Game Changing 42 ft Flybridge Concept? Opinions appreciated!

[BruceK]

The crucial thing here is that the option of the occasional two extra sleeping spaces in a comfy cabin in no way detracts from the comforts, spaciousness, utility, sense of luxury or any other quality of the boat when the extra capacity is not needed/used. The assumption this option has an inherent downside compromising other aspects of the boat is simply wrong. We sometimes are told there is no such thing as a free lunch..... well, in this case it certainly resembles a free lunch. Unless someone can tell me how and where the hidden costs arise.....

Fair enough. I had visions of it being a pokey afair with cramped cabins. The reason I harped on it was because despite all the other benefits if the layout felt cramped it over-rides all the other benefits.

 

[petem]

Fair enough. I had visions of it being a pokey afair with cramped cabins. The reason I harped on it was because despite all the other benefits if the layout felt cramped it over-rides all the other benefits.

I agree, it is so important that a boat can 'breathe' and not feel cramped. Incidentally I was in a Spanish marina on Saturday and couldn't help noticing the number of Targa 43's that were kept there. The broker said that at one time there were 16 Targa 43's in that marina alone. Those buyers bought the boat because it was bigger and more spacious than its smaller siblings (T34/T40), not because it had more cabins.

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

I am to some extent a little puzzled by the focus of almost all comments in this thread.

Hugin, I guess the problem is this. You come on here saying you have a 'game changing' design and go on to list its' apparent USPs whilst at the same time rubbishing the designs of other manufacturers. And then you refuse to put up any renderings or proposed layouts of your new design for anyone on here to properly evaluate. You say thats for commercial confidentiality reasons in which case I have to ask why on earth have you put up this thread in the first place? You ask for opinions and then when experienced boaters on this forum give you their opinion, you start arguing with them

I suppose I slightly object to the word 'game changing' as well. What you seem to have produced is a 42ft boat with a lot of berths crammed into it and a hatch in the foredeck. In my book thats not game changing, thats just mildly interesting. As I say, put up some pictures and layout drawings and I would be very happy to be wowed by them

 

[Hugin]

those buyers bought the boat because it was bigger and more spacious than its smaller siblings (T34/T40), not because it had more cabins.

Or because T43s have 2 heads rather than one? Or because they couldn't afford the 3-cabin T48 they really wanted? Or for any other reason we can only try to place into the context of the realistic choices they actually had at time of purchase. Perceived market preferences is an image of what is actually on offer. If a manufacturer only offers white hulled boats then 10 years later it will be a little too easy to conclude that boat owners overwhelmingly prefer white hulls. Only a minority of owners will go through the hassles/expenses of painting or foil wrap their 10 year old boats, but that doesn't mean they wouldn't have other preferences than white.

 

[BruceK]

But you know what we want despite what we are saying? There's either a touch of arrogance there or you're a bit miffed we aren't all blown away.
As Deleted User says, show us the goods and maybe you'll get a fairer critique

 

[MapisM]

In my book thats not game changing, thats just mildly interesting.

Couldn't agree more, though you can't accuse the OP to be biased, I reckon.
Hugin called that Sorensen article he linked an eye-opener, so on balance his boat well deserves to be called a game changer...

 

[Nigelpickin]

Man! its a tough crowd on here!

Its a great thread and a very interesting one and I think the OP has been very well receiving of the constructive criticism. Hugin's outline of a 42 foot boat is certainly more of a game changer than any I have designed in the last couple of years; even if it does not come to fruition it has raised some interesting questions and answers.

3k plus views in a few days shows that that the thread is of interest; I've learnt that in any feedback exercise, you shave off the feedback from the crazies/fanatics who sit either side of the sensible bandwidth.....

I think Hugin has thick skin, lets hope so and let's hope that the thread continues and we see some plans sometime.

FWIW there was certainly a time when bunks were more important to me that anything else, I can understand the appeal of a single engine shaft drive and the modular approach along with the bow access is quite an unusual proposition.

My reservation would be that the 350k to 450k segment is more driven by volume than partitions but it sounds as though this is being considered.

'course, I'm going to look like a muppet if the OP turns out to be a 14 year old with time on his hands!!!

 

[petem]

As an academic thread its great. Better still would be to see 3d drawings. Would I want the OP to invest his life savings in it? No I wouldn't.

 

[BruceK]

I don't think it's so much crazies and fanatics but this audience is always going to be tough,and if you ask for critique that's exactly what you're going to get. I don't see any arguments going down. Personally, I lack the eloquence of some, and just say it as I see it, but usually with tongue in cheek . Not always my best trait.
As for the OP, breaking the mold from time to time is good, even if it's just to learn the original was just fine. Trial by fire, I wish him luck, more hubris and thick skin to go with it :encouragement:

 

[MapisM]

Man! its a tough crowd on here!

Assuming it's no coincidence that your post followed my previous one, in hindsight I suppose what I wrote was a tad on the wrong side of the border between harsh and sarcastic, and if so I apologise.
Though as far as I can tell, Hugin has a tough skin. Which is good, considering what he's up to! :encouragement:

 

[Nigelpickin]

Assuming it's no coincidence that your post followed my previous one, in hindsight I suppose what I wrote was a tad on the wrong side of the border between harsh and sarcastic, and if so I apologise.
Though as far as I can tell, Hugin has a tough skin. Which is good, considering what he's up to! :encouragement:

Not particularly, its just a great thread and wanted to express to the op that even if We/I don't agree with with all of the design choices, it beats reading about death, destruction and lunatics competing for the power to press the red button.

It'd just be nice if a thread like this got treated in the same way as say, JTB's refit thread. I'm sure not everything he did on that awesome job would be to everyone's taste or preference, but I think we all managed to chip in without too much negativity. Hey, I'm not thread Stazi, each to their own and apologies if I'm coming across as a d£&k...

 

[BruceK]

........ Hey, I'm not thread Stazi, each to their own and apologies if I'm coming across as a d£&k...

oh no, you can't back out now, you've planted your flag you have Need some thick skin you do

point noted though.

 

[Nigelpickin]

oh no, you can't back out now, you've planted your flag you have Need some thick skin you do

point noted though.

 

[Hugin]

Hugin, I guess the problem is this. You come on here saying you have a 'game changing' design and go on to list its' apparent USPs whilst at the same time rubbishing the designs of other manufacturers.

It's an interesting point about rubbishing other designs..... I see it as contrasting which is normal in a market economy context. In what way is it a problem? The thread title contains a "?" precisely because it is not an absolute claim, but a suggestion...... IOW, a question.

And then you refuse to put up any renderings or proposed layouts of your new design for anyone on here to properly evaluate.

Layouts are a work in progress. Late January is the message I get from my partner.

You say thats for commercial confidentiality reasons in which case I have to ask why on earth have you put up this thread in the first place?

The previous debate - limited to discussing a cabin layout - revealed there was clearly an interest debating the bigger scheme of things. I got valuable feedback from that thread which has already been implemented in the plans (even if I didn't change as much as some posters suggested). I thought this thread could provide similar useful feedback.... and in a sense it has already. Resistance makes you strong, or so the saying goes...... by subjecting our ideas to real world criticism here before we finalize the design I can armor the argumentation and fine-tune the USPs, which might eventually bring investors and manufacturers aboard when we get to that point..... next year.

And I still hope there will be someone posting design change suggestions, which I will be happy to take into consideration..... no guarantee they will be adopted though

You ask for opinions and then when experienced boaters on this forum give you their opinion, you start arguing with them

I don't see it as arguing...... debating.... that's the whole point of debate - testing the strengths of arguments and counter-arguments. Especially in this case where strong arguments will be important for us at a later stage.

I suppose I slightly object to the word 'game changing' as well.

I wrote in my little initial disclaimer that I am well aware this is unlikely to be a revelation or game changer for all boaters, especially not those who already know the spoils of bigger motor boats...... which incidentally happens to be the case for many of the most active posters here

If you feel the words "game changing" is taking it a little far then I suggest you visit Bavaria's website and read about their Project DA10, a semi-displacement boat scheduled for launch next year. Bavaria has to date of course mostly offered stern drive and IPS equipped sport cruisers, but now they got the idea that engine and other technology can be concentrated in a compact engine room below the center salon..... and they call that idea - I quote - A Revolutionary Space Concept :ambivalence: Marketing gurus.... don't we just love them?

What you seem to have produced is a 42ft boat with a lot of berths crammed into it and a hatch in the fore deck. In my book thats not game changing, thats just mildly interesting.

That's your opinion and you're entitled to it of course...... I just think you ignore 4 out of 5 mentioned USPs in that assessment.

 

[Hugin]

But you know what we want despite what we are saying? There's either a touch of arrogance there or you're a bit miffed we aren't all blown away.

Where do I claim to know what you want? I have some assumptions about what some people might find an attractive proposition, but as I already pointed out, those people are probably someone else than people already enjoying the sun in 50'-80' ft. mobos. In a sense it is a shame I didn't get more input from owners of 25'-35' mobos, because that is exactly the segment which could be convinced by the features I bring to the table.

 

[Hugin]

Hugin called that Sorensen article he linked an eye-opener, so on balance his boat well deserves to be called a game changer...

I can see you wont let that one pass The article (written shortly after the financial crash) is basically a long summary of potentials for propulsive optimizations and reduced fuel bills. The eye-opener is when you contrast that huge potential with boat builders being utterly disinterested in going down that route. It should be taken into the picture that GreenLine - coming from nowhere - blasted it's way into the market in 2010-2011 and grabbed a sizable chunk of the 10-12m. segment with 2 models optimized for very fuel-efficient low-speed cruising while retaining some planing speed capability. Clearly there's a market for propulsive efficiency despite boat builders' inexplicable disinterest.

Bavaria's Project DA10 seems to be an attempt to address that neglected market; which I find interesting as Bavaria is mostly known for throwing big metal lumps in sport cruiser hulls and selling the package for modest money. There's no criticism of Bavaria in that statement - Bavaria do what they do better than everyone else - but now they also want to do something different - allegedly based on owner/dealership feedback.

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

If you feel the words "game changing" is taking it a little far then I suggest you visit Bavaria's website and read about their Project DA10, a semi-displacement boat scheduled for launch next year.

Well I wouldn't use the word revolutionary either. The Scandinavians have been doing this semi displacement aft cabin stuff for years and very successful they have been at it too. Actually the word 'bizarre' comes to mind looking at where the lower helm is located on the DA10. Having said that, I think Bavaria are reacting to market trends here and reacting to what some of their competitors have been doing, also successfully. I think there is going to be increasing market resistance in the future on fuel consumption and environmental grounds, certainly in the 30-60ft sector, to flash gin palace type boats with enormous engines capable of doing 30kts+. It is interesting to see that all the Italian manufacturers and, of course, Beneteau have introduced what they call trawler yachts (but which are nothing of the sort) which are designed to be cruised at slower, more economical speeds. Greenline, of course, were also ploughing this particular furrow. Also, of course, by fitting smaller engines, the cost can be kept down and IMHO that is another trend in the market as very few people are willing or able to shell out £1m on a 50ft gin palace. It is a mystery to me why none of the UK builders have got products in this area of the market

 

[BruceK]

... In a sense it is a shame I didn't get more input from owners of 25'-35' mobos, because that is exactly the segment which could be convinced by the features I bring to the table.

OK, for my sins, my personal take. In the 30 to 35 foot class space is always an issue for me. The crunch is regardless of being able to buy a bigger boat, I simply couldn't afford to run one. I think the affordability tipping point for the largest market sector here is at the 35 foot mark (I stand to be corrected but they seem the most prolific). On a personal level when looking at FB and Sedan style builds the act of partitioning off seperate cabins promotes a feeling of cramped spaces which is why I went for a caravan style. The space is illusionary and does come at the price of privacy / intimacy and curtains again don't quite cut it. Maximising space for flexible use for me is key. I would like sliding slatted wood partitions instead of fixed bulkheads.
Then w.r.t. dual purposing dinettes etc into beds. Frankly this is always a bit of a downer. Shuffling cushions and boards and pillar stands about last thing at night. Not fun. And stowing bits of board, cushion etc takes up valuable stowage. I'd like to dispence with the manual aspect and make it mechanical or sliding. Fixed V Berths are unsightly. In an open interior space all eyes are on the bed. And frankly it's the worst place to sleep at anchor. My imagination is sketchy here, but having seen some rather clever space saving furniture used now in single bed apartments in the major cities, I feel something clever should be on the cards to maximise this space. Having a permanent bed in it or ring seating with insert for bed is a bit archaic. Same goes for galley space. Having so much fixed furniture which goes largely unused clutters up the interior. Again a elegant folding or sliding mechanism would be a boon. One of the aspects that I particularly like about my boat is all cockpit seating (I have an express cruiser) can fold inwards and be tucked away within the hull areas and can be reconfigured into a number of seating and sunbed options. Fixed seating around a cocktail table can be limiting albeit aesthetically pleasing, especially when a guest finds themselves piggy in the middle and everybody has to stand up, grab drinks to avoid spillage, so they can move out, or if you just want standing and mingling room. So far all the boats in this class seem to rely heavily on fixed layouts, flexible layouts that are reasonably easy to reconfigure on the fly or can be left in situ indefinitely, that are constructed sturdily enough to stand the test of time and are elegant (nobody wants a campcot tube frame affair here) would be for me a winner. The rest is just icing.
Oh, and this size boat should come with a water maker standard. I carry 400 litres. When full I can feel the difference so increacing it is out, and yet 400 litres is not enough for an extended cruise. I always run out of water long before I run out of fuel. That is a PITA, especially if you are not marina berthed. The party really does stop at this very most basic of commodities and can be a limiting factor when I want to go out for a week to some secluded bay or similar.

 

[Anders_P42]

Also, of course, by fitting smaller engines, the cost can be kept down and IMHO that is another trend in the market as very few people are willing or able to shell out £1m on a 50ft gin palace. It is a mystery to me why none of the UK builders have got products in this area of the market

Princess used to be well below sub £1M, YBW review of the P52 shows price at £830K inc VAT including popular options Air-con, genny hydraulic swim platform, crew cabin, radar. So it seems they increased the price £200K in a few years because they can get away with it. Question is if they are not making money now, were they ever making money selling it at £830K? The base model was listed at £715K inc VAT.

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

Princess used to be well below sub £1M, YBW review of the P52 shows price at £830K inc VAT including popular options Air-con, genny hydraulic swim platform, crew cabin, radar. So it seems they increased the price £200K in a few years because they can get away with it. Question is if they are not making money now, were they ever making money selling it at £830K? The base model was listed at £715K inc VAT.

The thing is I don't think they are selling at £830k all the time. Sometimes they're selling at £830k less 15-20% discount by all accounts!