Warning:

The following link connects to a website that documents the
construction phases of a new boat. Folks offended by the mere mention
of anything that is, or might ever be offered for sale should not
follow this link:

http://www.nwtrawlers.blogspot.com/

"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
oups.com...
Warning:

The following link connects to a website that documents the
construction phases of a new boat. Folks offended by the mere mention
of anything that is, or might ever be offered for sale should not
follow this link:

http://www.nwtrawlers.blogspot.com/


Feh. I built two of those last week.


:-)

On Apr 3, 10:32?am, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:
"Chuck Gould" wrote in message

oups.com...

Warning:

The following link connects to a website that documents the
construction phases of a new boat. Folks offended by the mere mention
of anything that is, or might ever be offered for sale should not
follow this link:

http://www.nwtrawlers.blogspot.com/

Feh. I built two of those last week.

:-)

You ought to move out west. If you can crank out two of these a week
you'd make a fortune up in Skagit County. There is a bunch of boat
building going on up there right now. :-)

One of the neat features of this boat is going to be an articulated
rudder. Essentially has a vertical "hinge" with a trailing flap that
gets progressively extended as the rudder approaches either end of the
arc. They tested one of these rudders on a Nordic Tug not too long
ago. They were able to do figure 8-s
inside the normal turning circle of a Nordic with a standard rudder.

The hot ticket for the current market seems to be single screw
pilothouse boats capable of a moderate or better turn of speed. Funny
how fickle the public can be, who would have thought that singles
would become much more popular than twins?

On 3 Apr 2007 10:58:07 -0700, "Chuck Gould"
wrote:

Funny
how fickle the public can be, who would have thought that singles
would become much more popular than twins?

=============================

Misplaced priorities in my opinion.

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On 3 Apr 2007 10:58:07 -0700, "Chuck Gould"
wrote:

Funny
how fickle the public can be, who would have thought that singles
would become much more popular than twins?

=============================

Misplaced priorities in my opinion.

Maybe--but with bow and even stern thrusters available, along
with "get home" systems, including wing engines, a single makes a lot sense
when you count fuel cost. Speaking as a person with twins... ;-). Dan

On Apr 4, 9:34?pm, "Danlw" wrote:
"Wayne.B" wrote in message

...

On 3 Apr 2007 10:58:07 -0700, "Chuck Gould"
wrote:

Funny
how fickle the public can be, who would have thought that singles
would become much more popular than twins?

=============================

Misplaced priorities in my opinion.

Maybe--but with bow and even stern thrusters available, along
with "get home" systems, including wing engines, a single makes a lot sense
when you count fuel cost. Speaking as a person with twins... ;-). Dan



- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Among medium size and larger boats, the hottest sellers (in this area)
are currently single screw pilothouse boats. If you want to order a
new Selene, you go to the bottom of a 40-some boat waiting list for a
slot. Nordic and American Tugs are selling as fast as they can be
built, with virtually no unsold new boat inventory.

The fuel comment is a factor, but so many of these boats are being
built with engines large enough to so ridiculously overdrive the hull
that I'm not sure that fuel economy is always realized. Take the 37
Mariner trawler, for example; it burns about 2 gph at 8 kts- just
about what you would expect from a trawler near its displacement
speed. The very same boat with the very same engine will do 16 knots,
but turning twice the speed requires almost exactly *10 times* the
fuel!

Fortunately, the latest generations of electronically controlled
diesels don't seem to suffer from running at 1/3 throttle or so like
many of the older engines did. I guess if you're not harming the
engine by running it too slowly there is a case to be made for putting
450 HP in an 8 knot semi-displacement hull. You can always run a large
engine on a slow bell but if the day ever comes when you really need
15-16 knots, that old 130 HP Ford Lehman just ain't gonna cut it.

On 5 Apr 2007 08:47:04 -0700, "Chuck Gould"
wrote:

Fortunately, the latest generations of electronically controlled
diesels don't seem to suffer from running at 1/3 throttle or so like
many of the older engines did.

I think the jury is still out on that. Virtually all modern diesels
are turbo charged, and at 1/3 throttle the turbo is not making it up
to speed or temperature. Traditionally this has resulted in
carbonization of the turbo bearings and premature failure.

On Apr 5, 8:54�am, Wayne.B wrote:
On 5 Apr 2007 08:47:04 -0700, "Chuck Gould"

wrote:
Fortunately, the latest generations of electronically controlled
diesels don't seem to suffer from running at 1/3 throttle or so like
many of the older engines did.

I think the jury is still out on that. *Virtually all modern diesels
are turbo charged, and at 1/3 throttle the turbo is not making it up
to speed or temperature. *Traditionally this has resulted in
carbonization of the turbo bearings and premature failure.

I was always under the impression that coked turbo bearing were the
result of
inadequate cooling. If not adequately cooled, the lubricating oil
literally burns onto the bearing leaving deposits of carbon or "coke"
that begin grinding away at the surfaces. Wouldn't running the turbo
less expose the bearings to less chance of coking, rather than greater?

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On 5 Apr 2007 08:47:04 -0700, "Chuck Gould"
wrote:

Fortunately, the latest generations of electronically controlled
diesels don't seem to suffer from running at 1/3 throttle or so like
many of the older engines did.

I think the jury is still out on that. Virtually all modern diesels
are turbo charged, and at 1/3 throttle the turbo is not making it up
to speed or temperature. Traditionally this has resulted in
carbonization of the turbo bearings and premature failure.



When I had the Egg Harbor with turbodiesels the Cat service tech advised me
to run them at WOT for at least 10 minutes on the way back to port,
particularly after a fishing trip consisting of a lot of trolling.

Same can be said of turbodiesels in trucks. I was scolded by the Ford tech
at the dealership for not driving my F-350 "hard enough" after he finished
replacing the turbo a couple of years ago.

Eisboch

On 5 Apr 2007 09:02:10 -0700, "Chuck Gould"
wrote:

I was always under the impression that coked turbo bearing were the
result of
inadequate cooling. If not adequately cooled, the lubricating oil
literally burns onto the bearing leaving deposits of carbon or "coke"
that begin grinding away at the surfaces.

I am not a turbo diesel expert but I believe that's a different issue
you described. There are apparently different ways of making a turbo
unhappy. They all get expensive, not to mention the reliability
factor.

Speaking to the original question of one engine vs two, I think my own
experience is somewhat telling. I bought my first twin engine boat in
1999 (454s, gas). We brought that boat home twice on one engine, once
with a bad coil, and once with a defective raw water pump. We've now
had our current boat, the GB49 with twin DD 671s, for almost 3 years.
We've brought it home on one engine once (seized piston rings), and
experienced one unplanned shutdown while underway, fuel filter issue
on a very rough passage. For the kind of long distance cruising that
we do, sometimes to remote areas, you'd have a very difficult time
convincing me to buy a single engine boat. Reliability alone is worth
the price of admission, close quarters maneuverability is icing on the
cake.