IPS without bow thruster

I suspect the answer is no HOWEVER ... I saw an ips boat in an anchorage manoeuvring and the wash from the back as it turned would have made a large family of Piranha Fish proud - it was a sight to behold as was the noise.

It may have been a cack handed skipper, but the boat did not seem to be spinning at a silly rate.
 
Thruster can be retro fitted to most boats if required, might be an option if everything else is what you’re looking for and you feel you need one.
 
Bow thruster not difficult or big bucks to fit.

think also a stern thruster as manoeuvring is much gentler than IPS .

what size boat and type?
 
Chris H said:
is it needed with IPS ?
Click to expand...
No. That's the big deal with pods: the joystick movements are "translated" into independent positions of each pod that allow to move the boat in every desired direction, also with no thrusters.
I have first hand experience of maneuvering just that, an IPS600 powered Portofino with no thrusters, and I can confirm that it does what it says on the tin.

Trouble is, what jrudge said can and does happen, because many folks think that by using the joystick like there's no tomorrow they can move the boat sideways (or spin it, whatever) at the speed of the light. Which is not going to happen, because you can't get round physics.
But the system does try to react as fast as possible when it receives a strong joystick input, with the result of making a huge wash but only marginally faster boat movements.
Joystick controlled IPS boats are amazingly (and intuitively) maneuverable, but they must be treated gently!
 
I,am with MapisM on this , there’s absolutely no need for a bow thruster with a P47 IPS .
Again first hand experience here in La Napoule with that boat .
Additionally there are 1/2 a dozen other 40/50 somethings mostly Absolutes inc a San Remo 48 ( friends of ours ) IPS , without bow thrusters .

“Try before you buy “ a phrase that springs to mind .
Rtn for a full demo .

You certainly need one on a none IPS it’s std on the Porto 53 and an additional stern thruster is a possible add on later , personally in the Med it’s invariably stern to mooring so side ways stuff is not really required, just the skill of spinning it in tight ( aisles ) places before reverse .
You fuel bill will be fraction with the P47 IPS over the extra cabin of the P 53 and generally others bills nearly 1/2 like lift out etc .

IPS boats are masters at this sans bow thrusters .
My aisle has 15 M berths ether side so plenty of IPS action inc a P47 tbo I do not notice any commotion , pantomime etc , they just turn and park ,dare I say it but I will - “ even a woman can park it “ :)
 
Last edited:
That might as well be a sign of fate, suggesting you to steer clear of those boats.
I just realize that it wasn't mentioned anywhere in this thread, but are you aware that the main drawback of IPS is their silly maintenance costs, both preventative (i.e. regular) and unexpected, out of the blue, possibly half way along the season and killing the rest of it?
If you like the Portofino 47 (and I can see why), they made also a shafts version, powered by either FPT or Cummins, IIRC.
That would be my choice, hands down. :encouragement:
 
MapisM said:
That might as well be a sign of fate, suggesting you to steer clear of those boats.
I just realize that it wasn't mentioned anywhere in this thread, but are you aware that the main drawback of IPS is their silly maintenance costs, both preventative (i.e. regular) and unexpected, out of the blue, possibly half way along the season and killing the rest of it?
If you like the Portofino 47 (and I can see why), they made also a shafts version, powered by either FPT or Cummins, IIRC.
That would be my choice, hands down. :encouragement:
Click to expand...

I would have thought the saving on running costs would outway the maintenance costs, I’m also told IPS are a lot quieter and smoother, either way, if the right shaft boat comes along, I would be interested.
 
there was a thread on this a while back - can't remember what it was called. However the key to whether IPS is worth it for the fuel savings depends on how many miles a year you will actually typically do.
roughly based on 40" ish boats from fuel and servicing costs gathered from forum members.
if you normally do less than 500 miles a year shafts are the way to go
if you do less than 900 miles a year outdrives are the way to go
if you do 900+ miles a year then IPS makes sense

what ever boat you are interested in get some real world fuel consumption and servicing costs from people on here, and just do the maths. (ignore the brokers and add 10% to anything quoted in a boat magazine) If you buy new or nearly new depreciation dominates every other cost.
 
As far as bow thruster is concerned, depends on the boat, our ips Absolute 47 doesn't need it but we have one just in case as a nice to have. I was on a fairline targa 44 which definitely needed one.
As far as IPS costs are concerned, I am happy to pay the extra for the convenience, we will never do enough miles to beak even on fuel, so long as you budget for it isn't an issue.
 
Last edited:
Chris H said:
Would this be a deal breaker, I found a boat with IPS 600 but no bow thruster, is it needed with IPS ?
Click to expand...

No its not a deal breaker but the boat should be a bit cheaper because of it. Yes you may be able to rotate the boat using the IPS drives only but as others have commented, they make a lot of commotion doing it so a bowthruster would be a nice to have for making small movements of the bow
 
Deleted User said:
No its not a deal breaker but the boat should be a bit cheaper because of it. Yes you may be able to rotate the boat using the IPS drives only but as others have commented, they make a lot of commotion doing it so a bowthruster would be a nice to have for making small movements of the bow
Click to expand...
That’s the problem with one of the 47’s, high engine hours, not many goodies and although it looks to be in great condition it’s priced at the very top of the market.
 
Chris H said:
That’s the problem with one of the 47’s, high engine hours, not many goodies and although it looks to be in great condition it’s priced at the very top of the market.
Click to expand...

A boat with high engine hours shouldnt be priced at the top of the market. We have endless debates on here about whether high engine hours are good or bad and I generally agree with the idea that boats benefit from being used regularly. However, the used boat market is no different to the used car market. High hours/miles = lower price. Of course high hours can be compensated by excellent condition and/or high specification but by the sound of it, this boat doesnt quite fit that category. What has been the history of this boat? Has it been used for charter? Is it VAT paid?

Of course we should ask the question as to what you mean by high hours. More than 100hrs per annum?
 
Deleted User said:
A boat with high engine hours shouldnt be priced at the top of the market. We have endless debates on here about whether high engine hours are good or bad and I generally agree with the idea that boats benefit from being used regularly. However, the used boat market is no different to the used car market. High hours/miles = lower price. Of course high hours can be compensated by excellent condition and/or high specification but by the sound of it, this boat doesnt quite fit that category. What has been the history of this boat? Has it been used for charter? Is it VAT paid?

Of course we should ask the question as to what you mean by high hours. More than 100hrs per annum?
Click to expand...

I don’t know much of it’s previous history, the current owner hasn’t charted it and it was originally a UK boat, VAT paid.

2009 with 740 hours.
 
Chris H said:
I don’t know much of it’s previous history, the current owner hasn’t charted it and it was originally a UK boat, VAT paid.

2009 with 740 hours.
Click to expand...

Thats not high hours, probably about average for the type of boat. If it was an ex charter boat the hours could be double that and it would probably not be VAT paid. If its a nice boat in good condition then its probably still worth considering but I still maintain that if its lacking some desirable bits of equipment, its worth a bit less but then you could add those yourself
 
I have IPS and a bow thruster. Always switch on the bow thruster in case but have not used it once in 3 years - apart from checking it still works. Really don’t understand comments about high costs and maintenance. Would more than happily own an IPS boat again.
 
I'll avoid getting into any anti-IPS rhetoric (although we looked at a couple and were put off with the horror stories of servicing costs and what will go wrong and how it will cost to put right). Whoops, failed there sorry....

We had bow and stern thrusters fitted when we bought our 50 footer last summer. £12k with remote control for Sleipners - 10% reduction for having both fitted at the same time. Osmotech, Hamble Point. They work very well. Frequently don't use them but knowing that they are there is reassuring when you're being blown by the wind or negotiating a tight berth in the tide.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Other threads that may be of interest

simonfraser
water jet for a bow thruster ?
Replies
8
Views
442
lusitano
L

Share this page

Top