RCE wrote:
..

According to him, 6000 hours on these engines has just about broken them in.
Most problems are associated with the bolt-ons.


RCE

These engines can run 10's of thousands of hours in applications like
24/7 power generators, and 6000 hours wouldn't be unusual for a
commercial fish boat. Due to the differeneces in frequency of
operation, long down times with dirty oil festering in the crankcase,
etc etc etc it would be really unusual to realize a commercial duty
longevity in a pleasure boat application.

Just because some people will live to be 105 doesn't mean that every 75
year old should absolutely count on doing so. :-)

In the case of this DeFever, the price is depressed in part due to a
perceived "risk" of a 6000 hour boat. Buyers are going to be skeptical,
and rightly so. All the people who say, "Don't worry, she's got years
and years and years left in her" will do nothing more then express
surprise when something does break loose and it is the new owner who
will be footing the entire bill. Let's say nothing major went wrong,
jps ran the boat for 10 years and then decided to sell a 38 year old
boat with 7400 engine hours.........good luck!

The good news with this boat is that if it's available for $75k, $80k,
or even up to the $100k
asking price there's a potential (depending on the condition of other
systems and cosmetics) for the value to increase by about as much as it
would take to repower. Most of the time a buyer going into a boat that
needs to be repowered doesn't expect that to be the case and only
discovers after it's too late that he needs to spend another big pile
of dough.
My impression is that the market has discounted this boat for
something- and the most obvious suspect without an inspection has to be
the engine hours. The boat may not be sale-proof at $100k, but up in
the middle huns where you find boats of similar age with half the
engine hours it probably is. We can be pretty sure the seller didn't
start off at $100k, and that the current pricing is the latest step in
a series of measures (that included moving the boat from FLA to the PAC
NW?) to try to find the "spot" in the marketplace where the perceived
value at least slightly exceeds the price demanded and it becomes more
likely that a buyer will appear.

jps wrote:
In article .com,
says...


Without knowing anything particularly about the condition of the
vessel; if the hull is sound and the cosmetics aren't just completely
shot she might be an OK buy at $100k. Probably not a bona fide "steal",
however, unless it's a lot fresher and cleaner than it appears in the
photos and it's major sale-proofing is solely the result of some very
high engine hours. Unless there is some well documented major overhaul
work and/or unless Norm from Pat's Marine Engines surveys the stink out
of the engines and pronounces them in good shape I would figure on a
repower, for sure. (Just because some people will live to be 105
doesn't mean we should all expect to). Figure $50k for a rough number,
(if you can get a decent deal somewhere) but get a more detailed
estimate before finalizing an offer. The listing represents the boat as
a displacement, rather than a semi-displacement hull which would make
it somewhat unsual (ergo the paravanes). There wouldn't be any reason
to go for a lot more power than the current 120's, as you could double
the HP, maybe triple the fuel consumption and perhaps get another knot
or two as a result (maybe).

With 6000 hours, there's a good chance this has been a charter boat.

My impresssion from the listing and without inspecting the boat, is
that it is probably something of a fixer-upper. If you ultimately wind
up with $200k in the boat, you could have bought something a lot newer
(but not with new engines) in the same size category for that same
money. For somebody who wants to wind up with a freshly repowered,
cosmetically resurrected boat for something around $200k, a boat like I
envision this DeFever to be could be a good starting point *if it is
structurally sound*. If she needs a total exterior paint job as well
as a repower, {see Florida UV damage}, you will be in the game well in
excess of the $200k. If you've got stringers, fuel tanks, or house rot
to deal with you will be in the game probably way too much based on
what you'll have when done. On the other hand, if the boat is as tired
looking as the poor quality exterior photo suggests, you could make a
relatively modest investment, just boat around cheap and dirty for a
while, cross your fingers and hope the machinery doesn't come akimbo.
If something major conks out, you could always take a $40-50k bath and
just walk away- but I would never really personally recommend taking
the minimalist approach or trusting engines in less than top condition.


Arthur DeFever rather likely supervised the layup and construction of
this vessel, but it is still a Taiwan trawler with all of the
associated "isms". :-)

Call Brent Whiteman at Oviatt if you're seriously interested and you
can use my name if you'd care to. Brent and I worked together at
another brokerage in the past. He'll give you a no BS account of the
boat. I wouldn't worry too much about the broker in FLA with the lower
listing price. He may not actually have a legitimate listing on the
boat (could be just fishing for leads with another broker's listing-
maybe not- I don't know) but if the sellers will really accept $99k
presented by a broker in FLA they would certainly take the same price
presented by a broker in Seattle. There's a chance that the boat was
for sale for a while in FLA at $99k, didn't sell, and has been trucked
to the Pacific NW where trawlers are a much hotter commodity than they
are in FLA. The seller may be trying to recover some of the transport
costs as well as start a bit higher due to the market differential in
the PNW. Since you're in Seattle, talk to Oviatt.

I emailed the Florida broker last night, he referred me to Niel at
Oviatt and Niel just emailed me saying that he's changing the price on
the website.

The precipitous drop in price would likely indicate the boat needs new
engines.

jps

Niel is the local manager for Oviatt, and a very good guy. If you delve
into this any deeper, Neil is an excellent person to deal with. I've
known Brent longer than Niel, but I wouldn't hesitate to recommend Niel
as well.

In article .com,
says...

RCE wrote:
.

According to him, 6000 hours on these engines has just about broken them in.
Most problems are associated with the bolt-ons.


RCE

These engines can run 10's of thousands of hours in applications like
24/7 power generators, and 6000 hours wouldn't be unusual for a
commercial fish boat. Due to the differeneces in frequency of
operation, long down times with dirty oil festering in the crankcase,
etc etc etc it would be really unusual to realize a commercial duty
longevity in a pleasure boat application.

Just because some people will live to be 105 doesn't mean that every 75
year old should absolutely count on doing so. :-)

In the case of this DeFever, the price is depressed in part due to a
perceived "risk" of a 6000 hour boat. Buyers are going to be skeptical,
and rightly so. All the people who say, "Don't worry, she's got years
and years and years left in her" will do nothing more then express
surprise when something does break loose and it is the new owner who
will be footing the entire bill. Let's say nothing major went wrong,
jps ran the boat for 10 years and then decided to sell a 38 year old
boat with 7400 engine hours.........good luck!

The good news with this boat is that if it's available for $75k, $80k,
or even up to the $100k
asking price there's a potential (depending on the condition of other
systems and cosmetics) for the value to increase by about as much as it
would take to repower. Most of the time a buyer going into a boat that
needs to be repowered doesn't expect that to be the case and only
discovers after it's too late that he needs to spend another big pile
of dough.
My impression is that the market has discounted this boat for
something- and the most obvious suspect without an inspection has to be
the engine hours. The boat may not be sale-proof at $100k, but up in
the middle huns where you find boats of similar age with half the
engine hours it probably is. We can be pretty sure the seller didn't
start off at $100k, and that the current pricing is the latest step in
a series of measures (that included moving the boat from FLA to the PAC
NW?) to try to find the "spot" in the marketplace where the perceived
value at least slightly exceeds the price demanded and it becomes more
likely that a buyer will appear.

Completely agree. If the rest of the boat is in decent condition and
engine replacement is the only big issue, the boat could still be had at
a reasonable value with fresh engines. Obviously, there's lots else
that can require attention in a 25+ year old boat.

I'm not yet convinced that another sundeck or flush deck style vessel is
in order, given the aft line handling and boarding challenges they
present.

The length is about right but I'm pretty convinced the next vessel will
have a cockpit along with diesel engines.

jps

RCE wrote:
.

According to him, 6000 hours on these engines has just about broken them in.
Most problems are associated with the bolt-ons.



And poor maintenance.
But you're right, if these engines haven't been abused then
6k hours is no problem at all. An oil analysis would tell
much of the story quickly and cheaply; in the absence of at
least that much data then specualting about whether it needs
repowering is kind of pointless.

The 120 is my least favorite Lehman, it's big & noisy and
has the older style injector pump that needs regular user
service. We have the Lehman 135 which is a jewel of an
engine. We have 2200 hours and the engine's biggest problem
is that it doesn't get run enough. With the care that I take
of it (well within the skills of the average person) I
expect that they will get to 10k hours with no major work


says...
... In the case of this DeFever, the price is depressed in part due to a
perceived "risk" of a 6000 hour boat. Buyers are going to be skeptical,
and rightly so.

It's not the engines they should be skeptical of, it's the
rest of the boat.

... All the people who say, "Don't worry, she's got years
and years and years left in her" will do nothing more then express
surprise when something does break loose and it is the new owner who
will be footing the entire bill. Let's say nothing major went wrong,
jps ran the boat for 10 years and then decided to sell a 38 year old
boat with 7400 engine hours.........good luck!


You can sell anything if the price is right... and *that* is
the reason for the price depression IMHO, plus the common
perception that a boat like this will be a fuel hog.



My impression is that the market has discounted this boat for
something- and the most obvious suspect without an inspection has to be
the engine hours. The boat may not be sale-proof at $100k, but up in
the middle huns where you find boats of similar age with half the
engine hours it probably is. We can be pretty sure the seller didn't
start off at $100k, and that the current pricing is the latest step in
a series of measures (that included moving the boat from FLA to the PAC
NW?) to try to find the "spot" in the marketplace where the perceived
value at least slightly exceeds the price demanded and it becomes more
likely that a buyer will appear.


I also wonder if it's just beat-up looking and not
particularly well equipped. It could be a "bad first
impression" boat.

jps wrote:
Completely agree. If the rest of the boat is in decent condition and
engine replacement is the only big issue, the boat could still be had at
a reasonable value with fresh engines. Obviously, there's lots else
that can require attention in a 25+ year old boat.


Very much so. In fact if the figures being quoted on engine
replacement are accurate, you can count on spending at least
much on other stuff the boat will need. Shucks, a good set
of dock lines for this boat will cost a couple hundred. New
cushions? Canvas? Ground tackle? Battery bank & smart
charger? Inverter (plus some professional wiring work)?

The most recent addition we made to our boat is a bow
thruster, which I installed myself and am very pleased with.
It cost in the neighborhood of 4 boat units; getting it
"professionally" installed would have cost twice that. Of
course, a boat with twins won't need a bow thruster
(actually we didn't really "need" one) but you get the idea.


I'm not yet convinced that another sundeck or flush deck style vessel is
in order, given the aft line handling and boarding challenges they
present.

The length is about right but I'm pretty convinced the next vessel will
have a cockpit along with diesel engines.


Why would you not have diesels in a heavy inboard-powered
vessel?

There is an excellent book which I highly recommend on
weighing the factors in choosing a cruising power boat:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/sit...935312-9318226

Fair Skies- Doug King

In article ,
says...
RCE wrote:
.

According to him, 6000 hours on these engines has just about broken them in.
Most problems are associated with the bolt-ons.



And poor maintenance.
But you're right, if these engines haven't been abused then
6k hours is no problem at all. An oil analysis would tell
much of the story quickly and cheaply; in the absence of at
least that much data then specualting about whether it needs
repowering is kind of pointless.

Agreed.

The 120 is my least favorite Lehman, it's big & noisy and
has the older style injector pump that needs regular user
service. We have the Lehman 135 which is a jewel of an
engine. We have 2200 hours and the engine's biggest problem
is that it doesn't get run enough. With the care that I take
of it (well within the skills of the average person) I
expect that they will get to 10k hours with no major work

This is my first foray into diesel engines. I have a long relationship
with gas engines and figured that'd serve me well in keeping costs down.
It proved to be true. The big block Tolly I bought was $30K less than a
comparably equipped diesel model and I wasn't going to (and didn't)
cruise enough to justify the additional cost. Now, with fuel nearly 3X
the price, that's no longer an option.

says...
... In the case of this DeFever, the price is depressed in part due to a
perceived "risk" of a 6000 hour boat. Buyers are going to be skeptical,
and rightly so.

It's not the engines they should be skeptical of, it's the
rest of the boat.

I'm skeptical of the whole boat, no matter the age, care, etc. One has
to be thorough when making these sorts of decisions.

... All the people who say, "Don't worry, she's got years
and years and years left in her" will do nothing more then express
surprise when something does break loose and it is the new owner who
will be footing the entire bill. Let's say nothing major went wrong,
jps ran the boat for 10 years and then decided to sell a 38 year old
boat with 7400 engine hours.........good luck!


You can sell anything if the price is right... and *that* is
the reason for the price depression IMHO, plus the common
perception that a boat like this will be a fuel hog.

Please expound. Engine model? Hull design? Twins?

My impression is that the market has discounted this boat for
something- and the most obvious suspect without an inspection has to be
the engine hours. The boat may not be sale-proof at $100k, but up in
the middle huns where you find boats of similar age with half the
engine hours it probably is. We can be pretty sure the seller didn't
start off at $100k, and that the current pricing is the latest step in
a series of measures (that included moving the boat from FLA to the PAC
NW?) to try to find the "spot" in the marketplace where the perceived
value at least slightly exceeds the price demanded and it becomes more
likely that a buyer will appear.


I also wonder if it's just beat-up looking and not
particularly well equipped. It could be a "bad first
impression" boat.

Probably needs cosmetic things. The equipment list is extensive.

jps wrote:
Completely agree. If the rest of the boat is in decent condition and
engine replacement is the only big issue, the boat could still be had at
a reasonable value with fresh engines. Obviously, there's lots else
that can require attention in a 25+ year old boat.


Very much so. In fact if the figures being quoted on engine
replacement are accurate, you can count on spending at least
much on other stuff the boat will need. Shucks, a good set
of dock lines for this boat will cost a couple hundred. New
cushions? Canvas? Ground tackle? Battery bank & smart
charger? Inverter (plus some professional wiring work)?

I've been through all of the above. The first investment I made on the
Tolly was $3K in a professionally installed inverter/charger with an
interface. The rest of the stuff comes from the Tolly.

The most recent addition we made to our boat is a bow
thruster, which I installed myself and am very pleased with.
It cost in the neighborhood of 4 boat units; getting it
"professionally" installed would have cost twice that. Of
course, a boat with twins won't need a bow thruster
(actually we didn't really "need" one) but you get the idea.


I'm not yet convinced that another sundeck or flush deck style vessel is
in order, given the aft line handling and boarding challenges they
present.

The length is about right but I'm pretty convinced the next vessel will
have a cockpit along with diesel engines.


Why would you not have diesels in a heavy inboard-powered
vessel?

As stated above. Difference in initial cost, deep knowledge of gas
engines, fuel costs not being the same factor. The Tolly gets approx.
1nm/gal at an easy cruise of 2650-2700 rpm with its BB 454s.

There is an excellent book which I highly recommend on
weighing the factors in choosing a cruising power boat:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/sit...935312-9318226

Great book. Have recommended it to many.

I met with Chuck before buying the Tolly in 2000. In fact, he showed me
a couple of examples but I ended up finding the one I wanted in a
boathouse in Canada.

After going through the process of considering how, where, how many,
etc. I thought I'd made a good decision. If fuel prices would've stayed
reasonable, my decision still would have held. Oh well.

Fair Skies- Doug King

jps

jps wrote:
This is my first foray into diesel engines. I have a long relationship
with gas engines and figured that'd serve me well in keeping costs down.
It proved to be true.

Sure. Gas engines are more power for the weight but they
don't last as long and they don't get the fuel economy. The
savings of a gas engine goes away when you buy a new one.

I wonder if this familiarity with gas engines is why you
think a diesel is prime for replacement at 6k hours? Of
course you're very sensible to be concerned about the
condition of the engine(s) when shopping for a boat, no
matter what type.

... The big block Tolly I bought was $30K less than a
comparably equipped diesel model and I wasn't going to (and didn't)
cruise enough to justify the additional cost. Now, with fuel nearly 3X
the price, that's no longer an option.


Yep, changed the equation for considering repowering gas, too.




I'm skeptical of the whole boat, no matter the age, care, etc. One has
to be thorough when making these sorts of decisions.


Which is only right & smart... even with good care stuff on
boats tends to break down.



....plus the common
perception that a boat like this will be a fuel hog.


Please expound. Engine model? Hull design? Twins?


Combination of size, hull design, twins. This is a heavy
boat, not a slippery shape.


I also wonder if it's just beat-up looking and not
particularly well equipped. It could be a "bad first
impression" boat.


Probably needs cosmetic things. The equipment list is extensive.


And should be regarded in the same sceptical slant as the
engines. Was the equipment chosen well for the service, or
is it undersized (or skimpy in some other spec)? Was it
installed correctly? When my wife & I were boat shopping,
about half the boats we looked at had very fancy
charger/inverters & monitors that were fried (probably
within moments of when first turned on) and inoperable, with
installation problems that were obvious with very nominal
inspection.

For example, the air conditioner on our boat worked very
poorly until I ferreted out 3 problems with the way it was
installed... all of which were clearly spelled out in the
manual. Now it functions pretty well but it took me a couple
days worth of detective work. We got lucky on that one.

It can be satisfying work to replace/upgrade old boat
equipment, but it's an expensive hobby and it eats into your
cruising time.



Why would you not have diesels in a heavy inboard-powered
vessel?


As stated above. Difference in initial cost, deep knowledge of gas
engines, fuel costs not being the same factor. The Tolly gets approx.
1nm/gal at an easy cruise of 2650-2700 rpm with its BB 454s.


At what speed? What's the boat's displacement?

We burn approx a gallon every 3 ~ 5 nm but we're going
pretty slow (8 knots or less) in a ~10 ton 36 footer.



I met with Chuck before buying the Tolly in 2000. In fact, he showed me
a couple of examples but I ended up finding the one I wanted in a
boathouse in Canada.

After going through the process of considering how, where, how many,
etc. I thought I'd made a good decision. If fuel prices would've stayed
reasonable, my decision still would have held. Oh well.


You could always repower that Tolly with diesels. It's been
done, and brings some benefits like greater range.

Heck if you're really worried about fuel prices, get a sailboat!


Fair Skies
Doug King

In article ,
says...
jps wrote:

Please expound. Engine model? Hull design? Twins?


Combination of size, hull design, twins. This is a heavy
boat, not a slippery shape.

Hull speed is hull speed, no?

It can be satisfying work to replace/upgrade old boat
equipment, but it's an expensive hobby and it eats into your
cruising time.

Cruising is just working on your boat in exotic locations. Why the hell
would you want to own a boat if you didn't like working on it?

My bliss is in working on things. Boats are just about the coolest
things to work on that I can think of (or the grammatically correct "of
which I can think" but it just doesn't sound right in context).

As stated above. Difference in initial cost, deep knowledge of gas
engines, fuel costs not being the same factor. The Tolly gets approx.
1nm/gal at an easy cruise of 2650-2700 rpm with its BB 454s.


At what speed? What's the boat's displacement?

12 kts approx.

We burn approx a gallon every 3 ~ 5 nm but we're going
pretty slow (8 knots or less) in a ~10 ton 36 footer.

Single screw?

I met with Chuck before buying the Tolly in 2000. In fact, he showed me
a couple of examples but I ended up finding the one I wanted in a
boathouse in Canada.

After going through the process of considering how, where, how many,
etc. I thought I'd made a good decision. If fuel prices would've stayed
reasonable, my decision still would have held. Oh well.


You could always repower that Tolly with diesels. It's been
done, and brings some benefits like greater range.

Thought about it but, if I did it I'd pick up one of the 44' Tollys with
the cockpit. They delivered quite a few with gas engines but they were
set up to take either gas or diesel. Once the customer made a decision,
they'd drop in one or the other...

Heck if you're really worried about fuel prices, get a sailboat!


Believe me, if I had any inclination towards sailing, I'd be there in a
heartbeat. Grew up a stinkpotter. Like going out in good weather.
Don't understand being excited about ****y, windy weather. That's the
time to be comfortably warm and watching mother nature from indoors at a
secure anchorage or dock.

jps

Combination of size, hull design, twins. This is a heavy
boat, not a slippery shape.


jps wrote:
Hull speed is hull speed, no?


No.

Displacement and hull shape counts for a lot.



It can be satisfying work to replace/upgrade old boat
equipment, but it's an expensive hobby and it eats into your
cruising time.


Cruising is just working on your boat in exotic locations. Why the hell
would you want to own a boat if you didn't like working on it?

My bliss is in working on things. Boats are just about the coolest
things to work on that I can think of (or the grammatically correct "of
which I can think" but it just doesn't sound right in context).


Oh, I like working on my boat just fine. I've had enough of
it at the moment, and not enough of riding around in it.

Spending weeks & weeks of time and thousands of dollars
fixing something that ain't broke is trending away from
"hobby" and closer to "mental illness."



As stated above. Difference in initial cost, deep knowledge of gas
engines, fuel costs not being the same factor. The Tolly gets approx.
1nm/gal at an easy cruise of 2650-2700 rpm with its BB 454s.


At what speed? What's the boat's displacement?


12 kts approx.

Hmmm, I pictured you going faster. But that's not bad.


We burn approx a gallon every 3 ~ 5 nm but we're going
pretty slow (8 knots or less) in a ~10 ton 36 footer.


Single screw?


Yes. More fuel efficient, less maintenance.




I met with Chuck before buying the Tolly in 2000. In fact, he showed me
a couple of examples but I ended up finding the one I wanted in a
boathouse in Canada.

After going through the process of considering how, where, how many,
etc. I thought I'd made a good decision. If fuel prices would've stayed
reasonable, my decision still would have held. Oh well.


You could always repower that Tolly with diesels. It's been
done, and brings some benefits like greater range.


Thought about it but, if I did it I'd pick up one of the 44' Tollys with
the cockpit. They delivered quite a few with gas engines but they were
set up to take either gas or diesel. Once the customer made a decision,
they'd drop in one or the other...


Nice boats. There used to be one at our marina.


Heck if you're really worried about fuel prices, get a sailboat!



Believe me, if I had any inclination towards sailing, I'd be there in a
heartbeat. Grew up a stinkpotter. Like going out in good weather.
Don't understand being excited about ****y, windy weather. That's the
time to be comfortably warm and watching mother nature from indoors at a
secure anchorage or dock.


Windy, yes. Hell yes! ****y?

"Bad weather" is relative. I had a blast in 30 knot winds
and pretty big waves. In a power boat it would have been no
fun at all... couldn't go as fast, for one thing!

DSK

In article ,
says...
Combination of size, hull design, twins. This is a heavy
boat, not a slippery shape.


jps wrote:
Hull speed is hull speed, no?


No.

Displacement and hull shape counts for a lot.

Yes, of course. Don't know what I was thinking...evidently I weren't.

It can be satisfying work to replace/upgrade old boat
equipment, but it's an expensive hobby and it eats into your
cruising time.


Cruising is just working on your boat in exotic locations. Why the hell
would you want to own a boat if you didn't like working on it?

My bliss is in working on things. Boats are just about the coolest
things to work on that I can think of (or the grammatically correct "of
which I can think" but it just doesn't sound right in context).


Oh, I like working on my boat just fine. I've had enough of
it at the moment, and not enough of riding around in it.

Spending weeks & weeks of time and thousands of dollars
fixing something that ain't broke is trending away from
"hobby" and closer to "mental illness."

I don't go there. If it ain't broke and it's expensive in either time
or BUs, call it good.

When there's nothing to worry about, I still like tinkering with smaller
things to improve them.

As stated above. Difference in initial cost, deep knowledge of gas
engines, fuel costs not being the same factor. The Tolly gets approx.
1nm/gal at an easy cruise of 2650-2700 rpm with its BB 454s.


At what speed? What's the boat's displacement?


12 kts approx.

Hmmm, I pictured you going faster. But that's not bad.

It's just enough to maintain plane. 12 kts is plenty fast to cover our
cruising area, even w/rambunctious kids.

We burn approx a gallon every 3 ~ 5 nm but we're going
pretty slow (8 knots or less) in a ~10 ton 36 footer.


Single screw?


Yes. More fuel efficient, less maintenance.

Are you concerned about get-home power in the event of a failure?

I met with Chuck before buying the Tolly in 2000. In fact, he showed me
a couple of examples but I ended up finding the one I wanted in a
boathouse in Canada.

After going through the process of considering how, where, how many,
etc. I thought I'd made a good decision. If fuel prices would've stayed
reasonable, my decision still would have held. Oh well.


You could always repower that Tolly with diesels. It's been
done, and brings some benefits like greater range.


Thought about it but, if I did it I'd pick up one of the 44' Tollys with
the cockpit. They delivered quite a few with gas engines but they were
set up to take either gas or diesel. Once the customer made a decision,
they'd drop in one or the other...


Nice boats. There used to be one at our marina.

Unless something comes along that woos me away, that's my objective at
this point. I'd like to fine one w/gas or one cheap w/diesels. There's
a few different configurations in the 43 to 48 ft range that'd all be
acceptable. I love Tolly's versions of the Monk-designed boat,
especially the 44. I started salivating over earlier models when still
a teenager.

After hundreds of hours invested in their style/method of boat building
and chosen systems, it'd be a shame if I couldn't leverage that on the
next vessel but it just may not be in the cards.

Heck if you're really worried about fuel prices, get a sailboat!



Believe me, if I had any inclination towards sailing, I'd be there in a
heartbeat. Grew up a stinkpotter. Like going out in good weather.
Don't understand being excited about ****y, windy weather. That's the
time to be comfortably warm and watching mother nature from indoors at a
secure anchorage or dock.


Windy, yes. Hell yes! ****y?

****y is one of 75 words designated to describing wet weather in the NW.
We have plenty of time to come up with them. I don't mind cruising when
it's raining, the wind is another thing.

"Bad weather" is relative. I had a blast in 30 knot winds
and pretty big waves. In a power boat it would have been no
fun at all... couldn't go as fast, for one thing!

Yes, great fun when not barfing.

DSK

jps

Displacement and hull shape counts for a lot.


jps wrote:
Yes, of course. Don't know what I was thinking...evidently I weren't.


One of the coolest "trawlers" I have seen is a former
heavy-displacement type sailboat that had the mast shortened
to about 20', half the ballast keel sawed off, and a hard
top over the cockpit. Comfy and capable, got quite good fuel
economy.


Spending weeks & weeks of time and thousands of dollars
fixing something that ain't broke is trending away from
"hobby" and closer to "mental illness."


I don't go there. If it ain't broke and it's expensive in either time
or BUs, call it good.


I just get carried away upgrading things. Most have been
definite & worthwhile improvements.


When there's nothing to worry about, I still like tinkering with smaller
things to improve them.


I'll get there. Right now I'm still tinkering with the big
things, and trying to keep everything as clean as possible.


Single screw?


Yes. More fuel efficient, less maintenance.


Are you concerned about get-home power in the event of a failure?


Nope.

99% of engine failures are due to either bad/no fuel, or
dead batteries. A second engine is no help in those
circumstances, and a "get-home" engine is usually a bad
compromise and gets skipped on maintenance so it's actually
*less* reliable than the main.

My "get-home" plan in the event of main engine failure is to
stay put while I fix the damn thing. And with the full
maintenance effort devoted to just one engine, I feel that
it's far more reliable than twins anyway.

DSK