Fletcher500
Guru
That is a nice looking layout Nick. Congrats on the new build.
That is a nice looking layout Nick. Congrats on the new build.
Thank you for taking the time posting this. I hadn’t ever bothered to pull data sheets on these motors. I had assumed that the 250 was a N/A engine (or at least not aftercooled). If you’re already running a T/A motor, the $8,000 difference is money well spent for the flexibility. From all data, it would appear that the 380hp is the better motor for either vessel. It would be interesting to hear some first hand kts/gph from some owners. I’m wondering if the 250 hp will be lucky to run 10k full throttle, let alone max continuous.In terms of engine options, none of the new Cummins engines are naturally aspirated, probably for emissions control reasons. None of the other manufacturers are doing NA engines either to my knowledge. Here are engine specs that give you an idea of the cost of speed. The 250hp will cruise at 8kt and give you a decent range, and get to 11kt on a flat out push burning 13gph. The change to a 380hp costs about $4000 per knot of max speed at a fuel consumption of 20gph (the attached article has performance data). The 425hp and 480hp options push the envelope further. You go faster, but at 25gph you'd need to refuel every 14 hours of run time. The math just didn't work for me. Timing the current on the inside passage, 8kt can become 14kt with no extra fuel cost.
One other point.
Why not more than 380 while I'm at it?
I think Scott will tell you that at the speeds above what the 380 will give you, you need trim tabs. So cross that Rubicon and you have both an engine upgrade cost and trim tab cost, and throw in there will be some small level of ongoing maintenance of the tabs and so forth. I kept life simple by stopping short of that need.
I agree with your thoughts entirely. I really believe in the KISS principle, and that’s critical in any future boat purchase for us.
Additionally, having easily accessed maintenance points, component locations designed with repair/replacement in mind, and well thought out plumbing and electrical runs are essential. The design/engineering on our Mainship was almost criminal! There were items that you KNOW would need maintenance during the lifetime of the boat that literally required you to cut access panels to reach. It seemed like there wasn’t a thing that I worked on over the years that wasn’t befouled by some stupid installation decision! Most of what I have seen on Helmsman has been pretty good, but I admit I have not crawled through with a purchaser’s hat on! The ability to do so pre and during construction is invaluable.
Nick, you made some great choices. Congratulations! I think that interior layout will become a popular option for folks moving forward. I like the idea of the extended bedroom and larger shower, and head. Opinions differ, but I am on the side of one stateroom. A friend of mine is building a 43 with one bedroom, doing the same expansion you are doing. I think it will turn out well for him, too.
I went with the 480 and trim tabs. I won’t use it often, but when I want to, I will have it. My wife was a staunch advocate of it, or I may have ended up with the 380.
The quality of the work that Helmsman produces on the boat was one of the biggest selling points for me. The biggest selling point was their reputation. We will receive our 38E this fall. So far, the process has been easy and seamless for us. When we have questions, or want to change something, we engage in a good, common sense discussion with Helmsman and end up jointly reaching the best solution. A lot of fun working through a build with this company.
Thank you!
Your wife was a 'staunch advocate' of the 480 hp Cummins engine, lol? It sounds like our wives might have some similar views. Mine was not an ardent advocate of any particular engine, as long as we could cruise at a minimum of 14 knots. The alternative was that I would be exclusively a 'solo mariner.' :lol:
With our boat, I solved the problem of the admiral wanting to blast around at 17 kts all the time (instead of a much more efficient 6.5) by telling her I'm happy to speed up if she pays for fuel. She never took that offer, and she's finally starting to get used to going slow most of the time.
Thank you!
Your wife was a 'staunch advocate' of the 480 hp Cummins engine, lol? It sounds like our wives might have some similar views. Mine was not an ardent advocate of any particular engine, as long as we could cruise at a minimum of 14 knots. The alternative was that I would be exclusively a 'solo mariner.' :lol:
Gentlemen, I completely understand the issue, my wife dislikes 8 kts as well. We bought the OA, which cruises at 15-18 kts but drinks diesel like the proverbial sailor at that speed (I don't intend to disrespect sailors, be they rag boaters or Navy types). Now with fuel at $6/gal, I hear about the cost of operating the boat, haven't figured out how to solve both issues.
I was surprised by how adamant she was about the “need for speed”. She is usually all about the finishes on a boat! It will be interesting to see if she even cares once we are underway. The fact is that the higher HP motors run extremely well at lower speeds too.
Yes - I’ve actually seen that episode. I’ve also enjoyed being on a couple of Nordhavn’s, as well as have poked around Nordhavn’s of various sizes at boat shows. While I’ve likewise held them in high esteem as seaworthy - (I call them the “Brick Sh!t-house” of boats…), They’re definitely not perfect, as I’ve noted other issues, but pretty good overall. I guess it’s something I subconsciously look for. I do get what you’re saying.. but I stand by my assessment as a (now former) Mainship owner - that I don’t think there was any communication between design/engineering/and potential end users at that now defunct company! It definitely felt like there was a complete “who cares” shrugging of shoulders when it came to maintenance and future component access. I’d be hard pressed to own another, and definitely would not own another with twin engines. Having spent a bit of time on a buddy’s 44’ Carver, and neighbors 38’ Mediterranean… I think it may be more emblematic of the crank-them-out production lines that these boats were built by.Phy:
"There were items that you KNOW would need maintenance during the lifetime of the boat that literally required you to cut access panels to reach. It seemed like there wasn’t a thing that I worked on over the years that wasn’t befouled by some stupid installation decision!"
Ric's latest post had me re-reading yours.
One of the popular YouTube channels about a couple cruising on a Nordhavn had a segment where he was changing out batteries. To get to some of them he had to disassemble and remove some sort of storage cabinetry or similar, down in the engine compartment. Chatter as he's doing that, that this was the first time he'd accessed them. I am guessing he was not the original owner. My first thought was, he'd owned this for some years now, and in that time those battery terminals were never checked or even glanced at. No wonder given what he had to do to get to them. This was on a Nordhavn which many of us grant bullet-proof status to. The point being, the issue can occur on the best of brands.
Well, seems to me there are three possible options (apparently for both of us).
1) Go boating alone.
2) Pay the price to go faster.
3) Find a new Admiral who likes going slow.
#1 isn’t as much fun, though I foresee that some of the time in my future. Between #2 and #3, I think no matter how expensive fuel becomes, it’s still much cheaper than divorce.
You 2 guys have some cool boats coming! I like the concept of getting exactly what you are planning to use it for.
Who knows, maybe we'll be able to someday also. Spend a few years with what we've got to see what we like to do and if the market does well and we are able...
All the best on your new boats!
Here are my two cents for those thinking about pilot-house versus sedan layouts (whether Helmsman or not). Coming from sailboats, I used to think that walk-around side decks would be a high priority for me—on a sailboat, where you are helming from the rear cockpit, you have to be able to move forward quickly, especially when docking short- or single handed. But full side decks became lower priority for me after a couple of charters in trawlers that didn’t have them; I thought the trade off for a much larger salon was worth it, especially when living on the boat for weeks or months at a time.
What DID become high priority for me was port and starboard access from the helm station—I now consider that much more important than walk-around side decks.
I assume that those who consider side decks important are thinking mostly of docking, locking, and other close-quarter work. When docking or locking on port, I find it really helpful to be able to take a couple of steps to the port door, stick my head out to gauge precisely how things are going, and return to the helm, or quickly jump down to help with lines if necessary. Giving up the port-side door at the helm to acquire a walk-around side deck doesn’t seem worth it to me, especially if the issue is docking, and even more so if you want the option of docking single-handed.
One other thing I would be reluctant to give up is steps (rather than a ladder) to the flybridge, but that is a personal choice.
That’s a nice looking vessel!
One initial question I see (for me) is the lower helm.
Looks terrific.
I like the layout. And the comfort you will have of the walk around is certainly a consideration, and one that is a personal preference for each couple making the decision.
What DID become high priority for me was port and starboard access from the helm station
At my age and physical condition (and I’m not getting any younger), 38 ft is pushing the limits of what I think my body can reliably handle on my own (I hope!).