OldDan1943
Guru
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2017
- Messages
- 10,652
- Location
- USA
- Vessel Name
- Kinja
- Vessel Make
- American Tug 34 #116 2008
Having an CE A or B means little if one does not have the skill and experience to operated the boat.
What are the top three factors that differentiate a coastal cruiser from an ocean crosser?
1. Holds enough fuel to get to the other side.
2. Strong enough and seaworthy enough to stay floating and operational in the big weather you may encounter once you are out of forecast range
3. Pick anything you want as long as you have 1 and 2.
That covers the important stuff, but for more detail, see the first 22 pages of this thread.
1. Holds enough fuel to get to the other side.
2. Strong enough and seaworthy enough to stay floating and operational in the big weather you may encounter once you are out of forecast range
3. Pick anything you want as long as you have 1 and 2.
That covers the important stuff, but for more detail, see the first 22 pages of this thread.
If you compare some of the leading brands in
I’d take a big Nordhavn if I was doing ocean crossings and the Fleming for use closer to the coast. Not that either can’t do both with either some inconvenience and planning.
A guess one major difference is the air intake for the engine.
Yes, and that ends up being a factor in the CE stability rating. I had a look through the CE Class A certification for a sistership to my boat, and key elements are the AVS (how far the boat can roll and still right itself, and the parameter most commonly discussed), plus the down flooding angles. It will probably vary from boat to boat, but one critical angle is where the gunnels submerge and the decks and cockpit flood. Then the other is where the boat starts to downflood into the interior though vents or other openings. The higher the vents, the more heel it will take before you get down flooding through those vents.
Having an CE A or B means little if one does not have the skill and experience to operated the boat.
Do you know OldDan how much you can take people on your AT34, how much you can take cargo on your boat to make it still stable when you go out to sea?
At the risk of repeating past conversations, I find the Beaufort Scale helpful when discussing seastate and design. If I remember, CE-B is designed for sustained Force 7 conditions - just under gale force winds with 4-5 meter seas. Sounds pretty scary to me, but that's the yardstick.As a comparison. For sail a AVS of at least 120-130 is generally accepted as reasonable for blue water. 90 is a big deal in a recreational trawler. My current boat does not come close to even that . Also considered is the area of the Gz curve when the boat is past 90 degrees as that will determine how rapidly the boat will self right and if it will at all. The problem with most multihulls is once inverted they won’t self right if they turn turtle. However they have great righting arms if sufficient beam and reserve buoyancy is designed in. Along with escape hatches underneath they will stay floating if inverted so occupants can stay alive. Friend flooded his cruising cat when a escape hatch failed. Lost the engine on that side but did complete the passage.
Did go through the exercise of asking for Gz curves from Nordhavn, KK and DD. Only DD was responsive. However they didn’t give me a classic Gz curve but rather stability information in the format the Chinese use. It was Greek to me.
Recreational trawlers such as my boat and I suspect ATs look like they would have significant down flooding risks. Seriously doubt they would do well with repetitive pooping, significant boarding seas let alone a knock down. My boat is a B and said to be marginally better than AT in a seaway by some. I seriously doubt it would do well in sustained 35kts gusts to 50 and 6-7’ with short period. Remember that the average of the highest third. Thinking you won’t see boarding seas seems optimistic. Think people commonly greatly overestimate sea state (self included). Think all the recreational SD tugs aren’t good seaboats. Too much glass and some of it slides, insufficient AVS, too high a down flooding risk, too dependent upon form stability, too many wide open spaces. Just not made for that purpose. Still they are great boats for their purpose.
Bringing this back around to the OP, as long as either of the three (N, KK, or Fleming) have adequate range for your intended cruising grounds, I'd make the decision based on soft factors such as comfort, layout, and equipment. If engine rooms are important to you, then Nordhavn likely scores well though I'm guessing the other two are decent too, just not as manly.
Peter
The OP on this thread has been gone for close to a year. Apparently he was fully committed to the plan, until he wasn’t. Hopefully he is just busy doing something else, but he may have decided to take up golfing, instead.
RS would like to share several conversations I had with two close friends who are professional captains. They stressed the same points. CE A is applicable only for new construction at the time of initial splash. You aren’t on a blue water boat. Heavy weather tactics are different for power than sail. Coastal you may not have sufficient room to have your boat at the best angle and speed for the sea state. Even a simple line squall or T-storm can get you in serious trouble. Change your behavior. Stabilization does not improve stability. True for fins, fish, gyros or Magnus. Ignore the CE classification. If there’s a chance of more than 3-4 sustained stay put. It maybe worse. It’s recreational coastal cruising. You’re not doing it for a living.
Like the OP, we are a couple ready to retire in 2 years and planning to live abroad, if not for ever at least for 4-5 years. Like them, we are light in experience. we have almost similar goals (I too am electrical engineer so did similar thing while looking for a boat - started with defining objectives first). We recently made a decision and mailed a check for buying a new boat - KK open 60 design. We looked hard at the choices mentioned by OP and chose KK for the following reason. Nordhavn is solid and has many passionate owners. it has a far better network across the globe so repair and maintenance may be easier. Many more Nordhavn owners seem to have been doing ocean crossing. so, it was a close decision for us between N and KK. Fleming is a bit more expensive, well built but in our search did not find it that suitable for ocean crossing. Between N and KK, we chose KK because we like the open design (pilot house on the same level as saloon) which has lot more light and airy feeling in saloon. Also, like the fact that it has stand-up engine room, accessible from master bedroom as well as from aft desk. We are open to crossing ocean but it is more likely that we will spend most of our time in coastal cruising - although we will be spending summers in Maine and nova scotia and winter in Carribbean One year our future plans calls for going thru panama canal as well as doing Alaska trip.
We are both experiences sailors and not planning to have captain onboard except during teething period and crew for long passages. We think 60' feet is about our limit in terms of handling a boat. we are in 70's so that too was a factor in staying in 50-60 range rather than going for larger boats. I understand desire for simplicity particularly if you are crossing oceans or spending extensive time in foreign countries where repairs becomes prohibitively expensive. Right now going through the choices we need to make for building a new boat - chose to have watermaker even though ours would most be cruising in coastal waters - mainly because we may be in Caribbean ocean and Mexico often,
hrk
OK, here is my recommendation:
When you get tired of RVing and are ready for live aboard boating, first buy a Kady Krogen 39- see https://www.yachtworld.com/boats-for-sale/type-power/make-kadey-krogen/?length=39-39 or a Nordhavn 43- see https://www.yachtworld.com/boats-for-sale/make-nordhavn/?length=40-43. You can buy one of these for less than $500k and as little as $300K.
Both are solid cruisers, not as big as you ultimately want but if you can live on an RV you can live on one of these quite comfortably for a year or two. Other more coastal trawlers would also work, but by buying a smaller version of what you ultimately need for comfortable blue water cruising to anywhere in the world, you will develop your thoughts on what you really want long term.
I also chose these two boats so they would be less than twenty years old, so upgrading should be minimal. The older Nordhavn 40s may need significant upgrades as well as the Krogen 42s. You don't need to spend your time on upgrades. With your financial resources, buy something almost ready to go.
Then first do the Atlantic coast from Florida to Maine. That will take 6 months to a year depending on how much exploring you want to do. Then head over to the Bahamas for several months and then if you still have the blue water itch, head down to the Caribbean. Spend 6 mo to a year there.
You won't need a captain or crew for any of this. The first US part will let you develop large boating skills in an easy non threatening environment that I am sure you can handle with maybe a day or so of instruction on anchoring and boat handling around the dock. The Bahamas/Caribbean legs will let you develop self sufficient skills and particularly the Caribbean leg will give you a taste of blue water fun.
Then after a couple of years you will have a very good idea of what you want long term and the skills to go with it.
Finally, this plan gives you a low cost (well relatively) way to bail out if the live aboard cruising lifestyle doesn't suite you. Or maybe retreat to a US coastal and Bahamas lifestyle. Almost all TFers do the latter and enjoy the cruising in these waters. Also if you decide you don't want to do the world, but love the cruising lifestyle then there are lots of boats beyond the three that you originally mention that would work nicely.
David
Yes, the big small boat vs small big boat comment was me. It's not just space, but systems as well. Re space, someone brought it up earlier, but more beam has a remarkable impact of space. The N68 is only about 5-6' longer than an N60 (the name doesn't exactly represent it's length), but it's about 60% higher displacement which of course tracks overall size of the hull structure.
I'm a big fan of Dashew and his boats, but think they are optimized backwards to the way most people cruise. Even the most intrepid world cruisers who I know spend no more than 5% of their time on long passages. The other 95% is spent day tripping, at anchor, and in marinas.
To me, the FPB (and similarly inspired boats) are optimized for ocean crossing, and OK on a day to day basis. Where the Nordhavn and KK proposed by the OP are optimized for day to day use, yet also capable of ocean crossings. Personally I'd rather have a boat optimized for how I use it 95% of the time, rather than the 5% when I'm making a crossing.
PointDoc, you may already know this but there are owners' organizations for most of
the boats you are interested in. There is probably no better way to narrow down your
choices than to get on board and talk to the owners of these boats which the owners
groups or certain brokers might facilitate. Additionally, once you buy one the owners
group will be there to help you get the most out of the boat.
Fleming 65 displacement. 124,000
Nordhavn 64 displacement. 185,000
That lower displacement in the Fleming is exactly what I'd prefer - less boat for the same length makes a much better ride.
The Nordhavns typically have a much higher center of gravity - which makes for more room inside but at a ride/performance detriment.
Not a fan of Nordhavn.
Fleming 65 if I could afford it. Kadey Krogen 55 expedition is second choice for us.
Phillip I think you got that backwards. The heavier boat makes for a much better ride. 50% more displacement is a huge difference in fact. The only thing better about the “ride” of the lighter boat is that it can cruise at SD speeds, if that is what you’re looking for.