Linssen 372

[Hacker]

Advert on ApolloDuck for a Linssen 375. Hadn’t come across them before but the layout looks good, and quick research suggests well built. She has twin engines, Vetus, putting out around 500hp. Most seem to be described as river cruisers but hints that they are offshore boats as well (which is what I’m looking for). Anyone ever had one at sea, how do they handle. I’m assuming semi displacement, any idea of realistic cruising speed?

 

[Greg2]

Is it the 1992 372SX at TBS?

It pre-dates the Recreational Craft Directive by two years so unlikely to have a classification, which would be the easy answer.

There looks to be a small plotter and an autopilot on the lower helm and it says two engines and 500hp - it isn’t clear but I am assuming it is two 250hp motors. A lot of power for a boat that will probably only do displacement speeds but more than required on the river. Whilst it will probably do around 6-7 knit’s punching a tide would be no problem so perhaps she was built as a seagoing vessel. Most steel boats are displacement as opposed to semi-displacement hulls as getting above hull speed is difficult with the weight.

Worth bearing in mind that steel and salt water aren’t a good mix. More modern boats have better paint systems so are more resistant to rust but a boat of that age may not fair too well in a salt laden environment.
.

 

[Hacker]

Yes it is that one. My assumption was similar to yours. Likely to be displacement and therefore slow. I’ve seen adverts for some of the newer ones quoting semi displacement speeds. The internal layout was similar to the Aquastar 38 hence my interest.

 

[Greg2]

I may be wrong but I think those that quote semi-displacement speeds may be aluminium as opposed to steel.

Worth saying that speed costs fuel/money and that is a one way street in terms of cost so displacement speed is something to consider. We have looked at many Dutch steel boats and they were very much an option but in the end, when we last changed boats, we went for a semi- displacement Hardy Commodore 36. Nice to have a bit of speed when we need it (I say a bit because she is no greyhound) but the last couple of seasons we have pottered around at lower speeds - displacement or thereabouts - and have thoroughly enjoyed it.

In fact, when we bought the boat, a combination of increasing fuel costs/uncertainly about the future/impending retirement and reduced income led us to conclude that for us, and perhaps others, the future was not running at planing speeds and burning a lot of fuel.

 

[ChromeDome]

I believe it is steel - displacement of some 11 tonnes. Despite the hull design not a truly planning shape, I'd be surprised if 500 horses would be able to push it very fast.

Trim flaps indicate that someone wanted to lift the stern but still, 11.000 kg is a lot.

Another ad (for a 2 x 230 hp powered) states

 

[Flynnbarr]

I seem to recall the larger twin engine ones could do high teens speed wise but I would imagine fuel consumption would be a tad high !
Major worry with that boat should be 30 year old teak decks on steel plus as Greg says the paint systems back then aren’t as good as these days.
Nice boat mind.

 

[ChromeDome]

I seem to recall the larger twin engine ones could do high teens speed wise but I would imagine fuel consumption would be a tad high !
Major worry with that boat should be 30 year old teak decks on steel plus as Greg says the paint systems back then aren’t as good as these days.
Nice boat mind.

It was offered also with 2 x 303 hp (Iveco?), so 2 x 250 (500) hp would be mid range

 

[Dino]

I found this photo on google.looks like they can get up and go alright

 

[Greg2]

I found this photo on google.looks like they can get up and go alright

I stand corrected.
I had been thinking about it and our Hardy is around 9-10 tons with 2 x 265hp engines - probably less in reality as Perkins over-egged the HP designations - and we can cruise at around 12 knots and make 18 flat out on a good day. Fuel consumption prohibits that kind of nonsense of course
.

 

[Dino]

I stand corrected.
I had been thinking about it and our Hardy is around 9-10 tons with 2 x 265hp engines - probably less in reality as Perkins over-egged the HP designations - and we can cruise at around 12 knots and make 18 flat out on a good day. Fuel consumption prohibits that kind of nonsense of course
.

The SX version was unusual. Most Linssens were single engines with a few small twins. I remember seeing the marketing ads on the boating magazines where there was a faster SX version. I doubt they sold many. I’m not sure if I’d be a big fan of a steel cruiser based on salt water. A friend took his Steven’s to sea once and he said he was chasing rust for ages afterwards

 

[harvey38]

I stand corrected.
I had been thinking about it and our Hardy is around 9-10 tons with 2 x 265hp engines - probably less in reality as Perkins over-egged the HP designations - and we can cruise at around 12 knots and make 18 flat out on a good day. Fuel consumption prohibits that kind of nonsense of course
.

Just over 12 tons with 2 x250hp Ford Sabres, Aquastar Ocean 38, 23k @ WOT but don't go above 2k RPM and cruise at 1800 RPM giving us 14 knots or thereabouts.

 

[harvey38]

I believe it is steel - displacement of some 11 tonnes. Despite the hull design not a truly planning shape, I'd be surprised if 500 horses would be able to push it very fast.
View attachment 170239
Trim flaps indicate that someone wanted to lift the stern but still, 11.000 kg is a lot.

Another ad (for a 2 x 230 hp powered) states
View attachment 170240

Unusual exhaust porting and a lot of boat below the waterline.