, with good headroom for my 6'4", but did not scream "buy me now".
John
 
"I don't understand what that means. 16hp per gallon of fuel?"

It means for every gallon burned in an hour at modest 60% + loading 16 HP will have been created.

One use is figuring the size engine required to push a displacement boat.

Example , A displacement boat will cruise easily on 3HP per ton of displacement *2240lbs is a marine ton).

A 22,400 lb boat would be 10 tons so need 30hp or less or under 2 GPH

a 44,800 lb boat would be 20 tons so 4 GPH for cruising.

Cruising at 3 HP per ton is at about the sq rt of the LWL. this is called SL

With a DD a prop and tranny gear that runs 1200 RPM at SL, cruising speed is both efficient and quiet.

Engine life gets extremely long !

"Hull speed" 1,34 or so times the SL will require far larger waves , so may eat 200% to 300% more fuel per hour.

The speed difference usually only a knot or so , SL is the most common cruise speed , esp for distances.
 
Last edited:
I'm presently considering a Bristol 42. It is a 1973 with twin perkins. Your thoughts! One of the engines is fresh witn 10 hours on it and the other has 2200 hours. They say 270 hp each. Is that real? Total of 540 hp ?. Good , bad ?
 
Maybe 270HP total with 135HP each engine? That would be a typical 6.354 HP rating if non-turbo, IIRC.
 
Back
Top Bottom