Does anybody know anything about an Ocean Yacht 40+2 trawler?

[ce_smith]

I was looking at a 1979 Ocean 40+2 trawler in Alabama. Is anybody out there familar with them? Ocean builds fish boats and it looks like this boat was built on a fishing hull. Would appreciate any help.

 

[Daddyo]

The Ocean's I've seen look to be good quality and nice lines but I believe are built on deep-v go fast hulls.

 

[Baker]

I have always been a fan of these boats. Nobody really knows about them. I don't really either other than they always show up in my searches on YW. Ocean builds good boats. The fact that they are on a modified V type hull is really not of much consequence. Californians are modified Vs. Presidents are modified V. The new Grand Banks are Modified V. So what. There is a very thin line between that and a semi-planing hull. I just think they are neat looking boats and like the way they are laid out.

 

[Daddyo]

Just can't go with the notion that a v-hull and a semi displacement is not of much consequence. I've been in 9' vertical confused waves in a November gale and I can assure you had we been there in a v-hull things would have been much different. I also have a large prop protecting keel and a rudder skeg allowing for a two point rudder attachment, you don't get that with a v-hull

 

[ce_smith]

Here*are two pics of the hull. Also here is the link to *40+2 in Pensacola

http://www.yachtworld.com/core/listing/photoGallery.jsp?ro=1&slim=quicknull&r=2112035&checked_boats=2112035&rs=yachtworld.com&boat_id=2112035&back=/core/boats/1980/Ocean-40+2-Trawler-2112035/Pensacola/FL/United-States&boat_id=2112035


-- Edited by ce_smith on Tuesday 9th of March 2010 10:10:56 AM

 

[ce_smith]

Daddyo,

I see what you are saying. It looks like the keel on the Ocean offers some protection if you were going slow and bumped bottom. But if you kept moving forward it could get nasty.

 

[albin43]

i have a friend with a ocean sport fish. there great boats, very well built. if i were in the market for a TRAWLER i woundnt look for a ocean, depending on what you want to do with the vessel depends of if its right for you. theres not alot of that model oceans around which could mean they didnt work well. im not really sure tho. one thing i know is oceans sport fisherman boats are mint!

 

[Baker]

Okay Daddyo, exactly what would you have imagined your experience to be if you were in a boat with a modified V hull??? *I am not agreeing or disagreeing. *Just curious. *But I will stick to my opinion....there is not much difference at displacement speeds. *A planing hull will pound a bit more just because there are flatter section further forward. *Uncomfortable maybe...but not scary. *And likely more comfortable if you could get some speed with some lift under the hull.

I will venture a guess and say they probably didn't sell very well because of the "swooping" sheer line. *It is a bit different. *I kinda like it. *I think it is a good looking boat.....simply an opinion.


-- Edited by Baker on Tuesday 9th of March 2010 10:55:29 PM

 

[Daddyo]

I agree they are good looking to me, I like the shear line. They look to be very solid. The difference in my gale experience I think would have been profound. Even with my hull form and 5-6 knot speeds in the storm the bow section of our 24000lb boat went weightless many times ( I know because the kids were having a great time timing this and jumping up and down in the forward cabin). Had this been a v-hull the pounding would have been much worse. The other big issue would have been maintaining directional stability at slow speeds in huge confused seas, the full keel is made to do this where the v-hull will not. I am very sure we would have crossed the thin line between discomfort and extreme danger had we been caught in those conditions in a v-hull.

 

[skipperguy]

I've owned one of these since 1998.* Love it !* I describe it as a 2- bedroom, 2- bath condo with 4-side water view.* Good and heavy and good underway.* We have run from Old Saybrook to Boston with summers in Martha's Vineyard.** Block Island, Newport, Cuttyhunk etc.

Buy It !

 

[captrags]

Probably too late to be relevant for CE SMith but just thought I would add my 2 cents as our family bought an Ocean Yachts 40+2 new in 1979 and sold it about 2007.*
Having grown up on this boat and putting lots of hours underway and maintaining her*I have to say it was a trmendous family boat that we took all over the Chesapeake and some coastal trips as well.

Ocean built these models from 1978 to 1982, when they were first getting started, in response to the gas crisis of the time.* It was a 40 sportfish hull modified back aft with an integrated swim platform.* (maybe other changes I may not be aware of)
Not sure how many were made but they were rare and are getting more rare.

We experienced some rot issues - after about 20 yrs- in the p/s side windows - as many Jersey boats did.* Aside from a soggy aft deck due to installation of improperly bedded deck boxes (not by us- professionals)*we had no other structural issues.

As for handling seas, she was excellent in a head sea, a* bit*stiff in a beam sea and could occasional get a little squirley in a following/quartering sea (what boat doesn't)

With the twin Perkins 165's she would*cruise abt 9/10 kts at about 10 gal/hr or you could go about 8 kts at about 5 gal/hr.* We got her on plane once..moved out quite nicely.* With bigger engines and a light load she will easily plane.

Plenty of room below wiht an aft*master which had a queen bed, vanity and ensuite head wiht a full size tub/shower (xome had washer/dryer)*while the V was spacious and had an adjacent head with standup shower.* The couch in the salon was a pullout and we routinely slept 6+ adults.

I guess it's all about your experiences in a boat and mine was certainly positive so I guess I am a bit biased.* I hope this info helps someone, if specific info is desired you are welcome to contact me.

Cheers- Mike

 

[Nomad Willy]

Well, it looks like someone actually did what I've been saying would make an economical trawler out of planing hull w huge fuel guzzling engines. That is * * ..cut out the aft bottom of a planing hull and reshape it so it ramps up to (or nearly)*the water level. This would efectively turn the planing hull into a displacement hull.This boat has a hull like no other, * *...that I have ever seen. The last poster must have had an earlier version w a straight run aft made before the stern modification was made as the one in the picture ce smith posted would NEVER plane. Let me guess * *..it was made in 1973 0r very soon after. That upturned bottom aft would suck the stern down (as the kids say)big time. John, the expression "modified Vee" refers to the deadrise of the bottom, basically how it "warps" into a flatter bottom as one goes aft. The Mainship 34 was a rather extreme example of a warped or modified V hull. The opposite of a "Deep V" as deep Vs have no warp * * *.. they have constant deadrise from about midships*(or a bit fwd) all the way to the transom * *..in a straight run. This Ocean boat is modified all right but in the literal sense. The Ocean people (in my opinion) didn't do this right. They made the upturn of the bottom way too short. They should have made it start 1/4 to 1/3 of the way fwd of the transom. This is what I'd like to do w a Nordic Tug. Then it would go 7.5 knots w a 55hp engine and be essentially a full displacement hull. c e smith * *..I'd take these pictures to a knowledgeable person, ideally a NA and ask his opinion. I'd say this boat will run at 5 knots beautifully and rather efficiently but 8-9 knots would render it very bow high and in a very draggy state. And if had big engines it would run it's engines in a very under loaded state at 5 knots or in a very draggy condition w the stern down and the bow high. The value of this boat is extremely low. I'd say don't buy it without a fairly extensive evaluation of the shape of the stern. I'm not an NA and this is just an opinion of "some guy" * * ... but that's my take on the Ocean. Otherwise it looks like a nice boat.My opinion here is "independent" and I have seen capnrags post.


Eric Henning


-- Edited by nomadwilly on Wednesday 28th of July 2010 09:15:01 AM

 

[Marin]

I wonder if the main reason behind the rise in the afterbody was to allow the props to be mounted higher, thus reducing the draft? Sort of a poor-man's prop tunnel arrangement? It's also interesting how short the rudders are in that they will receive only about half the propeller's direct thrust. I would think larger rudders would improve the boat's maneuverability unless this boat is intended to be run relatively fast and the increased drag would negate the improvement in slow-speed maneuverability.

 

[Nomad Willy]

Hi Marin,Well * *... I think the short rudders may (100% speculated opinion) be related to prop walk in fwd gear. The upper half of the prop gets a lot of the prop wash and the lower get very little so the prop wash will tend to turn the rudder * * ..hopefully to counteract the tendency of the boat to steer away in one direction. However w twin screw it would seem not to work. Could it be a carryover from the days where twin screws were rare. Just thinking out loud. Dosn't seem to have anything to do w the Ocean.
The thing that works w your shallow draft theory is that it would work, however the props look full size and incidentally w quite low pitch. Whoever put the props on this boat didn't expect much speed. I think your'e on the right track thinking about speed relative to the small rudders (on the average fast boat) but not on this one. It's inconceivable the builder originally put the trim tabs on the 1st boat. The boat wouldn't have been expected to go fast enough to be able to gain beneficial lift so it must have been a desperate attempt to fix a bad design. As for low speed handling consider the fact that over half the aft end of the keel is missing relative to a trawler. Put the helm hard over and give it a blast of wash. I'll bet that Ocean 40 would swing smartly in the direction it was told.
captrags,
As you indicate head seas should be about average or a bit better and stiff in a beam sea is par for a beamy hard chine boat. The rise in the stern should help w quartering following seas but not like turning it into a double ender. There is a possibility that explains everything * * possibly. Let's say the builder/designer knew the stern would squat way down and put the extended stern on to flatten the wash out and counteract the stern squat. I've seen other boats that have this general shape none of them of planing speed. It didn't work and in went the trim tabs. And they probably only created more turbulence.
All of what I;ve said about this boat is guessing and speculation. I'd walk away from it if I were to look at it but at times there are things that work well (or at least work) that look for all the world like something that wouldn't work at all. For ce ------ w the poco-dot rowboat and little else I still say get a professional opinion.


Eric Henning

 

[Marin]

nomadwilly wrote:

Hi Marin,
Well * *... I think the short rudders may (100% speculated opinion) be related to prop walk in fwd gear.

*

Don't know about that.* Our boat has two very large spade rudders that extend down almost to the bottom of the prop circle.* There is no propwalk tendency at all.* Of course there wouldn't be with a "normal" twin-engine boat in either forward or reverse since the props are counter-rotating in both cases.* The only time propwalk will move the stern sideways is when you put one in forward and one in reverse, at which point both props will rotate the same way.* From the photo CE Smith attached, the props on the Ocean are set up the same way---- counter-rotating.* So I doubt propwalk was a factor in the design and placement of the rudders.

*

I took the attached photo several years ago when we were being hauled out for a two-year bottom cleaning and repainting.* In fact, because our rudders are behind the props and cover almost the entire prop diameter, the propwash blasts the bottom paint off of them in less than two years, hence the beginning of barnacle growth we always find at haulout time, particularly along the trailing edges.


-- Edited by Marin on Wednesday 28th of July 2010 11:24:33 PM

 

[Nomad Willy]

Marin,I think the rudder thing is standard in the industry and probably for a very good reason.


I like the picture for another reason. It shows your GB is about 60% disp 40% planing. I was under the impression it was about 65% planing - 35% disp.


Looks like you were on the way out rather than in. Why would you haul with a bottom that clean. soon I'm going over to Craig and I'm going to pressure wash only relative to anti- fouling. I'll go on the grid in the spring and apply cheap "red Lead" * * .. and annually thereafter.


Eric


-- Edited by nomadwilly on Thursday 29th of July 2010 03:38:26 PM

 

[Marin]

I don't know about the percentages, all I know is that you can force a GB hull (the original ones, not the current ones) onto a semi-plane if you put enough power into them and are willing to burn 25 gallons or more an hour. Our boat at cruise power exceeds its displacement speed by perhaps a knot or so.

We had just been hauled and were being pressure washed when I took the photo. The bottom was prepped and painted during the following week. We do this every two years (it will be longer this time as I've been traveling for work a lot and we've had to keep postponing our haulout-- hopefully we'll get to it in October). We use an ablative paint and after two years given the amount we use the boat it's pretty much shot in terms of its effectiveness. Also we start getting barnacle buildup on our rudders as we approach two years so we haul to clean them up and the props and shafts, too.

 

[skipperguy]

Celebrated our "50th" anniversary last year with this boat. We've owned a 30-year old boat for 20 years. (Hence the "50th") GREAT BOAT !
Countless family vacations, river & Long Island Sound, Block Island, Martha's Vineyard etc trips. Twin Perkins - smokers when cold but clean and green when warmed up. In all that time, one stalled once. Spacious & stable. Buy it !

 

[7tiger7]

I would personally stay away from Ocean Yachts. I grew up on sport fishing boats, the good brands (Bertram, Viking, Hatt, Post, etc) are magnitudes of quality better than OY. Go on the sport fishing forums and see what those guys have to say about OY (ie, www.thehulltruth.com).
Their quality may have gotten better in the 90's and 2000's - I don't know, since I moved away from sport fishing boats then. But, the last time I was on an Ocean Yacht, I was shocked by how flimsy it was. It was in the early 90's, I was an official observer on a catch and release billfish tournament in Ft. Lauderdale. I was aboard a 65' or so OY, about 3-5 years old - and the thing was literally (LITERALLY) coming apart at the seams. Screw popping out, trim pieces falling off, couldn't close cabinet / salon doors because everything and every bulk head was "floating" inside the hull.
Also the closest I've come to dying on a boat was on that 65' OY, in a following sea. Had a wave catch up to us and broach us, and we got knocked down on our beam ends. The salon windows and flybridge hit the water, and we had a wave of green water poop the cockpit.

And, I can't say I subscribe to their hull designs. They are absolutely flat at the transom - no deadrise - sort of like a Carolina Skiff with a keel

BUT - If you go view this trawler, and it is in great shape, and you don't plan to run offshore with her in heavy seas, and it's a great deal - then I'd say go for it. Better to have a mint condition OY for a steal than a beat up and trashed Grand Banks for big $, in my opinion.

 

[markpierce]

Tiger, I'm wondering how stable a 3-to-4 deck, 40-footer-someting boat*is as shown in your Avatar.* More than two decks scares me.




-- Edited by markpierce on Monday 28th of March 2011 12:17:15 AM

 

[Nomad Willy]

In my opinion this boat is not a planing hull at all. I think it was at one time but the builders/designers modified it to be fuel efficient but they stopped short of putting smaller engines in it. And as far as seaworthy-ness goes I'll bet the original planing hull was less seaworthy. As I've said before one could make a 7 to 8 knot trawler out of most SD trawlers by reshaping the stern basically like this "Ocean" and installing much smaller engines. One could get a big fuel efficient boat very cheaply this way. I originally thought of doing this to a wood Chris Craft but they are too flat fwd.

 

[Basil]

Celebrated our "50th" anniversary last year with this boat. We've owned a 30-year old boat for 20 years. (Hence the "50th") GREAT BOAT !
Countless family vacations, river & Long Island Sound, Block Island, Martha's Vineyard etc trips. Twin Perkins - smokers when cold but clean and green when warmed up. In all that time, one stalled once. Spacious & stable. Buy it !

Skipperguy,

I'm looking at one of these, perhaps the same one. The boat's name Crews In. Might you be able to tell me anything about the vessel, assuming it is the same one? Any information you can furnish would be appreciated.

Thanks,
Basil

 

[Mknight1947]

My single screw Rawson trawler looks like this bottom and keel Daddyo

 

[Last Tango]

Here*are two pics of the hull. Also here is the link to *40+2 in Pensacola

http://www.yachtworld.com/core/listing/photoGallery.jsp?ro=1&slim=quicknull&r=2112035&checked_boats=2112035&rs=yachtworld.com&boat_id=2112035&back=/core/boats/1980/Ocean-40+2-Trawler-2112035/Pensacola/FL/United-States&boat_id=2112035


-- Edited by ce_smith on Tuesday 9th of March 2010 10:10:56 AM

I own her now and have under since 2012.

One of the absolutely best cruising vessels you could ask for, if you’re considering fuel consumption. She’s amazing. 2 gallons an hour at six knots.

She is not a very good seaboat as she has no ballast.

I’ve put 12,000 miles on it in eight years doing in land rivers.

Most of my prior stuff was on a sailboat that I owned for 39 years and sailed 70,000 miles on her, mainly deep water cruising. So the Trawler was a whole new game. And as I slid into my 60’s, I lived it and loved it.