How realistic is it to use a Planing boat at Displacement speed?

[Bouba]

So in this thread a number of people have decent sized boats and are driving around at D speed, for reasons I understand, and fuel has a lot to do with this thread if you read the whole thing, so, if any of you had your time again would you have bought a real D boat, Dutch steel type of thing or Nordhaven type of thing. I find the biggest issue with the forum is people getting pissy always defending the decisions they have made but if you were being objective, and could turn back the clock knowing what the cost of fuel would ramp up to, what boat would you have now?

I agree with you, but it's not just boats people like to justify why they bought a Malaysian car. I think VW Golf did a series of ads with that theme. I do have a fuel budget in a man's maths kind of way. And I do worry about it in a 'what if the price of oil doubled' kind of thing. Around the Med you see people blasting away at top speed all the time, its like boats are an antidote to speed restrictions on roads.
But if you see the way I drive then you would know I'm a semi displacement type of guy. So no regrets, but always envious of bigger.

 

[stillwaters]

Hate to be a bore, but you'll no doubt be aware that it wouldn't be great for the engines subjecting them to low speeds for sustained periods. Likely to cause glazing and carbon build up. As long as you give them a good blast every now and then, should be ok.

Good point and well worth saying, I believe I mentioned in the OP that we would intend spending around 80% of the time at displacement speed, one of the main reasons for the other 20% being at planing speeds being exactly what you have said. In fact, for the last 8 years on our present boat we have successfully done this, spending much of our time running our twin 425hp engines on our 23 knot SD boat at around 50% for displacement speed but always ensuring that they also get regular airings.

So in this thread a number of people have decent sized boats and are driving around at D speed, for reasons I understand, and fuel has a lot to do with this thread if you read the whole thing, so, if any of you had your time again would you have bought a real D boat, Dutch steel type of thing or Nordhaven type of thing. I find the biggest issue with the forum is people getting pissy always defending the decisions they have made but if you were being objective, and could turn back the clock knowing what the cost of fuel would ramp up to, what boat would you have now?

Simple, an SD with fin stabilisers, which would happily plod along at 8-9 knots but could also do around 20 knots, and would be able to take on most conditions in relative comfort.
This question just happens to be very much in our minds at the moment due to our looking to change our existing 43 foot SD for something a bit bigger. Our search has already led to us discounting D boats, which we decided would be too limiting. In truth, it might have been fine, but ultimately, having seriously considered a rather nice 50 foot Dutch steel boat complete with fin stabs, we just weren't prepared to take the risk that D speed or nothing was right for us. Each to their own, I'm sure. I'm not totally convinced either that fuel cost should be that major a concern, even though I have fuel metering on my own boat and shudder every time I see we are using nearly 2 gallons a mile when at wot. I think Deleted User came up with a very good point about this a while ago on this forum, when he suggested that the depreciated value of a boat could actually be greater than the cost of fuel used due to the additional hours put on the engines due to travelling at slower speed. One example might go like this.
Assume a boat with 500 hours on its engines is bought at a cost of £500k and then is kept for 5 years, during which it covers 1,200 miles per year. In example A, it averages 8 knots at 1.75 mpg, giving a 5 year fuel use of over 3,400 gallons at say a total cost of about £17,000. Over the 5 years it racks up an additional 750 hours, bringing its total to 1,250. In example B, the 6,000 miles total is covered at an average of 20 knots at 0.6 mpg, giving a 5 year fuel use of 10,000 gallons at a cost of £50,000, an increase of £33,000.
It sounds quite a lot, but only until you consider the possible sales value of the boat after this. Example A now has 1,250 hours on its engines, whereas Example B has 800, having added only 300 to its original 500. So, how much different will the two residual values be, and which is likely to sell the easiest? Of course there are other possible considerations with boating apart from cost. Apologies to Deleted User for 'borrowing' his topic.

 

[Momac]

I haven't got the occasional need for cruising at 20+ knots out of my system yet !
The 20 odd knots speed also allows me to do some journeys on the same tide that would be much longer or less convenient at slow speeds.

I do however spend a lot of time on the river which has speed restrictions resulting in economical cruising. Therefore the fuel cost of the fast speed journeys is bearable as it is only part of the years boating activity.


On the subject of hours added against depreciation the outcome depends very much on the price of the boat at the outset. Those of us fishing in the relatively poor end of the boating world (less then £100k to purchase the boat ) need be less concerned about a few hours added.

 

[BartW]

.... but if you were being objective, and could turn back the clock knowing what the cost of fuel would ramp up to, what boat would you have now?

at the time when choosing a bigger boat, initially I was looking at trawler style SD boats,
it turned out that none of the SD models was appealing, either much too expensive for what you get,
and mostly we didn't like the interior of none of them.
also the kids and swmbo preferred a much more sleek looking model, they still tease me with that

I consider our old Canados, as a timeless boat, right between trawlers and modern planing models,
I don't see any negative point in running our boat at D-speed, and wouldn't make another choice today.
The only thing I would do different is choose one which is completely made from GRP,
our's superstructure and deck is wood

so to answer your question;
after 6 seasons of ownership of our planing C70, I would not choose a SD and for shure not a D- boat.

 

[stillwaters]

at the time when choosing a bigger boat, initially I was looking at trawler style SD boats,
it turned out that none of the SD models was appealing, either much too expensive for what you get,
and mostly we didn't like the interior of none of them.
also the kids and swmbo preferred a much more sleek looking model, they still tease me with that

so to answer your question;
after 6 seasons of ownership of our planing C70, I would not choose a SD and for shure not a D- boat.

That's our own situation in a nutshell. However, I wonder if you would think differently if there were any sleeker looking SD boats, especially with stylish interiors - and at realistic prices, of course. I'm sure that we would.

 

[Portofino]

That's our own situation in a nutshell. However, I wonder if you would think differently if there were any sleeker looking SD boats, especially with stylish interiors - and at realistic prices, of course. I'm sure that we would.

Many years ago Sunseeker delivered a Pred 95 or was it a 108 ? ,with a pair of John Deere ,s .
It was commissioned for a chap who wanted to tour the med in a year off - with the "sleek " look and stylish interiors etc .
This was strictly a D speeder only -no worries about engine load as Deeres where in there's sweet spot re T and P ,s etc @
Sq root of WL what ever that was ----- all day and ( crewed ) night !
Again high hrs not an issues with that type of commercial engine .

But and it's a big but -- all became unstuck at the end ----- it took 3 years to sell on - according to the broker .
At the time early noughties potential big Pred owners wanted the real deal ,a 2 x 2000 hp or better still a 3x 2000 hp Arneson 40 Knot missile - to go with the style and accomodation - to hell with the fuel bill .

So on that basis turning things around in 2017 going fwds if you want the style and accomodation etc you could get an old ish ( max depreciation ) big ish Italian lady -say a SL 62-72 -82 and refit ( allready high engines hrs + low price )
Some JDeeres for D speed only --- without or pref with allready fitted stabs .- .
Extra weight released -fit more tankage -both fuel and water --- leaning towards greater self sufficiency -blue ish water end of the spectrum ?
Just a thought for folks with more time ,but want a bigger MoBo with a smaller fuel bill

 

[MapisM]

much too expensive for what you get

This is the crux of the matter.
I've been cruising on a D boat for 16 years, all the time at one digit speed.
I never missed the option to go faster, and for my next boat (if any) I would choose another D boat in a heartbeat, because I'm not interested in the wild card option of hammering the throttles - in a sense, I prefer knowing to NOT have the option at all, to start with.
Trouble is, Nordhavn and the likes are awfully overpriced.
I mean, 'course they are solid and well built, but there are also P boats built by yards whose approach to construction quality has absolutely nothing to learn from Nordhavn, Fleming, or anyone else for that matter.

Sure, anyone who really wants to go rtw by boat - and for some reason doesn't like the one and only logical choice, i.e. a sailboat - can't do that with an Alalunga 72, while he/she could with a N46.
But other than that, the fact that nowadays a similar amount of money could buy either of these two boats of similar vintage would be beyond a joke, if it weren't true.
I mean, also looking "under the skin" at these two vessels, not just to their sheer size and the obvious "wow" effect of the first vs. the latter!

Bottom line, "normal" pleasure boaters don't cross oceans, so they don't really NEED a D boat.
Most of them like slow cruising though, and not just to save fuel, but because it's a nicer way of cruising for pleasure altogether.
And as I always said, for those who don't, it's just a matter of WHEN, not IF they will.

Otoh, the used market is flooded with beautiful P boats reasonably priced, and imho THAT is the key reason why the question in the title of this thread became increasingly popular in recent years.

Oh, btw, of course the answer is "yes, it's realistic".
As I said at the beginning, for slow cruising I would still prefer the attitude of D/SD hulls at sea, in more ways than one, and by a fairly large margin.
But in terms of value for boating, so to speak, P boats used at D speed are definitely a realistic and viable alternative.

 

[Bouba]

This is the crux of the matter.
I've been cruising on a D boat for 16 years, all the time at one digit speed.
I never missed the option to go faster, and for my next boat (if any) I would choose another D boat in a heartbeat, because I'm not interested in the wild card option of hammering the throttles - in a sense, I prefer knowing to NOT have the option at all, to start with.
Trouble is, Nordhavn and the likes are awfully overpriced.
I mean, 'course they are solid and well built, but there are also P boats built by yards whose approach to construction quality has absolutely nothing to learn from Nordhavn, Fleming, or anyone else for that matter.

Sure, anyone who really wants to go rtw by boat - and for some reason doesn't like the one and only logical choice, i.e. a sailboat - can't do that with an Alalunga 72, while he/she could with a N46.
But other than that, the fact that nowadays a similar amount of money could buy either of these two boats of similar vintage would be beyond a joke, if it weren't true.
I mean, also looking "under the skin" at these two vessels, not just to their sheer size and the obvious "wow" effect of the first vs. the latter!

Bottom line, "normal" pleasure boaters don't cross oceans, so they don't really NEED a D boat.
Most of them like slow cruising though, and not just to save fuel, but because it's a nicer way of cruising for pleasure altogether.
And as I always said, for those who don't, it's just a matter of WHEN, not IF they will.

Otoh, the used market is flooded with beautiful P boats reasonably priced, and imho THAT is the key reason why the question in the title of this thread became increasingly popular in recent years.

Oh, btw, of course the answer is "yes, it's realistic".
As I said at the beginning, for slow cruising I would still prefer the attitude of D/SD hulls at sea, in more ways than one, and by a fairly large margin.
But in terms of value for boating, so to speak, P boats used at D speed are definitely a realistic and viable alternative.

I agree, except for the bit about pleasure boaters. In UK waters or the Med, yes it's true that D hulls aren't necessary but look at the trawler market in the US. These people are summer birds chasing the sun up and down the west or east coast, then there are trips to Bermuda, Panama and on the other side of course there is Alaska. D boats, many made in the US as well as China are very popular, and even there there are only a few who cross oceans. So my point is, like prom night, like Halloween, like American football they are sure to become the new normal here. What you don't realise MapisM is that you are a trendsetter:encouragement:

 

[BartW]

Bottom line, "normal" pleasure boaters don't cross oceans, so they don't really NEED a D boat.
Most of them like slow cruising though, and not just to save fuel, but because it's a nicer way of cruising for pleasure altogether.
And as I always said, for those who don't, it's just a matter of WHEN, not IF they will.

Compared to you P, I still feel like a novice in the boating world,
but after 6 seasons owning BA, there still isn't any itch to sail a boat at "one" digit speed,

I do agree that sailing a boat at slower speed has its sharmes, but for us that is 10kn,
at 8kn or less, trips or distance we want to travel, seem to take ages...

and I still like some faster sailing aswell.
For our trip to Venice last year, there were technical reasons why we sailed 90% at 10kn,
if we had had complete freedom, it would have been 30% to 50% at P speed.

I see fast navigation just as a additional dimension or feature of our hobby that I pleasantly enjoy,
with due respect ofcause for all those that enjoy the 6kn (sailboats) to 8kn D-speeds

 

[MapisM]

Compared to you P, I still feel like a novice in the boating world,
but after 6 seasons owning BA, there still isn't any itch to sail a boat at "one" digit speed,

Well B, thanks for the flowers, but I'm afraid you are also well past the "novice" stage by now...
In fact, indeed you are one of the first P boaters here in the asylum to have appreciated slow cruising!
And whether at 10 or 8 knots, that doesn't really matter a lot - it's basically just a matter of hull length...

 

[MapisM]

So my point is, like prom night, like Halloween, like American football they are sure to become the new normal here. What you don't realise MapisM is that you are a trendsetter :encouragement:

LOL, does the fact that my old tub (on top of her D hull) is built in wooden planks also count for trendsetting...?

Your point on the differences between US and EU boaters is a good one, but in my experience, also in the US the boaters who choose trawlers (or also SD boat with LRC capabilities) and actually exploit their full potential are not many.
Yes, most boaters like boats capable of crossing oceans, and they don't mind the slow pace, but they actually use them for coastal cruising.
And TBH, while I'd pick the N46 for a rather long ocean passage to Bermuda, for all the other destinations you mentioned I'd rather have the Alalunga 72, in just about any other respects!

 

[Hardmy]

And TBH, while I'd pick the N46 for a rather long ocean passage to Bermuda, for all the other destinations you mentioned I'd rather have the Alalunga 72, in just about any other respects!

Sorry for the thread drift. But I am very curious Mapis. Why Alalunga and not say San Lorenzo 72 or Uniesse 72?

 

[MapisM]

No particular reason, 'twas just for consistency with my previous example...
Feel free to replace the Alalunga with both your alternatives. :encouragement:
Or if you prefer, in the same size bracket, any of the following others (in no particular order):
- Canados
- CdP
- Technema
- Maiora
...just to name a few of the yards that in terms of build quality, as I said, don't have a lot to learn from the Dana Point boys.
And I'm sure to be missing some!

 

[stillwaters]

No particular reason, 'twas just for consistency with my previous example...
Feel free to replace the Alalunga with both your alternatives. :encouragement:
Or if you prefer, in the same size bracket, any of the following others (in no particular order):
- Canados
- CdP
- Technema
- Maiora
...just to name a few of the yards that in terms of build quality, as I said, don't have a lot to learn from the Dana Point boys.
And I'm sure to be missing some!

Beneteau? You know you love 'em really. :encouragement:

 

[Portofino]

No particular reason, 'twas just for consistency with my previous example...
Feel free to replace the Alalunga with both your alternatives. :encouragement:
Or if you prefer, in the same size bracket, any of the following others (in no particular order):
- Canados
- CdP
- Technema
- Maiora
...just to name a few of the yards that in terms of build quality, as I said, don't have a lot to learn from the Dana Point boys.
And I'm sure to be missing some!

I,am on some IT brokers mailing list

Thought of you when I saw this --- looks v high end quality and suspect one will have pay for ,even so ticks a lot of Med D speeder boxes ?

http://www.mondialbroker.com/Barca.aspx?pk=e3a11748-9232-489f-bedc-f085849e860d

 

[BartW]

I,am on some IT brokers mailing list

Thought of you when I saw this --- looks v high end quality and suspect one will have pay for ,even so ticks a lot of Med D speeder boxes ?

http://www.mondialbroker.com/Barca.aspx?pk=e3a11748-9232-489f-bedc-f085849e860d

haha good find,
A nice example of a bigger sistership from MapisM's beautifull CNA
from the pics it looks indeed a very nice boat.
I'm afraid it ticks one box on MapisM 's negative list and that is LEGNO

 

[MapisM]

I,am on some IT brokers mailing list

LOL, do tell, which sort of selection criteria did you use, to receive email offers with 75' timber trawlers?
Are you considering to change the Itama for something more pipe & slipper-ish...?

Regardless, I would describe the quality of that boat (pretty much as any other built by the yard, mine included) as solid, rather than high-end. Otoh, this particular vessel is possibly their most famous one, because she was built for a very popular IT singer and songwriter, which happened to be also a true sea lover: Lucio Dalla (RIP).

I bought my boat a few years before Dalla commissioned this one, so I was not surprised at all when I read that his choice (coming from a Pershing, believe it or not!) was driven by onboard comfort and quiet, both underway and at anchor - in fact, the boat was built with an onboard recording studio, go figure.

Before he died of heart attack in 2012, he had just commissioned a larger boat (90' or so), which eventually was never built.
A big shame, first and foremost because the man was a great artist, but also because I would have loved to see what vessel the yard could build after this one - which is already stunning, in more ways that one.

But BartW is right anyhow, and on top of that she's too big to be handled without crew, as we wish to continue to do in the foreseeable future.

 

[Portofino]

LOL, do tell, which sort of selection criteria did you use, to receive email offers with 75' timber trawlers?
Are you considering to change the Itama for something more pipe & slipper-ish...?
.

Nope - the criteria with IT brokers ( that still E-mail propects ) as with ALL estate agents often gets lost in the chase for commission !

Thx for the detailed reply - wasn't, expecting that - did not realise you have a junior modal - nice boats - quite a sad story really ,pity about the 90 .

 

[michaf]

For us slow speed to cross over to the islands is most of the time terrible. The speed counters the rocking in a significant way. I would love to be able to cross at 9 nots and burn 1/3, but the rocking just kills everyone! Off course if we had a stabilisation system it would be a different story...