Zing
Well-known member
For those of you who are also fans of these boats there are a couple of videos here, which I enjoyed a lot.
Warning, it’s nearly 3 hours in total of filming in bilges. Not your average action movies:
New Nordhavn 41
- Thread starter EricJ
- Start date
Warning, it’s nearly 3 hours in total of filming in bilges. Not your average action movies:
TwoHooter
Well-known member
The 57 is a beautiful boat. I particularly like the access from the saloon to the engine room so you don't have to go through a cabin. It is also, probably, the fastest model in the fleet. Dan Streech, president of the company, has said that they wish they had kept the hull moulds and built a slightly different topside layout. I know the owners of a 57 and when they cruise with other Nordhavns they have to throttle back to let the others keep up with them. Of course we aren't talking planing boat speeds here, the words 'speed' and 'fastest' have a slightly different meaning in the world of full displacement boats!
The 62 was a very successful progression from the original trawler design, the 46, and yes it is still sought-after by people who love the form and layout. But it has one fundamental feature which means it wouldn't compete successfully as a new model - the engine room headroom is too low. When people buy a new boat of this size they want to be able to stand upright in the engine room.
Neither of these would tempt me though, for one reason. I absolutely love the fact that our 40 is small enough that in 5 years of ownership and after 94 trips to 52 different destinations we have only once been turned away because there was no room for us. Apart from that single instance, whenever we have wanted a berth in a traditional harbour or marina space has been found for us, including this winter when we have been able to get into Sutton Harbour at Plymouth for the winter (and the lockdown). Looking at the sorts of places we go - mainly little out-of-the-way places - a bigger boat would be far more restrictive and it would be harder to find a berth. I remember reading a blog about moving a Fleming 55 down to Portugal in the summer and they found it really hard to get berths along the French Atlantic coast simply because the boat was too big for the available visitor berths. And of course the mooring fees are lower for a 40 - some marinas charge a higher rate per metre for boats longer than 15m. The new 41 also has this advantage over the larger boats.
The 62 was a very successful progression from the original trawler design, the 46, and yes it is still sought-after by people who love the form and layout. But it has one fundamental feature which means it wouldn't compete successfully as a new model - the engine room headroom is too low. When people buy a new boat of this size they want to be able to stand upright in the engine room.
Neither of these would tempt me though, for one reason. I absolutely love the fact that our 40 is small enough that in 5 years of ownership and after 94 trips to 52 different destinations we have only once been turned away because there was no room for us. Apart from that single instance, whenever we have wanted a berth in a traditional harbour or marina space has been found for us, including this winter when we have been able to get into Sutton Harbour at Plymouth for the winter (and the lockdown). Looking at the sorts of places we go - mainly little out-of-the-way places - a bigger boat would be far more restrictive and it would be harder to find a berth. I remember reading a blog about moving a Fleming 55 down to Portugal in the summer and they found it really hard to get berths along the French Atlantic coast simply because the boat was too big for the available visitor berths. And of course the mooring fees are lower for a 40 - some marinas charge a higher rate per metre for boats longer than 15m. The new 41 also has this advantage over the larger boats.
MapisM
Well-known member
+1.
Together with the Fleming 55, they are probably the only boats which I would have rather chosen, instead of the many planing boats I evaluated before downgrading back to a plastic boat.
Which is enough said, because some of them were very good indeed.
I would have, if it weren't that in terms of price/value they were among the worst boats I ever came across.
And I wasn't thinking to cross oceans anyway, so their superior seaworthiness vs. any P boats was neither here nor there for me.
MapisM
Well-known member
I've seen them both, and I can only confirm your recommendation.
Give me one of these videos rather than a hundred from Aquaholic or Bulleri, any day of the week.
Piers
Well-known member
As you know, we chose our Fleming 55, Play d'eau, in 2003. Key requirements (apart from her beautiful lines) were complete walkaround decks, pontoon height access, galley and saloon on the same level, and what was for then, a huge engine room.
A few years ago when we were looking at a potential upgrade, we'd agreed that 2 Pilot House (PH) seats were mandatory and much better access around the engine(s) so I didn't need physio after an engine service. A single engine was a preference over two, but not mandatory.
The Fleming 58 had a single seat in the PH but if you opted for two, you'd both have a screen strut in front of you. The 65 would meet the criteria, and knowing how well these boats handle with 2 on board, it ticked all the boxes.
However, the iconic Nordhavn 62 had been our focus point for a long time so we were sad to see it replaced with the 63, albeit the 63 really is a lovely boat. Hence, the toss up would have been a Fleming 65 v Nordhavn 62/63.
If we were to make the move, I'd want to spend ages going over each model in great detail. I've known our Fleming 55 for 17 years and handled all her faults and build issues. Provable Customer Service from the manufacturer would be a major key factor.
A few years ago when we were looking at a potential upgrade, we'd agreed that 2 Pilot House (PH) seats were mandatory and much better access around the engine(s) so I didn't need physio after an engine service. A single engine was a preference over two, but not mandatory.
The Fleming 58 had a single seat in the PH but if you opted for two, you'd both have a screen strut in front of you. The 65 would meet the criteria, and knowing how well these boats handle with 2 on board, it ticked all the boxes.
However, the iconic Nordhavn 62 had been our focus point for a long time so we were sad to see it replaced with the 63, albeit the 63 really is a lovely boat. Hence, the toss up would have been a Fleming 65 v Nordhavn 62/63.
If we were to make the move, I'd want to spend ages going over each model in great detail. I've known our Fleming 55 for 17 years and handled all her faults and build issues. Provable Customer Service from the manufacturer would be a major key factor.
MapisM
Well-known member
I inspected one in Dana Point a few years ago, and I can't agree with that.
Aside from not being (imho) a patch to the 62, I'd still have the old 57 instead.
D
Deleted User YDKXO
Guest
Agree with that. Excellent videos and if you were in the market for one of these models you couldnt find a better explanation of the pluses and minuses of each one. I hope Knight does more videos
Btw is he English born? He sounds like an Englishman who's been in the USA too long!
D
Deleted User YDKXO
Guest
Just out of interest, does anyone know which Nordhavns in the 40-70ft range have stand up headroom in the engine room?
Zing
Well-known member
I detect a bit of Australian twang to boot.
MapisM
Well-known member
I was told that the 64/68 do, but no first hand experience.
Bouba
Well-known member
Why won’t someone buy me a Nordhavn??
??
??
D
Deleted User YDKXO
Guest
Not the 55/60/63?
Trouble is that I've got too used to the stand up engine bay headroom in my F630 and I'm not sure I could go back to any boat where I had to crouch to do daily checks! Not with my stiff back anyway
MapisM
Well-known member
I've been on one of the first 55 (now replaced by the 60), but I can't for the life of me remember her e/r.
I think the 63 is built on the same hull mould though, and you would definitely be disappointed by the e/r comparison with your F630.
Aside from the space around the (single) engine, obviously.
Apropos, don't be fooled by the nominal beam size: I checked it after seeing that 63, and IIRC it's exactly the same of your F630, but she actually feels narrower. And do you know why? Because she is.
As with most full D boats, the max beam is measured amidship, while the boat actually gets less beamy as you move both forward and astern.
PS: coming to think of it, e/r aside, you'd be VERY disappointed by the N63/F630 overall comparison of interior spaces/accessibility.
In this respect, the N63 is much more akin to my 56 footer, if that.
I think the 63 is built on the same hull mould though, and you would definitely be disappointed by the e/r comparison with your F630.
Aside from the space around the (single) engine, obviously.
Apropos, don't be fooled by the nominal beam size: I checked it after seeing that 63, and IIRC it's exactly the same of your F630, but she actually feels narrower. And do you know why? Because she is.
As with most full D boats, the max beam is measured amidship, while the boat actually gets less beamy as you move both forward and astern.
PS: coming to think of it, e/r aside, you'd be VERY disappointed by the N63/F630 overall comparison of interior spaces/accessibility.
In this respect, the N63 is much more akin to my 56 footer, if that.
Last edited:
Bouba
Well-known member
TwoHooter
Well-known member
Yes to the first question. No comment to the second!
D
Deleted User YDKXO
Guest
Actually I've looked at a number of Nordhavns but I can't remember what the engine rooms are like in terms of headroom. It is quite obvious though, even just with a quick tour, that the accommodation is smaller and less well laid out than an equivalent length of planing boat. However every boat is a compromise as we've discussed before and the quid pro quo on a Nordhavn is the ocean crossing capability and, for me, the separate pilot house. Obviously you wouldnt buy a Nordhavn if you didnt have extended offshore cruising in mind. A Nordhavn would make a lousy marina queen
Bouba
Well-known member
When you think about the future when there are no more cruise ships and airlines, a Nordhavn could go up in value
D
Deleted User YDKXO
Guest
One thing is for sure. They hold their value far better than a planing boat so from that point of view they are far less of a bottomless money pit than the average gin palace. And yes if this Covid thing carries on, then the demand for boats that allow their owners to get away from the rest of the world will increase
Bouba
Well-known member
Apart from Itamas
vas
Well-known member
are you two for real?
you are assuming abundance of cheap diesel as well?
if someone wants to get away from it all, s/he'd get a decent saily boat thing stuffed with solar, some decent LiPo4 battery banks of one gazillion Ah, a few sets of sails, lots of fishing equipment, an el. motor instead of diesel (see Uma) and cast off in the sunset (never to be seen again :-\ )
what's a Nordhavn got to do with all that?
V.
you are assuming abundance of cheap diesel as well?
if someone wants to get away from it all, s/he'd get a decent saily boat thing stuffed with solar, some decent LiPo4 battery banks of one gazillion Ah, a few sets of sails, lots of fishing equipment, an el. motor instead of diesel (see Uma) and cast off in the sunset (never to be seen again :-\ )
what's a Nordhavn got to do with all that?
V.