Are Symbol yachts good passage makers?

[Queen Shira]

I am currently looking at a 2011 Symbol 48' classic pilothouse. There happens to be one for sale in Sydney. Passage makers are exceedingly expensive and Symbol seems to be more in a lower price bracket. Can any one shed light on Symbol as a passage maker? I would be grateful for any feedback.

 

[DavidM]

Well, I did a search on Yachtworld and all I could find in that year range was a new build from a Rhode Island dealer (I searched world wide). It does look nice and the bulbous bow definitely indicates an efficient displacement hull.

The listing did say that 250 hp Cummins engines were standard. That is too big for pure displacement cruising. It also talked about John Deere engines and a pair of 4 cylinder 4045s would be ideal.

What engines does the boat you are considering have?

With smallish engines, that boat will require about 80-100 hp to go hull speed and maybe 50 to go a knot or two less- say 7.5 kts. At 50 hp it will burn about 3 gph for both engines so with 900 gallons of fuel on board it should have a range of 2000 NM.

I can't tell anything about the build quality, but the basic design looks good- somewhat like a Flemming but with a displacement hull.

David

 

[sunchaser]

As Dave Marchand asks, engines? Also to be said, like OA, Symbol put many types of PH on different hulls, is the vessel you are considering a full or semi displacement hull? Stabilized?

A 48 to 50 DeFever would be a good comparison in many respects.

 

[Queen Shira]

Thank you for your interest. It has a hard chine hull and full-length keel. It has midship bilge keels and a bulbous bow. It has twin cummins 6BTA5.9M1 (270hp@2600RPM) engines and apparently at 1400RPM does 7knots and 1800 does 8.6 knots and at 2400 does 11.4Kn. I can't answer as to wether it is semi or true displacement hull but it also has trim tabs.
It also only holds 400 gallons of diesel on the info from the broker but the yachtworld (2014 Symbol 48 Classic Pilothouse (New Model) Power New and Used Boats) info for the same boat says 900 USG. I'll have to quiz the broker.
My plan is to cruise to New Caledonia and the surrounding islands from Sydney so I do need reasonable range.
Thank you both for your help
Ilan

 

[DavidM]

The hull shape you describe sounds like a bastardization: bulbous bow to improve waterline length and low speed hydrodynamics (ie displacement hull) and a hard chine, flat deadrise (the angle the two sides of the hull make at the transom) semi-displacement hull. The only way to know is to post some pictures of the boat out of the water.

If it is a semi-displacement hull with only 400 gallons of fuel, it won't have anywhere near the range I described in my first post- maybe 500-750 NM. Semi-displacement hulls use almost twice the fuel as a true displacement hull at low speeds.

David

 

[sunchaser]

Have you seen the vessel? Is it US or Australia based? How many hours on vessel? The engines sound OK, you should be able to run them all day and night at 1500 or so RPM for good fuel economy. Are they sea water after cooled?

I've been on several larger Symbols and they have a good following. But I'm with Dave, the hull description sounds strange in the brochure. What other vessels are you contemplating? And what price range?

 

[Queen Shira]

Thank you again. The vessel is in Sydney harbor close to where I live. There are 130 hrs on the engines and it was brought out to be sold new in 2011, but has not yet been sold. It has no electronics and they want $795000 AUD but I can only afford half of that. I have not made an offer yet.
I have had a 1996 Sunseeker portofino 400 for many years but have been seriously looking at trawlers as I am approaching retirement age. There is a 2000 62 nordhavn for sale in Sydney but they want crazy money. When I saw relatively new engines (on the symbol) that I can trust I thought this might suit me. I just haven't worked out if it will make a good passage maker. It has no stabilizers so I may have to enquire into gyros. There a bunch of trawler like boats here but most are older than 1990 with lots of hours on the engines and all around the $350000 mark.
I longingly look at boats in the US but the cost of freight plus taxes is prohibitive. This Symbol 48 holds 2850 Litres Fuel plus 535 Litres in a Cruise Tank. That makes 894 USG. It has wet exhausts. I have not yet seen the boat out of the water but within the next few weeks I will make an offer and if I am close I will get a survey and post pictures of the hull out of the water.
What suggestions do you have re other makes or the things I should look out re this boat.
Thank you
Ilan

 

[Rogerh]

We looked at a 2003 Symbol around a 48 here in the states and were somewhat disappointed. We liked the vessel and layout but the one we looked at had alot of spider cracks in the gelcoat throughout the vessel. It may have just been a bad batch of gelcoat but it really turned us off.

 

[FF]

>I longingly look at boats in the US but the cost of freight plus taxes is prohibitive<

If you keep looking at hard chine fast ,no range boats you will need a freight delivery.

Find a genuine passagemaker , one in a hundred built for ocean crossing from the keel up and a self delivery would just be time and fuel.

 

[Robster_in_edmonds]

Friends of ours have a 48 foot symbol. We have a Bayliner 4788. Similar layouts, ours has more interior room. Our exterior gel coat is beautiful and straight. Their's is wavy. Very poor exterior finish IMO. Yes, and I am comparing it to a Bayliner. Interior fit and finish is comparable.

I have no clue as to the range or seaworthiness of either vessel. My boat holds 440 gallons of diesel and can get over 1.2 nautical mpg. So my range is around 500 miles if I am fearless, which I am not! Cummins 330 engines. There are a number of 4788s in Australia. Check them out. Properly maintained, they are fine boats.

 

[AusCan]

From what I've seen & read they defininitely are a semi-displacement hull. They do a few modifications to the Classic models and have a "Long Range Classic Pilothouse" model which has slightly larger tanks, bulbous bow, added bilge keels, and extra ballast etc, but I was under the impression these were all fitted with a single Cummins. They list the range of up to 3000nm @ 5 knots.
You can find a spec sheet for them here.
SYMBOLYACHTS.COM
Click on "News/Events" then "News & Announcements" and you'll find:
Symbol 48', Long Range Classic Pilothouse

 

[Peter B]

That vessel looks very nice, in fact I would kill for it (almost), but I don't see any evidence of a bulbous bow there, in the specs or the water flow in front of the bow in moving shots - which is good in my view, as I don't favour that kind of bow in our kind of boating.

 

[Capt.Bill11]

Symbol makes 2 48' classics, one with a bulbous bow, single engine and 900 gallons of fuel and one without the bulbous bow, twin engines and less fuel capacity. Which one are you looking at?

As to semi-displacement hulls, that term is really a misnomer in my opinion. A hull either is or it isn't.

 

[Tingum]

Big engines and a small fuel capacity does not make a passage maker.

 

[AusCan]

Spec sheet for single engine model:

Symbol 48’ Long Range Classic Pilothouse

Principal Dimensions,
L.O.A (W/Swim platform): 52'-3" (15.93 M)
L.O.A. of hull (To ISO 8666): 48’-5” ( 14.75 M)
Length at Waterline (LWL): 44’-9 1/2” ( 13.65 M)
Beam (Molded): 15’-10” ( 4.83 M)
Draft (Full load): 5’-10” ( 1.78 M)

Displacement, Light load: 47,850 LB ( 21,720 Kgs)
Half load: 52,300 LB ( 23,750 Kgs)
Full loadL: 56,800 LB ( 25,780 Kgs)

Ballast (Single Engine Configuration): 1,870 LB ( 850 Kgs)
Fuel Capacity: 900 USG
Water Capacity: 250 USG
Holding Tank Capacity: 50 USG

Bridge Clearance (with Radar Arch or Mast down): 16.8 ft ( 5.13 M)

Standard Power,
Single Main Engine: Cummins 270B; 270HP@2600RPM; Gear Ratio: 2.88:1
Est. Top Speed: 10 KTS Est. Cruising Speed: 8.5 KTS

Wing Engine: Yanmar 50HP (Optional)

Hydrostatic Data,
A/B Ratio (full load): 2.2
S/L Ratio (top speed): 1.5
S/L Ratio (cruising speed): 1.27
D/L Ratio (full load): 283
Cb (block coefficient): 0.3
Cp (prismatic coefficient): 0.695
Cm (midship section coefficient): 0.4
Cwp (waterplane coefficient): 0.8

Range:
5 knots: 3,000 Nautical Miles
6 knots: 2,500 Nautical Miles
8.5 knots: 1,800 Nautical Miles
9 knots: 1,350 Nautical Miles

Note: Calculated with a 10% reserve. Ranges are approximate.

 

[Takefive]

Unfortunately I have personally had a very bad experience with the Symbol Dealer in Australia, I believe I am no orphan. I strongly advise you to verify and check everything you are told, I understand the dealer owns this boat and was the last boat he imported some years ago and has been trying to sell it ever since.

The designer Jack Sarin is in my opinion an excellent designer, honest and ethical. I would in no way offer the same endorsement to anyone else whom I have personally dealt with at Symbol Yachts. I would advise you to contact Sarin direct to see exactly what involvement he had in the design and control of the manufacture, this may be interesting!! Your posts and others in my opinion indicates confusion as to the specifications of the boat, I am not surprised.

I have previously posted in other forums and posted a website about my experience with Symbol Yachts and the Australian Dealer as a warning to others. I did not renew the website a couple of years ago, it was time to move on for me.

If you are told anything by Symbol or their Australian dealer ( i believe Symbol may no longer exist?) about me or my experience or what they did, ask them to commit it to writing and contact me and forward it too me.

Be very very careful, my experience cost me serious money and grief.

 

[FF]

The quickest way to decide if ant vessel was built for blue water or brown water is to examine the glass in the PH

1/4 or 3/8 glass for an acre its brown water.

1/2 or 3/4 glass with built in heat tapes , you have possibly found a genuine blue water boat.

Look for at least 1000NM range minimum , 3000-4000NM if you want world cruising.

Look for numerous hand holds inside , flying across the width of the PH can be painful.

If there not OEM , its lakes , bays and rivers only.

 

[David Cherbonnier]

The hull shape you describe sounds like a bastardization: bulbous bow to improve waterline length and low speed hydrodynamics (ie displacement hull) and a hard chine, flat deadrise (the angle the two sides of the hull make at the transom) semi-displacement hull. The only way to know is to post some pictures of the boat out of the water.

If it is a semi-displacement hull with only 400 gallons of fuel, it won't have anywhere near the range I described in my first post- maybe 500-750 NM. Semi-displacement hulls use almost twice the fuel as a true displacement hull at low speeds.

David

The purpose of a bulbous bow is to reduce wave-making resistance and improve fuel efficiency by as much as 15%. That's why all big ships have them.

 

[O C Diver]

The purpose of a bulbous bow is to reduce wave-making resistance and improve fuel efficiency by as much as 15%. That's why all big ships have them.

True. But you don't see them on planing hulls or semi displacement hulls which was the point of the person you quoted.

Ted

 

[David Cherbonnier]

True. But you don't see them on planing hulls or semi displacement hulls which was the point of the person you quoted.

Thank you Ted, IThe point I made wass the purpose of the Bulbous bow was purpose of a bulbous bow is to "reduce wave-making resistance". I'm sure you are aware, as a rule of thumb, the amount of water your hull violently displaces is an indicator of hull efficiency. which can be definitively described as Wave Making Resistance. To minimize "Wave Making Resistance, it has to be beneath the surface. (Surely you have seen the bow wave of those vessels compared to those that plow through the water.) Planing hulls eliminate wave making resistance by being on top of the water, i.e. planing, like your tires will if you hit standing water on a hard road surface.
And for clarification this is the post I was comment I was commenting on, "
"The hull shape you describe sounds like a bastardization: bulbous bow to improve waterline length and low speed hydrodynamics (ie displacement hull) and a hard chine,"
"The hull shape you describe sounds like a bastardization: bulbous bow to improve waterline length (It has nothing to do with increasing length!) and "slow speed hydrodynamics" refers to a displacement hull is misleading. Hydrodynamics pertains to the response to the motion of any solid in a fluid. And the difference between a displacement hull and a semi-displacement hull, is the chine, hard or soft. Tbank you for allowing me to clarify my statement.

 

[mvweebles]

The purpose of a bulbous bow is to reduce wave-making resistance and improve fuel efficiency by as much as 15%. That's why all big ships have them.

@David Cherbonnier - Can you provide a reputable citation for the 15% efficiency improvement number in a <100-foot recreational boat (or even 5% -- or even 1.5%)? I've run a few boats with bulbous bows and I don't care for them one bit. While the N57 is a personal favorite, I have to overlook the bulb.

Interesting discussion piece from Tad Roberts. Bulbous Bows

Peter

 

[David Cherbonnier]

@David Cherbonnier - Can you provide a reputable citation for the 15% efficiency improvement number in a <100-foot recreational boat (or even 5% -- or even 1.5%)? I've run a few boats with bulbous bows and I don't care for them one bit. While the N57 is a personal favorite, I have to overlook the bulb.

Interesting discussion piece from Tad Roberts. Bulbous Bows

Peter can you reference where I specified any length in the discussion of Bulbous Bows, much less specifically <100'. With 10 years in the Navy, 5 years operating Offsore supply vessels and 6 years in ABS Offshore Technology, I also have exposure to the maritime industry. If you are truly interested in becoming aware the purpose of Bulbous bows has nothing to do wiyh increasing water line lrngth, you can spend a few minutes on Google. You may then discover , properly designed and operated bulbous bow on VLCC's typically results in fuel savings of 12% to 15%. The greater the DWT, the greater the wave making resistance, hence the greater reduction. BTW here's a very comprehensive article by Bray Yacht Design and Research Ltd. You'll note, speaking exclusively in reference to yacht design, maybe <100', they clearly state the benefit of a modern-day bulbous bow will reduce your fuel consumption 12% to 15%. Bray Yacht Design & Research Ltd - Bulbous Bows. Please don't hesitate to let me know if this requires any further clarification, or better yet, send your enquiry direct to Bray. They may appreciate your input. I surely did as it encouraged me to learn more about the topic. 10 minutes well spent.

 

[Mako]

Look for numerous hand holds inside , flying across the width of the PH can be painful.

Tell that to the furniture as well.

On my boat during heavy rolling I would look into the saloon and watch my cousin sliding from port to starboard while lying on the sofa. Hence the name "loose furniture" which needs to be "fastened furniture."

 

[mvweebles]

Well I now see where AI pulled the 12%-15% number from. With due respect to Bray, the article is not empirical. It's speculative based on modeling - this is the problem. It's not based on real world. Heck, they show a picture of tank testing but don't even mention the results. And tank testing doesn't always scale well. This type of article is what led to the brief popularity of bulbs in the first place. Reality didn't even come close to the hype. Had bulbs delivered anywhere close to 15% reduction in fuel consumption, they would be immensely popular right now in the land of $5/g diesel. It doesn't take much time on TF to realize people go to extreme measures to save even a tiny bit on fuel.

When the dust settled on the bulb movement, I seem to recall efficiency improvements of 1.0%-1.5%, and then only at very specific speeds. For a ship that spends 95% of it's time underway at the same speed, it makes sense. And because of a ships length, it's unlikely to encounter the bulb-thunder-clap in head seas that a 60-70 footer will encounter fairly frequently. First time I heard it I thought we'd hit a container and I started yanking hatch boards looking for damage.

For me, bulb bows on small boats are only slightly more legitimate than snake oil ideas such as Algae-X magnetic fuel polishers and ultrasonic hull cleaners. Interesting hype but doesn't work in the real world. Do they show benefits? Meager at best - juice isn't worth the squeeze as the saying goes. Over-promise and under-deliver.

If there's actual evidence for recreational yachts vs doodles on a sketch pad, I'm all ears.

Peter

 

[Mako]

"Algae-X magnetic fuel polishers"
Funny. I remember those things.