On 3/17/2014 2:22 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/17/2014 1:52 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 13:25:10 -0400, H*a*r*r*o*l*d
wrote:

You might like one of these...I sure do.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3YokmT8Kft8

It has the look of a Bayliner.

===

It does, and it's single engine, not particularly desirable for close
quarters maneuvering with a high profile, flybridge design like that.
Once the wind catches you things get very dicey if you are near docks
and other boats.



The 34 does sorta have a Bayliner look to it, but I like some of their
other models.

Although single screw, the boat shown in the video had both bow and
stern thrusters which overcome some of the close quarter maneuvering
challenges. The single screw 36' Grand Banks we had was equipped with a
hydraulically powered stern thruster which was useful although it was
not particularly powerful. It was still fun learning "back and fill".

I understand that Beneteau boats have a very good reputation but I've
never been aboard one. I like this one though:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vWZwWXyQFcA


Here we go. Now I just need to find a one acre barge with grass that I
can tow for the horses.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfyzrmjaFZ4

On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 14:39:10 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Here we go. Now I just need to find a one acre barge with grass that I
can tow for the horses.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfyzrmjaFZ4

===

It looks like New England to Florida is about 4,000 gallons each way.
Let's hope the price of diesel doesn't get too much higher.

On 3/17/2014 4:09 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 14:39:10 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Here we go. Now I just need to find a one acre barge with grass that I
can tow for the horses.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfyzrmjaFZ4

===

It looks like New England to Florida is about 4,000 gallons each way.
Let's hope the price of diesel doesn't get too much higher.



I hear you.

I was a little surprised at the fuel burn of the 52' Beneteau.

With two 600hp Cummins diesels it burns 27 GPH at 14 knots and 60 GPH
at 24.7 knots.

The 52' Navigator I had with two, 375 hp Volvo diesels burned 25-26 GPH
at 19 knots. It topped out at about the same (24 knots with a clean
hull) as the Beneteau but I don't remember what the burn rate was.
One of Navigator's claims to fame is a very fuel efficient hull, but
still that's quite a difference in hp.

The Beneteau must be a much heavier boat.

On 3/17/14, 4:28 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/17/2014 4:09 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 14:39:10 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Here we go. Now I just need to find a one acre barge with grass that I
can tow for the horses.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfyzrmjaFZ4

===

It looks like New England to Florida is about 4,000 gallons each way.
Let's hope the price of diesel doesn't get too much higher.



I hear you.

I was a little surprised at the fuel burn of the 52' Beneteau.

With two 600hp Cummins diesels it burns 27 GPH at 14 knots and 60 GPH
at 24.7 knots.

The 52' Navigator I had with two, 375 hp Volvo diesels burned 25-26 GPH
at 19 knots. It topped out at about the same (24 knots with a clean
hull) as the Beneteau but I don't remember what the burn rate was.
One of Navigator's claims to fame is a very fuel efficient hull, but
still that's quite a difference in hp.

The Beneteau must be a much heavier boat.


The 52' Beneteau has been replaced by a 50-footer with IPS drives.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gO9wBpzIkjw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3HFIgkxo-E


Really nice boats that take advantage of modern design developments.

On 3/17/2014 5:09 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 3/17/14, 4:28 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/17/2014 4:09 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 14:39:10 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Here we go. Now I just need to find a one acre barge with grass that I
can tow for the horses.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfyzrmjaFZ4

===

It looks like New England to Florida is about 4,000 gallons each way.
Let's hope the price of diesel doesn't get too much higher.



I hear you.

I was a little surprised at the fuel burn of the 52' Beneteau.

With two 600hp Cummins diesels it burns 27 GPH at 14 knots and 60 GPH
at 24.7 knots.

The 52' Navigator I had with two, 375 hp Volvo diesels burned 25-26 GPH
at 19 knots. It topped out at about the same (24 knots with a clean
hull) as the Beneteau but I don't remember what the burn rate was.
One of Navigator's claims to fame is a very fuel efficient hull, but
still that's quite a difference in hp.

The Beneteau must be a much heavier boat.


The 52' Beneteau has been replaced by a 50-footer with IPS drives.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gO9wBpzIkjw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3HFIgkxo-E


Really nice boats that take advantage of modern design developments.


I don't know much about the "Pod" drives. I recall when Volvo made a
big deal about them when they introduced their version but you don't
really hear much about them anymore.

From what I understand, the biggest advantage was being able to move
the engines back further towards the stern, freeing up more cabin space.
There are claims to better fuel economy and easier maneuvering in close
spaces. The negatives are complexity, expensive to repair and, in the
event of hitting something, the risk of tearing a big hole in the bottom
of the boat. That can happen with props and rudders also, but if a
rudder shaft starts leaking it's easier to deal with, I think.

Being a Luddite, I like conventional props and rudders. Once you learn
how to use them, maneuvering isn't a big deal, especially with twins.

On 3/17/14, 6:40 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/17/2014 5:09 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 3/17/14, 4:28 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/17/2014 4:09 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 14:39:10 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Here we go. Now I just need to find a one acre barge with grass
that I
can tow for the horses.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfyzrmjaFZ4

===

It looks like New England to Florida is about 4,000 gallons each way.
Let's hope the price of diesel doesn't get too much higher.



I hear you.

I was a little surprised at the fuel burn of the 52' Beneteau.

With two 600hp Cummins diesels it burns 27 GPH at 14 knots and 60 GPH
at 24.7 knots.

The 52' Navigator I had with two, 375 hp Volvo diesels burned 25-26 GPH
at 19 knots. It topped out at about the same (24 knots with a clean
hull) as the Beneteau but I don't remember what the burn rate was.
One of Navigator's claims to fame is a very fuel efficient hull, but
still that's quite a difference in hp.

The Beneteau must be a much heavier boat.


The 52' Beneteau has been replaced by a 50-footer with IPS drives.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gO9wBpzIkjw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3HFIgkxo-E


Really nice boats that take advantage of modern design developments.


I don't know much about the "Pod" drives. I recall when Volvo made a
big deal about them when they introduced their version but you don't
really hear much about them anymore.

From what I understand, the biggest advantage was being able to move
the engines back further towards the stern, freeing up more cabin space.
There are claims to better fuel economy and easier maneuvering in close
spaces. The negatives are complexity, expensive to repair and, in the
event of hitting something, the risk of tearing a big hole in the bottom
of the boat. That can happen with props and rudders also, but if a
rudder shaft starts leaking it's easier to deal with, I think.

Being a Luddite, I like conventional props and rudders. Once you learn
how to use them, maneuvering isn't a big deal, especially with twins.


I'm not a fan of pod drives for the reasons you mention. One of the
"discovery" type channels had a show on the replacement and repair of
one of the pod drives on a huge commercial ship, and the complexity of
it compared to replacing a conventional shaft or prop was just incredible.

Also, the waters in Chesapeake Bay are very thin even way offshore in
many places. Thin enough so that I found myself in a mud bank more than
once with my smaller outboard boats, and the prop churning up muck, and
I was at least a half mile offshore. Now, an inboard is going to draw
more water and be harder to dislodge, but a pod drive? That's got to be
a serious challenge.

On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 18:47:55 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 3/17/14, 6:40 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/17/2014 5:09 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 3/17/14, 4:28 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/17/2014 4:09 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 14:39:10 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Here we go. Now I just need to find a one acre barge with grass
that I
can tow for the horses.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfyzrmjaFZ4

===

It looks like New England to Florida is about 4,000 gallons each way.
Let's hope the price of diesel doesn't get too much higher.



I hear you.

I was a little surprised at the fuel burn of the 52' Beneteau.

With two 600hp Cummins diesels it burns 27 GPH at 14 knots and 60 GPH
at 24.7 knots.

The 52' Navigator I had with two, 375 hp Volvo diesels burned 25-26 GPH
at 19 knots. It topped out at about the same (24 knots with a clean
hull) as the Beneteau but I don't remember what the burn rate was.
One of Navigator's claims to fame is a very fuel efficient hull, but
still that's quite a difference in hp.

The Beneteau must be a much heavier boat.


The 52' Beneteau has been replaced by a 50-footer with IPS drives.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gO9wBpzIkjw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3HFIgkxo-E


Really nice boats that take advantage of modern design developments.


I don't know much about the "Pod" drives. I recall when Volvo made a
big deal about them when they introduced their version but you don't
really hear much about them anymore.

From what I understand, the biggest advantage was being able to move
the engines back further towards the stern, freeing up more cabin space.
There are claims to better fuel economy and easier maneuvering in close
spaces. The negatives are complexity, expensive to repair and, in the
event of hitting something, the risk of tearing a big hole in the bottom
of the boat. That can happen with props and rudders also, but if a
rudder shaft starts leaking it's easier to deal with, I think.

Being a Luddite, I like conventional props and rudders. Once you learn
how to use them, maneuvering isn't a big deal, especially with twins.


I'm not a fan of pod drives for the reasons you mention. One of the
"discovery" type channels had a show on the replacement and repair of
one of the pod drives on a huge commercial ship, and the complexity of
it compared to replacing a conventional shaft or prop was just incredible.

Also, the waters in Chesapeake Bay are very thin even way offshore in
many places. Thin enough so that I found myself in a mud bank more than
once with my smaller outboard boats, and the prop churning up muck, and
I was at least a half mile offshore. Now, an inboard is going to draw
more water and be harder to dislodge, but a pod drive? That's got to be
a serious challenge.

That's what happens when you try to take a shortcut to the Bay coming out of the Deale Harbor. The
Long Bar gets a lot of folks when the tides out a bit.

On 3/17/2014 5:07 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 16:09:03 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 14:39:10 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Here we go. Now I just need to find a one acre barge with grass that I
can tow for the horses.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfyzrmjaFZ4

===

It looks like New England to Florida is about 4,000 gallons each way.
Let's hope the price of diesel doesn't get too much higher.

It that point you could just charter one of those "executive" 737s and
still save money.



When I took the Navigator from MA to Florida my fuel expense was about
$2,800. (one way) Fuel prices probably averaged about $1.55 per gal
back then.

Figure about a 1600 mile trip, that's about 1,866 gallons burned.
(actually less because I still had fuel upon arrival).

I don't know what diesel goes for at marinas now, but it must be at
least $4.00/gal or more. So, today that trip would cost at least $7,500.

The Navigator was a nice compromise between cruising speed and fuel
economy. It would cruise all day at 17-19 knots which is fast enough to
get you there in a reasonable time and it didn't beat you up in rough
water. The Egg Harbor was much faster but most of the time you
couldn't use it's speed due to sea conditions.

On 3/17/14, 7:03 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/17/2014 5:07 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 16:09:03 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 14:39:10 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Here we go. Now I just need to find a one acre barge with grass that I
can tow for the horses.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfyzrmjaFZ4

===

It looks like New England to Florida is about 4,000 gallons each way.
Let's hope the price of diesel doesn't get too much higher.

It that point you could just charter one of those "executive" 737s and
still save money.



When I took the Navigator from MA to Florida my fuel expense was about
$2,800. (one way) Fuel prices probably averaged about $1.55 per gal
back then.

Figure about a 1600 mile trip, that's about 1,866 gallons burned.
(actually less because I still had fuel upon arrival).

I don't know what diesel goes for at marinas now, but it must be at
least $4.00/gal or more. So, today that trip would cost at least $7,500.

The Navigator was a nice compromise between cruising speed and fuel
economy. It would cruise all day at 17-19 knots which is fast enough to
get you there in a reasonable time and it didn't beat you up in rough
water. The Egg Harbor was much faster but most of the time you
couldn't use it's speed due to sea conditions.






About $3.65 to $4.04 around here.

Example:


Annapolis Landing Marina

Annapolis, MD
Annapolis Harbor, Back Creek
(410) 263-0090


Diesel Price: $3.679
Comments: Tax included.
Gas Price: $3.779
Tax Rate: -
Discounts: WE'RE OPEN WEDNESDAY THROUGH SUNDAY 9:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M.
CLOSED MONDAY AND TUESDAY .10/gallon for CASH or CHECK Check wed site
www.annapolismarina.com for fuel prices Volume discounts-500 gallons or
more .10/gallon
Last Update: Mar 13, 2014