Skipper wrote:
wrote:

I came across something that would have appealed to him 6 or 7 years
ago when he was in Seattle doing some shopping.

http://tinyurl.com/dkjym

So, for someone looking to cruise from the Gulf of Alaska to the Cortez
and avoid the return bash by diverting to Hawaii you'd recommend that
boat? Fascinating! Do you believe intended usage plays at all in boat
selection?


Absolutely. What do you figure from Mexico to HI, 2500 miles? Maybe a
bit less? (Depends where you set out from, of course) Right now, with
1000 gallons, she's supposed to have an 1800 mile range. Add a pair of
250 gallon fuel tanks and a watermaker you're set. 70,000 lb
displacement, deep draft, full displacement hull? This is what a true
seagoing boat looks like. Even Beebe would probably approve. You could
skip the additional fuel tanks if you're only going to coastal cruise
and willing to forget about Hawaii. If you had to, you could sail this
thing with a jib.

I was aboard this boat today, and she's built hell for stout. People
make Hawaii all the time in little mass-pro sailboats that couldn't
hold a candle to this trawler.

wrote:

http://tinyurl.com/dkjym

So, for someone looking to cruise from the Gulf of Alaska to the Cortez
and avoid the return bash by diverting to Hawaii you'd recommend that
boat? Fascinating! Do you believe intended usage plays at all in boat
selection?

Absolutely. What do you figure from Mexico to HI, 2500 miles? Maybe a
bit less? (Depends where you set out from, of course) Right now, with
1000 gallons, she's supposed to have an 1800 mile range. Add a pair of
250 gallon fuel tanks and a watermaker you're set. 70,000 lb
displacement, deep draft, full displacement hull? This is what a true
seagoing boat looks like.

To your eye maybe, but not mine. AND I suppose it does depend on what
your definition of is is. While the boat is pleasing to the eye, it is
not the best choice for the stated usage. It's a boat better suited for
inward passage cruising, IMO. Suspect you may have fallen victim to a
bit of stableblindness here, Chuck.

I'll mention just a few of the obvious problems with your choice of the
best boat for the stated usage:

1- Fuel costs for this vessel is about $200+ per day. That can add up
rather quickly on a voyage from Tracy Arm to Mazatlan. Sail might be the
more prudent choice.

2- I believe roll could well be a problem offshore with that boat's
unstablized rounded bottom.

3- Only having one (1) head on long voyages is more of risk than I'd
like to assume.

4- The boat is well short of the amenities needed for such a voyage.
Ground tackle also seems substandard for the intended usage. That
$225,000 asking would only be the starting point to equip this boat for
offshore passagemaking.

There are other shortcomings that would disqualify this boat for subject
passagemaking, but let me note it DOES have some very good things going
for it as a Northwaste boat. Dry stack, keel cooler, woodburner in the
master are a few of the attractions for someone doing your type of
boating.

--
Skipper

Skipper wrote:
wrote:

http://tinyurl.com/dkjym

So, for someone looking to cruise from the Gulf of Alaska to the Cortez
and avoid the return bash by diverting to Hawaii you'd recommend that
boat? Fascinating! Do you believe intended usage plays at all in boat
selection?

Absolutely. What do you figure from Mexico to HI, 2500 miles? Maybe a
bit less? (Depends where you set out from, of course) Right now, with
1000 gallons, she's supposed to have an 1800 mile range. Add a pair of
250 gallon fuel tanks and a watermaker you're set. 70,000 lb
displacement, deep draft, full displacement hull? This is what a true
seagoing boat looks like.

To your eye maybe, but not mine. AND I suppose it does depend on what
your definition of is is. While the boat is pleasing to the eye, it is
not the best choice for the stated usage. It's a boat better suited for
inward passage cruising, IMO. Suspect you may have fallen victim to a
bit of stableblindness here, Chuck.

I'll mention just a few of the obvious problems with your choice of the
best boat for the stated usage:

1- Fuel costs for this vessel is about $200+ per day. That can add up
rather quickly on a voyage from Tracy Arm to Mazatlan. Sail might be the
more prudent choice.

2- I believe roll could well be a problem offshore with that boat's
unstablized rounded bottom.

3- Only having one (1) head on long voyages is more of risk than I'd
like to assume.

4- The boat is well short of the amenities needed for such a voyage.
Ground tackle also seems substandard for the intended usage. That
$225,000 asking would only be the starting point to equip this boat for
offshore passagemaking.

There are other shortcomings that would disqualify this boat for subject
passagemaking, but let me note it DOES have some very good things going
for it as a Northwaste boat. Dry stack, keel cooler, woodburner in the
master are a few of the attractions for someone doing your type of
boating.

--
Skipper
Skipper,
Give us a link of your ideal boat within your price range.

--
Reggie
************************************************** *************

Q. What's the difference between a brown-noser and a ****-head?
A. Depth perception.
************************************************** *************

wrote:
http://tinyurl.com/dkjym


Thanks for the link, Chuck. Interesting boat, if it weren't
on the opposite coast I'd go take a look myself.


..... 70,000 lb
displacement, deep draft, full displacement hull? This is what a true
seagoing boat looks like.


That's not a boat, it's a ship.

Skipper wrote:
To your eye maybe, but not mine. AND I suppose it does depend on what
your definition of is is. While the boat is pleasing to the eye, it is
not the best choice for the stated usage. It's a boat better suited for
inward passage cruising, IMO. Suspect you may have fallen victim to a
bit of stableblindness here, Chuck.


???

Given reasonable structural integrity, that particular boat
looks quite seaworthy to my eye as well.

I'll mention just a few of the obvious problems with your choice of the
best boat for the stated usage:

1- Fuel costs for this vessel is about $200+ per day.

Uh huh. And in a ~50' 30 ton power vessel, what would you
expect for fuel consumption? Unless you're willing to go 5
knots it's very unlikely you'll do any better in any type hull.


.... Sail might be the
more prudent choice.


Yeah, but then you'd have to learn to sail.

2- I believe roll could well be a problem offshore with that boat's
unstablized rounded bottom.


It might be uncomfortable to a landlubber, but if the boat
is ballasted as stated, there is no question of it's
stability. I'd rather have a boat that rolled & had good
reserve stability that one that jerked & slammed, and might
flip bottom-up from a very shallow angle.


3- Only having one (1) head on long voyages is more of risk than I'd
like to assume.


Yeah many lives are lost at sea that way....

I suppose the issue of proper maintenance on the head would
never occur to you? What about the boat's other equipment,
like a single engine?

4- The boat is well short of the amenities needed for such a voyage.
Ground tackle also seems substandard for the intended usage. That
$225,000 asking would only be the starting point to equip this boat for
offshore passagemaking.


I think Chuck tried to make this point to you earlier when
you were griping that he couldn't find you a boat for your
desired price.



Reggie Smithers wrote:
Skipper,
Give us a link of your ideal boat within your price range.


What he said.

Regards
Doug King

DSK wrote:

Skipper wrote:

http://tinyurl.com/dkjym

To your eye maybe, but not mine. AND I suppose it does depend on what
your definition of is is. While the boat is pleasing to the eye, it is
not the best choice for the stated usage. It's a boat better suited for
inward passage cruising, IMO.

Given reasonable structural integrity, that particular boat
looks quite seaworthy to my eye.

The original spec was for safe and *comfortable* passage. I guarantee
excessive roll would be a problem in offshore seaways with that
hullform. That effects BOTH safe and comfortable passage. Yes,
stabilizers or vanes could mitigate the problem, but not as well as
sail. That low midships freeboard would also insure wet decks. And let's
not forget the starting point for this boat is $200,000+. When you add
safety gear, electronics, and other amenities required for offshore
passagemaking where do you see the costs to splash this boat?

I'll mention just a few of the obvious problems with your choice of the
best boat for the stated usage:

1- Fuel costs for this vessel is about $200+ per day.

Uh huh. And in a ~50' vessel, what would you
expect for fuel consumption?

Considerably higher than for a proper sailboat.

.... Sail might be the more prudent choice.

Yeah, but then you'd have to learn to sail.

Well then, we are always learnin'.

2- I believe roll could well be a problem offshore with that boat's
unstablized rounded bottom.

It might be uncomfortable to a landlubber, but if the boat
is ballasted as stated, there is no question of it's
stability. I'd rather have a boat that rolled & had good
reserve stability that one that jerked & slammed, and might
flip bottom-up from a very shallow angle.

Most prudent and experienced sailors would prefer less roll.

3- Only having one (1) head on long voyages is more of risk than I'd
like to assume.

Yeah many lives are lost at sea that way....

Believe you underestimate the risk here also.

--
Skipper

Given reasonable structural integrity, that particular boat
looks quite seaworthy to my eye.


Skipper wrote:
The original spec was for safe and *comfortable* passage. I guarantee
excessive roll would be a problem in offshore seaways with that
hullform.

I guarantee that
1- you could install a set of stabilizer fins on that
particular boat

2- any boat in a seaway is going to roll. If you can't stand
it, don't go to sea in a boat.


... That low midships freeboard would also insure wet decks.

And higher freeboard would do *what* exactly to the
stability & rolling?


.... And let's
not forget the starting point for this boat is $200,000+. When you add
safety gear, electronics, and other amenities required for offshore
passagemaking where do you see the costs to splash this boat?


That's the asking price, not the getting price... but
personally I'd expect to spend 10% of the boat's price on
commissioning it to my tastes, as a minimum, and budget a
lot more if the boat is poorly equipped.

Judging by the pics, it looks like this boat was at least
prepared for short range use, which is a good starting point.

OTOH what have you found on the market that is a
substantially better vessel at a substantially better price?



I'll mention just a few of the obvious problems with your choice of the
best boat for the stated usage:


1- Fuel costs for this vessel is about $200+ per day.



Uh huh. And in a ~50' vessel, what would you
expect for fuel consumption?


Considerably higher than for a proper sailboat.


And were you shopping for a sailboat? You've never mentioned
the slightest interest in sailing... that I saw, admittedly
I don't read even 1/10th of your posts.


.... Sail might be the more prudent choice.


Yeah, but then you'd have to learn to sail.


Well then, we are always learnin'.


Years back when you were looking for a passagemaker, did you
tell Chuck you wanted a sailboat? If so, I missed that part
of the story.

Another thing you might be interested to know is that
sailboats don't cost substantially less to operate over a
given period of time. You can look at several industry
studies on the subject. The common perception that sailors
are cheapskates is not backed up in fact.

DSK