Seagulls love it though...This one has way too much glass to clean!
Seagulls love it though...This one has way too much glass to clean!
That is one of only three Grand Banks 66s every made. By the accounts I've read and been told the GB66 is one of the worst production boats ever made. One of them was commissioned in our harbor when it was new and a good friend who was the commissioning shipwright said the boat was so unstable he wanted to turn on the stabilizers when it was tied to the dock. The model was a complete failure and production was halted after the first three.
I've seen two of the three. The other one I've seen tore a stabilizer off the hull on a reef in SE Alaska and was in the local yard for repairs for quite awhile. Neither boat was named Fish & Chicks when I saw them but I suspect they may have been through several owners by now.
A big part of the problem stemmed from the buyer of hull #1 insisting on a fully enclosed flying bridge. This put a huge amount of weight very high on the boat. I'm sure it meets whatever stability requirements there may be for production boats but it makes the boats very top-heavy and they need stabilizers on all the time they are underway, even in smooth water. The buyers of hulls #2 and #3 wanted the same enclosed flying bridge as the owner of hull #1. So GB put them on.
Didn't think the extra weight would have been a problem as the length compensates for that, my concern would be the ever present wind and the enclosed bridge acting as a sail.
Marin - What years were those three GB66 built? Wood or glass?
Hawgwash--- When I say the boat is essentially a lengthened GB52 I mean in its design. I do not know the beam of the GB66, but I expect the hull is somewhat wider than the GB52.
They are fiberglass. I don't know the exact year but the first new one appeared in our harbor for commissioning sometime during the 2000s. Mid-2000s as I recall. Our shipwright friend who was doing the commissioning work said that simply walking from one side of the flying bridge to the other set the boat to rolling rather alarmingly at the dock. He said the boat was originally intended to have an open flying bridge but the buyer insisted on a fully enclosed one.
The boat is in essence a lengthened GB52. In my opinion the GB design does not hold up aesthetically past 46 feet or so. Seen in person the GB66 is pretty ugly and awkward in my and most of the other people who were around at the time the boats were here's opinions. Most people felt the boat was a case of "mine's bigger than yours."
This one was also pretty cool. I wish I had more pictures of it, as I'm not sure what it is.
As a long time tugboater and yacht enthusiast, I know the realities of tug conversions to yachts. What makes a good "Tug" is mutually exclusive of what makes a good yacht.This is my favorite tug conversion.
This vessel looks to be one of the more ocean capable craft I have seen that is not a Diesel Duck. It would have been nice to see the inside.
These are a couple of BC classics...interesting to me anyway. I think this is just entering Grenville channel south of Kitimet at a lifeboat station. Sorry to our BC brothers for any spelling errors...
This was a nice looking slow boat in Anacortes, WA. Nice shear lines but I bet it catches the wind with that house.
These are a couple of BC classics...interesting to me anyway. I think this is just entering Grenville channel south of Kitimet at a lifeboat station. Sorry to our BC brothers for any spelling errors...
Thanks, I often wondered about the wisdom or lack of, in converting a real tug to a cruiser. Knew it couldn't be fuel efficient. Didn't have a clue about the stability issue.As a long time tugboater and yacht enthusiast, I know the realities of tug conversions to yachts. What makes a good "Tug" is mutually exclusive of what makes a good yacht.
Tugs are deep draft, all engine room, ROUND bottom (or multi chine) and carry lots of fuel. They look like all "business", and they are but that doesn't translate to being seaworthy. Most tugs are designed for protected waterways and not to make passages. Some of the conversions that I see are accidents waiting to happen. Adding quarters up top to these boats is dangerous. A 6:1 gear with huge prop (good for towing but not for yachting) is a drain on anyones purse.
A common alteration is to minimize fuel tank and ballast capacity, again not what the naval architect had in mind.
A good yacht is a fuel efficient, comfortable, and seaworthy vsl within its designed parameters.
Don't get me wrong, I love tugs, just not as yachts.
I
Didn't think the extra weight would have been a problem as the length compensates for that, my concern would be the ever present wind and the enclosed bridge acting as a sail.
Pretty sure it'a a glass hull.